[0:01] Mayor Luke Hellier: Okay, we'll call this May 27th work session to order. could join me in the moment of silence and the pledge of [0:19] Mayor Luke Hellier: allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. All right, moving on to citizens comments. We have any today unless is there anybody online? [0:42] Mayor Luke Hellier: We'll roll right into the recreation and heritage center strategic plan overview and Mr. Masiarchin te that up, I believe. [0:53] Joe Masiarchin: Yep. And actually, I'm going to be handing it off to Susan, our rec manager. So, I'll just chime in when I All right. It's welcome. Thank you. [0:58] Susan (Rec Manager): Thank you for having us. Um, so the recreation department and the senior center did uh hadn't had a strategic plan done for about 20 years, Joe. Um, so it was time uh way past time to get that done and try to figure out where where we're going and how we're doing and where we want what we want to look like in 5 to 10 years. So we took some time um there were about 15 16 of us that went over to the art center for a couple days in February. Um Aurora Consulting um worked with us. They had also done the art center strategic plan a few years ago. Um, and Joe spoke very highly of them and it was a really great experience. Um, really interesting. I had never gone through the process before. So, he did a really good job of asking questions that didn't feel like you were really working too much, but he [1:44] Susan (Rec Manager): was really getting good information out. So, um the group consisted of recreation and heritage center staff, um advisory, the park and recck natural resource committee members um, and two two members of the active adults. Um so it was a nice it was a nice good group. [2:00] Susan (Rec Manager): Um a couple environmental resources staff also attended. They switched off to Aan and Mac so they were there too. Um so day one um we kind of just talked about our current reality where we are um and kind of talked about where we wanted to go in the next five years. And then a couple weeks later on day two we identified barriers. Um why can't what do we need to get to the next level? [2:22] Susan (Rec Manager): What do we what don't we have? What do we need kind of a thing. So what did we need to overcome to get to the next level? Um so again current reality um these are all things you all are very aware of but our our the membership over at the Heritage Center is going crazy. [2:38] Susan (Rec Manager): We got lots of seniors over there which is awesome. We have about 67 facilities. We have a almost 500 sessions in our um summer brochure. Um our programming over at the ELC out at Ritter is is expanding and of course our population is growing. So, all things that you guys are very well aware of. Um, current reality, um, we're growing obviously out at Ritter Farm Park with a new facility out there. [3:03] Susan (Rec Manager): Um, we have a beautiful new facility out at Antlers Park that we're doing some programming out of. Um, we're working on expanding our social media communications. Um, we're going to be dedicating a page for our website. Um, we also have our Facebook up and running now for for park or parks, recreation, and heritage center. Um, we have updated our scholarship fund. Um, help me with my numbers, Joe. We used to give a $100 per person. Um, and they could use an 8020. They had to pay 80%. No, we paid 80%, they paid 20%. Um, we just didn't really have very many people using it. [3:37] Joe Masiarchin: So, we had a substantial balance in it. Um, we were hoping to to reach more people and even even doing 8020 splits, some people still couldn't afford them. Um, so I think we're up to $300 per person and we will pay a 100% of a program. So um, so and I've seen substantial growth. Yeah, I've seen we're hoping to get the word out um, a little bit more on how to get people to use that system, but yeah. [4:05] Mayor Luke Hellier: When you say dedicated website, parks and recck doesn't have its own website, a page on the Oh, no. [4:18] Joe Masiarchin: So we we currently do not have our own URL. uh and the park and rec department doesn't have a landing page in the same way that art center heritage or the city page does. As part of the new website design, we are getting that. Um so that's a great step for us. It'll have kind of a dedicated URL and a slightly different look than the rest which will help us stand apart a little bit. So yeah, interesting. [4:39] Mayor Luke Hellier: So yeah, interesting. [4:42] Susan (Rec Manager): Um and the last one is just substantial growth um in the active adults over at the Heritage Center. Um we talked about trends, you know, what's going on in our community. [4:47] Susan (Rec Manager): Um obviously we have new cultures coming to our community that we're we're trying to service and find out what they need and like. Um we have people retiring. Um again, trying to trying to make spots for all of them over at Heritage Center. We're running out of room there pretty quick. Um obviously we have a growing population and we have some facility growth needs. Um people's expectations are rising. Um and we also want to stay affordable. Um our strengths in our department, we think our staff is a strength of ours. Um I always say park and wreck people are people people. We like we like to be with people. We like to listen to them. We like to, you know, we like to hear from them. So we think that's a strength. Um, we have a great [5:33] Susan (Rec Manager): community that's e eager to participate in our programs. Um, we're still growing and attracting new people and that brings in new ideas and new requests for programs. Um, we're very thankful that we have open-minded leadership. Um, I have worked in other communities where you didn't try something if you didn't know it was going to be successful. Um, it's really nice to be able to offer a program knowing it's going to maybe start small and grow from there. So, it's really nice that um, have leadership that's that's open to that. [6:01] Susan (Rec Manager): Um and then we have a very strong support u volunteer support over at the heritage center. Uh gaps um this is kind of things that we need more of. Um resources. We can always use more time. [6:16] Susan (Rec Manager): We can always use more money. We can always use more people. Um community feedback. Um we we have started doing surveys of everybody who participates in our programs. Um, so we kind of we're getting really good feedback from the people that are participating, but we don't know why the people who aren't participating aren't or andor what they want or need. So we would like to do a communitywide survey to get the people who aren't already participating with us. Um, we have pretty good community awareness about us. Um, or excuse me, we we are we are hoping that we have enough community awareness and education about our program offerings. And that part of that is our brand and identity. Um we would like to create a brand for the for the recreation and heritage. So when [7:02] Susan (Rec Manager): people see a flyer or they see a brochure, they know that it's coming from us. Um a lot of times people mix us up with community ed. Um so we want to make sure that people know who we are and who they are, what we're really good at and what they're really good at. So we just want to make sure they know who we are. [7:19] Susan (Rec Manager): um cultural awareness when we deliver programs and how people perceive our programs. Again, we want them to know who we are and what we do really well. And then um li and we are limited in our facility space. So, we don't have a community center. We don't have gyms. [7:36] Susan (Rec Manager): So, we we make do um we've done again we've added some programming over at Antlers, which has been super helpful us helpful and um ELC has really helped us out at Ritter Farm Park. Um but otherwise we're still kind of struggling for space. Um and we are we have met as staff. Um we know that the heritage center is really busy during the day, not as busy at night. Art center is the opposite way. They're a little less busy during the day, a lot more busy at night. So we're trying to figure out if we will if we can move some senior stuff over to the art center or some art center over the senior center and then recreation has to fit in there when there when both of those things aren't busy. facility space is always a gap. [8:17] Susan (Rec Manager): Um, boulders are things we need to get over. Um, again, flexibility of facilities are aging. Um, again, um, as we appreciate having the heritage center, but it was obviously we all know it used to be a police station. So, there's lots of small spaces in there. We need some bigger spaces. So, how do we make use of that? Are we able to, you know, what can we do over there to make it better use more useful for us? um community expectation for niche programs. Um again, an example of that is cricket. Um we have a culture that would like some cricket, so we're trying to meet that need as well. Things programs like that. Um we have a lot of competition from other recreation providers. Um athletic associations, the YMCA, soccer shots, everybody [9:02] Susan (Rec Manager): everybody's everybody's got something recreational. Senior high senior living places now have their own programming as well. Um so we need to convince them that why they need to come and and particip participate with us. Um staff workload and demand. Um we're small but mighty which is great. Um and we again sometimes in the summer we get a little crazy because we got so many things going on. That's our busy season. So um we just have to make sure that we can all handle that. Um reviewing previously successful programs. We have um luckily in Lakeville we have a long history but we have some things we've been doing for a really long time and sometimes we don't take the time after it's over to really talk about how did it go? What can we do better? Can we change it? Do we need to modify it? Is it maybe need [9:48] Susan (Rec Manager): to be retired? We've done it long enough and we just don't need to do it anymore. So we just need to um make sure that we're evaluating our own programs. Uh and then allocation of facilities to programs. Again, we just would always use more facilities to do things. [10:05] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Question. Sure. Um and maybe I don't know if I'm getting ahead of myself, but um when you're talking about space needs and you're talking about the competition, um are we looking into um partnering with our competition? [10:25] Susan (Rec Manager): Yep. And we do that. We, you know, we do partner already with community ed. do some joint programming things like that. [10:37] Councilmember Michelle Volk: I was thinking more of the senior buildings that have, you know, run some of their own stuff, but maybe creating a partnership with them. [10:44] Joe Masiarchin: We have over our history um done select programs um and Art Center Heritage both do a great job of that. I think there's opportunities with recreation as we continue to look at how those programs develop to maybe look at that more, but I think we're we're always open to working with other community partners. um to increase or improve their programming and do the same with ours. Um so a lot of what we offer are based on on