##VIDEO ID:4qE2Og3YzFs## good evening and welcome to the regular city council meeting for the city of St Peter Minnesota it is Monday November 25th 2024 at 7 p.m we are called to order would all please rise for the pledge I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all all right everybody's received a copy of the packet uh are there any revisions or corrections to the agenda hearing none is there a motion to approve so move second all those in favor of approval say I I any opposed the agenda is approved as distributed uh next up approval of the minutes the minutes appear on pages 5 through eight of the packet are there any revisions or corrections to the minutes hearing none is there a motion to approve the minutes as distributed so move all those in favor of approval say I I any opposed the minutes are approved we have time on our agenda for visitors if there are there any visitors who would like to address the Council on any agenda item seeing none we also have time for General visitor comments if there's any visitor who'd like to address the Council on any matter whatsoever hearing then we will move on to the approval of the consent agenda the consent agenda begins with the memo on page nine of the packet and concludes with the resolution that is on page 42 of the packet the uh P 42 through 43 uh the consent agenda includes the following employe appointments Matt Alman as fire chief Emma Armitage as Recreation interm uh Jessica scrabeck as fitness instructor at the wages listed within the packet the following board and commission appointments shall be made Keith stelter to the parks and wreck board for a partial term ending December 31st 2024 and continuing for the next term of 25 through 27 Mark Bachman to the Planning and Zoning commission for a term ending December 31st 2025 we declare the following as Surplus and authorized the staff to dispose of the fire department a 1969 snorkel fire truck with attached equipment the commun community center and library a hard surface floor scubber an advanced reel cleaner a Black and Decker corded drill we approve the following licenses temporary gambling licenses for the Church of uh St Peter on the dates and locations listed within the packet the attached revised ret uh attached revised tree planting lists for right of way and parks and green spaces as well as the schedule of dispersements for November 7th through November 20th 2024 is there any discussion of any items on the consent agenda Brad Madam mayor I'd like just uh just like to point out uh since we have so many visitors tonight um we're doing some boards and commission appointments that the city regularly has uh positions available on their boards and commission so if any residents of St Peter would be interested they can go to our City website or check with our staff to see uh what boards or Commission might be available it's always great to put in a plug for boards and commissions further discussion hearing nothing further the resolution approving the consent agenda is on pages 42 through 43 of the packet is there a motion to approve so moved second we have a motion and a second call the rooll please mayor noell I council member Johnson I council member Pettis hi council member ramp I council member weisenfeld I council member shrom hi council member DeVos hi the resolution is approved we have no items of Unfinished Business tonight and so we will move on to new business the first item of new business is the adoption of a resolution approving water rates and water fund budget so we have two separate resolutions under this uh memo and Sally's here to talk to us about that uh mayor Noel and city council we are here asking for the approval of water rates starting uh two increases one on January 1st 2025 another on January 1st 20 26 those um increases will be reflected in the bills due March 15th of each year um and also our water fund budgets for 2025 and 2026 the memo begins on page 44 of the packet and ends on page 50 of the packet the water fund as you know provides the operation of City's Wells aquafers water treatment facilities two elevated towers and two ground storage reservoirs and they distribute the and they distribute water through the system that's 54 miles of pipe throughout the city this is a 2-year budget proposal for 25 and 26 um just so you know State Statute does not require budgets for Environmental Services but we think it's best practice to approve budgets and give our ourselves and staff the agreed work direction for each fund the 2025 and 2026 budget changes um operating expenses are similar to what the council has approved the last in the last budget cycle the 2025 proposed budget is a 5.4% increase from the 2024 budget and uh 9.3 from the projected 2024 year end numbers we are coming in favorable in 20124 right now as I'm projecting it out right now we have uh numbers through October but um we have some spending that does come in at year end just getting caught up in those types of things but right now we are projecting favorable to 2024 budget the 2026 is an 11.6% increase from the 2025 budget uh projected years of budget have a number of assumptions the 2025 um and 2026 revenue does not include any additional new customers or consumptions Beyond 2024 this means that generally if there's growth in the system as houses come on um it will help it'll be a favorable impact to the budget but as you know we don't know when homes will be complet and it's hard to forecast and plan of what people will spend there are no transfers from Wastewater to water in 2025 and 2026 we've been doing this the last uh three four years um because wastewaters debt was paid off that was always the plan to help Shore up water reserves um we're at the point now where waste waterer is going to be and when we get into that budget we'll discuss it has some big Capital project projects coming along so we will have to spend that money to in Wastewater so we won't be doing that transfer anymore uh wages were projected to increase 3% for 2025 and 2026 um another big contributing factor to our expenses is our health insurance that we provide for employees uh there was a 6% increase for 2025 from the healthc care and we're projecting a 10% increase for 2026 uh budget revenues are projected to have an approximately 52 Cent per thousand gallons used uh increase in 2025 and a $124 per uh base charge again those are beginning on January 1st of 2025 of the budget cycle and then in 2026 it'll be a 56 Cent per thousand gallons used and a134 base charge each month the revenue uh projected to increase for 2025 is 263,000 1 with this rate increase and 283,000 so we're trying to increase rates to help offset not 100% but we're trying to offset that not happening and get our reserves where we need to be other revenues collected in 2025 and 2026 will will remain flat for 2024 please note that this water is very weather dependent so one of the impacts um for 2024 it was a dry cool summer and revenues right now are projected to be below Target of 298,000 so it can fluctuate depending upon what happens with um weather again residential irrigation meters continue to be installed um on new construction these meters will continue to have no monthly base rate but they they do include a slightly higher cost per thousand gallons used but it does not have the waste water on it so it's just a water usage on that versus your home meter is whatever gallons you use as water it's considered the same gallons for Waste Water the water fund does transfer 6 and a half% of its sales to the general fund and that began in 2023 and we will continue for this budget cycle the financial goal has been to have has been to have a water fund unrestricted reserve of 4 months of operating expenses or 674 985 for 25 and 7532 2017 for 2026 the re the unrestricted cash Reserve is identified in two categories Bond payment and unrestricted Cash Cash um there is inar earmarked funding for membranes to cover large cost of membrane replacements for reverse osmosis by the end of 2026 the projected cash balance is $62,000 and4 again no transfer from waste water to water in 25 and 26 the 2025 budget anticipates Capital cost to be funded with reserves in the amount of 979 th000 of which 360 is for the membrane acral and the remaining balance from cash reserves 2026 Capital costs are 521 th000 again all cash reserves there is a 10 10-year Capital plan found in the packet with a breakout of funding for years 25 and 26 current Deb dissu issuances excuse me are listed on pages 45 and 46 most of the five of the six-year um debt issuances will be done at the end of 2029 and the largest de payment right now is for the water treatment facility and that will retire at the end of 2029 uh the remaining debt issuance will be in 2024 issued in 2024 will retire in 20230 2039 wages and benefits are acrw in where people work between water and wastewater it's a shared team so they do that with your time sheets um and benefits are allocated accordingly um again we will come back in front of you for any purchases over 25,000 so approving the budget does not mean that we're going to go and um spend on large capital or purchases we'll come back and have those presented to you for final approval the total fund balance for the water Fund in 2023 was 186,187 and at 2025 will be 159,900 $4 at