The meeting began with resident Kenny Ryen addressing the council regarding a persistent drainage issue affecting his property at 14248 82nd Street Northeast. Ryen expressed frustration over an illegal culvert causing water to flow across his backyard, impacting his house and septic system, particularly during heavy rainfall. He presented handouts to the council and shared his understanding that the council could allocate city funds to resolve such issues. Ryen proposed solutions including connecting to a storm sewer, creating a drainage ditch, or modifying the existing culverts. He emphasized the urgency of the matter, stating, “We all know and I think we can all recognize that it’s illegal the way it is now.”

City officials, including the city engineer and attorney, responded to Ryen’s concerns by providing historical context and legal clarifications. The city engineer noted that the drainage pattern had existed since at least 1972 and observed no signs of flooding after a recent rain, asserting that “everything was dry.” This led to a discussion among council members and city staff to reconcile Ryen’s observations with the city’s findings. The city attorney mentioned the possibility of legal action if Ryen chose to pursue the matter further.

Next, the council moved on to deliberate on the joint powers agreement with Wright County concerning the issuance and regulation of cannabis business licenses. The agreement sparked debate among council members, with one member expressing opposition, stating, “I’m not in favor of the city abdicating its responsibility to the county.” Concerns were raised about the potential loss of local authority and whether the county would control the number of licenses issued in the city. City staff clarified that the city would retain zoning authority, while the county would handle compliance checks. The state statute mandates a minimum of one cannabis business license per 12,500 residents, which would remain regardless of the agreement. The council appeared divided, reflecting broader concerns about governance and community standards. Ultimately, a motion to approve the agreement passed with a vote of 4 to 1.

The council also considered a proposal for the expansion of an office building associated with Michaels Construction. The existing 23,000-square-foot office is set to double in size, requiring site and building plan review. The new structure will be positioned to the west of the current building, with additional off-street parking and compliance with setback requirements. City staff recommended approval, citing alignment with the comprehensive plan and economic development goals. The Planning Commission had previously reviewed the application and voted 6-0 in favor of recommending approval, subject to seven conditions.

Discussion then shifted to a preliminary plat for Prairie Park Estates, which includes one existing single-family lot and five proposed single-family lots. The proposal requires a conditional use permit for smaller lot sizes and access via a private drive. City staff recommended approval, asserting consistency with the comprehensive plan. Concerns were raised about homeowner expectations for road maintenance and the design standards for the private drive.

EXL Energy presented a proposal for an electric substation in the ATO Industrial Park. The substation will connect to a transmission line to distribute power within EXL Energy’s service district. The Planning Commission recommended zoning changes for better adaptability concerning setbacks and lot requirements. The proposal included a utility building, stormwater basins, and landscaping for visual appeal. During public commentary, concerns about electromagnetic radiation were addressed by EXL Energy. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 in favor of the application, which city staff recommended for approval.

The Prairie Park master plan was another significant topic. A council member criticized the project’s scale and estimated $16.2 million cost. Parks and Recreation Director Nick Jacobs defended the plan, highlighting community input and the necessity of upgrading amenities. Another council member emphasized the importance of having a guiding document for future developments and funding opportunities. A motion to adopt the master plan passed with a vote of 4 to 1.