partnerships. [11:15] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Where do they hold their activities? Are we able to just um rent their space? [11:21] Joe Masiarchin: So we do we have a combination of programs that run kind of in all of those formats. Um we host some you know we this is where Antlers has been great for us. You know, we do a lot of programming at antlers with other partners and there are some programs where we will travel and go to um you know, some of the senior living facilities and do programs. It just depends on what they're looking for, what fits for them. [11:33] Joe Masiarchin: And for us, it's also about making sure that it fits in financially. We need to be able to cover our costs for supplies and staffing and all that. Sometimes that fits their model, sometimes it doesn't. But for us, it's always a good opportunity to kind of reevaluate and explore. So, [11:53] Susan (Rec Manager): And I would say we have really good partnerships with many of the senior living. They they sponsor a lot of the programs over at the heritage center. Um and again we have done um kind of a senior living tour where you go to like five different places. You have lunch, you have snacks, things around. So I think Bridget has built a really good partnership with the with the senior living places in town. [12:12] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Be kind of cool to have a progressive dinner. Huh. [12:14] Susan (Rec Manager): Yeah, that's kind of what they do. They used to do you know you'd have or lunch I guess. Exactly. That's right. [12:18] Susan (Rec Manager): All right. So, we took all of that information um that we went through in those two days and then came up with our vision of where we want to be in three to five years. Um which is great because against I say sometimes you put your nose to the grindstone and you're just trying to get through every day and every week that you can't even think about three to five years. So, it was really nice to take two days to think about where do we where do we really want to go with this department? Um so, um yep. Um, yeah. All right. So, yes, go ahead. [13:00] Joe Masiarchin: I was going to say, so all of all of that kind of came together and allowed us to create what is the strategic plan. Um, and this is kind of the the big picture, the five-year plan. This is kind of where we're intending to go with things, right? [13:05] Susan (Rec Manager): Yep. So, we got down to kind of the four directives. Um, exploring new funding opportunities. Um, so again, this this talks about our scholarship program. We've already made changes to that. We may make some more to that. um simplify our fees um and make sure that they're in line with everybody with everybody else so we're not too high or too low. Um we've also for our um for our rental facilities, we've tried to go to block pricing blocks of time. Um so it's just very standard. We don't have all different hours and times and things like that. So it's fairly easy to know how much our what our um expenses are. [13:39] Susan (Rec Manager): Um again, sponsorship programs, we've talked a little bit about that. Um, again, we have great partners in town that allow us to um, keep our, uh, prices affordable. Um, one of the things we're talking about over at the Heritage Center is Key Wests. Um, again, it's an aging population and the reality of is that people pass away when they are at a senior center. And so, you know, promoting to them that you can leave a legacy to us, how however big or small that might be, but remember us in that. [14:10] Susan (Rec Manager): Um so um again exploring new funding opportunities is one of our strategic plan. Um reviewing current facility use and future needs. I feel like I've talked a lot about facilities here already, but um we would like to tour some other facilities to make to see um how have people used their art center or their heritage or their senior centers for programming? What do they do? How do they make it work? What do they have that we don't have? What you know, we can dream a little bit a little bit of what we want. Um that one too. [14:48] Joe Masiarchin: Yeah. So I think the big thing with that and it's we kind of point to what we did at the art center about maximizing the existing facilities that we do have. Um and that's one of the things you know looking at spaces that we already have and small tweaks or adjustments here or there um in how we schedule spaces, how we use spaces allows us to use them very differently and allows us to then increase programming or serve the community differently. So one that's kind of a big focus on on the facilities we do have. Um, and it's been a good discussion among staff about utilizing a facility like Antlers that is rarely used or rented during the week, you know, mornings. Um, it allows us now an opportunity to maybe use that more for WCK programming and save evenings and weekends for rentals. So, exploring those options as well so that we can continue to provide space for recreation to expand programming, meet the need, and use a space that's maybe going underutilized. [15:36] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Do you does that also include like the conference room and public works, you know, as like classroom space like not just parks facilities but also facilities? [15:43] Joe Masiarchin: Yeah. And we I would say Casey and Susan do a good job as they as they're planning programming to find a space to house them. We always find a place and you know whether it's um at the Art Center Heritage, you know, recreation really does float but it works. Yeah. Yeah. Um, and I think as we've met with staff, you know, pulling the whole group together, we've had some really good discussions about finding those times that are commonly available within our own buildings, right? Um, and Susan's already referenced art center may be less busy during the day. Heritage is bursting at the seams. So, what programs could feasibly be moved to the art center? Um, those are the types of things that we're looking at when we're talking maximizing facility use. [16:35] Susan (Rec Manager): And some of that will take time. don't like change very much and they really like to go to where they're comfortable. Um, so we we surveyed all the group leaders to say, would you be willing to do your book club over at the art center? Would you be willing to go to a park building? So, we're still getting those that feedback back. A lot of them are not. I mean, they're not they're not super excited. They're not super excited. They might be willing. [16:49] Susan (Rec Manager): So, we'll see. And I think partly too, and Bridge is very good about adding, let's add a book club, let's add a this discussion, let's add a this. And I think as we add if they want to add something we're going to say we would love to add that but you might have to you have might have to meet at the art center or at Antlers or somewhere else. We'd love to have you but we you just don't you just don't fit into our schedule right now. It's just the building's too. [17:21] Councilmember Dan Wolter: Is there any value in trying to leverage because there's you know there's some private spaces certainly for like daytime you know bonus room there's everybody during the day and then the F3 which is on 50 I don't think they use that during the day I just wonder [17:34] Joe Masiarchin: yeah I think at this point we I think those types of spaces we we have where recreation is maybe more in the need is gym space to those larger spaces where we can do some of the um sports related activities. Um but again we you know we've used classrooms at the art center for exactly that and it's worked. It's maybe not ideal but um there's larger spaces I think that we can we can continue to explore at this point. Um and that's kind of where we hit this you know that next topic as we look you know 5 10 15 20 years down the road. Obviously, you know, the evaluation of new or expanded or future facilities is always going to be kind of out there. Um, in the short term, it's about what can we do today, you know, next five years to really use what we've got. So, [18:21] Councilmember John Bermel: And so as a community, do we have many um training centers that are focused on training kids usually after school on whichever specific sport, but their facility is pretty much empty during the day and it would be considered probably like gym space. [18:41] Joe Masiarchin: That's and I guess that's a good thought. I would say what comes first to mind is the are the schools which we always have trouble getting in check. No, but there's independent businesses, but that's an area I would say we probably have not explored as much. Um, and it is, but I don't know how many there are in Lakeville. I mean, I, you know, I know other communities have some, but I don't know what's in Lakeville. There's Lakeville soccer. They have a but, you know, that's just their own. Um there's the total hockey place, you know, but they're all gonna they're all forprofit, you know, they're all gonna just want to cater to their business, right? They're forprofit and they could rent out their space when it's empty, I guess, you know, for a reduced rate since it's not doing them any good. Uh having to air condition, you know, type of thing. It's costing a money empty. [19:43] Councilmember John Bermel: Yeah. Yeah. Space. Yeah. If they can fill their space, I'm sure they would, right? So, if we offer try to offer something there, it may be a time when it kids wouldn't typically be available. Something to look into. [19:54] Susan (Rec Manager): All right. We'll move on to optimize programming to meet community expectations. Um, talked a little bit about this using feedback to update programming. Again, we're getting some really good survey data back from people who are already participating and hope to do a communitywide survey to see how we can get people to find out about us. Um, prioritize collaborative staff planning and evaluation. And again, that's we've already started doing that, getting together to talk about how we could all work together, which is really great. I know the art center has come over to do some art art programs over at Heritage Center already. Um, so just, you know, using our staff to do some collaborative different programming. Um again create the recognizable recognizable brands so people know who we are and then assess technology to improve customer and staff experience. [20:42] Susan (Rec Manager): Um that would be our rec track. We want to make sure people know how to make an account, how to register. Um we occasionally have problems with that. So just education on that. Um the URL for the park and wreck will be helpful because they don't have to go through the city website to try to find parks and wreck. They can just go right to park and wreck. Um, another part of this is we'd like to get all of our rentable rent rental spaces on one page. Um, right now you have to go to the art center to rent the art center and to the heritage center to rent that and to us to rent any park shelters. So, if we could just have one page with everything you can rent right here from us, it's just easier to be like, you know, where do I fit? So, you don't have to go to three different places, just one. Um, let's see. [21:24] Councilmember Dan Wolter: How