the end of 2026 again we are we are trying to get to a 4-year operating expense balance which would be 67495 at the end of 2025 and that increases to 7 153,000 to7 at the end of 2026 again as debt gets paid off in 20 after 26 and 27 28 as you can see we do have a budget detail there and we are getting close to those Reserve targets by the end of 2030 um again we continue there's a a large relationship between water and wastewater but we are asking you to approve the water fund budget or resolution on page 59 for 2025 it's 3,3 51,9 91 and for 2026 it's 4,298 390 questions questions for Sally BR um not a question for Sally uh just uh just just multiple comments on this um so what we're looking at is a 7 and a half% increase over the next two years each year um that is substantial um I did look back over several years all the way back to the 2019 budget there were no increases from 2019 through through 2022 and then the last two budget years at council's insistence um we did increase rates uh 1% each year um seven so basically part a lot of this is driven by the fact that there has not been any inflationary cost of living or just even small adjustments made between the last increase and now um it it's it goes to show that um as I say you know it's easier to do 1% every year than 10% every 5 years so we're behind we need to catch up I will be supporting the rate increase I am concerned though about the projections of 7 a half% again into 2027 and 2028 while we're not approving that budget right now I'm not in favor of looking at that I part of that can be alleviated um by looking at using financing options so I am going to vote against the budget I will be voting in favor of the rate increase but I will be voting against this budget because I don't think it works in favor of reducing potential costs in the future as far as uh the rate incre the projected rate increases Beyond this year um I think we need to do a better job of looking into the future um we we'll get into this more on Wastewater but there was a big miss two years ago when we were setting these budgets and and uh and the anticipations of Wastewater costs um everything was great um staff was thinking you know we're flush with cash and now we're not so um as I said we're putting ourselves back to where we should be um probably further ahead than we should be had we been doing regular consistent rate increases um uh that that predates this Council because newest one uh but um as I say I'm in favor of the rate increases because we're in a position that we need to do it um but uh I don't like the way the budget is structured because I think it sets us up for even larger rate increases Beyond this budget cycle oh Carrie um so at the workshop the last Workshop we discussed the budget and the question was asked I believe it was by council member Pettis about um the 2026 Capital plan Capital purchases and if it made sense to do financing there and the answer I remember was no not really can Todd or S can you explain that again it's to your choice of how you want to do it right now we're looking at using cash reserves as we have in the past and just because of the life of the pro of what we're buying and some of the other ones we aren't looking at financing for that and putting it out for the next yeah I guess it was my understanding from the workshop that like the amounts or what what we would be purchasing wouldn't necessarily be a you know a good option for or the best option for financing I think there are a number of challenges that you have any of which you could choose to make a different decision whether you're using cash or issuing debt you do have challenges related to the issuance of debt and that it cost to issue debt not just from an interest perspective but the issuance cost and so there's a a number there's not a magic number but there's a number at which the cost to provide for the issuance means that you've paid a lot for a relatively small imp that's a decision that the council could change at that time again this is a budget and we try and move forward based on the plan if we have additional dollars that come in as we apply for additional dollars and this is even more true in Wastewater related to PFA there are opportunities there that we can apply for whether we get them or not we won't know until we get closer to that timeline um I I think the challenge that you face is that staff has recommended in previous years that your reduction on that you reduce your use of Wastewater funds to subsidize the water fund this does that you could certainly go back to transferring more dollars from Wastewater to water but as you know you have substantial Capital increases that are going to come in front of you related to waste water as well if I had to compare funds the largest expenses that you're going to see in the near term defined as less than five years is going to be within the water in the Wastewater fund not the water fund I think as you look look at these debt issuances um we continue to see an evolving environment and how you're rated by standard and pors and that's something that the methodology that's behind that you don't get to control But continuing to have a plan where you are making adjustments that provide opportunity for those credit reviewers to see that you making changes to apply extra cash within those funds helps within those ratings but I don't want to double talk you I mean the reality is is that the issuance environment so what are interest rates out there have more impact than you're going to have on these issues in their world these are very small sums of money but they do review that and look at those issues as they provide information to those folks that might invest in you another way to say that is buying your debt so I hope that answers your question yeah I guess I'm just make I guess I wanted to make the point that there was discussion about um financing versus using cash for Capital expenses and what made the most sense and I just wanted to revisit that here okay I just wanted to piggy back off of what Brad said Brad you you said that you weren't in favor of approving a 27 28 29 budget correct well we're not approving that what I'm saying is that what what staff is currently projecting is 7.5% and so my concern is alleviating a a as we basically did a couple years ago with the 23 24 was finding a way to make sure we didn't put a burden on further budgets with staff rejecting a 7 and a. half% in 2728 what can we do before we get to that point with that budget is to alleviate the process there so gotcha so we're approving a 2526 budget now 2526 and the methodology that I think we're using to do 2526 is putting additional pressure on 2728 okay gotta additional questions darl I just want to remind everybody that we've been using the water and wastewater fund to shore up our street projects um to buy down our cost and buy down the assessments on our street projects um we have not been assessing for water main nor have we been assessing for sewer main those are covered by the Enterprise funds I believe um if we are going to do that which I fully support and I fully support doing Street work and we have plans laid out for Street work um this spreads those cost uh across other customers within the city that do not pay property taxes so this is a way to take money uh Citywide to buy down the cost of Street work by reducing potential assessments on front footages of lots to construct streets and I believe we do need to construct some of those streets and we do have some utilities water and sewer needs within those streets so I do support the rate increase and I do support this method ology in doing that there nobody's in favor of any substantial rate increases I mean that that's the last thing we want to put forward I am glad that we are being transparent and we're not taking funds from the Wastewater Fund in order to move it over and we're actually being clear on which funds are covering which and allowing us to have that Revenue there any other comments ments we will continue this discussion after tonight and after this vote um moving forward I'm sure and so just to be clear metam on that as the council is where your process is is that you do a midterm review of this so you'll be talking about these budgets even though there's an approved budget for 26 you'll be talking about what your performance has been and where you might go in the future about this time next year that's part of your process um you don't have to do a two-year budget if you want to improve a one-year budget you can certainly do that um we've done two-year budgets for a few Cycles now it seems to have been a benefit because it does allow us to project a little bit further and think a little bit harder about Capital Improvements and where we want to go um I also believe that it's important for your rate paers and that it gives them some additional shity for more than six or eight or 10 months at a time um that doesn't mean that something catastrophic might not happen and changes have to be made um but I think you're doing your best your due diligence in moving things forward and a two-year budget helps in that at least to some extent thanks uh if there is no further discussion the resolution adopting the 2526 water B fund budget is on page 59 of the packet is there