►
From YouTube: Council Work Session Meeting 10 17 2016
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Well
good
afternoon,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
and
then
welcome
to
the
Monday
October
17
2016
work
session.
At
this
time,
I
will
call
the
meeting
to
order
we're
gonna,
have
some
discussion
on
the
street
cost
recovery
assessment,
collection
process
and
the
under
industrial
park,
and
there's
been
questions
about
this
Shane
I
know
you
have
put
in
a
lot
of
work
to
this,
so
we're
going
to
just
kind
of
go
through
and
understand
this
Craig
thanks
for
being
here
tonight
and
Craig
Atkins
with
the
Watertown
development
company.
B
If
you
want
to
come
up
and
sit
with
Shane
up
here,
I
would
appreciate
it
and
we
can
kind
of
go
from
there
and
I
think
I.
Think
folks
that
Craig
has
a
lot
of
history
on
this
I
know.
This
is
done
before
most
of
us
were
on
here,
so
I'm
just
gonna
open
it
up
for
you
Shane.
If
you
want
to
give
us
an
idea,
what's
going
on,
why
we're
talking
about
this
and
what's
up.
C
C
All
right
so
a
little
background.
The
injury's
industrial
park
area
began.
We
began
improvement
projects
in
2009
and
finished
them
in
2011,
so
there
was
three
three
projects
involved.
Two
of
them
were
street
projects
and
one
was
a
sanitary
sewer
project.
Essentially
it
picked
up.
The
street
was
improved
north
of
of
this
general
vicinity
to
some
extent
prior
to
those
projects
and
then,
as
of
2009.
C
C
During
that
time,
the
city
spent
well
we'll
be
able
to
read
these
numbers
but
good.
Thank
you.
The
total
projects
costs
just
over
a
million
dollars.
At
that
time
there
was
a
street
cost
storm
sewer,
cost
and
sanitary
sewer
costs.
There
was
for
the
sanitary
sewer
portion
of
the
project.
The
city
did
get
and
utilize
what
was
called
state
revolving
loan
funds,
so
that
was
low
interest
long
and
then
that
was
about
the
time.
The
economy
can
it
took
a
little
bit
of
a
hit,
so
the
state
did
offer
a
10%.
C
Forgiveness
on
principle
for
a
lot
of
those
state
revolving
loan
funds.
So
if
you
look
at
the
column
here
to
the
far
left
of
this
spreadsheet,
those
principal
forgiveness,
'iz
were
accounted
for
in
the
cost
of
the
project
that
so
those
aren't
reflected.
What
we
were
forgiven
for
costs
are
not
reflected
in
the
$1,000,000.
Those
were
deducted
out
before
this
project
or
before
the
spreadsheet
was
prepared.
C
So
basically
you
take
this
total
project
number
and
we
took
the
total
acreage
of
the
area
that
was
benefited
from
it,
and
then
we
we
created
a
cost
per
acre
and
a
cost
per
square
foot
and
then,
as
the
proud
properties
were
sold
off
for
further
use
by
individual
companies,
it
was
presumed
that
we
would
be
collecting
those
fees
and
and
I
think
that
was
done
by
various
methods.
We
either
got.
C
E
Yeah,
what
I
can
do
I
know
that
my
office
has
been
working
with
with
Shan
quite
a
bit
on
providing
some
background
and
some
of
the
previous
purchase
agreements.
What
I
can
do
is
I
I.
Don't
haven't
had
a
lot
of
time
to
look
into
this
myself,
but
I
can
give
you
kind
of
the
history
of
how
we
ended
up,
where
we
ended
up
and
kind
of
how
these
lots.
E
The
purchases
of
these
Lots
took
place.
If
you
look
at
the
lots,
eight
and
nine
those
first
two
lots.
The
road
and
infrastructure
that
was
in
place
already
supported
those
lots
without
any
additional
work.
So
we
just
had
a
base
price
on
those
Lots
if
I
think
of
it
at
the
time
it
was
around
12,500
an
acre
for
two
and
a
half
acres.
There
was
also
an
easement
that
ran
back
kind
of
through
the
back
third
on
the
east
side
of
those
Lots,
and
so
as
part
of
that
discussion
with
the
buyers.
E
Put
that
in
your
capital
improvements
budget,
that
we
could
probably
sell
the
rest
of
those
properties
over
a
period
of
time,
which
is
exactly
what
happened.
What
we
didn't
talk
about
specifically
was
how
the
city
was
going
to
collect
their
cost
for
the
infrastructure,
and-
and
this
is
just
recollection-
so
my
recollection
is
originally
the
city
went
ahead
and
put
this
in
its
normal
budgeting
process
decided
to
go
ahead
and
pay
for
it
in
the
capital
improvements
plan,
and
we
really
really
really
beyond
that.
E
We
didn't
discuss
until
we
had
a
first
sale
what
those
land
costs
were
going
to
be.
We
actually
sold
a
couple
of
those
Lots.
Well,
the
road
was
being
constructed
and
I
can't
tell
you,
which
ones
exactly
and
at
that
time,
mayor
Williams
and
the
previous
city
engineer
decided
that
they
needed
to
understand
how
much
the
infrastructure
cost
assessment
should
be
on
those
properties.
And
so
they
came
back
with
this
forty
nine
cents,
a
square
foot
which
you
saw
on
this
piece
of
paper.
E
E
They
went
ahead
and
did
it
the
mayor's
office,
along
with
the
City,
Engineer
and
I?
Think
maybe
at
the
time
there
would
have
been.