are seniors when it comes to smartphones and apps and things like that? [21:30] Susan (Rec Manager): Surprisingly good. And they offer actually offer some classes over there. Of course, you're going to have the older seniors who aren't very technological. Um but um they're they're pretty savvy with it. And some of this the over at the Heritage Center, a lot of they they take a lot more in-person registrations than we do. You know, a lot of our our registration is online recreation. Um but the Heritage Center, they walk in and and register there. So if they can't Obviously, if somebody can't use their computer, we're going to get them registered. So, but surprisingly, some of them are probably better than me. Um, see, um, and then assess staff responsibility and volunteer opportunities. Um, evaluate full-time [22:10] Susan (Rec Manager): and seasonal staffing based on programming levels. Um, most of the programming that we do right now is based on contractual um, arrangements. Um, so we hire a contractor to do our tennis lessons and then we usually do a split, 7030 splits. So I always go for easy math. So if we charge $100, they get 70, we get 30. Um, right. So then the the model used to be you hired tennis instructors and you hired um teachers and you hired coaches and things like that. Now we are mostly contractual. So it's going to be a um a balancing act of would it be better to hire our own staff? Is it feasible to hire our own staff? Can we find our own staff? It's getting a little better. [22:52] Susan (Rec Manager): There was a few years there where it was really hard to find any staff at all. So, um that'll be a that that'll be a comparison that will be whether we should stay with contractual or try to hire some more summer employees. Uh and then establish do a volunteer program. Again, Heritage Center does a really good job. They have a great volunteers over there that, you know, greet people at the door. They set up for lunches. They call people. They do the library. lots of volunteers. Um, and in the recreation department, um, we don't have a a great ongoing program. We need volunteers for things like the haunted forest, um, for the illumination walk, things like that. But we'd like to get a a better year round system going. [23:32] Susan (Rec Manager): So, if we need help with something, we we have a a bank of people to call. Um, we also are looking back into getting an internship program started again. um to get a student here in the summer would be really helpful um just for time wise. Um and again that's usually getting a a person who's ready to start their career at a better better rate than they're going to make full-time. So get some work out of them and get a project done usually that will help help them. That's some of our staff things that we're working. Um so that's the four pieces of our strategic plan. And then so underneath all of those two, we have everybody was assigned tasks. Um so here's just kind of an idea. It's a 18-month plan. Um so our first things [24:17] Susan (Rec Manager): will start becoming due here July 1st and then again October 1st, January 1st, April 1st. And so there's an implementation plan for the recreation side and also for the heritage heritage center. Um so one of the reasons we liked this consultant and this process particularly at the art center for the two that we did was specifically related to the implementation plan. It kept everybody on task. You know first 18 months we've got laid out and then we renew it after that for the for the fiveyear duration of the of the strategic plan. So so far I would say the challenge with it has been everybody is excited and is moving so far ahead uh and we've not talked. So just keeping in mind this does not all need to be accomplished today, right? This is five years ultimately. So we can take our time, we can do this, right? Um but it's good to see that we've got enthusiasm amongst the staff. Um and I would say so far things have been really positive. So yeah. Yeah. [25:35] Mayor Luke Hellier: Any questions? I over I have a few. Um, I this could be a sensitive question, but as I'm hearing you talk, I see the Heritage Center sort of as under the umbrella of parks and wreck, at least from how a user might see that. Is that kind of the direction at least in the marketing and how you use the system that you're going? Not necessarily that the director of the heritage center would be under parks and rec director. Um or maybe I maybe I'm confusing the whole structure anyway. Um but I guess is that kind of what you're thinking? [26:15] Joe Masiarchin: So Heritage Center is under us. Bridget does Bridget as the Lakeville area active adults manager works for Susan. Um and Bridget really oversees the facility and the programming there and then works closely with the um historical society Neil Ribbon. So there is a kind of a direct workflow with all of that. But I would say this is precisely where the confusion for us comes in because we reference a lot of times the heritage center programming when in reality our senior programming is actually Lakeville area active adults. It's very rarely referenced that way and I think just in naming in branding there's confusion. Um I would say from the customer's perspective we're less concerned about that. you know, we want you to know we've got programming for 50 plus and here's how to get it and here's where you go. How it's structured within the department is less important, right? And it's in the same way that art center also reports to us, but also has its own identity. Heritage is really that same way. Um, and recreation and parks really should be in a lot of respects set up that same way even though it's all the same department, right? We we crossuse facilities and, you know, programs and supplies and all of that. But yeah, it does lead to some confusion because the other the other thing that I've noticed, you already referenced it, but when I get the uh community ed packet and then I get the parks and wreck packet, sometimes I have to go back to the front cover to figure out which packet I'm looking at because I don't some of the programs seem similar, but I mean, what's the strategy and what you're not doing because community ed is doing them and we have a good we meet with community education to talk about kind of our lane and their lane and there's some programming we even run jointly right so there's some programming you are going to see in community guys brochure and our brochure where I would say if confusion comes in our brochures [27:54] Joe Masiarchin: do look very similar so much so that when we published this summaries we realized community education used the same photo two years ago so which we should try to avoid right so we're trying to work on that with communications as well and looking for some maybe some updated um updated appearances for ours so that it does stand out. Um, but I think when we talk about programming for recreation, we have a clear idea of who we are and what we do. I don't think that necessarily comes across to the community. Um, and that's really where we want to continue to try to make sure that there's a better understanding of who we are. [28:38] Mayor Luke Hellier: I would say more often for me because it's confusing. I would sign my kids up for doing stuff. But when I hear from people in the city, they think all the community stuff is ours. You know, they see that as separate. I know this would be I don't even want to say a one unified registration for both would be really great. I don't It sounds like a hero task, but that would be nice. [29:00] Joe Masiarchin: Yeah. one one sign on and this is where we say at least on our part we want to make sure we are making this as easy as possible. We know that the software that we use is not necessarily the most userfriendly. Um but there are things that we can do to streamline to make it easier um as simple as just how you create your own account. And when we did the Hannah pavilion last year, Susan did a great video with communications on, you know, how to set up the tables and how the TV works and all that. And that video is used constantly. Our renters reference it all the time. So the thought was, we'll have Susan do this for how to create an account track. Same thought process. It's been great for us. And I think there So there are things like that that I think we could do to at least make life easier for for the residents. Yeah. I mean, I was this is my in-laws were like, "Oh, we're going to sign these their kids and our kids up for the same thing. We sign up for the community was part." [30:11] Councilmember Joshua Lee: Did you did your group during the session talk about um sort of who the target audience is and you you referenced all the different groups that provide programming? is our audience the programs that they're not doing. Uh or are we trying to keep it broad so we're offering lots of different things that everyone can even if it's already offered in a another way? [30:29] Joe Masiarchin: We do try not to compete um you know especially with larger organizations like community ed. Um but there are areas that are really arts and recreation, right? Nature programming being one, the Ritter events, the community events, a lot of the sports uh with Rev sports and all that is very much us. And um those are the things I think when you know when we talk about the confusion between the departments or community and us we need to talk more about the things that are solely like the parks and recreation. And I think that's where um that's where our focus is at this point. We need to highlight the things that you can't get somewhere else. You're not going to get nature programming like we can do at Ritter um through community ed. So we've got to continue to focus on what we do and what we do well. The other thing I will add in we did part of this process we did it's a mission money matrix looking at what we charge for programs and where it falls within our mission which I think was a really good process for us as staff. Um and that's where we were able to kind of focus and highlight some programs that were maybe low on our mission and low on revenue that we need to reanalyze whether or not those are programs we continue to offer. If it doesn't meet our mission and we're not making revenue on it, why are we offering it? And there's a whole series of programs that are high revenue and high mission. we need to focus more on those. So, I think there's a lot of analyzing that we're doing as far as what our offerings are. So, but it's been fun. [31:55] Councilmember Joshua Lee: One more. Um, I saw a small uh smile when you talked about the changing expectations of what what are some of the things that our heritage centers uh users are looking for that have changed over time? [32:10] Susan (Rec Manager): Uh well pickle ball. Hook ball didn't exist, you know, five ten years ago. So, a lot of that. [32:20] Joe Masiarchin: Well, and I, again, I I ran a senior center for a lot of years a while ago, too. And the whole model is changing, right? Um, ours is 50 plus. Um, and it's how do you get those younger people in there? I'm over 50, but I don't know that I would go over there, but maybe if they had a kayaking trip or they had something, maybe I would do that. So, I think especially at with senior programming, you have to be like, how do