a motion to approve so move second we have a motion and a second to call the rooll please council member Johnson I council member Pettis I council member Ram I council member weisenfeld hi council member shrom hi council member DeVos n May I the resolution is approved uh next up a resolution adopting water rate Sally your Todd anything to add no Madam all right that resolution appears on pages UH 60 through 61 of the packet is there a motion to approve so move second uh we have a motion and a second to call the role please council member Pettis I council member ramp I council member wield I council member charom I council member DeVos I mayor Noel I council member Johnson I the resolution is approved moving on to adoption of a resolution approving Wastewater rates and Wastewater fund budget for 2526 May City Council has same um again we're here to approve the Wastewater rates and fund budget for 25 and 26 um budget detail begins on page 66 of the packet through 73 including a 10-year Capital Improvement plan um Wastewater fund provides operation of the city's Wastewater system lift stations treatment facilities Laboratory Testing um disposal of Bio solids and reporting to mpca and the discharge of um treated water into the mississipp OR Mississippi I wish um Minnesota River um the and the city's commitments to min minimize the our overall environmental impact through quality treatment and very low impact on a fluid water discharge into the Minnesota River again we are proposing a 2-year budget we've done this for the last four year four Cycles um State statue again does not require budgets to be approved but again we think it's best practice and give staff a um working direction for the next two years changes to the 2025 and 2026 um operating expenses are similar to to what's been approved in Prior years um 2025 operating expenses are 5.3% % above the 2024 budget driven mainly by wages and benefits fuel costs and utility costs again Wastewater uses a lot of City Utilities so um we are one of the bigger users of utility costs there 2026 budget is a 4.1% above the 2025 operating budget capital projects for 2025 and 2026 there's 14.6 million for 2025 14 million of that is for the Wastewater treatment plant and rehabbing the bio solid um work that's done in equipment it's 20 years old 22 years old to be exact and we're needing to upgrade that equipment and replace some failing um equipment there and then 2.1 million in in 2026 and that's 1.1 million of that is for um building re refurbishing that will be going on rate increases proposed for January 1st of 2025 and 2026 is approximately 60 cents base charge per month and approximately 46 cents per thousand gallons for Wastewater used this translates into about n into 94,969 increase over 24 projected year end and for 2026 156,157 water usage again is projected flat to 2022 levels and um water sales again can be weather dependent depend upon um what's going on and if people have irrigation meters or not full rate recommendation the table is on page 64 of the packet again way sweater will transfer 6 and a half% of their sales gross sales to the general fund that percentage has been in place um and then Wastewater will not be transferring any funds to water in this budget cycle um most of the Wastewater um debt has been retired um there is one that was issued in 2019 um and that has about 1, 290,000 that last payment is in 2043 and then we have some of the sewer and revenue refunding B funds for the street projects Pine Street Cullen and Cline um as stated earlier we are looking at issuing a bond issuance of 14 million for capital for the biosolid equipment replacement in 2025 and 1.1 for building 1.1 million in 2026 for building rehab that would be Bond issuance um there are no Personnel ads for this year and for either Year and no new programs or substantial changes in operations planned again being living on the river if the legislature would change or make some rules that we have to follow we will have to come in compliance but right now we're not for anything in in this budget cycle uh we re the recommended Reserve goal for Wastewater at the end of 20126 is 65,0 which equates to about a 4month average of operating expenses the Wastewater um fund is projected to have an unrestricted cash balance of 69121 at the end of 26 um again we are working towards that and we are asking approval of the Wastewater budget resolution on page SE page 74 which includes 2025 expenditures of 3,668 531 and capital expenditures of 14,668 668,000 and then for 2026 expenditures of 4,299 299,999 you Sally questions for Sally Brad um can you come up here please I'm going to go easier on you because of the audience um so so a couple years ago when we went over this budget we were swimming in cash everything was duckies and bunnies the only reason why we did a 1% rate increase because the council insisted on it in fact I look I I I reviewed the notes and and staff made sure people knew it was a council because it even said at the council's direction we're raising rates 1% um we had $600,000 in capital expenses in 2025 two years ago now it's 14 million kind of a big difference what happened well we finished our facility plan and so that is really a event that we do with our Engineering Services to identify needs for the future and so even though we developed a five and 10 year plan that information was out there for our budget considerations um we just didn't take any action to raise rates at that time because we didn't know the impact and we still don't know the impact exactly where we're going to be when we complete the uh end of our Capital Improvements um so I I will say the um I I think uh part of it was earlier this year uh when you brought us a facility plan you said while it's because we have a 20e uh facility our facility is 20 years old and we should expect it and I know two years ago as you know I would hope that maybe there might have been a little bit more anticipation that there might be some needs that would need to be upgraded so we could have anticipated this we rely on staff um to set a lot of our rates um even if we even a couple years ago if we could have bumped up rates a little bit more it would have prepared us more for this um once again we haven't raised rates at least back to 2019 rates haven't been increased not sure when was the last time rates were increased Todd do you yeah so um once again it gets down to is is we just have to basically consistently look at gradual rate increases versus these large bumps at one time um I think honestly a poor job of setting rates has happened in the past I'm not putting that on staff I know prior directioni prior direction from councils was basically don't do it until you absolutely have to which is what has led to a lot of these tramatic rate increases um but I will say two years ago we were also put on we were also working under the assumption that our budget for the next five years out was going to be fairly limited except for some water expenditures um I am in favor of the budget I am in favor of the rate increases um actually the rate increases dating back to 2019 are less than inflationary um so had we so at this point I would say we move forward with it um I would once again advise staff do all you can to not just look at this two years but to look at the budgets Beyond to look at your impact now as to what it's setting us up going forward um and as well as you know looking not just at this but I know what our electrical system is is looking further out even though you don't know exactly what you need now even your best estimate or best guess as to what might be needed in the future I I attend the Public Works meetings I know you're talking about Breakers that might need to be replaced and starting to look at those into the budget um to help you know avoid these large surprise essentially this was a big surprise to us earlier this year and just finding ways to kind of eliminate the surprises is what we need to look at going forward uh additional questions or further discussion for the sake of our audience who has not been at our workshops can either one of you maybe Pete more aptly explain what is this $14 million going towards that be bile solids improvements and so you have a a Class A Wastewater facility and what that means is that your permit requirements you have to treat to a certain level our biosolids is a exceptional quality biosolids which gives us less regulation when we go to the disposal and so the goal behind that is to maintain that level of environmental impact uh within our community and within the surrounding area um right now we're evaluating what we're trying to accomplish in two methods one would be a $20 million Improvement which would take us to a drying level which would have an impact on posos treatment in the future we just recently completed the testing requirements with the mpca and we do not have any posos in our Wastewater or our water stream at this time and so what we're now trying to do is look at the options below that you guys have authorized a construction manager at risk a semr uh for us to operate we'll be getting that on board here in December and at that time we'll evaluate what methods of treatment we can do uh in the future here within the next year or so um in order to treat our