A
public
works
committee
agreed
that
the
50
cents,
a
square
foot
or
49,
the
square-foot
assessment
on
the
infrastructure
would
be
adequate
to
cover
their
costs,
things
that
they
were
reimbursed
for,
whether
it
was
through
stimulus,
money
or
others
other
resources.
E
Now
every
one
of
those
Lots
is
sold
a
little
differently.
It's
not
like
a
cookie
cutter.
Some
of
those
assessments
were
paid
upfront
understand
that
when
we
sell
those
Lots
on
the
city's
behalf,
that's
Watertown.
Development
Company
really
works
as
an
intermediary,
so
we
sell
those
properties.
So
it's
a
transaction
between
the
buyer,
the
development
company
in
the
city,
the
only
thing
the
development
company
agrees
to
or
whatever
the
terms
are
that
are
agreed
to
between
the
city
and
the
buyer.
E
So
you
know
as
far
as
how
those
assessments
were
collected
or
or
when
they
were
paid.
We
didn't
really
care
from
the
development
company's
perspective,
because
we
weren't
gonna
see
any
of
that
money.
All
we
saw
was
50%
of
whatever
the
base
price
per
acre
was,
which
started
at
12,
5
and
I.
Think
is
now
at
I
want
to
say
sixteen
seventeen
thousand
an
acre
somewhere
in
there.
So
the
whole
idea
was
at
the
time
industrial
park
property
fully
developed
was
selling
for
around
seventy
five
cents,
a
square
foot.
E
If
we
just
sold
this
for
what
all
our
costs
would
have
been
into
it,
it
was
going
to
be
somewhere
in
that
buck.
Fifty
a
square
foot
range
which
would
have
basically
made
this
land
unsellable
and
undeveloped,
and
so
the
the
the
city
leaders
at
the
time
and
somebody
were
out
on
the
council
at
the
time,
agreed
that
that
was
probably
the
best
method
or
best
way
to
move
forward.
E
This
was
an
incredible
gift
from
the
Andrews
family
to
begin
with,
I
don't
know
if
you
know
the
history,
but
this
property
was
basically
gifted
to
the
city
with
the
idea
that
we
had
to
pay
three
thousand
an
acre
that
went
into
a
drug
fund
that
was
used
used
to
help
in
this
case
fund.
Some
of
the
drug
dogs
at
the
police
department
has
had
we've
sold
all
the
properties
out
there,
except
for
Lots.
Well,
it's
this
map
isn't
exactly
similar
to
what
I'm
familiar
with
Lots,
10
and
11
a
lot.
F
E
Let's
a
lot
11
and
then
there's
one
lot
over
here.
The
slot
see
basically
it's
been
replanted
that
that
hasn't
been
sold,
so
otherwise
you
have
and
I
think
that
you
know
when
you
look
at
the
background
of
that,
that
was
for
the
city.
That
was
a
kind
of
a
unique
thing
because
in
the
past,
you'd
always
required
commercial
or
industrial
development
projects
to
pay
for
the
infrastructure.
E
Upfront,
and
one
of
the
ideas
that
we
approached
you
on
was
the
idea
that
let's
put
some
infrastructure
and
in
some
of
these
cases,
knowing
that
we
won't
see
it,
but
knowing
that
shovel-ready
sites
were
important
and
we
bet
that
we'll
sell
some
of
these
properties
much
quicker,
and
you
know
the
reality
is,
with
the
exception
of
a
couple
of
those
Lots,
we
filled
that
industrial
park
up
in
about
four
years.
So,
like
I,
said,
I,
don't
have
a
lot
of
the
detail.
E
E
Sometimes
it
was
paid
based
off
of
how
the
normal
assessment
process
for
the
city
would
work
on
any
other
property
that
you
might
do
an
improvement
on
and
then
reassess
back
to
the
ultimate
owner
of
the
property.
So
I
know
if
that
helps.
But
I
can't
try
to
answer
any
questions
if
anybody
might
have
any
for
me,
it.
B
C
B
C
What
are
we
seeing?
In
our
case?
It
was
only
10%
of
the
principle
of
whatever
that
s
fr.
You
know,
state
revolving
fund
loan
was,
it
looks
to
me,
based
on
the
numbers
I
see
here
that
the
the
loan
would
have
only
been
in
about
that
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollar
range,
so
ten
percent
of
that
would
have
been
here
presumed
stimulus
money.
If
that's
what
you
want
to
call
it
I
mean
really.
C
It
was
just
a
principle
forgiveness
that
those
kind
of
ideas
were
run
pretty
currently
across
anything
that
had
federal
or
state
monies
in
it.
They
gave
a
lot
of
forgiveness
back
in
those
year
lean
years
during
the
recession
and
I
guess
taking
the
numbers
that
were
there
and
really
that
was
the
only
breaks
for
funding
here.
The
majority
of
this
million
dollars
was
all
funded
from
city
funds.
E
Yeah
I
think
that
you
know
my
recollection
is
that
that
was
done
in
two
phases,
and
so
you
did
a
stretch
of
that
2010
2000
2009
2010,
and
then
you
did
the
balance
of
that
road
the
following
year
and
so
yeah.
You
know
I
can't
say
with
a
hundred
percent
certainty,
but
if
there
was
any
stimulus
money
added
to
that
outside
of
your
normal
budgeting
process,
I
wasn't
aware
of
it
at
the
time
and.
B
G
C
So
this
is
those
same
properties
boil
down
to
what
we've
collected
and
what
we
haven't
collected.