how do we keep going, right? the the again it's a model where you know you've got a changing population so we got to keep we got to get younger people coming in so I think that I think Bridget is doing a really good job of she calls them junior seniors of attracting people you know but part of that is also that the staff there is reviewing you know programming that's later at night right so we know if you're 50 if you're 50 or older um often you might be working the times that the programs that we're currently offering are still So, um, we're reviewing kind of how that's working for the facility because she's got a whole demographic that we're not really getting. [33:17] Councilmember Joshua Lee: Sure. So, well, I imagine you have 50 to 100 year olds, you know, so that you're getting into almost three generations of, uh, folks using these heritage centers. So, um, yeah, it's that's an interesting thing to try to keep up with three different generations of these. [33:38] Joe Masiarchin: And I think I think the next wave I I'd like to do the next prediction. I think it's going to be pinball and arcade games. Get them into play a little Pac-Man for that age group. [34:04] Councilmember Joshua Lee: I suppose you need to be in the mentality of the schools. You have the elementary, the middle school, and the the high school levels. You know, as you think about programming and our programming really goes, you know, birth through, you know, end of life heritage. But yeah, but as a department we are we are offering you know so to your point though we we do focus on programming that is should be accessible for the entire community and that's where we say um you know increased surveying and and our ability to look at what people truly want from us is going to be an important phase of that. So, [34:36] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Did the um arts board and the parks board they weigh not park center... [34:41] Joe Masiarchin: um since this is just heritage and and but park natural resources did review and and they were pretty involved in the process from the get-go. Okay. Um but it was at their ago already. Yeah. Yeah. [34:55] Mayor Luke Hellier: Other questions or comments? This is good. I look forward to seeing some of the implementation that comes out. Appreciate it. Thanks for being here. [35:00] City Administrator Justin Miller: Okay, Mr. Mayor, I just might add, you know, we talk a lot about the investments we've done in public safety. Talk a lot about development and economic development, but as you all know, you survey our residents about why they move here, why they live here, the top two things are parks and schools, right? And um we talk a lot about parks, physical parks. I'm glad that we're doing a lot more deep dive into recreation because I think it's we're just scratching the surface. [35:36] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Can I ask one question quick? [35:38] Mayor Luke Hellier: Yes. [35:39] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Kind of on that. Do you get a sense of like how many people that aren't from Lakeville participate in our our activities? [35:46] Joe Masiarchin: Yeah. It's the benefit with the registration software we have. We we know exactly where everybody is from. Um so there are demographics that we pull and and this is one of the other focuses. We're trying to spend more time looking at this the statistics on our registrations. Um it's it is very useful information for us in a lot of respects. So, [36:03] Councilmember Michelle Volk: And how often do you have to look at the other two school districts in the ed programming to make sure? [36:09] Joe Masiarchin: We don't do a lot of comparisons with the other school districts. Um we mainly meet with ours. [36:18] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Well, they're all three ours. Well, yeah, you're right. The thing is is that the community has grown. So now you have a whole another population that's, you know, sitting in two different directions going to two different school districts um besides the main one. So I guess that's, you know, as we're looking at what's crossing, we pro and partnering, we probably should be looking at partnering with them, too. Thank you. [36:51] Mayor Luke Hellier: Thank you. All right, we'll now move on to our tree preservation ordinance. [37:21] Community Development Director Tina Goodroad: Mayor Council, thank you for um us some time tonight. Um as you know, forestry department, community development have been working together on um creating some ideas around a a beefier tree preservation ordinance. So, Zach and and particularly Grace have put in ton of effort and research into this process. So, we're here tonight to update you um kind of on the general outline of the ordinance um that was included in the packet. And the whole idea is that um as you know from when we met with you last fall, we do have a minimal tree preserv tree ordinance um in our um subdivision code that doesn't really do a whole lot other than requiring a tree preservation plan. And then if there are trees earmarked to be preserved, there's guidelines and requirements in there and how to that's done. But there isn't any kind of threshold requirement of what should be preserved and then if that is removed the reforestation and so we um have gone through a few iterations of the outline that's in your packet. We have shared that with the planning commission. We held a joint meeting with the planning commission and the parks and recreation natural resources commission committee on February 6 and we also shared it with a handful of developers um who responded positively. nobody, you know, was oh, shock and awe that we're considering this. Somebody provided some feedback. We have some responses to that that were included in the packet. And so, we really want to have an opportunity for Zach and Grace to kind of go through the latest outline um and see if we continue to have buyin from you. And if we do, we will turn this outline into a new ordinance. Um, we will repeal and replace what is in the subdivision code, put this into the zoning ordinance. I think that's a more appropriate place. Um, and then Grace has some information just on how does this all flush out from a cost standpoint using a couple example projects. So, hand off to you guys. [39:19] City Forester Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah, thank you. Yeah, thanks for having us in again. Um, I'm going to run through just the the outline that we put together as far as the bullet point list, the main points of the ordinance proposal. Um I'm going to skip some of the the smaller stuff just to focus on the big changes that we've been looking at and that we've reviewed with all the different groups and talked about internally as well. So um you know I'll start with with bullet point three the scope of application uh you know we're really looking to keep this uh affecting you know new development at the time of subdivision much like it is now. uh any new building construction uh you know new construction on vacant lots uh meets and bounds lots and then uh residential tearowns and rebuilds where they're expanding the footprint um and that would only apply to heritage trees on the site. So we're not looking at every tree on the site trying to be specific to trees of higher value. [40:27] Mayor Luke Hellier: So, how do we thread the needle not becoming diet where it's like in the news? And so, how do we like preserve trees, but then also like allow some, you know, flexibility on some of this property? [40:40] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah, I think we get into that some of the the later parts. Um, the nice thing is I don't think we're looking to charge $1,000 an inch. Yeah. Like that. Okay. Uh, I think that was one of the big thing talking with Luther up there and hearing his presentations were, you know, the values they were signing were huge. Okay. Um, and it was, yeah, every tree, every inch regardless of where it was, regardless of what the project was. So, we're definitely trying to provide some some um some incentives, uh some um exclusions, things like that that would would make it less, let's see, overwhelming as a way. Um so, we've got that. And then item C, uh you know, we did talk about including a look back provision. And so, you know, property owners who decide to go in and clear, you know, more than two acres, you know, within two years of of submitting an application for development, you we'd have that look back process to then try to capture some of that tree loss that was that was occurring right before, you know, they propose a new development. Um, and then you obviously applying both the public and private development projects. [41:43] Councilmember Michelle Volk: I didn't quite understand the look back process. [41:46] Zachary Jorgensen: Sure. Now I understand a little bit better when but when I read it I went what? [41:52] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah. So the idea with the look back is you know we're we're trying to avoid u you know someone coming in since we're going to have thresholdables established right that would say you can remove up to 50% of your trees. Um we're trying to prevent someone coming in you know a year a year or two beforehand and just clearing the entire lot and then when they submit their application we have no trees. [42:19] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Oh, so it's a look back on a future project versus if they came in last year under an old plan. [42:24] Zachary Jorgensen: We're not looking back. Correct. [42:25] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Yeah. For a future project. [42:26] Zachary Jorgensen: Yep. Got it. [42:27] Councilmember Michelle Volk: It's a loophole. It's protection from a potential loophole. Yep. The ordinance. [42:28] Tina Goodroad: I don't know if you all heard about the lot on west side of 35. Think you guys have a picture of it. That was clearcut. My mother-in-law asked me about it. Yeah. Nothing we can do about it. Um, so if this were to be adopted in the future, if that were to happen, then they come in within the next year for some kind of a subdivision or development of that property, then we have something in the ordinance that will help us get some tree preservation or reforestation, I should say, back on that property using satellite imagery, right? Because then we wouldn't really have a survey of the whole. [43:09] Zachary Jorgensen: Correct. Yeah. and really feasible. I mean the the amount of varial imagery out there now is updated so frequently that it's a pretty good good look back in two years. [43:30] Councilmember Joshua Lee: How did you arrive at two years for it? [43:33] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah, that was something that we saw in other other ordinances. Um you know we kind of toy ated the idea of you know was it one year? Is it five years? Um you know really you know having this out there people who really want to get around it are going to say oh five years oh great I'll cut them down in five years I'll submit an application. Uh so two years was just kind of one of those standards we were seeing uh that seemed to make sense uh especially for you know developers who's you know who's going to be holding land and what are they going to do