biosolids to the capacity that we have and currently meet the regulations if I can jump in with um um a less Public Works director explanation we have a plant that's over 20 years old and the equipment in it is like driving a 22y old car lots of us drive 22y old cars but they don't meet the efficiency they don't protect the environment like a modern car they don't get the gas mileage like they used to and for us the big issue is is that they don't treat Wastewater or the stuff that comes out of that Wastewater in the way that it needs to be treated not only to meet the law but to meet the environmental goals that we have when of the biggest issues that we have within our community towards protecting the environment is how do we treat that waste and so this is a significant issue in that and so once in a while you got to fix the brakes you got to put new tires on the car you got to do those types of things and unfortunately this is a very expensive kind of car and so $14 million buys new brakes and new transmission and those things that are necessary to continue to meet those environmental goals and keep us running down the road and treating our we just right and for our very attentive audience here the treatment of Wastewater is the final stop before it gets to the river so in terms of bonding at what point would we submit a bonding request so we will submit a bonding request in every cycle way they offer the opportunity to submit a bonding request I would tell you that from my perspective there is opport opportunity for that to happen however the most significant opportunity for financing that we have is through the PFA or for the public facilities Authority and they provide funding based on state Bond issuances and they loan US money sometimes they give us a little bit of Grant but usually they loan US money and it's targeted towards ensuring that our Wastewater is x% of that area median income and so they might give us a better interest rate if we have a lower area mediate income and maybe not as good interest rates so a higher interest rate when we have a higher area mediate income so they target those dollars to ensure that there is at least some level of equity throughout the state of Minnesota and what folks pay towards maintaining the environment and treating Wastewater so that would be our number one kind of style yeah and I think the challenges is that the legislature hasn't added funding in a long time and there the needs for infrastructure Wastewater plans water plants is just going up and so it is I mean it gets to be competitive as as those resources are are limited yeah it it's very very competitive I think one of the advantages that we have is that you as a council as a community you have a great reputation for meeting the requirements of treating this waste appropriately and so I think that they look favorably upon that mpca does and therefore PFA does as well um I think you know there are other options you could do nothing and let all the sewage run into the river and then the state would jump in and try and save you but that isn't what councils traditionally here have done you've really tried to ensure that you are doing things right as it relates to environmental impact and treatment of waste and that's the process you've been in now for over 25 years um but again specifically to this plant and the Capital Improvements it's Tires and Brakes and changing the oil and all those kind of things are really important in keeping that car moving down the road it's not the building itself the building is fine um it's the stuff that's inside that's in a very hazardous um challenging environment yeah corrosive all of those things for sure so anyway further questions discussion hearing nothing further the resolution adopting the 2526 Wastewater fund budget is on page 74 of the packet is there a motion to approve move second motion and a second to call the role please council member ramp I council member weisenfeld I council member shrom I council member DeVos I mayor Noel I council member Johnson I council member pet I the resolution is approved any discussion before our next resolution the resolution adopting Wastewater rates is on pages 75 through 76 of the packet is there a motion to approve so moveed second second motion and a second call the RO please council member weisenfeld I Council member shrom hi council member DeVos hi mayor Noel I council member Johnson I council member Pettis hi council member ramp I the resolution is approved thank you our next item of new business is the adoption of a resolution reestablishing a mayor's task force on Child Care mayor members this is something that the council's talked about quite often and this is really what you might consider the number two child care task force you originally had one about 10 years ago that did some great work uh we tried to establish this not that long ago and had some challenges related to membership and covid and other issues this is my effort and my recommendation to you based on discussions with the mayor related to ensuring That We Gather folks that are really smart in this area that can do a couple of things first of all identify challenges within our community for the provision of child care whether it's the cost the amount the number of spaces that are available all those things and then that task force would provide a report back and the goals are outlined within the body of the memo but generally it goes like this we've identified a problem here's some potential Solutions and the city then can make decisions what type of solutions make sense for you to implement some of these things are things that the city can own or could own and help with some of the items that will come up you just don't have any control over and that's okay but maybe we know someone who does or can help in that area and so then we have an opportunity to inform them and solicit their assistance to try and promote additional affordable child care within our community this is a big issue Child Care is economic development in a number of different ways it provides opportunity for workers to work within our businesses and for many families operating a child care business is their business it's a small business and really important the goal here again is to emplo some members and this provides latitude for me to bring other folks to the Gathering to the party I would anticipate there'll be three to five meetings on this each meeting taking maybe an hour to an hour and a half from this group I've talked with all of these folks over the last couple of months about participation um and Council has discussed this and council member Johnson said that she would participate and our goal will be to have a structured and facilitated discussion identifying challenges and then doing those three or four things that I talked about um the resolution establishes this task force and I hope brings specific relief or highlights the need for these type of services within our community and the impact that the city can have on helping with not all of those but maybe some of them and as the council's told staff on many occasions we do what we can to help people when we can and so this is an opportunity potentially to do that again Madame mayor the resolution is included in your packet um that provides for the task force itself provides for the mission of the task force and membership discussion Carrie I'm I'm very excited to serve on this task force I was on the board of a child care center before I came on the council I have two kids of my own and um face some challenges um with access to child care as well as cost um I think the work also really aligns with the work that I do on the regional Economic Development Alliance um the one thing with this list I think um I think it's going to be really easy for all of us uh especially the folks that run the child care centers the family child care providers to identify the challenges the solutions is going to be a lot more difficult and so um as we work on identifying those challenges which I think will be come pretty quickly um I think we might want to expand to um businesses and other like outside of this group where we can kind of think more from a community perspective about what's right for St Peter in addressing this challenge because every Community is so different um the issue is very Le so um darl and I were just at the uh Coalition Conference uh this uh last week and there was a um panel presentation on Child Care case studies from across Greater Minnesota every one of those communities is facing a little bit of a different challenge they really only were addressing capacity issues they did not have any solutions for addressing Workforce um or cost and so it's a very Dynamic issue um I'm really glad glad that we're doing this um and so I think you know we can do work as a task force but we're going to have to uh expand into the community because it's not going to be um we're not going to have like one siiz fits-all solution for for our community we're going need need a lot of support in that uh realm so but I'm very excited it it starts with having these conversations so I look forward to serving on the task force second I look forward to council member Johnson serving on the task force as well um Brad you got a lot of great work in