Based on the context provided and the dialogue within the transcript, here is the formatted version with speaker names identified. [0:00] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Welcome everyone, and let the roll reflect a majority of our council members are present and a quorum has been established, with the absence of Councilmember Haus this evening. We have a proclamation recognizing Arbor Day, and we'll start with Councilmember Pemble. [0:45] **Councilmember Dave Pemble:** Whereas the city of Hastings declares Friday, April 28th as Arbor Day; and whereas the city of Hastings has celebrated Arbor Day since 1997, planting trees in different parks and spaces identified by the City Forester; and whereas the purpose of Arbor Day is to encourage and educate Hastings residents in tree planting, developing civic pride and a sense of community; and whereas Arbor Day 2023 will be held at Gerten Park Friday, April 28th from 1:30 PM to 2:30 PM; and whereas 10 trees will be planted, mulched, and watered. And should I read the next whereas? Arbor Day 2023 is partially sponsored by Dakota Electric Association and Hoffman & McNamara and the City of Hastings; it is appreciated that these civic-minded groups help make this event possible. And whereas the city of Hastings has been recognized as a Tree City USA Community by the National Arbor Day Foundation since 1997, celebrating 26 years. And now, therefore be it resolved that I, Mayor of the city of Hastings, do hereby proclaim April 28th as Arbor Day in Hastings. Adopted by the city council of the city of Hastings, Minnesota this third day of April, 2023. [2:06] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** [Applause] Thank you, Council. Tonight, we will have—council members, are there any corrections to the minutes of the March 20th meeting? Tonight, we will have comments from the audience. Is there anyone wishing to speak to the Council at this time? If you would please step forward to the podium, state your name and address, and explain to us your comments. Thank you. There you go. [2:52] **Raymond Menard:** Thank you, honorable council members and Mayor. Appreciate the opportunity to be here. We're speaking on behalf of several neighbors; not everyone was able to be here tonight. Yes, Raymond Menard, 906 East First Street. [3:05] **Cynthia Carl:** Cynthia Carl, 102 Washington Street. [3:08] **Raymond Menard:** Thank you. Um, we're bringing to the attention of the full Council items that we've brought to the attention of the Planning Commission in the past, and we've had people from streets and water down to visit the site and have agreed that what we're saying is there and real and that can be verified. We've also talked to the Planning Commission as well, and so this is an issue that has been ongoing for some time. It's raised by the flood that's pending potentially for us as well. So, this is a block between Franklin and Washington and First and Second Street. In the middle of this block is literally the lowest lot in the city of Hastings, probably the lowest lot in the metro area because here we are at the drainage area. It's an empty lot at the present time. There are in this block three garages and one house that are lower than the houses on First Street on the river, which are listed in the flood issues, but every year this area gets missed as a subject. When the city put in the streets, sewer, and gutters down in that part of town—I actually lived there and so did Cynthia—they raised the streets all around this block and so the block was left low. There's an alley between Franklin and Washington which literally goes downhill to the center and all of the water in this block flows into this low spot. There's a culvert out of this area into the river. There's also a culvert into the block on Washington across Washington Street. So now we have another block's water coming to this block as well. We have two issues here: when it rains, it doesn't have to rain that hard, it is a river here. It's a huge amount of water that flows because all of this happens, and as houses have been added to this block, we have a lot of hard surface now in roofs and driveways and such. So, an enormous amount of water comes flowing into it. The rain creates huge amounts of water; that's problem one. When we have a flood, they plug the Culvert with a balloon, and that's been done quite a number of times since we've lived there, and that helps to keep the river from backing up into the lot. Helps, because the river still seeps up slowly, but as this is plugged, no longer can rainwater exit the lot. And so this is weird, but literally the lot fills with more water than the flood because the rain fills it up. We've had the city come down with pumps a number of times and pump it out to keep the house and the garages from being flooded, although the garages have been flooded in 2001. The amount of water that's flowing is so enormous that the little pump that they've tried doesn't work; they end up renting