Everything
in
the
green,
these
two
on
the
top
these
two
in
the
middle
and
these
two
on
the
bottom
and
the
one
in
the
middle
nine
we've
collected
all
of
those,
and
so
those
collected
dollar
amounts
equals
two
hundred
and
seventy
eight
thousand.
The
total
that
we
anticipated
to
collect
was
eight
hundred
and
sixty-six.
C
The
yellow
line
is
a
parcel.
That's
still
out
in
the
county
and
by
our
policies,
and
I
think
state
laws.
We
can't
assess
property,
that's
not
within
the
city
limits,
so
so
that
that
will
not
be
collectible
until
that
parcels
brought
into
the
city.
The
pinkish
colored
ones
are
those
that
are
in
the
city
that
remain
uncollected,
and
then
I
want
to
point
out
that
part
of
the
process
that
the
water
tone
Development
Company
did
is,
as
they
were,
selling
these
Lots
off.
They
created
in
their
Purchase
Agreements
a
provision
and
I'll.
C
Read
it
to
you
that
buyers
will
pay
all
costs
associated
with
any
interest
structure.
Improvements
necessitated
by
the
development
occurring
on
the
above
described
property.
Well,
those
improvements
occur
on
public
or
private
property,
so
I
have
five
signed
agreements
in
my
possession
and
they
correspond
or
four
of
those
correspond
to
these
stars
here.
So
those
owners
I'll
just
use
lock
well
industry.
C
As
an
example,
we
have
that
purchase
agreement
that
says
that
they'll
pay
for
the
public
infrastructure
and
that
would
include
a
unpaid
assessment
in
the
amount
of
fifty
three
thousand
five
hundred
$14.98
as
an
example,
and
we
have
that
for
each
one
of
those
four
that
aren't
on
there.
But
I
will
point
out
that
the
majority
of
the
other
uncollected
assessments
are
owned
by
members
of
the
Andrey's
family.
So
whether
there
was
some
special
agreement
that
exempted
them
from
something
I
have
no
knowledge
of
that.
But
that's
that's.
C
The
remainder
of
the
portion
and
and
I
do
want
to
be
clear.
One
of
the
key
reasons
that
spurred
all
this
research
and
and
and
was
this
lot
15
so
Michael
and
Michelle-
might
injure
recently
purchased
lot
16
and
paid
their
assessment
in
the
amount
of
50
2009
39
70
at
that
time.
But
that
raised
a
question
with
some
of
the
remaining
properties
around
there.
Why
you
know
so
there
was
some
knowledge
that
somebody
knew
that
some
of
the
assessments
weren't
paid
and
some
were
and
and.
E
C
So
so,
this
15
also
had
the
purchase
agreement
that
should
have
included
payment
of
the
infrastructure
in
front
of
it,
and
that
remains
uncollected
and
it's
essentially
the
same
they're,
both
identical
size,
Lots
and
one's
been
paid,
one
hasn't.
So
what
I'm
looking
for
is
or
not
even
looking
for
anything
I'm,
providing
this
information
to
you
as
a
counsel
and
then
hopefully
we
get
some
direction
as
to
whether
or
not
we're
going
to
pursue
collection
on
the
outstanding
assessments.
If.
E
I
and
if
I
could
just
add
a
little
bit
more
background,
I
think
from
my
perspective.
So
when
you
look
at
those
years
that
are
kind
of
in
question,
those
were
the
years
that
we
were
discussing
how
to
read
how
to
assess
those
properties.
Our
purchase
agreements
even
allude
to
the
fact
that
we
all
acknowledge
that
there
might
be
some
type
of
assessment.
E
B
E
C
We
use
it,
we've
been
using
that
word
assessment
here
pretty
heavily
in
this
conversation
and,
in
truth,
be
told,
these
aren't
actually
assessments
as
such,
because
a
true
assessment
has
a
certain
procedure
and
we're
actually
going
to
see
that
later
tonight
in
Council,
so
a
standard
assessment,
we
would
have
to
have
assessment
hearings
and
have
all
these
owners
come
forward
and
then,
of
course,
there's
a
an
interest
rate
involved.
This
was
all
done
without
interest
and
not
setting
any
parameters
of
payback,
except
for
the
expectation
as
I
interpret.
C
It
was
that
as
properties
would
sell
off
and
change
hands
that
someone
was
going
to
collect
a
fee
and
I.
Don't
why
I
believe
in
my
research
is
that
that
someone
was
probably
never
really
truly
identified
so
that
the
Watertown
Development
Corporation,
probably
didn't
know
or
as
Craig
said,
you
know,
they
weren't
concerned
about
collecting
them
and
then
somehow,
on
our
end
of
the
the
city's
end
of
it,
we
just
were
busy
going
forward
and
didn't
look
back
to
make
any
collections
sold.
E
I
think,
if
you,
if
you
look
at
the
transaction
history,
it's
pretty
clear
that
you
can
see
three
kind
of
transitional
phases
of
how
that
land
was
sold.
The
first
two
would
be
with
with
clause
and
construction
and
cabinet
concepts.
Then
the
next
series
would
be
those
that
were
2004
to
2009,
and
then,
after
that
you
know,
2010
2011.
We
had
a
pretty
consistent
formula
in
place
to
make
sure
that
the
city
was
reimbursed
for
those
expenses,
and
so
you
know
shoshain
said
I.