with it before developing it. So oh [43:56] Councilmember Michelle Volk: can I just ask for clarification? for instance, like you brought up that other property, is this privatelyowned property that they're clearcutting before they sell it to somebody else? And if you're nodding yes or or they bought it and just clearing it to so develop what I'm trying to figure out is legally how much right do we have to tell somebody that they can't clear cut what if I just my husband and I decided that all the trees that are on our property we just decide we don't want them. Do do you do do you kind of feel where I'm going here? [45:00] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah, absolutely. And it's not necessarily that I plan on selling it, but I just decide, you know what? I'm sick of raking leaves. So, I'm cutting down a bunch of trees. [45:08] Zachary Jorgensen: So, correct me if I'm wrong though. If you're not changing your house, then you're not right subject to that. So, if you're not going to make your house bigger, if you're just clearing it because you want to clear it, that's stupid. [45:14] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah. it still remains tied to development process uh and an application for for development. So if you were going to tear down your house and make it bigger then you would be subject to this versus if you just were clearing because you retire raking leaves and then the two acres in that in that scenario it would have to be greater than two. [45:34] Councilmember Michelle Volk: So if you have a acre lot or a twoacre lot you could still clear it out and do your bill. you would be an example. It's if you have a 5 acre lot, then it's going to kick in. [45:44] Zachary Jorgensen: Well, it's really looking at the scenarios that are on that screen. [45:49] Tina Goodroad: So, that's the property couple weeks ago that was clearcut was immediately put on the market right after. And so, this look back would apply. It's it's more likely not to apply to the current owner who did this. It's going to be whoever buys it wants to develop it. It may very well affect the price that they end up negotiating because whoever decides to buy it. Now, this it's actually not going to apply to them because the ordinance is in place. But if it were in place, it might impact, you know, what someone's willing to pay for it because they now find out they have an ordinance where they're going to have to do some report station. So that may have some impact, but it's really going to apply once development occurs. [46:33] Councilmember Michelle Volk: So are they not are all of our residents that own two acres or more notified of this ordinance? [46:44] Tina Goodroad: We have not done that now. [46:46] Councilmember Michelle Volk: No, but would they be? Because how else would somebody else know that they're buying a piece of property that now follows uh falls under this ordinance as they write up a purchase order? [46:58] Mayor Luke Hellier: It'd be just like any other zoning ordinance we do. We don't notify everybody of every zoning ordinance change. It's up to their It's their responsibility to know what the laws are in place when they sell a property or buy the property. [47:04] Tina Goodroad: I mean, public notice that we have hearings. [47:08] Mayor Luke Hellier: Yeah, we'll do all that, but we don't notify everybody of every single change. [47:13] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Well, I'm not saying to do it. I'm just trying to figure out how they don't get caught caught up in not knowing um not the owner but the person purchasing that be part of our due diligence. [47:33] Councilmember John Bermel: Do you look back and go before the ordinance is passed? Does that make sense? Does it does a clock start ticking once we pass the ordinance? [47:48] Tina Goodroad: Yes. So you can't actually go back and say something. So something yeah I mean we have to ask there's some practical we have yeah I we haven't really figured it's a good question. Can I say that? That's good. Thank you. [48:05] Mayor Luke Hellier: One question I have and I I think it's something that you want to look at when you're asking those questions about how to best rate it up. So this outline says in the look back a total tree removal greater than 2 acres. It doesn't say a lot greater than two acres. It says a tree removal. I'm looking at this. You have a 7 acre lot. Could somebody do three removals of 1.9 acres and be okay? [48:26] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah. The idea was that it would be cumulative. [48:29] Mayor Luke Hellier: Okay. [48:30] Zachary Jorgensen: And in this case, yeah, it's a much larger acres than seven is the amount of acres of trees that they cleared. [48:36] Mayor Luke Hellier: Oh, they cleared. [48:37] Zachary Jorgensen: Yep. And so, and this is the latest aerial that we have, so I'm not sure if they've done more, but that was was mapped anyways. Sad. There's already another square there. Looks a little too geometrically uh cleared in the center there. Okay. Sorry, that was a long uh uh answer to the question. I didn't understand that. I thought it was to your point. Yeah. No, we had a lot of a lot of talks about the look back just because there are so many issues around it and so many questions about it still. So, but yeah, we have definitely seen it in other cities. So, we've included it. That's a balance to the thresholds as well. [49:29] Tina Goodroad: That terminology is something that's known by other people. Okay. Yep. Yeah. We actually had one developer actually ask us about it like before we even got to that point of the discussion like is there a look back? [49:45] Mayor Luke Hellier: Okay. Okay. [49:46] Zachary Jorgensen: Excellent. So yeah, we'll move on to to number five. So the rubal thresholds and replacement requirements. So I think last time we talked, you know, first time we talked um you we had some lower thresholds in here as well as a whole list of exemptions. uh after talking with the different commissions, talking internally, um talking to developers, we actually raise those thresholds. Uh so currently for residential zoning districts, uh we've got 50% as a removable threshold and then for commercial industry, we've got 70%. Uh and the idea here is that we actually eliminated the the exemptions. Before we had a list of um you know, storm water ponds, streets, sidewalks, all those different things. I think there was just a lot of potential confusion about how you calculate those and so we raised the threshold overall. Uh and the only exemption that we'll get to or one of the exemptions that we'll get to is just for major collector streets and arterials. So things that property owners don't really have to say on where they go. So we didn't want to uh you know get people for those kinds of things. But everything else we just decided to raise that threshold instead of going to the whole list and having to have folks calculate you know the area of sidewalks and which trees fell within that. So um and then that's Tina can see speak more to this but it's based on residential it's based on zoning district and so we're not looking at land usage we're looking at the actual statics so far as the calculations go to talk about about the maths [51:22] Grace (Associate): um yeah we've got a we've got a a set of calculations we talked about a little bit last time that we're really trying to prioritize some of those higher value trees. I know last time we had talked about, you know, com trees, hardwood, deciduous, conifers, and so the math still remains uh the same as far as how we do that, but really trying to prioritize some of those higher value trees. So, um so the tree replacement requirements is really where those different uh priorities come in. Um we have the different categorizations of trees almond conifer hardwood deciduous and then heritage. Um the most emphasis so the highest replacement rate is on hardwood deciduous trees as 1/ half the diameter inches removed above the threshold of 50% need to be replaced. And then heritage trees are just a flat 100% of the inches need to be replaced. Um the way that they calculate how many need to be replaced at what ratio is a sequence of subtraction. Basically um we put less emphasis on the less valuable trees. So the common trees get factored in first and that leaves usually the conifer and hardwoods to be replaced at those fire rates. So I think it prioritizes a little bit of them focusing removals or putting more footprints of construction in areas where there are more common trees and potentially preserving more areas with larger and hardwood deciduous trees like oak woodlands and stuff. [53:13] Mayor Luke Hellier: Why? Why 50? We're talking like 40 35 when we had this conversation. [53:23] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah, I know. We started uh with 40. We went down to 30 after we talked the first time. Um a lot of it was looking at, you know, what the actual impacts were as examples and then starting to look at some of those exemptions or some of the footprints streets buildings all those different things like that. and 50 kind of emerged as a number that was um common to some cities but also uh accounted for what actually gets built on the site while still providing a good replacement number. So yeah, we'll definitely see some comparison between other cities and see how much that percentage or higher threshold changes than others. [54:02] Mayor Luke Hellier: I mean, because I would rather make it more difficult and then if we have to back off later than if it's not doing it, then try to increase it. [54:27] Grace (Associate): Did you want to run through the summary first? [54:29] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah, we can finish up. So, yeah, we talked about um as far as the the thresholds and how we get to that. We've got some examples here we can show as well. And then, yeah, as far as the replacements go, you know, anything removed over 50% as an example for residential requires replacement. That's where we get into the second set of math where we're looking at um you know if you've got you know a thousand inches of of hardwood deciduous that have been removed above the threshold you replace 500 in uh of that um and a whole bunch of math that goes along with that. [55:18] Mayor Luke Hellier: doesn't seem like a lot. Yeah, it does add up. [55:20] Councilmember John Bermel: Yeah. I mean we want to have a wooded committee or I don't know. I'm trying to wrap my head around the replacements. So, okay, you take out a I don't know 12inch tree. So, are you saying that that has to be replaced by a 6inch tree or three two inch trees or that's what I'm trying to get wrap my head around is what does that mean to replace it? Um is it is it inch for inch or is it you know just the total cumulative? [55:50] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah. So it's after you do the math, it's the total accumulative and then divided by a 2 and 1 half inch tree. So in the case of a 12-in tree, you know, the math is is just under three trees of two and a half inch caliber. Um yeah, so as we start looking at sitewide, it does add up. Um so let me get those examples. We've got maybe just I think there's a lot of questions here that get answered by some examples. Can we double those? [56:06] Councilmember