some monstrous pump to try to keep up with it. Um, so we have—excuse me—we have three asks. One is for the city to be ready to pump this year. In the past, that's forgotten, and so it's like an emergency at the last minute; so, to have a pump ready for it. Um, the second is we've had conversations with the city about actions that could be taken to mitigate the amount of water that's flowing, like closing the Culvert into it, raising the alley—these kinds of things could be done—putting a gutter in the alley so it flows out to the streets. So there's some actions there that could be done, and we're willing to cooperate and help with that. And I understand we even have to pay some taxes to do it; we're happy to do that. And third, we've talked to the city also about a third step: this empty lot is slated by a developer to build a house on it, which is going to increase the problem we face—more hard surface, less place for it to flow, less drainage area, etc., less ponding space, on and on and on. And we've talked to the city about that, and the landowners on each side of the lot, we're willing to pay a reasonable price for an unbuilt lot and dedicate it to a ponding basin and so meet the city's needs there. We were told by the city that this is actually a positive thing; there's pressure from the state and from the county to create more drainage areas like this, more wetlands, and they would like that, and we're happy to dedicate it so it can never be built on, just protected as a drainage area. So those are our three requests. Any questions? Anything I missed? [8:13] **Cynthia Carl:** Nope, he’s got it all. It’s good. [8:26] **Bob Majeski:** I didn't know Erica was coming up with me; she scared me earlier. So my name is Bob Majeski, long-term resident of Hastings. Erica's my daughter-in-law, speaking kind of in their behalf from my recollection, and plus parts of it will be about neighbors, which I obviously respect and care for. [8:55] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Could you please give your both addresses please? [9:02] **Bob Majeski:** Oh, my address is 1800 Brittany Road, and the area I'm talking about is where I grew up at and where my kids currently live. [9:09] **Erica Majeski:** My address is 2925 4th Street East. [9:12] **Bob Majeski:** Okay, thank you. Um, so I'm here for those reasons basically, and I'm talking about a part of 4th Street that floods quite often down in that area. Before I go too far though, I want to make sure I acknowledge Tina Folch, who I've been dealing with a little bit here on the side. When I brought this up to her, she was more than willing to take a look at this area, explain to her what we went through. I even drove through part of the area that I'll be talking about briefly, and she's just been super to deal with. So I thank you, Tina, for your understanding and cooperation on all this. Anyway, the elevation we're talking about, the end of 4th Street, is 16.9 feet from the base of the Mississippi River. It doesn't mean a lot to a lot of people, but to put it in perspective, there's some areas such as walking paths along the Mississippi that get flooded at this time; the steps down by the Memorial Park area come up quite high. Probably the most notable one is the under-tunnel or under-pathway underneath the bridge along the river there on First Street. So when those start getting affected, their road is flooded. So what happens when the road is flooded down there? Basically, there's one way in and one way out currently, and that's it. So when that road goes, the school buses can't come down, the garbage can’t come down, deliveries can't come down. So what do they do? What they've taken upon themselves—the Likes family and the Majeskis family that live down there currently, and Tyler lives down there currently too and he'll be a part of this no doubt—is, I believe Pete's the one that has some easement through some DNR property, and the easement allows us to go through there. And so what they do is—and they'll be doing that real soon because it will flood this year I'm afraid again—and the reason why I say that, if you looked at past 20 crests and the report that I got from Tina, 11 of those were flood stage to that road of those top 20. So there’s a 50% chance it's going to go again. So what they do is they get together with the DNR permission to go through there, and they start taking the chainsaws out and they start cutting limbs, and there's broken trees down they have to remove; they're going to be battling buckthorn. And it's all rock in this area too, so it's rock and buckthorn and fallen trees, and they create a path. And the path is probably about 12 feet wide and probably about six blocks long. To give you an idea, the part that floods is about four blocks long. So they go out there and they do this, and they're willing to do it. I'm not here complaining about what they have to do; these are good people that will do what they have to do to get their families to daycare, to get