E
H
C
So
the
majority
of
the
improvements
were
done
in
that
three-year
period
and
really,
ideally,
you
would
have
began
if
we
would
have
went
traditional
assessments,
we
would
have
developed
the
assessment
procedure
in
2011
or
2012
and
they
would
have
been
on
tax
rolls
and
collecting
these
assessments,
probably
with
an
interest
variable
included
in
it
as
per
our
ordinance,
and
then
we
would
just
would
have
been
collecting
these
over
time
through
the
tax
rule.
Well,.
H
H
I,
don't
disagree
with
that,
but
if,
if
the
purchase
of
the
property
was
done
after
the
improvement,
you
would
assume
that
these
are
those
costs
were
in
there
and
be
told
that
there's
a
bill
outstanding
for
it.
If
you
bought
the
property
prior
to
that
and
provement
got
done,
you
know
you
didn't
pay
for
it
cause
it
wasn't
there
before
so
I.
E
Would
I
would
say,
maybe,
with
the
exception
of
the
2004
transaction,
with
Clausen
construction,
where
I
believe
all
we
did
was
was
provide
water,
a
water
line,
because
that
road
was
actually
surfaced.
Hard-Surfaced
all
the
way
to
the
end
of
the
block,
the
water
and
sewer
may
not
have
been
there
at
the
time,
but
but
that
was
a
I,
don't
know
the
city.
C
Just
for
clarification,
the
purchase
agreement
at
the
time
of
sale
for
Clausen
construction
did
also
include
the
language
for
paying
for
infrastructure
improvements,
so
even
that
property
back
in
2004
was
identified
that
if
and
when
the
streets
improve,
that
it
will
include
a
investment
on
the
buyers.
Behalf
know.
H
That
one
seems
fairly
forthright
to
me:
I
mean
the
problems
weren't
there.
You
know
you're
gonna
pay
for
my
question
comes
in
ones
that
later
the
improvements
are
done
in
the
buy
it
later
we
had
is
fifty
cents
in
there
is
there
some
assumption
with
a
fifty
cents
that
they
paid
for
everything
and
is
that
50
cents
already
deducted
from
this
or.
C
Okay,
great
can
clear
up
what
I
don't
I
guess
there
were
one
or
two
purchases
that
are
shown
on
this
list
in
the
green
that
some
of
them
included
a
final
cost.
That
included
the
improvements
and
others
did
not
and
I
think
for
the
most
part,
all
the
ones
in
green
that
came
later,
the
improvements
were
included
in
the
closing
cost.
C
In
other
words,
they
paid
a
base
feet
water
tone,
development
company
for,
however
many
acres
they
they
purchased,
and
then
there
was
the
fifty
cents,
a
square
foot
fee,
added
to
it
as
part
of
their
purchase
and
I
believe
and
I'm
not
trying
to
isolate
anyone,
but
I
believe
this
lot,
16
that
that's
likely
how
that
that
amount
was
determined
and
collected.
E
That
would
that
was
my
impression.
Originally
okay
was
that
when
the
city
looked
at
their
original
costs
for
that
infrastructure,
it
was
much
more
than
is
reflected
on
the
spreadsheet
I.
Just
you
know,
that's
recollection,
there's
no,
nothing!
You
know
that
I
have
that
documents
anything
any
differently,
and
so
we
kind
of
agreed
that
that
50
cents
a
square
foot,
even
if
it
wasn't
going
to
collect,
even
if
it
wasn't
going
to
cover
all
the
city's
expense,
was
a
fair
cost
to
provide
that
property
at
a
competitive
rate.
E
I
will
also
tell
you
that
the
city
took
criticism
from
other
developers
for
selling
some
of
this
property
2004
2009
in
particular,
because
we
were
selling
it
for
much
less
than
other
industrial
property
might
be
going
for
in
smaller
Lots.
The
reason
was,
we
were
just
selling
it
at
a
base
price
with
the
idea
that,
oh,
you
might
know
some
money
later
for
infrastructure
improvements,
so
it
wasn't
when,
when
you
really
compared
to
apples
to
apples,
these
lots
are
very
we're
very
competitive
with
any
other
lot
out
there.
A
C
E
If
you
look
at
this
map,
this
is
just
my
recollection.
Lots
12
and
13
12,
13
and
14
were
never
part
of
this
transaction
or
if
they
were,
there
was
something
that
was
done
before
my
time
and
then
in
15,
16,
17,
18
and
the
rest
of
those
were
all
part
of
the
entries
gift
for
this
industrial
park
back
in
I.
Don't
even
know
when
you
guys
did
that
97
or
something
like
that,
so
88,
so
so
it's
quite
a
while.
F
Guess
I'm
confused
here
you,
okay,
Craig
use.
You
said,
there's
no
doubt
that
the
and
now
we
would
know
all
those
dollars
that
that
money
is
owed,
but
from
a
practical
standpoint,
do
we
have
any
way
of
collecting
I
guess
I'm
asking
you
or
if
Shelley
or
Justin
I
mean
it's
all
water
under
the
bridge
at
this
point
or
what
recourse
do
we
have
at
this
late
juncture
now
I.
C
I
H
H
J
C
Well,
the
only
document
I
had
in
front
of
me
was
that
one
that
we
showed
here,
those
are
the
numbers
on
how
the
dollar
amount
said.
In
my
view,
some
were
collected,
some
were
uncollected,
and
so
those
are
really
the
only
that
was
my
focus
of
the
research
was
to
figure
out
that
part
of
it
not
dive
back
into
the
history
and
try
to
figure
out
why
other
people
made
other
decisions,
because
I
really
I
really
can't
read
through
that
I
think.
