The City Administrator provided clarity, explaining that the state’s reviewer insisted on comprehensive testing beyond the standard requirements. This included inspections of the water barrier, vapor barriers under the slab, and the roof. Council members were concerned about the financial implications, questioning whether the original testing provisions could cover some of these additional costs. There was a suggestion to combine site visits for different tests to potentially reduce expenses.

A notable point of discussion was the potential risk of jeopardizing state funding if the additional inspections were not carried out. The City Administrator confirmed the non-negotiable nature of these requirements for project approval.

Despite lingering questions, the council concluded that proceeding with the approval was necessary to maintain project momentum. The council emphasized the importance of clear communication with the contractor about state expectations.

Another topic discussed was the public safety agreement with the city of Aurora. The council reviewed budgeted increases for 2024, noting an 8% increase for Hoyt Lakes compared to Aurora’s 11% increase. This disparity was attributed to a historical population-based revenue split. Aurora, experiencing a higher call volume, is gradually working towards a more equitable 50/50 cost split.

Attention was also given to a joint water board agreement, which required examination. The council encouraged city staff to provide comments by the January 10th deadline to ensure effective negotiation of various clauses.

The meeting addressed several other issues, including the clubhouse agreement for the golf course. The new manager, Jenna, proposed a pay structure similar to the previous manager’s, with a modest increase. Her innovative ideas aimed at creating a family-centered experience received unanimous support. The council also approved a standard liability coverage waiver from the League of Minnesota Cities.

Utility customer requests were another focal point. One such request involved a refund and payment plan proposal. The council expressed skepticism about issuing a refund, concerned that it would simply recreate an outstanding balance. A motion to deny the refund request was supported and carried.

The council discussed legal considerations surrounding water shut-offs, clarifying that these do not violate Minnesota’s Cold Weather Rule. The city employs a system of red delinquency notices to alert customers of impending shut-offs, and several residents have successfully entered payment plans to manage their debts.

The council also reviewed a project agreement with St. Louis County regarding County Road 665, emphasizing the importance of coordinating roadway and utility work to avoid future disruptions. Concerns about the impact on existing infrastructure, such as sidewalks and trails, were raised, stressing the need to minimize disruptions and additional costs.