John Bermel: I guess I have one other one is are there requirements to then maintain by the developer that they survive? What's like the long Okay. Yeah. You throw up like 50 trees but then 40 of them don't live. [56:22] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Yeah. What's the point? Yeah. Isn't But the warranty it's not very many years. [56:34] Zachary Jorgensen: It's hard. Is that a It's hard to do more than that. It is. I would I would say I mean it's going to be hard to have people keep coming back after two years. It's just that [56:49] Councilmember Michelle Volk: I'm looking at some of these other properties that have been built or whatever and you suddenly seeing trees that are dying out, you know, type of thing. And it's like then they have no incentive to even replace that tree. They can take it down because it's now dead. Does that make sense? But it's still a young tree that died. [57:08] Zachary Jorgensen: depending on the type of of it. Let's go through some examples. I think that'll answer a lot of questions. [57:19] Grace (Associate): Sure. Yeah. I have made up two examples. Didn't make them up, but use the map. Um first one we've got Tasano. So they removed a lot of the trees that we put place higher emphasis on. So the hardwood deciduous and heritage removed all heritage trees on the site um and most of the hardwood deciduous but then left a lot of the common trees as you can see in the little table. Um overall 61% of the significant diameter inches on the site were removed. That's about 2,200 trees out of I think uh 3,900 trees to make it simple. No heritage trees were preserved. So in our write up we have a credit for preserving those. So it would apply to um for at a 2 to1 ratio for up to 50% of the replacement requirement. Um so no heritage trees were preserved in this case. So, it only counts as 100% required replacement for those. That drives up the numbers. Um, with a 50% removal threshold, the replacement requirement works out to be about 873 trees. That's at a rate of 1/2 because of the hardwood deciduous they removed. That is what came out of the calculation. Um, and that's plus the 260 uh inches of heritage as well at a rate of 100%. And I just divided that number of the inches that I got by 2.5 to find the number of replacement trees that would be planted. um their landscaping plan plan for 187 trees as screening under our rate up that would count but the 605 planted on individual lots would not. So we're seeing that as bare minimum two trees per lot. Um does that make sense for Yeah. Yeah. So, in this example, they're about 700 trees short of replacement requirements. [1:00:15] Mayor Luke Hellier: In this example, where would those 605 trees be eligible to be planted? So, those are ones that they have planned for the individual lots as part of the two trees per lot requirements. Uh, and as part of the discussion, part of the write up, uh, we don't include those as being credited because someone could move in, the next day cut them down, right? Um and so we only counted ones that were in common areas uh in development areas in other properties that are under control of not the individual property owner in essence. So in in their development of this property they would need to figure out a way to have acorage available to put additional trees. So the development plan would need to change change or cut down less or [1:00:39] Councilmember John Bermel: or cut down less. [1:00:40] Grace (Associate): Right. Yeah, I think that's what this site demonstrates is kind of that they did not plan to save any hardwood deciduous trees and we would hope that future developments would because we place a higher replacement rate on those. [1:00:52] Councilmember Joshua Lee: I I guess I was just trying to think through the implications in the planning phase is that they probably would just cut down fewer trees as opposed to having more replacements. You know, you would hope that would be the result. [1:01:05] Tina Goodroad: I mean, that's certainly when we're working on site plans um behind the scenes before things ever get to planning commission to work through that um because of this ordinance going forward. There will be cases where there still may be plentiful reforestation that's required that just doesn't fit or can't be saved. um sites that are um have a lot of topography. It's challenging with grading. There is a fee in loo where then we would collect funds um that we will then have to determine how that fee is used, but practically could be used when we build a new park um or a parkway and the city needs funds in order to reestablish forests and areas, then we can use that funding for that. [1:01:45] Mayor Luke Hellier: So, how is it cost to plant 200 or 700 2 and a half inch trees? [1:01:50] Grace (Associate): Yeah. Oh, look at that. Wow. So, um a lot of information, but uh the cost you were asking about is at the bottom typed out there. Um at our 50% threshold, it'd be about 479 480,000. um in a development scale. I mean compared to some of the other numbers we came to that's small um because how many lots was this? It was like 400 lots, right? 300 something. It was 200 or 600 landscape trees. 300 lots. [1:02:22] Zachary Jorgensen: Um yeah, that's I compared to some other cities nearby us and otherwise um the yellow box is the number of their replacement trees that they require under their ordinance. Um, and the blue box is ours. For Cottage Grove, they're probably pretty similar. In this example, they actually ended up less than our requirement, which is because of our heritage tree 100% requirement for replacement. Um otherwise they pretty much hover around the same requirement because they're replacing at a 50% rate and the uh removal thresholds are similar. With Dayton and Farmington, the removal thresholds are much lower, more in the range you were thinking. Um and also Dayton the replacement rate is higher. So you can see how that comes out in the red box. their required replacement trees are much higher. Um, and Farmington even with the same uh calculation for replacement trees with the 1/8 one quarter and 1/2 they still come out higher with a 30% removal threshold. [1:03:52] Mayor Luke Hellier: What was what was the feedback from developers on 50? Because again, I I would if we're rolling on an ordinance, I'd rather be more strict on the threshold and then have to negotiate than coming out at 50 and then be like, "Well, I guess we'll go to 60, you know, like I just from a practical because I I mean $1,600 a lot." Come on. [1:04:15] Tina Goodroad: Sure. I mean, it was generally positive. [1:04:20] Mayor Luke Hellier: Do you Yeah. Do you have a sense of how many developers pay the fee in L versus I mean just I'm going to mow the trees down and just pay a fee and [1:04:32] Tina Goodroad: Yeah, that I don't have. [1:04:41] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah, when we presented the information to the developers that was the version that had I think 40% as a removal threshold but it had the exceptions listed so and so yeah the feedback wasn't they weren't overly critical of that. [1:04:55] Mayor Luke Hellier: Well and and I don't know in Farmington does but I know Dayton you know it shows 40% but there's lots of exceptions. [1:05:04] Tina Goodroad: Yes. [1:05:05] Zachary Jorgensen: this is just for which ends up being just tricky math, you know, when you start to accept out pawns and all these other things. It's just more math that has to be done either by the developer and then us double-checking it. Um, so having just a straight percentage without all those exceptions here easier for for both them and user. So that's how we ended up back on 50. [1:05:27] Tina Goodroad: Um 50 is a 40 to 50 is probably the most common. [1:05:32] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah. [1:05:46] Mayor Luke Hellier: But if if I think about the big parts of the wooded lots that are still left to develop, I don't know if there's be a lot of exceptions in there. Just a lot of forest. If I think about southwest, you know, west of 35 and you know, around Orchard Lake and one thing I've been thinking of is is there an appeal process or is it pure negotiation? because I mean there's a lot of trees, a lot of inches, and a lot of math. And if you reach a stalemate, it's an ordinance. There's no negotiation. [1:06:26] Tina Goodroad: Yep. We we even talked about, you know, trying to come up with some kind of an Excel tool that we can share with folks. Put in your numbers. It'll spit out the per, you know, figure it out, spit out the math for you or the trees and or, you know, that math for you. um to help folks. Developers are well-versed. Majority of cities have these ordinances. Um so it it isn't up for negotiation. [1:06:53] Mayor Luke Hellier: Okay. So we can't we can't go in at you know and let someone talk us up to without changing the ordinance. I guess more of my question is how do you resolve? They're saying it's this many inches and you're saying it's this many. Is there a factual tree inventory? [1:07:06] Tina Goodroad: Yeah. [1:07:07] Zachary Jorgensen: Yep. That's all part of the ordinance. So that's step one and we currently do that. That's first step. [1:07:11] Tina Goodroad: But if if council is, you know, wants to start at a, you know, if you were to change a threshold, I would change the residential one. You know, we could start at 40 without exceptions. Um, that's what we had originally shared. Um, we could start there if that's something that feels important right now. Again, we can always change it, but we just have to do it as a zoning or amendment. It's not something that community development staff or forestry staff is going to debate with somebody. [1:07:52] Mayor Luke Hellier: You have another example of another neighborhood you said? [1:07:56] Grace (Associate): Yeah, I've also got the preserve. So, this one is a very heavily wooded lot. a lot of oak woodland and they ended up preserving about a hence the name. Very very good. Um a 5 and a half acre lot in the middle there and I think dedicated it um as an out lot a great recreation opportunity. Um they still overall removed 56% of the significant tree inches. Um so about 60 or 6% over that 50% threshold. Um 2,24 trees. They did preserve a lot of heritage trees. So you can see up in the top table there are 858 um diameter inches of heritage trees on site. They only removed 319. That 319 is still 100% replacement, but the amount that they preserved counted for about 50% of their required replacement, right? They cut it by half ministries. Um the replacement requirement is came out to 244 trees at a rate of 1/2 from the amount they removed. and that's cut by half because of the heritage tree credit. Um, another thing we are thinking is a significant woodland credit to further encourage preserving trees as groups um for better future health, maintenance, everything. um and that we're considering whether or not to let that zero out this requirement or just cut it by half again and give it's still important they reforest but also there's really good strong efforts to preserve in this case um they only proposed 140 trees planted for screening but those would all count towards or with this reforestation requirement. So that took down their their numbers a lot by preserving that money. When does the if you did the woodland, when