their families to school, to haul the garbage up where the garbage will pick it up, to haul the kids up to where the bus will meet them at every day until the water goes down, which is weeks. Now, when I grew up down there, it was very similar. So part of my question is, how long does this have to go on? On the path road that's about 10–12 feet wide, it works out all right; they're already stockpiling wood chips because this is a rock. So imagine taking your nice vehicles and driving through a pasture with rock as a foundation. So what do they do? They collect chips and try to bury the mud pits that are going to formulate if this spring rains hit. They still got to go through because there's six families down there and they all work—that’s 12 cars on a good day going one direction and 12 cars coming back. But we also have Timmy Likes here who runs a business; he's got trailers, he's got to move, he's got to do repairs on things, he's got to move stuff out from where he's at for his family to keep business going. Pete's similar; he's got hobbies that he's got to do, and everybody's got stuff to do and that's okay. They're willing to try to do it, but I remember walking that path 65 years ago trying to get to school. I remember there was a wood bridge down there, and I remember when I was a little kid that flooded on both sides. So I was too little to roll up my pants, so I had to take my pants off, my socks off, my shoes off, and walk in the water on one side because it was on both sides of the bridge at the time. My oldest brother used to get on the bridge and jump, they'd say "oh, it's okay for you now to come across," and we'd cross one at a time. That's been repaired; there's a beautiful bridge down there now. But why do they still have to go through a pasture 60 years later just to get food, just to take the kids to school and do those simple things? It’s about four blocks long. So what can be done? I'm not an engineer; I'm a crabby old grandpa this time of year. What gets me through this time is Johnny Cash's old song "Five Feet High and Rising." If you're bored, look it up on your phone. I was a little boy in the song always asking "How high is the water, mama?" That's what the song is about because you didn't know what you had to do the next day. I got kids that age that are thinking the same way: "What are we gonna do if it gets higher? When do we got to go through the pasture?" Now, that 10-foot wide area is okay until you meet another car. Now there's buckthorn growing up, so whose car is going to take a nosedive into a buckthorn patch to let the other one go? Or if you're pulling a trailer, you can't back that up; you're gonna have to do something to get the heck out of their way so you can get to work and get his family going. But that's okay, they'll do the best they can with what they got, but for how long does it got to be this way? One generation I hope would be enough; now it's going to be two generations. My son's house burned down down there five or six years ago probably, and it was a beautiful summer day out and everything else, and all of a sudden it caught fire and burned down. We had three units—Hastings, Ville, and Prescott—respond. A neighbor worked their tail off to try to get that house out and couldn't. Nobody was hurt—houses can be rebuilt—but what happens if the water was up and somebody was hurt, somebody was trapped and needed that ambulance service or that fire truck? As much confidence and trust I have with a fire rescue and ambulance service in town here, I know the cops could get down there. Fire truck? No way. Ambulance? I don't know, with all the branches hanging down. How high do you cut them off just to let them go? It’d be terrible. And we're talking four blocks long for 60-some years. So that's my biggest fear; that's why I'm talking living on Brittany Road about my grandkids and people I love down there. What can we do to help six families have a good chance of going another day without worrying about flood? I know the people on First Street, God bless their hearts, they're going to work their tails off again. These families living down there are going to work their tails off again. What I'm asking for is help to solve a solvable problem. We can't fight the Mississippi, but we can sure give them a chance to get out of the Mississippi's way. So I want you to think about that. Realistically, if you ever went down there—and I hope you do—if you move the road probably 50 yards on one end and 10 yards on the other for three blocks, it’s solved. That's it. So please consider this, and please take a drive down there because it's a beautiful area. Thank you. [19:20] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Thank you, Mr. Majeski. Thank you. Got a question for him? [19:25] **Councilmember Lisa Leifeld:** Um, sorry Bob. Between the two of you, I'm thinking someone might be able to answer this. So what year was that bridge redone down there? [19:34] **Pete Likes:** 1987. The way that it got done was