this area so you've definitely done your tour for sure um but yeah I I I think she'll be I think she'll be a great uh addition to this with not only her uh background uh on a board but with Rita and the Coalition in the Coalition Greater Minnesota cities um and people understand this is not going to solve everything but there should be the ideas for ideas to come forth to help to to help make access easier it may not help help with uh Workforce creation um but it may help with licensing uh we've had previous things where we've tried to make licensing easyier for home child care or make Eda loans more available for home child care um providers so it's not necessarily the big ideas but necessarily small ideas can add up um so I'm I'm excited to see this task force come together again and I'm looking forward to seeing what they come up with so further questions or discussion hearing nothing further the resolution EST establishing a 2024 Child Care task force on pages 79 and 80 of the packet is there a motion to approve so moved second we have a motion and a second call the rooll please council member charom hi council member DeVos I mayor Noel I council member Johnson I council member Pettis I council member ramp I council member wasn't v i the resolution is approved next up adoption of a resolution approving execution of an updated Mutual Aid agreement mayor members this is including your packet starting on page 81 and this is something that you've done before however there's a few items that have changed within this Mutual Aid agreement and if you had a chance to look through your packet you'll see some of those but let me highlight a couple first of all um has we provide assistance orist assistance is provided to us um the bills start rolling after 12 hours not 48 Hours as was in the previous agreement this is important in a number of different ways certainly it's important that it's articulated but also this relates to some changes that we've seen and implications that we've seen related to natural disasters in FEMA so I think that's important for you to know and understand also the length and the renewal terms for this the initial agreement here is 5 years but it renews automatically unless we provide notice in the past it was actionable each time and so this keeps it rolling um please be assured that this is something that we'll watch on a regular basis but we will count on some of our County friends and the County Emergency Management teams to continue to move this forward and we have discussions about this as we have tabletops and other exercises that relate to it um again this is really important so that we know how we're engaging with others and as we look for assistance they engage with us and we understand what the ground rules are when we come together we are our strongest and this provides that opportunity so that it's done with Clarity and understanding of how that works um also this is part of what we see female looking for should there be a natural disaster like the tornado or flooding that's occurred and so FEMA looks for these types of agreements to provide for reimbursement for local units of government not just cities not just counties but other local units of government townships and others as we work together and um as is mentioned in the last bullet point St Peter really understands the importance of mutual Aid in providing for partners we sure do um Madame mayor that uh there's not a direct cost to doing this at this point but should we be engaged or seek assistance that that's when costs and the outline of this agreement provides for how those costs would be paid there's a copy of the agreement within your packet and then a resolution at the end of that Madam Mar I think if I remember right um the resolution is on page 87 if I remember correctly you are correct uh any questions for Todd well you did so well explaining it uh the resolution approving execution of an updated Mutual Aid agreement with blue Earth nicholet and L County and cities located in within within those counties is on page 87 is there a motion to approve so moved second we have a motion and a second call the role please mayor Noel I council member Johnson I council member Pettis I council member ramp I council member weisenfeld I council member shrom I council member DeVos I the resolution is approved next up adoption of a resolution accepting 2022 Broadway Avenue and Sunrise Drive intersection improvements and Pete is here to talk to us about that Madam mayor and city council back in 2022 we began the Broadway Avenue and Sunrise Drive intersection roundabout um that work has been completed uh dirt Merchant out of Mano Minnesota was hired to complete that project and they have completed all the warranty work as you realize uh we had some uh concrete that had to be corrected this last summer and a couple of storm sewer issues to resolve there and those have been directed to our satisfaction uh what we're asking you tonight is to approve final payment and to um just summarize uh what we did for the fiscal impact uh local Road Improvement Grant funds were 60% of the overall project and so we're very happy with that our total project was 21291 so we had 2 million 2.1 million on that and what we're asking is that you uh approve the resolution on page 90 any questions hearing nothing I just want to add one other thing Pete is exactly right we started construction on this project in 2022 but planning for this occurred approximately five years before that and request for federal funding and other things so these projects take a little bit to develop just like we talked about with water and wastewater as we're looking for resources you have to be a little bit ahead of the game and so um um these are great projects as we can move forward and we're very fortunate to get those IP dollars in cooperation with the county thanks any further discussion the resolution authorizing final payment for the 22 Broadway Avenue and Sunrise Drive intersection improvements is on page 90 is there a motion to approve so moved second we have a motion and second call the rooll please council member Johnson I council member ptis hi council member ramp hi council member weisenfeld hi council member shrom hi council member DeVos I may no well I the resolution is approved now we'll talk about the adoption of a resolution accepting old Minnesota Avenue in St Julian Street roundabout again did have dirt Merchant bid this project you authorized the project to be completed um we did come in about $3,000 less than the bid amount uh funding for the project was Federal grant again 64% of the overall project uh and this one had a little more utility work underneath it because of the age of what we were doing there in the future plans uh for our growth area in St Peter here um total project as I mentioned 1792 million um has been uh warranty work has been completed on this project they uh really went together on both we had the same issue on both of the projects with some storm sewer uh those were lined and corrected and we were happy to report that everything looks good and we're asking that you approve the resolution on page 93 and we will make final payment all right questions for Pete oh let's go with Ben one question yes so the two projects um there was uh about $300,000 difference between the two projects however the hold back between the two was flipped it was different so the first project that was $300,000 more the final payment was about $50,000 what's the reason for the difference between the two the final payment or the total cost of final the final payment um in the 2022 project as the project got near uh reached achievement we were um less likely to hold money back on the final payment because more had been accomplished so by law we have to release that money only to cover the expenses for the uncorrected uh issues and now if this project wouldn't have gotten completed in this year uh we probably would have had another payment that come down the line and it would have been similar in that but due to timing dirt Merchant was able to correct both issues and that's why perfect the issues talked about that needed corrected those were corrected under there those are warranty issues warant yes so we we didn't pay extra for the for those to be NOP we did not so for the people who voice frustration of why are we tearing something up and redoing it and paying for it y we were not paying for it that's correct yep and the other the other issue with the 2022 project at Sunrise and Broadway was we did have County participation on one of the legs and so that extended uh to the West up County Road five or up Broadway and that's why the difference in the overall cost of the project additional questions or comments hearing none the resolution authorizing final payment for the old Minnesota Avenue in St Julian Street roundabout improvements is on page 93 is there a motion to approve so moved second we have a motion and a second to call the RO please Council ptis hi council member Ram hi council member weisenfeld hi council member shrom I council member DeVos I mayor Noel I council member Johnson I the resolution is approved next up adoption of a resolution authorizing purchase and installation of a Wastewater lift station pump Madame mayor and city council at your main lift