C
A
K
So
so
we
have
five
signed
agreements
for
assessments
that
weren't
paid
and
so
I
think
I'd
like
to
really
explore
that
the
cost
parts
of
it
and
everything
we
can
work
with
people
who
know
what
they're
doing
there.
But
you
know
as
I
look
at
this
we're
leaving
right
now
we're
leaving
over
a
half
a
million
dollars
on
the
table.
If
you
look
at
the
two
numbers,
do
you
see
that
and
that
that's
not
making
me
happy?
K
B
L
L
L
If
we
go
down
the
line
there,
it's
a
little
misleading
of
who
really
paid
and
who
didn't
paid
as
I
see
I'm
only
really
actually
talking
about
the
first
stretch
that
went
in
part
of
23rd
Street
and
it
turned
the
curve
there
and
14th
one-upped
is
a
where
Walmart
has
a
holding
pond
there.
Now,
that's
all
I'm
going
to
address,
because
the
other
Street
was
part
of
a
whole
different
agreement.
I
mean.
M
L
Talking
about
lot
seven
and
the
concrete
products,
that's
where
it
started
at
lot.
Seven,
you
see
the
line
in
there.
Okay,
that
was
not.
We
never
had
any
meeting
their
ages
Clausen's.
They
never
been
contacted
at
all
that
a
street
was
even
going
in
never
a
word
until
I
spoke
to
him
here,
three
weeks
or
three
months
ago.
That's
eight
was
Costa
Minh.
L
He
did
pay
a
couple
years
later.
He
got
a
statement
in
the
mail
and-
and
he
paid
forty
two
thousand
bucks
he
told
me
number
ten
is
is-
is
the
flambeau's
he
paid
assessment
because
he
was
buying
his
property
when
the
street
was
going
in,
eleven
was
lok
wa
llahu
was
there
and
he
never
got
any
assessment.
L
Sixteen
is
a
lot
that
really,
why
were
here,
fifteen
is
mightier
and
he
paid
he
never
paid
any
assessment
and
fifteen.
I
never
paid
any
on
thirteen
or
fourteen
and
joe
never
paid
in
yen
twelve.
So
what
we're
talking
about
is
kind
of
a
fact
here
that
only
one
assessment
has
been
paid
in
six
years.
Not
half
of
them
are
not
most
of
them.
There's
only
one
except
the
one
assessment:
that's
been
paid,
that's
night,
he
paid
a
couple
years
ago
and
all
the
while.
L
It
leads
me
to
think
that
it
was
still
stimulus,
money,
I,
think
it
was
stimulus,
money.
The
reason
I
think
it
is
is
because
I
didn't
just
wake
up
one
morning
and
say
I
think
this
is
stimulus,
money
putting
this
wrote,
it
I
heard
it
I
heard
it
on
the
radio
or
I
read
it
in
the
paper,
and
the
second
thing
is
that
no
meetings
at
all
that
you
always
meet
with
the
landowner.
So
why
meet
with
him?
It
was
the
government's
money
you
need
no
meeting
just
put
it
in.
L
We
knew
nothing
about
the
street.
Nobody
knew
anything
about
it.
You
just
come
out
and
start
building
the
street,
and
third
is
if
there's
$500,000
missing
out
of
the
treasurer's
office
whole
new
world.
Is
anybody
account
for
that
now
before
you?
Don't
look
at
me
like
that?
It
was
before
any
of
you
guys
really
because
you
know
when
I
first
called
Stanton
Fox
when
I
look
at
Justin
there,
when
I
first
called
Stanton,
Fox
I,
said
Stan
I,
don't
think
this
is
right.
L
You're
charging
for
assessment
on
Mike's
lot
out
there,
which
would
be
16,
I,
said
I,
don't
think
that's
right
and
Stanton.
If
I
can
repeat,
is
he
isn't
here,
but
I
think
I
can
tell
it
the
way
he
said
it.
He
said.
Oh,
my
god,
he
said
and
I
didn't
want
to
screw
that
up.
He
said:
I
talked
to
I,
think
I,
don't
miss
I,
don't
think
I
missed
a
person
in
the
street
department
and
I
asked
him.
Was
that
stimulus,
money
or
not
well,
I
thought
gee
Stan
I
had
just
walked
over
here.
L
C
L
Oh
I
certainly
stand
correction
because
I
don't
know
that
it
that
I
made
a
true
statement.
I,
don't
know
when
they
were
created,
but
it
seemed
to
me
like
nobody
was
talking
about
stimulus
money.
Nobody
was
talking
about
recovering
his
500
grand.
Nobody
said
a
word
about
it.
It
would
have
just
passed
if
I
hadn't
brought
up
the
question
Mike
paid
on
16
and
I,
don't
believe
he
should
have
and
that
created
all
all
this
here.
J
L
I
don't
like
to
know
how
five
hundred
and
thirty
six
thousand
dollars
could
be
missing
out
as
a
treasurer's
office.
Now
I'm,
certainly
not
a
secretary
or
treasurer
or
a
bookkeeper
I
should
say
or
know
anything
about
it.
But
you
know
if
you
wrote
a
check
out
to
the
contract
for
five
hundred
and
thirty
six
thousand
dollars.
L
If
you
wrote
a
check
out
for
the
for
five
hundred
and
thirty
six
thousand
dollars-
and
you
didn't
have
an
assessment
coming
in
from
injuries
and
from
my
Teager
and
from
Claussen's
than
the
books,
don't
balance,
there's
a
536
thousand
dollar
hole
in
the
audit,
so
it
was
stimulus,
money,
so
I
just
say
to
you
guys
I
feel
that
my
first
thought
was
stimulus.