Jim Kleinschmidt was a Road and Bridge guy here, and I ran into a guy by the name of Van Gilder. He was working in the Presbyterian Cemetery in the south end of town, and I went up to him and we were talking. He says, "Where do you live?" I told him I lived down 3000 East 4th Street, my name is Pete Likes. He says, "You live down there where the condemned bridge is?" The bridge that we walked across and drove across in 1953 was condemned; they weren't even supposed to be running the school buses across it. So I came down here to Mr. Kleinschmidt's office as Mr. Van Gilder told me; he says, "Tell him to tip the pile over." So I came into Jim's office and said, "Jim, Pete Likes says tip the pile over." We tipped the pile over; there was the funding for the bridge that they put in down there in 1987. I don't think the city had to pay ten thousand dollars, but that bridge cost was like $77,000 when they put it in. [20:47] **Councilmember Lisa Leifeld:** Question for you guys: at that time, was there discussion with the city about fixing the road? [20:53] **Pete Likes:** No. This is what happened when they did 15th Street going up towards the golf course when they put the sewer and water in there. Cal Rudy was the superintendent, Butch Kane was assistant superintendent of the Road and Bridge. They came to us and they said, "We got fill for East 4th Street." So they started trucking it from all over, because when you drive down that road, the road was lower than the barbed wire fences on the north side of that road. They hauled in for like a month, and all of a sudden the Corps of Engineers caught wind of it: "Oh, they're filling their floodplain." It's not the DNR, it's the Corps of Engineers that's controlling that road down there. And like Bob said, there's probably less than a thousand feet from bluff to bluff that they could continue to build up, but the Corps of Engineers shut them down. [21:42] **Councilmember Lisa Leifeld:** Follow-up question: if you go across any other part of the state of Minnesota, they seem to make provisions for those kinds of things. They allow you to build permanent dikes along the Mississippi River. Why is it that when it comes to a thousand feet, they shut it off? [22:04] **Pete Likes:** My wife and I, we have the easement to that pasture that we talk about. We've asked the Corps of Engineers, we've asked the DNR, we've asked the state of Minnesota... why can't we put gravel in there? Because they don't want to ruin the "aesthetic value" of that three-block area. [22:23] **Councilmember Lisa Leifeld:** Question for you—hold on... So as going forward, because what you guys are saying is amazing. Pete, as the city looks at this, clearly there's an issue with the Army Corps of Engineers. [22:37] **Pete Likes:** It's a Corps of Engineers; they shut that down. But the thing is, when they're going to build your new sewage disposal plant over there down off of 10th Street, there's going to be some provisions that they're going to have to make to get their stuff to go out to the river. We're aware of that because we're the property owners; we've been involved and we know what's going on. But the thing we're asking the city to do is probably three different things. You can address the Corps of Engineers and tell them you're talking a thousand feet of roadway and you've got to raise it up basically another six or seven feet. That way it makes it compatible. When they put the bridge deck in down there in 1987, they put it at the height of the 1965 flood, which was 790. That has a floating deck on top of it. So when the water starts to hit the girders underneath that bridge, you can't drive across it; you got to park your car on one side and walk across it. So we're well-versed because Bob grew up down there, I moved in there in '77... we're a family down there and we work together. But the thing is, we're here now because, like Erica's sitting here, my kids sitting back there, they got grandkids. These kids have to go to school, they have to pick up the garbage. We were aware of the flood risk when we built these houses, but you know what? If something goes readily awry down there, the city of Hastings is going to be called on the carpet if someone burns up in a fire because you can't get the fire truck through. You granted those permits. We built one foot above the '65 flood in the houses we built. We're aware... I would like to thank Tina for sending out that information today. I’m glad Bob came here because he lived there before I did. He understands it; he used to have to get in the boat to cross the Vermilion River by the bridge to go to school. Remember that? When we got married, we had to ride the boat out of the cornfield, come up the river and park in the harbor just to go to work in 1978. So we're aware of what has to happen down there. If anything, the city should go after the state of Minnesota because they're going to come back and say "you issued the permit." Let us put gravel on that road that goes through that