station down there on Union Street um we are going through some issues now again similar to what you're experiencing at your Wastewater Plant where we're starting to look at pump Replacements uh the original pumps are still there uh they have been taken out about every four to five years and rebuilt and then reinstalled um your utility our Water Resources uh superintendent has done some extensive research on this and is recommending that we not take the low bid for this project but yet we look at a uh overthe life cycle cost of this project because we feel that due to the nature of how maintenance is performed now and the companies that we hire to do this maintenance this gives us more flexibility and can be done at a cheaper cost uh over the 20 years we anticipate about a 50-year savings over the life cycle uh and most of that's related to the cost to pull the pumps and where the pumps can be maintained um I believe that we've got a a decent product here in both of the two low biders um and so our recommendation is that we go with Minnesota pump works um and that we approve the resolution on page 96 and that we'll begin working on some routine Replacements when we have pump failures questions Carrie I remember hearing a lot about lift stations during the flooding the historic flooding we had um and in the summer and um just it's interesting just with our geography um that we may need less lift stations than other communities that aren't as don't have gravity as as a support um but you called this our main lift station so how how important is is it to our community to have that one functioning this this pumps all of the Wastewater to the wastewater treatment plant so we collect everything at that site as you guys are aware we originally built that lift station in 1960 we have since uh refurbished that and added um uh vfd pumps which means that they operate on a different frequency with electricity and so we need that in order to make our Wastewater Plant run the most efficient and so these improvements here will allow for some of those improvements to be maintained at a high level thank you and we do have quite a few less lift stations in most communities right uh we really have about three lift stations uh in St Peter and one at Cota uh for Community our size uh that's very low number as you are aware during our expansion to the West uh we made the conscientious effort to put in deeper sewers at a higher cost in order to prevent from having electrical pumping situations in the future with lift stations thank you Brad um so I am in favor of this I'll just say it seems like we're flushing a lot of money down the [Laughter] drain I got we don't pay extra for that other questions or discussion all right hearing nothing further a resolution authorizing the purchase and installation of a new Soler pump at the main lift station is on page 96 of the packet is there a motion to approve so moved second uh we have a motion on the second can call the r please council member ramp I council member weisenfeld I council member shrom I council member DeVos I mayor Noel I council member Johnson I council member Pettis I the resolution is approved thanks Pete uh next up adoption of a resolution approving Traverse green subdivision number three final flat and Ben is here to talk to us about that all right thank you mayor Noel and members of the council um this has to do with the um Travers green subdivision number three final plat and just a little background so over the past two decades the city of St Peter has constructed three new single family dwelling developments um so in the early 2000s it was nicholet Meadows and Washington Terrace 77 lots and 87 Lots both of which are full in 2016 the city developed Traverse green um and that was six or 59 original Lots which is now 63 and that is almost full so um that's really good news there is 19 vacant Lots left and 18 of those are reserved so just to break it down a little bit there's 14 medium Lots reserved and four small Lots reserved and then there's just one large lot available which is the most southeasterly lot um all three of these neighborhoods were um designed on the building better neighborhoods design concept um they did help to bring in new tax base um increase public utility users it increased population added school age children to local schools and offered new housing options for the entire Community um it's best practice to have about two to three years worth of inventory on hand as far as Lots go the last two years we did 11 uh new single family homes and this year we're at 25 or 30 units um and we're not quite done yet so um currently the city is experiencing a shortage of available Lots in these in this particular lot range not only in Traverse green but throughout the city um the city does own 46 acres of land that show is showing up on the screen um and doesn't include the school property along um Nicolet Avenue that was recently purchased um so with that 46 uh Acres the city worked with a Development Corporation uh to originally create some concept plans out of those uh multiple concept plans came um the option of extending esler Street to the north um about 2,000 ft and that would open up anywhere from 40 to 46 Lots um about a year ago the city reached out to Miller holes to uh see if we could find a partner and we did um it's been a good partnership so far and Miller Holmes committed um last spring to constructing 26 of the new homes in the subdivision that's being proposed and they also paid 20% of the engineering costs um that was part of the development agreement to become a partner with with us um so attached is the actual plat and so what what a plat is is essentially it's our our method of subdividing land and this particular plat um subdivides this land into 42 Lots um which can be built on mostly they're above 10,000 squ ft and less than 16,000 ft in size it also creates two out lots and then establishes three roads so it extends Cullen Street um it adds Benson Street and then it extends Clark Street as well um so with that um it would be City staff and the planning commission's recommendation to approve this uh final plat which was based off of the approved preliminary plat from back in May thank you very much any question questions or discussion Brad um I'm just I'm really excited about um this I've been saying for several years we need larger Lots I it's just a demand that we're missing here interestingly enough now all of our smaller lots have been bought up um so but uh I I think this is giving some people something they were looking for and I'm I I think it's going to do really well so anything else hearing nothing Travers screen subdivision number three final plat this for the city of St Peter the resolution is on page 103 of the packet is there a motion to approve some Mo second we have a motion and a second call the role please council member weisenfeld I council member shrom I council member DeVos I mayor Noel I council member Johnson I council member Pettis I council member ramp I the resolution is approved U moving on to the adoption of a resolution approving Traver screen subdivision number three lot prices and design standards we have two resolutions with this and Ben sure take it away thank you mayor Noel um yeah two action items uh off of this memo here and now that the final plat is approved um we have officially established lots and so we need to add prices to those lots so attached there is a map and a spreadsheet that shows um the lot sizes and the proposed lot prices uh we did review this at the the workshop um and you know the the staff including the you know city engineer Public Works and Community Development director we tried to uh lay out these sizes um so that they'd be desirable for the community new home builders and prospective uh purchasers and we also tried to um make sure that the lot prices were also reciprocating the where they are located how desirable they'll be and uh based on the development costs that are shown on the on the next page so there was $2.7 Million worth of development costs there's 10 items in there um and those what are what make up the 2.7 million we're just trying to recruit those costs and so far um with our partner Miller homes they have reserved 26 of the 42 Lots um so we have 16 lots that are available for us as a city to Market we'd start marketing those after the beginning of the year and into the spring um so for this um the council and in August did approve the Cullen Street project which started the actual Road and utility work so that was just uh recently completed the underground work was completed here um just a few weeks ago and then we'll let that sit over the win winter to settle and then in the spring we'll pick that back up and that's when the curb and gutter sidewalks and pavement will come in um and then we can uh see some start houses start coming in and maybe spring summer next year so with that there are two things to look at here one would be the the the lot prices so there's correlating lots and blocks addresses square footages of lots and then broken out by the lot prices so that would be the first resolution that we're looking to approve any questions about that first resolution Josh uh just to clarify these lot prices include uh any potential assessments right so for folks