does that calculation fall into place? The way you stated it made it sound like it would come after um the the heart the heritage, right? So there's we would work it out so that it's not uh not double counting at if we could um or that you would have to choose one credit or the other. Well, I'm just trying to figure out if it's like going to a sale and then they say, you know, this is on sale then you get an extra 10% off or something. You know what I mean? But really by the time you calculate 30 and 10 is not 40. You didn't get 40% off. Yeah. It would go in with the rest of the calculations. I haven't set it up yet because we would need the locations of the trees. Um but once they calculated all the ones they preserve that number of inches preserved they could just how did we word the yeah I think in effect it's at the same time you're you're cutting replacement requirements there's a line with that that talks about the the incentives preserving movement. At that same time, this to me is the ideal situation for what we're trying to accomplish encourage encourage. Yeah. And currently we have a region with, you know, an incentive jumping to raise on those list an incentive both for heritage trees. So if you're preserving those on site, um you would get a credit for that. But yeah, as Grace mentioned, the idea is, you know, 10 trees scattered across your site that may or may not be adequately protected, you know, that's great, but a wood link itself uh would be a more more desirable end goal. And so if we have a credit, you know, that includes that. Um for instance like this, you know, even countries that aren't necessarily heritage trees, but they're being preserved as a woodland. So, so when they do that count, does someone actually go out and count all the trees? It's not like it's a survey. Our staff. That was my kind of concern about this is we like the same driver, right? Yeah, it's true. No, they're usually pretty good. I mean, the folks they have about doing the survey generally know what they're looking at 90% of the time. We see a solid everything's identified correctly and they have a what I meant meant by was they have a license. So, right. So, they have to it's not a they have an incentive to do it, right? Yeah. Um this is the same comparison. Still other cities landed pretty squarely higher requirements than us. Um we definitely had a you can see with Cottage Grove this probably most similar to our requirements right now. Um we still landed pretty far below them because of that heritage tree credit. um taking a lot of the replacement required off. Um and estimated cost came out to yeah 450,000 for those added 200 trees. Yes. Or 144. Yes. [1:13:52] Mayor Luke Hellier: Shakabe has just stood out to me significantly on these. But then and then Woodberry as well that I mean the replacement rates really seem to fulfill the purpose of preservation. They're acting as a deterrent, right? [1:14:05] Tina Goodroad: Deterrent. [1:14:06] Mayor Luke Hellier: It's not necessarily is a tree preservation plan, not a tree replacement plan necessar I mean so I tried to say there just make it just makes sense. [1:14:15] Councilmember Michelle Volk: You want to make it tough to cut down the tree. Yeah. [1:14:18] Mayor Luke Hellier: rather than just put it. Why are their costs so much higher than what am I missing between Woodbury and Shaki? It's so much more expensive to meet Shaki's requirement, but Woodberry is higher, right? [1:15:02] Zachary Jorgensen: I think Woodbury is a one half. So 50%. [1:15:05] Tina Goodroad: Replace is one to two. [1:15:06] Zachary Jorgensen: Replace replace one for every two. [1:15:08] Tina Goodroad: One for every two, right? [1:15:10] Zachary Jorgensen: Okay. Oh, so is it one for every one of us? Oh, I just But I guess what I'm trying to say is it seems like a deterrence to cutting down trees is is better for this than it is um just making it easy to replace them. That's why your heritage plan is the heritage tree plan in that second example really stands out. I'm just restating what you all probably have. [1:15:42] Mayor Luke Hellier: So I mean from my standpoint the councils I I do think the 40% residential and some sort of woodland credit for our proposed ordinance makes sense to me. I like what you said about preservation and if we can incentivize that that's a good way to do it. It's just that first example really stood out because they really didn't preserve any of that. I mean that's what we're trying to avoid, right? Clear cutting. [1:16:04] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah. The nice thing having the numbers in the first example, you know, the 40% basically double the number of trees that were required over the 50% removal threshold. [1:16:15] Mayor Luke Hellier: So I'm hearing support. [1:16:16] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Well, I like your simplicity part, too. I think that's really important, too, because it's difficult for us to figure that out. [1:16:21] Zachary Jorgensen: Yeah. Just imagine trying to comply with it. [1:16:42] Tina Goodroad: So, next steps will be creating the ordinance. Um, we'll adjust the residential to 40%, look at the option for the woodland credit or significant woodland credit, craft the ordinance. That won't take too long. And then the cycle would be going through planning commission back to council with with a stop at the parks commission. So, we'll do parks commission first, have the formal public hearing of planning commission. We'll let everybody who we send these drafts out to know when that hearing will be held so um developers and builders can come and speak to it if they want or ask additional questions and then get it in front of you. So, as soon as we can. [1:17:18] Mayor Luke Hellier: Good. Thank you guys so much. [1:17:21] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Thank you. Did you know you had this much math when you decided in forestry? Hope you get some sort of like certificate excelry or something. [1:17:41] Zachary Jorgensen: Thank you. I appreciate it. [1:17:58] Finance Director Julie Stahl: report. Thanks, council, mayor. Um, as you know, first quarter there's there's not a lot happening. Seasonal things. Um, we haven't got our tax money. Building permits are just starting out, but um as we're looking at building permits right now through May 21st, we're at 50% for the town homes that we budgeted and we're at 30% for the single family. So, you know, we're just getting into the construction um period now. So, thinking that those will come up and we'll meet or exceed the budget benchmarks on those. Um just touch you on a couple of high points. Um the charges for services are a little bit underneath the budget benchmark. Um mostly because our Eureka Township, we build that in June. That's 64,000 this year. Um so revenues when we were looking at those for the general fund, they came in at excuse me 3.2% of budget, but again most of that reasoning is because of the tax money not coming till June. Um, as we're looking at the expenditures in the general fund, uh, we're under budget. We're so we're at 21% of the budget overall. Um, some of the departments are over and, um, highlighted those in the narrative. But, um, personnel in general is, uh, at 20%, so 5% under the budget benchmark. Utility, so the electric costs are actually 74,000 higher than they were last year. Um part of that is the rate increases that the um utility company put through. Um but they are at 25% of budget. So we did a good job of budgeting on those. Mayor and council, your expenditures are actually $50,000 more than last year at the same time because of the way the League of Minnesota cities changed their billing. They always build us in October for like a odd year. It wasn't even school district years. So they finally changed their ability to match calendar year for like all the cities do. So that's why that one looks higher. Um city administration 15,000 higher than last year. Um we added the National League of Cities membership. So that was 6,400 and that accounts for most of that um increase. So um other things just noting human resources just slightly higher than budget and that's due to the software subscription timing of those um payments that were made. So they're at 33% of budget. Engineering is just barely over budget at 26%. Um nothing alarming. A fire p fire actually kind of interesting that we um did such a good job of budgeting. We um are slightly over the same period last year, but most of that's due because of the 15 firefighters that we hired at the end of March. Um but it's all good in in and going forward because we received our first safer grant reimbursement in May of $85,000. So you'll start to see that on the second quarter report where we have that up in the intergovernmental and we'll, you know, call that out as far as the safer reimbursements. Um, so for general fund total expenditures, like like I said, 21% of budget, so we're doing well as far as where we're at this time of year. Um, so overall general fund, nothing no surprises. Um, nothing alarming. Even legal counsel when it's coming in at 34% of budget, it's it's not all that alarming. Just I mean, seeing nature of things to think. So, um, any questions on the general fund? [1:21:41] Mayor Luke Hellier: Did you see anything that you were I just and maybe this maybe this is for at the end, but in like forward looking, right? There's all this conversation about how counties are going to take a haircut from the feds and the state. What's the downstream impact on us like future road projects or anything we do together? Because it's not we get county money to do stuff. So, are we insulated from that? [1:22:15] Justin Miller: Well, kind of. Good example is the Boulevard mine. [1:22:18] Mayor Luke Hellier: Okay. [1:22:18] Justin Miller: You know, they were going to yank that funding from us this year. Yeah. We supple They pay us to supplement it. Basically, they were going to yank that. You know, that's like 10 20,000, I forget. So, smaller things like that. But I imagine the county have to start making some tougher decisions on cost contributions on things. [1:22:36] Mayor Luke Hellier: Yeah. Okay. [1:22:38] Justin Miller: Start to see where they're they're going to charge us for stuff in reverse. So like fiber installations now going to be they're looking at anything we partner with them on fiber they're going to start charges per per mile per foot. So they're looking at I think also revenue side of things as well is how can we squeeze more money out of the cities that charge them for services that they may not have in the past. [1:22:56] Mayor Luke Hellier: Yeah. I just be curious at some point on the block. Yeah. So that's substantial good. Yeah. But maybe after the next quarter if you put a little foot I'm thinking maybe if we're not seeing it yet maybe it's too early. [1:23:09] Julie Stahl: Yeah. I mean it doesn't have to be the report but just to keep us off. [1:23:13] Julie Stahl: Um so general fun again like I said nothing alarming. uh you're going to go to a communications fund. That's all um pretty much coming in where we would expect it. Revenues are at 19%, expenditures at 22%. Um those revenues continue to decline as people find other options to their cable. Um the liquor fund uh sales roughly about 19% um of budget. So, a little underbud as