pasture. And then you turn around and say, "How about if we negotiate how high we can raise that road from bluff to bluff for those thousand feet?" The city had all kinds of fill in the '60s and the DNR and the Corps of Engineers shut them down. Thank you for your time. [28:02] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Thank you, Mr. Likes. Anyone else wish to speak to the Council at this time? [28:36] **Jonathan Cyriaks:** I want to thank you for the opportunity to come speak tonight. My problem isn't too much water. [28:45] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Could you please state your name and address? [28:47] **Jonathan Cyriaks:** Excuse me, I'm Jonathan Cyriaks [phonetic], and I live 10 miles south of here in Douglas Township. I'm in the Hastings School District; I went to school at Hastings here all 12 years and so did my folks, so I've been a longtime citizen of this area. Anyway, I happen to be a farmer; I farmed all my life and I happen to farm some land right close to Hastings. Over the years I've raised corn for a dollar a bushel and I've raised corn for seven dollars a bushel. Right now it's around six or seven dollars. My concern is if you look at food prices, how food has gone up so much, and everything starts on our soil what we produce. We have some of the best soil right outside our city limits. We can raise two crops of vegetables in the same year. One acre will produce $15,000 of food sold in the grocery store. The farmer doesn't get all that money, but there's a lot of people involved in that. We have land prices, fertilizer prices, farm supplies... even the grocery store has to deal with you. We need grocery stores, we need food. The thing is, I spent four years on the Metropolitan Council and I've talked about this to try to save farmland because we're losing so much. Once you use the best kind of farmland, you surely hate to lose it. The reason why we have such good prime land is because we have irrigation and we're really fortunate because we're right next to the Mississippi River. We have a good underground record to show our water supply is good. But there's some people who want to develop this and pour concrete on it. In time you're going to have to be voting on it—do you want to destroy that and put a house on it? I talked about this many times. We always thought the best thing to do is if you want to build more homes, you shouldn't build right south of the city because that's some of the best land. We are blessed; they say about one-tenth of the land in Minnesota is irrigated and we have some of the best of it. Dakota County has more irrigation than any other county in the state. I was on the State Irrigation Board of Directors for many years. I just want to express these ideas so when you come to vote, you see if there's good farmland. If they want to build more houses, they should cross the bridge and go into Washington County because that land is up and down, it's got rocks and wet holes, whereas we don't have that out here. It's nice level land. I think it's a mortal sin if we keep going that way. I'm 89 years old and I know Hastings pretty well, so I just like to tell you my two cents worth. [33:45] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Thank you, John. I want to appreciate you for your time. Is there any questions? I don't think so. Thank you. [33:55] **Diane Likes:** Hi, I'm Diane Likes. I live at 3000 East 4th Street. I guess one concern I have is if they're putting an emergency vehicle on the other side of the tracks by the church, if there is a train on the tracks, how long could you estimate for an emergency vehicle to get to the East End? And how is somebody going to get from the other side over to the emergency vehicle? Are they going to crawl under the train? Are they going to go between the train? And are they going to keep the trains at minimal length? Because we have waited for a good half hour or 45 minutes before anybody can get through to the other side. They always give us a number to call to let them know what's going on, but we never get an answer from the railroad. So I'd just like to know how long would it take to break up that train to get an emergency vehicle down there. Thank you. [35:31] **Pete Likes:** Pete Likes once again. We talked about the length of the train, and in the last time we had the flood in 2019, we asked the Canadian Pacific whoever runs that... they said a train could be 115 cars long. At 118 cars, the Second Street crossing is plugged. Then 15 or 20 years ago, the city took the Third Street crossing out; they gave in to what the railroad says "we'll give you a new landing and stop arms if you close the Third Street crossing." The thing is, the Third Street crossing in an emergency situation could be used; it could be governed with temporary arms. If you have 117 or 118 cars waiting to go through the tower, they could use a Third Street crossing as an emergency access. It's something that the city is going to have to work out