who are looking to purchase one of these lots and build a home on it all the utility are already going to be installed this is the only price that they're going to have to pay they're not going to exactly yep and then there was some assessments past assessments um from projects that were close up on Clark Street and County Road 20 um that are also included in this and so it's just one price for all the assessments for sure yeah additional questions members if I could reason that we asked you to do it in this way is so that has you move forward with the third phase of this which is the marketing and sales rules which will come to you in the New Year we have numbers that are fixed so that staff and your City attorney can do the transaction complete the sale without additional action on the part of the council all right seeing no other raised hands the resolution establishing the sale price of residential lots without within Travis Green subdivision number three is on pages 108 through 109 of the packet is there a motion to approve so second all those uh oh we need a roll call thank you Kesha council member Char hi council member DeVos hi mayor Noel I council member Johnson I council member Pettis I council member ramp I council member wield I all right the resolution is approved we're going to move on to uh resolution establishing architectural design and home standards for Travers screen subdivision number three uh thank you mayor Noel and just a note that there was a updated resolution that was passed out um so there was 14 standards now there's 16 standards um so in in an effort to help protect property values and promote a consistent and aesthetically pleasing neighborhood this new neighborhood in the city a list of 16 standards what's compiled by the city to help direct home construction within this new Travers green neighborhood um the standards were sent to our partner and also reviewed at a recent Workshop uh to note the ones that were revised from the workshop were number five we make sure to add h roofs um we did some revisions to number seven to uh address sighting color we made sure that there on 10 that tax attached garages were required and then 14 and 15 were added and that addresses the um the the shop home house um idea that has come about recently and then number 16 there is some uh kind of a a catch all where the city administrator the community development director and the building official as we re review these um we do look for all these different things but we do have some uh um on a specific Case by casee basis we may approve some minor variances or deviations um from this just things that don't always get brought up there's always something new to that we haven't thought about so with that it would be staff's recommendation to approve the next resolution thank you Ben any questions Brad um so number one uh you did make a revision into three which I appreciate which is the split L basically home size uh previously it was just a flap what's above ground you took in account split levels home Ramblers and two story and I appreciate the I'm in favor of increasing the square footage as you did for the single floor slab homes um I do have I I think you know you know the biggest thing D part of it is drive you know we want homes of greater value biggest thing that drives value on the home is is square footage I think we're getting too deep into the weeds when we start dictating uh that they have to have a facade roof Gable um uh you do allow the hip Rifts but the fact that that one of the G if they have a Gable to rft one has to be a facade facing um the other thing is I still have an issue with the two different exterior siding materials I drove through my neighborhood um and the neighborhood and the house in my neighborhood they're all larger they have decent value to them but I'd say at least one out of every three homes would not be able to be built with these siding standards um because many of them like my own only have one I I have steel siding top to bottom I don't have any other facade fixtures but my steel siding went on in 2018 um you know it was and uh it was something that Schmid Sid and used as a model um I don't and there are people who may not want the facade I'm someone who said I'm not if someone has a brick facade but then it ends right at the front of the house and you can see the sides it just it's not appealing thing to me that's just my taste so I'm not saying we ban that I'm just saying people have different tastes um I I would be I I would be against having two different exterior side the two different exterior siding materials um the other issue I had was the exterior uh essentially the uh limiting of the exterior siding colors to Earth Tones but the city May approve other visually appealing siding colors who gets to dictate what's visually appealing um the reason why I asked that is you know you once get we'll use my neighborhood as an example we have Light blues we have dark Blues we have greens mine is a very dark gray um would any of these be permitted in this neighborhood um and so I guess what I'm getting at is I was in favor of these Lots because I wanted PE I I have a lot over 10,000 s ft I'm you know one of the things I was looking for is let people have larger Lots over 10,000 sare ft let them build the house that they like now do we want to have minimums on size absolutely because we do we don't want someone building a tiny house on a large lot um but I do think allowing a little variation in what people want for their house versus you know saying you either have to have a hip roof or or or or a facade cable um dictating what colors essentially leaving the colors up to somebody and I think you've got great judgment and color Bend but you know just leaving it up to somebody in Community Development to decide whether they whether they want a light blue house this week or whether that dark blue house isn't something they're interested in um and you know and just the exterior walk I think I think we're getting into the development side of things when we're not developers I guess that's the way I'm looking at this is I I don't have a problem set setting minimum sizes um even minimum size of the garage but just when we get into siding color and the design of the house the exterior of the house I I just think it's going beyond what the city should be doing and it cuts down on honestly it cuts down on variety I mean part of the appeal of lots of neighborhoods is just not all the houses look the same and I I think I think that's a big thing I'm just so I I wouldn't be in favor of this I wouldn't mind taking taking it back to a workshop um to discuss to discuss this more um because just as laid out I think we're doing too much design work and in you know 20 years from now this neighborhood might look really old with all these houses that look the same Carrie we any push back from developers that have seen reviewed the design standards or has it are we too soon to really show Miller Holmes this for instance no miller Holmes has approved this and they're the ones that and 26 of the 32 Lots so this will be for the 16 lots that I mean the same standards will be for Miller Holmes which are they're fine with the 16 lots that are left that the city will Market will use this as well to uh um to promote the the neighborhood I'm okay with the design standards it's pretty similar to what I've seen um in other newer neighborhoods um I do like to see variety as well um and I get that but I think I'm okay with the design standards as listed especially if we sought feedback from developers who really know the customers um probably better than we do so Josh so I think I'm in Brad's Camp I would prefer this one back to a workshop and probably will vote no on it I think we're overstepping in the design of a home um I I think one of the biggest attractions to having larger Lots is people get to build sort of whatever home they want to build or whatever dream home they have and one of our sort of directions that we wanted to go as a council was getting people from their starter homes in St Peter into their second homes that likely will be ones that they more fully designed I think this is far too restrictive of design um metrics for a city to be imposing on a community as I mentioned at the workshop if if this was an HOA community and people were voluntarily electing to go into an HOA I think this is very appropriate but for the city to uh enforce this on its own I think I think that's overstepping making a motion to table definitely I I would love to talk about this at a workshop again before we come back on then you then I would recommend you make a t a motion to table definitely and if there's a second we'll vote on it I'll make a motion to table definitely I'll second that um we'll do a Voice vote we'll do a Voice vote all those in favor of of tabling say I I any opposed uh the motion is uh it is a no on the motion so we will move back to discussion if there is any discussion on this hearing none we will move forward with a vote on the resolution the the revised resolution that was distributed establishing architectural design and home standards for Travers screen subdivision number three so I would like to make a motion to approve the this revised copy of the designed standards I would would