all everybody in the industry is seeing that same trend. Um, we are still keeping our gross profit healthy at 29.1% compared to last year at 29.7%. Um, staff did a great job of keeping expenditures down for first quarter because they're um at only at 18% of budget. So, roughly three $340,000 saved um compared to budget. So, that helps all in the long at the end of the day. Um, solic fund doing well is with what we've got. Uh, utility funds, nothing alarming there. We're as we see the the growth trends um slightly, you know, the revenues are slightly higher than last year, 85,000 for the water fund. We did build $65,000 65,000 gallons more, but we did have a rate increase in 2025, 6%, so that's also contributing to it. Um water fund doing well expenditures are at 20% of the budget benchmark. Sewer fund uh similarly um the revenues are exceeding last year's at the same time and part of that is the sewer rate increase of 4% part of is the increased customer base. Um our disposal charges at council went up 4.5%. So um when we're looking at the what we pay them for the total for 2025 it's $5.6 6 million that fits that budget. Um so our fund also doing well slightly under budget at 22%. So just things are moving like they should. Street lighting fund um revenues matching the benchmark slightly above last year again growing customer base and we did not have a street light increase in 205. So um and environmental resources fund those are um in line with the budget benchmark and they again exceed last year's partly to large base but we also did also have a 4% increase in that environmental resources fee. So, um, and just for what we've got for intergovernmental grant revenues in that fund, we've got 535,000 this year, 35,000 is for the aquatic invasive species from Dakota County. Okay. So, there's an example. That's an example. Yeah. Um, and then 500,000 for the Greenway Green Ridge Park water quality improvements. And I'm not sure where that grant is from. So that's most likely Washington. [1:26:32] Julie Stahl: Any questions on how the funds are sitting? [1:26:35] Mayor Luke Hellier: um where does the franchise fee number come in? [1:26:39] Julie Stahl: It it we will call it out. Um, we've spent about um for what we've c what it cost us cities for our facility so far was 64 um $4,600 that we've spent just in our in our own city bills, our buildings. Um, we won't see our first franchise payment from the utility companies until July. [1:27:14] Mayor Luke Hellier: Gotcha. So, and where will that fall in this report? [1:27:17] Julie Stahl: I would call that out. I'll call that out in a separate debt service fund to show it as I think that's very high profile and want to keep that front of transparency everything. [1:27:25] Mayor Luke Hellier: Perfect. Thank you. Any other questions? [1:27:26] Julie Stahl: Communications fund. So that that is basically the franchise fe um and we don't have the ability to extend that to actually how most people get their internet service anymore. So that is just if you're getting cable TV. [1:27:38] Mayor Luke Hellier: Do you pay that if you only cable TV portion of your bill? [1:27:42] Julie Stahl: So even if you have like a triple play or something like that, it's only... [1:27:46] Mayor Luke Hellier: just seems like such an outdated message. [1:27:49] Julie Stahl: There have been bills proposed the past two years at the state level, but they haven't. [1:27:54] Mayor Luke Hellier: Yeah. I mean, as you can imagine, it or just to Yeah. I mean because we can imagine the lobby appro I mean to me it just seems like having in place we're really disincinizing that one form of you know it's just archaic. Yeah. [1:28:18] Councilmember Joshua Lee: Well maybe when ESPN charges $30 a month people go back to the cable. [1:28:20] Mayor Luke Hellier: I I there has been conversations amongst mayors think about that and there's that bill but then there's also the providers want to put a tax on like the Amazons and the Facebooks and make up their revenue. So there's conversation but we're assess [1:28:34] Councilmember Michelle Volk: I'd be curious to know what it was five years ago. [1:28:38] Julie Stahl: We have that trend in the budget documents every year. We can point that out. [1:28:43] Councilmember Michelle Volk: And what is the fee per 5%? [1:28:46] Julie Stahl: 5%. [1:29:04] Mayor Luke Hellier: Yeah. It's a tax on seniors. [1:29:06] Councilmember John Bermel: You're the problem. Shut it off. Yeah. [1:29:08] Mayor Luke Hellier: Well, me and my dad bro one YouTube account cracking down on that. [1:29:14] Councilmember Joshua Lee: All of them are cracking down. We've been sharing different accounts of the family and having to [1:29:18] Julie Stahl: Okay. Thank you. [1:29:22] Mayor Luke Hellier: Yeah, it's one way to keep families together, right? This meeting's important, isn't it? Yeah. Uh all right. Any items for future discussion? [1:29:41] Councilmember Joshua Lee: I've got one that you all are going to be really surprised. Garbage chickens. [1:29:46] Mayor Luke Hellier: Oh, man. [1:29:47] Councilmember Joshua Lee: I think we need to It's been a long time since we've discussed that ordinance. report about it. Well, I think there's one issue that is uh the I think that is left but the uh the material at which a coupe is required to be as wood in our ordinance and there's a common trend to be using that recycled plastic composite. So, I think there's one issue there that we need to update and I do think we need to look at the the number of chickens just as a new found chickener. Um I I think there there's a certain rationale that can be made for increasing [1:30:29] Councilmember Michelle Volk: well and I guess do we get many complaints? I think it would just be nice to have that because when it it was set before I was here so I was talking planning commission chair ameritus about that three number said we just kind of pulled it out of the air. [1:30:43] Councilmember John Bermel: I think the three was since you had a buying group of three years. [1:30:46] Councilmember Michelle Volk: It was within 10 years there in here but it was the first year we were here. [1:30:48] Mayor Luke Hellier: Yeah. It was the first year you guys were here. [1:30:49] Councilmember Michelle Volk: See, it's like for the career council members there. It's even I don't even remember it. [1:31:02] Justin Miller: No, because there was after Justin has sight on the issue now. [1:31:07] Mayor Luke Hellier: That's just one suggestion. [1:31:09] Councilmember Dan Wolter: No more trash though. I won't raise trash again. Uh I think yeah I do think we should we should have a review of our trash zones and just maybe I don't know if we want to make this change but I think this earlier this year... [1:31:20] Mayor Luke Hellier: is it okay? [1:31:21] Councilmember Dan Wolter: I have a I have a decibel app for you now too so you can... [1:31:25] Mayor Luke Hellier: a what decibel... [1:31:26] Councilmember Dan Wolter: so you can we can find out how loud it is 46 for you. Oh yeah I don't care anymore. I know you do actually. Yeah know that's still top priority. [1:31:39] Councilmember John Bermel: Okay. Any committee or city administrator updates? Uh, we had the Dakota 911 board meeting on the 15th and probably the most powerful thing is we passed the 2026. [1:31:55] Mayor Luke Hellier: You asking at what point they're going to not mess up sending a text message because the two that have come into Lakeville have both been in the states. [1:31:59] Councilmember John Bermel: It's on the list of things. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. after that. [1:32:05] Mayor Luke Hellier: The only uh one thing that I wanted to mention is uh the downtown business association is looking at possibly having a taxes next round. [1:32:09] Councilmember Joshua Lee: Do they put a number on it or No, they're going to discuss it at their August meeting. [1:32:15] Mayor Luke Hellier: Okay. [1:32:16] Justin Miller: I sent them several scenarios broken out by property on what that would impact would be. [1:32:18] Councilmember Joshua Lee: Okay, good. So I can have sense of what to do with [1:32:23] Councilmember Michelle Volk: um ALF met you'll see a a budget um probably in the next Monday night's meeting supposedly. [1:32:32] Mayor Luke Hellier: Monday night's meeting. [1:32:33] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Yeah. Um the thing you'll notice is that it doesn't really impact us. We're not putting money into it, but we're barely pulling money out of this fund that has a couple hundred,000 in it. So I think that'll be the question to be discussed in upcoming meetings in the next year or so if we need to be withdrawing it and spending some of that money back to the cities. [1:33:05] Mayor Luke Hellier: Yeah. Well, when I learned about how much we're allowing Apple Valley to not show up to fall the fire department and Alpha is doing instead that we we may need to re-evaluate the relation the business relationship. [1:33:15] Councilmember Michelle Volk: that that was one of the things that I brought up again at our meeting last week was that I'd really like to see side by side the public safety uh related calls um and what our police and fire are responding to versus ALF and how that changes per city um because I mean anecdotally we know of a couple properties in Apple Valley that get a ton of fall calls um whereas in Lakeville our fire and police are the ones handling those um when they happen. So um yeah, it's it's a it's a drain on the system when you have elf going to Apple Valley and staying there and then they're trying to get to maybe Southern Empire or whatever. Um so their call response times increase when they're always in Apple Valley. [1:34:09] Mayor Luke Hellier: Okay, I'll take a motion. [1:34:21] Justin Miller: Just a note, um, next month's council meeting where we we will spend some time doing the tabletop exercise. That was one of the goals of the council. [1:34:29] Mayor Luke Hellier: What are you in? [1:34:31] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Pretty sure that's when I'm in Canada. What's the date of that again? 20 the 23rd [1:34:39] Mayor Luke Hellier: the 23rd there is... [1:34:42] Councilmember Michelle Volk: okay what I'll do there is a fifth Monday that month um if Monday... [1:34:49] Mayor Luke Hellier: um I'll leave after the meeting then I'll just let her go. [1:34:53] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Oh, you're going then I'm going that week. Mhm. [1:34:56] Mayor Luke Hellier: Are you driving by car? Are you going? [1:34:58] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Yeah, by car. Is that okay? [1:35:01] Mayor Luke Hellier: Yeah. Well, I'm just going to Iowa first and then we'll leave the next morning. So, okay. If that makes sense. So, okay. [1:35:05] Councilmember Michelle Volk: Is there other stuff? [1:35:07] Mayor Luke Hellier: There will be, but um we'll spend a considerable amount of time doing that. So, um it won't be too much more. [1:35:12] Justin Miller: Okay. That' be a good one to do. Just the poor pants frog, you know, not do it so we don't have to do it. I want to see that way too busy week. [1:35:47] Mayor Luke Hellier: Okay, I'll take a motion to move. [1:35:55] Councilmember Dan Wolter: Second. [1:36:04] Mayor Luke Hellier: All in favor? I post. Thank you everybody.