with the railroad lines. Thank you. [37:12] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Anyone else wish to speak to the Council? [Silence] Okay, then. Councilmembers, are there any Council items to be considered? Council, I would accept a motion to accept the consent agenda. Councilmember Folch. [37:34] **Councilmember Tina Folch:** Thank you, your honor. I was going to request to pull three items from the consent agenda for further consideration: number 13, the second reading of city code Amendment chapter 34 regarding the fee schedule for cannabis and hemp businesses; number 17, the update on flood forecast and response planning steps so that we can answer the public's questions; and then number 18, the no wake ordinance. [38:15] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Thank you, Councilmember Folch. We'll put those under Administration. With removing those three items, could I have a motion to accept the consent agenda? Councilmember Leifeld? Second by Councilmember Fox. Any discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. [Ayes] Opposed state by saying nay. That motion prevails. Under awarding of contracts and public hearings, we have our 2023 neighborhood infrastructure improvements. For this item, we will have an introduction by Public Works Director Ryan Stempski, followed by a public hearing and action by the Council. Welcome, Ryan. [39:10] **Ryan Stempski:** Thank you, Mayor. Mayor, members of the Council, as stated, tonight we're here to conduct the hearing for the 2023 neighborhood infrastructure improvements. Item of note: the resolution in your packets tonight will be ordering the improvements and adopting the assessment roles. Because of the supermajority requirement we have for ordering of the improvements, we didn't do that at the last hearing last month, so that's placed on the resolution tonight. The vote would need six council members to pass. The neighborhood we're talking about is the same as the last hearing: Pleasant Drive is the dominant street with several side streets. It is predominantly a reconstruction but also has some reclamation. Total project cost is about 4.3 million dollars, of which the portion of assessments we're talking about tonight is approximately $500,000. Our approach to assessment this year is a little bit different. We looked at the lots and they were extremely curvilinear and non-standard. We drew upon the city ordinance that says for irregular lots, a per-lot assessment basis may be used in lieu of formulas. The recommendation from staff and the operations committee is to use a per-lot assessment. We used our third-party consultant, Patchin Messner, for appraisal analysis. They provided a special benefit value for the property types. Again, we carried forward that for corner lots, the short side gets 100% and the long side gets 25%. This year, it's notable that there was no Backlot assessment for homes along Pleasant Drive that access off a different street. [Shows slides]. Here on Old Bridge Lane, if we used front footage, it would range from zero to 300 feet. You can see lot 2522 has a shared driveway but technically zero frontage. That's why the per-lot assessment is applicable. For a single-family home on a reconstructed street, it’s $7,650 per lot. For reclaimed streets, it’s $6,750 per lot. These values are actually at the low end of the appraiser's range. Some unique properties: St. Phillips Church is over five acres. The appraiser looks at the "highest and best use"—in this case, potential for 12 homes. The assessment for that parcel is $41,400. On the south end, we have agricultural land zoned at one unit per 10 acres. Those assessments are $6,750 per lot, but they are in "Green Acres" so they are deferred until the land is developed. Total assessments are just over $496,000. Payments begin October 1st, 2023. If unpaid by November 30th, they are certified to county taxes over a 10-year payoff with interest projected at 5% to 6%. We do have assessment abatement/aid via the Community Development Block Grant for those who qualify based on income. We also have senior/disabled/military deferral options. With that, I will stand for any questions and allow the Mayor to conduct the hearing. [52:43] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Thank you, Ryan. At this time, I'll have the public hearing start. Is there anyone that wishes to speak to the assessment or the infrastructure project? [Silence] At this time I will close the public hearing. Council, open for discussion. Councilmember Lund. [53:13] **Councilmember Lund:** Nothing big, I just want to say thank you again for rethinking the fee structure and going at a per-lot approach. I think we have a process, but sometimes it needs to be flexible, and I appreciate that you did that. [53:40] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Thank you, Councilmember Lund. Councilmember Folch. [53:45] **Councilmember Tina Folch:** Thank you, your honor. Ryan, I was a little concerned about the $41,000 