have one further question actually Ben who who does decide what's an acceptable color it would be a combination of the city administrator myself and the building official okay uh is there a second I'll second uh call the RO please council member DeVos n mayor Noel I council member Johnson I council member Pettis I council member Ram I council member weisenfeld no council member shrom hi the resolution is approved thank you Ben thank you guys uh we're going to move on to reports there is no report from your mayor at this time are there any council members who'd like to make reports I I would thank you darl um car like Carri stated before um I will let her talk also uh we did attend the cgmc conference uh up in um Alexandria last week um good Conference of day day and a half um one of the things I'd like to talk about is actually the daycare information that was presented Ed um from the panel city of lever City of Warren city of Wilmer and some of the challenges they have just like Carrie had said they focus mainly on the St Sticks and Bricks I guess building these um they did receive a couple questions from the audience I thought was very interesting um the one gentleman basically asked uh okay great great presentation on getting the building built what are you doing to reduce the actual cost of daycare and they were talking $116,000 on average for infant daycare in Minnesota right now for a year and the the lady from leverne basically said there will be subsidies there will be subsidies this Center will not operate without some type of subsidies now we can debate where these subsidies are going to come from are they going to come from business are they going to come from a foundation private donations or they be some type of taxpayer subsidy and she didn't really answer that but basically there will be subsidies especially if you have infants you can look at losing about $1,000 per week per infant room it's like so she was talking some real money so it was very interesting on the daycare I think we are somewhat ahead of this game we have had these daycare task forces in the past um look for more of them in the future um and look for requests it's going to be an interesting and I will leave it at that and pass over to yeah so the conference was was really interesting and you know this the fall conference is where we're setting the um also at the business meeting we're setting our policies for that upcoming year so that um when we go into the upcoming legislative session the Coalition of Greater Minnesota cities really has um direction from its members which are um over a 100 uh municipalities across Greater Minnesota um Daryl uh council member Pettis serves on the transportation committee um um I serve on the economic development committee um and help uh develop those policies and there weren't a ton of changes because we just anticipate this upcoming legislative session not a whole lot um that's going to get done uh I think just pushing again for LGA and bonding is going to be the primary focus areas uh for this for cgmc um other than that I was really interested in the um marketing Greater Minnesota communities uh panel presentation um so we're a member or of the alliance the regional Economic Development Alliance huge portion of that budget goes into marketing um and you think of if you think of our overall state budget there's not a whole lot of marketing that goes into or marketing dollars um that go into Economic Development marketing resident recruitment marketing now there's there has been a transfer of funds from um deed uh but it's still like who gets that money and where does it go um is really interesting so uh more to come I hope to engage more with the executive director of explor Minnesota with Rita so that we can talk about um how we can uh you know bring more residents to this area attract people to live in our um greater Min greater Mano area which is um pretty great place to live so I found that the most interesting out of all the panel presentations plus the CH the one on child care as well so well thank thanks to both of you for representing us at uh the cgmc conference yes I uh see that Rita is up there as well I um so at our last uh Rita meeting um at the advisory committee meeting I was voted as chair of the regional Economic Development Alliance for the next two years so normally it's a one-year term um the uh advisory committee uh wanted to do two-year terms so there's some stability um so as chair for the next two years also hold my seat on the greater M growth board as well well thanks so much congratulations thank you all right other council members Brad so the talk on share reminded me of something that's coming up and I won't be here at the December meeting so I thought i' bring it up now um St Peter Community Childcare Center which I got involved with in 2013 um they were uh well they were basically the result of a childcare task force that started um they got a loan through the Eda the city worked with them both first in the old hospital then here at the community center providing them space giving them Room to Grow sometimes a little too much room um but then also uh working with uh working with gustavis uh times got really tight for a while the city extended uh extended uh a a lot of uh Grace uh as far as the timeline for repayment of of their back rent um a well six years ago now a payment plan was set up to repay the whole thing and if I'm correct the final payment should be coming in this December um so it's something uh when we're talking about things that can happen uh City collaborations honestly city of leiv talking about subsidies happening while there wasn't so much a city subsidy at there was a lot of City assistance that took a long time and basically I think started in 2008 so it took 16 years for the city to get paid back um so these are kind of the Investments that are needed but it is goes to show that um sometimes you know it takes a little patience um sometimes it I I will say it was the center really was um saved by a great board that was made up uh that was made up at the heart of when it was the worst was uh Nessa Fell's president Casey West Hannah godbout uh Laura Zender myself and Sarah neelon um and basically we drag that Center Kicking and Screaming from near bankruptcy and profitability and it's a like I said it's one of those things with childcare centers you can't expect it to be successful overnight uh but I think it is a success we have to look at and the city staff honestly the city staff should look at as a success a success for what they did as far as helping to Foster it and keep it going thank you any other Council reports how about our city administrator Madame mayor I just want to recognize Pete as some of you may be aware Pete has been elected as the simpa president for the upcoming year and so I want to really take a few moments and congratulate him on that um that is not just about Pete and the respect the other 17 communities have for Pete and his work but it's a sign of how they feel about St Peter in the direction that you've gone not only within your electric utility but other utilities and how you've led the way on a number of issues including some of the sustainability and reliability issues that you see with rp3 and others um simp is an important partner for you we buy all of our electricity from them and so they have a major impact on a 13 plus million budget in um how we as the mayor talked earlier with the Boy Scouts that were here how reliable we are and the cost that we see and our impact on the environment so I wanted to congratulate Pete and say way to go Pete that's super cool again not just for you but for the community and um I don't know if Pete wants to say anything or anybody else has anything to say but words Pete yeah but congratulations Pete it is super great um in St Peter you've had two presidents now of simpa and so that is fantastic and again you are so well regarded um within that partnership and um we we continue to have the opportunity um through Pete to continue to influence the impact um and that simpa has within our economic and environment um into the future so thank you and thank you thank you for representing us uh before we move into our next uh item which is moving into a a a closed session would like to thank all the scouts who came tonight and stuck through a very long meeting thanks for joining us we love to have uh people join us for our meetings so uh that said next up is the adoption of a resolution calling for a closed session related to a real estate transaction Madame mayor members I would anticipate that if you approve this resolution you'll go into closed session you will only come back into Open Session to adjourn the meeting I have no planned action after this um at this meeting so um that's the goal we would um will it turn downstairs to the Travers cor room all right uh the resolution calling for a closed session is on page 115 is there a motion to approve so move second we have a motion and a second call the rooll please mayor Noel I council member Johnson I council member Pettis hi council member ramp hi council member weisenfeld hi council member shrom hi council member DeVos I the resolution is approved we will move into Clos session it is 8:25 p.m. thank you thanks everybody respond for