Money
I,
didn't
hear
nothing
when
I
seen
it
and
heard
on
the
radio
and
seen
in
the
paper.
L
Secondly,
we
had
no
meetings
at
all
that
isn't
the
way
it's
done,
while
it
was
stimulus
money.
Thirdly,
there
was
no
assessment.
Why
well
with
stimulus
money
and
there's
no
hole
in
the
treasurer's
office,
because
it
was
stimulus,
money,
so
you're
really
not
losing
536
thousand
dollars.
You
just
got
532.
You
really
have
collected
from
a
couple
of
people
that
I
would
think
would
be
on
there.
I.
M
D
A
L
Not
believe
that
this
was
stimulus,
money
I
believe
that
every
single
contract
would
say
that
you
pay
you
pay
for
assessments.
You
agree
to
pay
for
this
estimates
I'm
sure
they
all
say
that.
But
if
there's
no
assessments,
because
there
was
stimulus
money,
there
was
no
collection,
they
would
have
paid
it
if
they
would
have
sent
him
a
bill
and
say:
okay,
here
we're
going
to
put
the
street
in
it's
going
to
cost
X
numbers
of
dollars.
This
is
your
share.
L
B
L
E
But
that
was
just
a
number
that
we
all
agreed
to
now.
Unfortunately,
I
you
know
wasn't
responsible
or
didn't
track
those
numbers.
So
I
can't
tell
you
if
there
was
a
different
number
out
there
and
the
set
of
numbers
were
looking
at
where,
after
other
funds
were
maybe
diverted
to
it
or
or
what
may
be
the
case,
a
lot
16
specifically,
though
I
can
tell
you
because
of
when
that
happened.
E
C
C
There
is
to
to
clear
processes
that
were
going
on
everything
that
was
sold
before
2009
had
these
agreements
in
place
that
they
would
pay
for
the
infrastructure
when
they
were
put
in
everything
after
that
is
essentially
in
the
green
and
the
Watertown
development
companies
been
collecting
those
as
those
properties
sold
and
those
were
primarily
after
the
2011
improvements
or
somewhere
within
those
projects.
So
I
think
they
there's
a
distinct
cutoff
between
2009.
C
What
happened
before
that
and
what
happened
after
that,
and
the
only
thing
that's
left
in
the
gray
I'll
say,
is
the
formerly
owned
injuries,
properties
and
the
concrete
plant
are
the
only
ones
that
really
fall
into
the
no-man's
land.
The
rest
of
them
look
like.
They
were
fairly
clearly
defined
as
to
how
they
are
intending
on
collecting
or
pursuing
those.
H
A
H
C
L
But
it
is
past
what
we're
talking
about,
they
have
all
paid
the
street
was
in
they
were.
These
are
paid
for
they're
on
an
assessment,
roll
there's,
no
question
about
about
McKeever
or
or
wicks
or
there's.
No,
it's
no
question
at
all,
Stimpson,
all
those
that
they
were
all
aware
of
it.
They
got
their
attack
statement
and
these
are
they
paid
for
it
or
they
were
had
the
assessment.
That's
got
nothing
to
do
with
what
I'm
talking.
E
About
for
a
minute
all
of
those
since
2011,
we
knew
what
the
assessment
was,
and
so
in
the
purchase
agreements
we
specifically
outlined
what
that
cost
was,
and
we
either
collected
it
at
closing
or
had
an
agreed-upon
date
to
collect
it.
So
anything
prior
to
that,
we
were
a
little
bit
in
what
I
would
consider
a
gray
area,
because
we
weren't
exactly
sure
what
those
assessments
would
be
on
those
lot.
So
that
would
have
been
that
2010-11
or
2009-2010
timeframe,
but.
E
In
the
contract
that
said
once,
we
knew
what
that
was.
You
would
agree
to
pay
for
it,
so
specifically
any
of
the
property
that
the
city
owned
and
that
they
sold
the
private
developers.
The
property
improvements
is
due
and
payable
any
property
that
was
not
part
of
the
city.
I,
don't
think
you
have
any
ability
to
necessarily
go
back
and
recoup
your
costs
on
those
infrastructure.
Improvements,
I
have.
N
Basically,
the
the
stimulus
that
was
talked
about
here
at
that
time.
They
were
through
the
srf
program
and
that's
actually
water,
clean
water
or
you
know
which
stormwater
or
sanitary
sewer,
and
so
we
did
a
great
big,
RS
rf9
project,
which
included
five
different
projects,
which
included
the
sanitary
sewer
for
this
street
project.
The
rest
of
the
money
came
from
the
second
penny
sales
tax
and
it
was
a
street
project.
There
is
no
stimulus,
money
for
streets,
there's
no
federal
funding
for
streets.
N
That's
what
like
why
we
get
the
highway
bridge
money,
that's
the
tax
back
that
we're
supposed
to
use
for
for
Street
projects,
and
then
our
second
penny.
So
there
was
when
they
talked
about
the
city,
getting
stimulus.
Money
like
he
said
about
a
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
of
it
with
the
10%
principle.
Forgiveness
and
the
rest
is
a
loan
that
we're
paying
off
over
20
years
back
to
the
state.