being assessed to St. Phillips Church. Considering it's a religious institution that isn't taxed and churches have been struggling with attendance, I'm concerned about the financial impact. Have you had a conversation with the pastor or leadership about possible financial aid they would be eligible for? [54:55] **Ryan Stempski:** Yes, we actually have talked to them several times. We went through the assessment methodology with them, and they were very pleasant to deal with. They understood the assessment and were encouraged by the process beginning. Even if they are tax-exempt, state statute says they still have to abide by the assessments we levy. In our conversations, they did not have further objections. [56:45] **Councilmember Dave Pemble:** Ryan, the pastor was concerned about the project starting the same week as their annual garage sale. I was just curious if we can make sure we give them access both ways in and out of their parking area during that sale? [57:20] **Ryan Stempski:** Once we get a contractor on board, we can have those conversations about accommodations. We'll work that out with the contractor. [58:05] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Motion's been made by Councilmember Leifeld and second by Councilmember Fox. Any additional discussion? All those in favor signify by saying aye. [Ayes] Opposed nay. Motion prevails. Under Administration, first we'll hear the second reading for the city code Amendment regarding the fee schedule for cannabis and hemp business. Dan Wietecha will give us an introduction. [58:45] **Dan Wietecha:** Thank you, Mayor. This is a step following discussions with the Public Safety Advisory Commission. We need to set license fees to cover costs associated with enforcement and community impact. The recommendation for a retail establishment was initially $10,000, but Council reduced it to $8,000 during the first reading. Other fees like the $500 investigation fee and $200 for manufacturing/testing remain as initially recommended. If adopted tonight, it would be effective 10 days after publication. [1:00:15] **Councilmember Tina Folch:** Thank you, your honor. The $8,000 fee caught my attention. During the pandemic, we saw our on-sale liquor establishments struggle with a $4,200 fee, and we kept deferring it. I don't understand why we would require $8,000 for cannabis when liquor is only $4,200. They are both controlled substances. I feel we shouldn't be setting this so high that it discourages our business community from taking advantage of selling products like gummies that are currently legal. I would advocate that we lower it to be reflective of the liquor license rate. [1:03:57] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** At this time, I'm going to ask Counselor to speak to us. [1:04:45] **City Attorney:** Thank you, your honor. I think there is a difference, Councilmember Folch, between a very regulated liquor product and a completely unregulated CBD product. The state of Minnesota does not test or regulate these; they tell what the packaging has to be, but they don't monitor them. It is left to local law enforcement to monitor and test. I can guarantee you about 90% of stores selling them today are not truly complying with dosage laws. This is new territory requiring special drug recognition experts. I think the initial higher fee is justified, though the exact amount is up to the Council. [1:06:50] **Councilmember Jen Fox:** Thank you, your honor. I think also neighboring cities were higher—that’s where the $10,000 was derived from. We aren't on an island with that. Serious businesses that are going to be the best partners are those that will be able to manage a larger fee. We can always revise it later, but we don't know a lot at this point in time. [1:08:35] **Councilmember Dave Pemble:** Part of the aspect of looking at this is that we don't have a good base. It’s not regulated by the state yet. If we're going from $10,000 down to $8,000, I can live with that for right now and see what transpires as the legislative session ends. [1:09:40] **Councilmember Jen Fox:** I am a business owner and I pay a lot of fees, and they are prohibitive. An $8,000 fee is not only hard to pay, but it's going to stop businesses from opening. If we want to see businesses thrive, we should create an environment where they can do so. I will make a motion to amend it to $6,000. [1:11:15] **Councilmember Tina Folch:** I’ll second that. I think it’s important not to create barriers. I don’t feel we should be penalizing the business community with an arbitrary figure. I’d rather see Outlets selling safe, legal cannabis products within our community. [1:13:30] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** I do want these businesses to be successful, but our Public Safety Advisory Commission spent numerous hours looking at data from surrounding communities. It was already lowered from $10,000 to $8,000. Also, if the state later sets a cap, everything will be prorated and refunded. There