N
The
rest
has
a
regular
street
that
was
taken
out
of
the
second
penny
sales
tax
and
paid
for
out
of
that,
and
we
do
have
all
the
records
that
show
all
the
payments
that
were
made
from
that
and
then
based
on
that
it
was
brought
through
the
engineering
department
to
come
up
with
a
cost
recovery
method.
And
you
know
from
there
that
that's
the
information
I
know
from
what
my
position
was
back
at
that
time.
So.
E
If
I
could
add
to
even
Shelly's
comments
from
a
budgeting
standpoint
at
that
time,
the
city
used
to
dedicate
I
want
to
say
150,000
a
year
annually
towards
industrial
park
improvements
and
you
kind
of
rolled
that
money
over
from
year
to
year,
and
that's
specifically
I
think
where
that
second
penny
source
came
from
to
pay.
For,
though,
to
pay
for
that
initial
road
improvement
and.
M
E
E
I
think
we
ended
up
in
a
situation
where
that's
the
perception
was
that
we
were.
You
know
the
the
you
know.
If
you
to
read
it
in
the
newspaper
here
down
the
press,
you
would
have
heard
that
we
approved
a
preacher's
purchase
agreement
for
12,500
per
acre,
but
the
reality
was,
it
was
12,500
per
acre,
plus,
whatever
infrastructure
you
might
have
to
pay
for,
when
those
roads,
water
and
sewer
were
put
in.
L
L
D
C
D
D
E
L
E
L
L
L
Mayor
told
us
that
we
could
could
farm
that
thought
we
gave
we
gifted
the
land.
The
mayor
said
we
could
farm
it
as
long
as
as
long
as
it
wasn't
sold.
They
said
we
were
digging
gravel
in
in
13
and
14.
They
said
we
could
continue
to
take
the
gravel
out.
It
actually
was
improving
the
park
as
there
was
a
hill
there
and
then
all
the
once.
They
were
having
a
big
concern
in
the
city
that
we
were
taking.
E
I
would
agree,
that's
probably
how
it
happened,
but
what
I
would
tell
you
is
when
that
was
put
together
as
an
industrial
park,
master
plan
by
the
city
and
the
infrastructure
improvements
were
started
in
2004-2005.
Those
lots
were
never
considered
part
of
the
park
because
they
were
already
privately
owned.
E
C
E
C
C
E
E
So
you
know
those
two
lot:
they're,
not
on
their
the
the
integrity
tool
and
dye
Lots
example.
So,
prior
to
all
of
these
improvements
being
done,
that
that
property
had
already
been
sold.
So
that
would
be
similar
to
how
Lots,
12
and
13
and
14
or
13
and
14
were
sold
back
to
Bob
Lots
12
from
those
Lots
that
our
integrity
tool
and
dye
we're
sold
prior
to
any
of
these
improvements,
and
they
don't
pay
they're,
not
paying
any
assessment
on
those
improvements,
even
though
those
improvements
were
done
in
front
of
their
property
as
well.
E
So
I
guess,
if
that
makes
sense,
that
kind
of
explains
the
transition
from
when,
when
injuries
took
the
two
Lots
back
to
when
the
rest
of
these
properties
were
sold
as
part
of
that
industrial
park,
they
were
just
separate
land
transactions
with
separate
terms.
So
there
wasn't
any
kind
of
carryover
from
you
know
the
sale
of
lot
13
and
14
to
15
or
to
the
integrity
tool
and
dye
Lots,
because
those
Lots
so
I've
been
with
the
Watertown
Development
Company
since
2003
and
all
of
those
properties
have
have
been
outside
of
that
city-owned
industrial
park.
E
D
A
G
E
L
Wire
was
never
correct,
you're
missing
money
because
you
wrote
a
check
out
to
the
contractor.
The
city
did
for
five
hundred
and
thirty
six
thousand
dollars
and
the
books
indicate
nothing
that
there's
any
assessment
put
on
the
property.
There
doesn't
say
this
I
mean
if
they
would
have
come
and
wanted
the
assessment
for
me,
I
may
have
wrote
out
a
check.
It
doesn't
account
for
that.
It
doesn't
account
for
an
assessment.
They
don't
audit
the
books
with
purchase
agreements.
L
D
L
The
city,
if
nothing
else
I
say
it
was
stimulus
money.
There
was
stimulus,
money
floating
all
over
South
Dakota
got
nine
ten
million
dollars
or,
yes,
they
got
nine
or
ten
million
dollars
of
stimulus.
Money.
I
heard
Watertown
got
stimulus,
money
for
shovel-ready
project
and
I'm
I'm
dead,
set
that
it
is
and
how
would
you
account
for
the
hole
in
the
budget
cuz?
There
is
a
hole
in
the
budget,
no.
L
L
Oh,
it's
coming
from
an
assessment
from
injuries.
It's
coming
from
a
check
from
my
teacher
that
accounts
that
makes
the
books
balance,
but
you
got
a
hole
in
the
budget,
no
matter
how
you
can
and
and
and
this
would
have
never
been
brought
up.
If
I
hadn't
hadn't
thought
that
my
teacher
was
charged
and
he
paid
and
that
I
thought
that
it
was
kind
of
unfair
that
he
had
to
and.
E
What
I
could
what
I
could
do
to
maybe
try
to
clarify
that
again
is
just
to
explain
that
none
of
those
properties
that
were
that
were
already
owned
by
individuals
outside
of
the
city
were
intended
to
be
assessed.
But
you
still
did
the
improvements,
and
so
late
in
fact
did
get
a
deal.
They
got
a
deal
because
their
property
was
improved
and
they
didn't
have
to
pay
prop.