is a motion on the table and a second. All those in favor of the motion to reduce to $6,000 signify by saying aye. [Ayes: Folch, Fox]. Opposed nay. [Nays: Fasbender, Pemble, Leifeld, Lund]. That motion fails. [1:15:10] **Councilmember Dave Pemble:** I'll move the original $8,000 fee. [1:15:15] **Councilmember Lisa Leifeld:** Second. [1:15:20] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** All those in favor signify by saying aye. [Ayes] Opposed nay. [Nays: Folch, Fox]. Motion prevails. Dan, you may continue with the flood update. [1:16:10] **Dan Wietecha:** This is informational. We look at projections for future flood levels. This year we've had an extraordinary amount of snowpack. It’s tough to work from projections two weeks out, but when it gets to a week out, we start looking at mobilization. We have existing procedures for protecting public facilities and utilities, such as sealing manholes. We’ve been in contact with Branch Line Church to use their parking lot as a staging area for sandbagging if needed. We also park an emergency vehicle on the other side of the tracks in case a train blocks the crossing during an emergency. [1:20:20] **Councilmember Tina Folch:** Thank you, your honor. I have a couple questions. The memo mentioned a 50% to 75% chance of moderate flooding. In 2019, the city took the lead on sandbagging and organizing volunteers. Is the city organizing that this year, or are you expecting the Council or residents to do it? [1:22:45] **Ryan Stempski:** Public Works would take the lead in coordination with Branch Line Church. We have 25,000 sandbags ready and big equipment. Our crews won’t literally fill the bags—we don’t go on private property for liability reasons—but we will provide the materials and deliver filled pallets to curbsides for volunteers to place. [1:26:40] **Councilmember Tina Folch:** To follow up on Mr. Majeski’s concerns: I drove that DNR land with him and his truck was being hit on both sides by buckthorn. If action isn’t taken to clear that, there will be a major problem. It’s a public safety issue. I would like to hear from other council members about our obligation to residents in Cow Town. I’ve never heard so much anxiety from a group of neighbors as I hear from that east side. [1:31:50] **Councilmember Lund:** I think it's a completely legitimate conversation. My thought is to have the Operations Committee meet to discuss the long-term and short-term issues. That will give Ryan time to pull information together since there are multiple entities involved. [1:32:35] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** The next Ops committee meeting is August 14th; we can possibly organize one sooner. Chief Wilske, did you have anything to add? [1:33:15] **Chief David Wilske:** We park the emergency vehicle there because we have little control over the trains. In an emergency, we would cross even with a stopped train. I’ll also say the Likes family and others down there are very resourceful; they’ve helped us locate missing persons before. We are watching the models and are ready. [1:34:50] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Motion to accept the report? [Motion by Folch, Seconded]. All in favor? [Ayes]. Motion prevails. Dan, the no wake ordinance. [1:35:35] **Dan Wietecha:** About two years ago, residents asked for no wake zones due to erosion and safety concerns. This is outside city jurisdiction and requires Dakota and Washington counties to coordinate with the DNR. Washington County was reluctant, and recently Dakota County said they are not seeing a public safety need for it and are not taking it further. [1:38:35] **Councilmember Tina Folch:** This is a bunch of baloney. Residents and marina owners have come forward over and over. It affects tourism; boaters from Prescott don’t come here because it’s not safe to dock at the public dock without a no wake zone. I personally spoke to Sheriff Leslie and Sheriff Starry about this. Where is the speed study they promised? I am personally upset that our residents are being so flippantly disregarded. [1:42:35] **Chief David Wilske:** I spoke with Sheriff Leko today; he is willing to continue the conversation. The ultimate decider is the DNR. A no wake zone of 1.2 miles would add 30 to 40 minutes of travel time for boaters. We need to look at if that would stop people from coming to the landing. Also, buoys are difficult because of the narrow river and barge traffic. One middle ground might be enacting a no wake zone only when we reach certain flood stages. [1:50:30] **Councilmember Tina Folch:** Residents are concerned about the day-to-day, not just flood stages. Boats zip by at unreasonable speeds and people almost fall in the water. It’s a disservice to our residents when this keeps getting ignored. [1:51:50] **Mayor Mary Fasbender:** Council, any announcements? [Lists Earth Day birding, yard waste drop-off, and upcoming committee meetings]. Motion to adjourn? Councilmember Leifeld and Councilmember Pemble. We are adjourned.