They
didn't
have
to
pay
for
the
improvements.
B
L
Thank
you,
9
is
the
only
one
that
had
his
assessment.
Well,
when
you
sit
down
and
write
out
an
assessment
for
nine,
pretty
tell
me
why
you
went
right
on
an
assessment
for
the
rest
of
them.
Why
didn't
close
in
space?
Why
didn't
Midwest
motor
freight
pay
all
right,
so
the
concrete
plant
was
in
the
county.
I
mean
I.
Just
don't
understand
how
anybody
I
mean
we
can
say
Oh
what
wasn't
stimulus
money.
You
know,
you
might
say:
I
didn't
get
out
of
bed
this
morning,
but
I'm
here.
L
E
Of
all
of
the
all
of
the
properties
agreed,
you
know
all
of
those
properties
agreed
to
pay
the
assessment,
whether
or
not
the
city
or
the
county
that
collects
the
property
taxes
implemented.
That
collection
process
I
mean
that's
really
what
it
is
is
it
was
never
implemented.
The
collection
process
was
never
implemented,
so
it's
not
a
matter
of
whether
or
not
they
did
or
didn't
agree
to
pay.
For
that
for
the
improvements
they
did
that's
clear
in
the
purchase
agreements.
It's
a
matter
of
whether
or
not
at
the
administrative
level
those
improvements
were
ever
paid.
E
For
so
what
happens
and
you've
all
been
there?
Is
you
get
a
statement
every
six
months?
It
says
here's
what
you
owe
plus
your
assessments
and
you
either
pay
it
or
you
don't,
and
if
you
don't
pay
it
it's
up
to
somebody
to
collect
it.
Now,
I
can't
tell
you
what
happened
specifically
with
Clausen's.
Why
they
haven't
or
have,
but
you
know,
choice
tune
was
a
stand-up
guy.
He
paid
it
as
soon
as
he
got
it.
He
was
aware
that
he
owed
it.
I
think.
B
G
C
After
2011
were
clearly
collected,
the
ones
that
have
the
stars
by
them
that
are
in
the
pink
were
transactions
that
happened
prior
to
2011
and
just
simply
haven't
been
collected.
Yet
so,
really,
though,
in
my
opinion,
the
whole
part
of
this
process
that
we
brought
this
out
is
to
get
input
on
whether
or
not
these
are
collectible
recoverable
dollars.
You
know
seeing.
F
F
If
I
do
myself
necessarily
do
we
have
the
appetite
to
go
back
and
try
to
all
of
a
sudden
try
to
collect
something
from
some
of
it
has
no
idea
what
that
they
might
owe
something,
but,
but
secondly,
we
can't
ignore
this
I
guess
I
would
definitely
like
to
see
us
go
back
and
try
to
find
out.
You
know
what
our
recourse
is
if
we
do
want
to
try
to
pursue
this
and
find
out
what
our
options
are.
At
this
point,
that's.
E
M
Know
I
can't
I
really
struggled
to
believe
that
the
city
of
Watertown
had
had
there
been
stimulus
monies
to
cover
all
this
would
even
entertain
the
idea
of
trying
to
collect
it.
If
that's
the
case
and
I
think,
we've
established
the
fact
that
there
were
stimulus
money
and
what
it
was
for
and
sort
of
a
dollar
amount,
so
so
I
I
think
it's
fair
to
say
that
that
was
not
I
mean
this
was
not
paid
for
with
stimulus
money,
I.
D
B
G
B
E
B
B
Perfect,
so
we
have
three
folks
that
are
going
to
be
sitting
in
on
that
meeting.
There'll,
be
all
the
stakeholders
from
the
mall
and
are
involved
they'll
be
Justin
myself
and
just
numerous
people
there.
So
we'll
look
forward
to
that
see
kind
of
what's
going
on
and
then
what
we're
looking
at
the
other
one
that
I
know
I
don't
have
time
for
this
evening
is
I
would
like
to
move
forward
with
getting
a
retail
strategy.
As
a
result,
coach
or
buckston
I
want
to
bring
some
information
in
front
of
you.
B
Folks,
we've
had
this
conversation
about
bringing
in
retail
to
the
city
of
Watertown
and
and
I.
Think
the
clear
choice
is
out
there.
What
we
really
don't
have
time
right
now,
so
that
will
be
coming
to
you
at
the
next
work
session.
Okay,
any
other
questions
or
comments
before
I
adjourn
this
meeting
I'll.
B
A
B
G
B
G
B
Okay:
well
thanks
Shelley
number
one
approval
the
consent
agenda.
I
will
look
for
a
motion,
a
second
for
discussion
motion
by
Bruce.
Second,
by
Glenn
any
questions,
any
changes,
hearing
none
I'll,
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries
number
two
approve
of
the
agenda.
Now
look
for
a
motion
in
a
second
for
discussion
motion
by
Randy.
B
Second,
by
John
any
questions,
any
changes,
hearing,
none
I'll,
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say:
aye
opposed
motion
carried
number
three
application
for
a
transfer
of
ownership
and
location
or
retail
on
sale,
liquor
license
from
Valley
Heights
Lincoln
LLC
care
of
great
great
western
banks
at
101,
North,
Phillips,
Avenue,
Sioux
Falls
to
be
mg
Inc
doing
business
as
ringo's
at
520,
10th,
Street
Northwest.
At
this
time,
I
will
open
the
public
hearing.
If
there's
anybody
that
wants
to
speak
in
favor
of
or
against
this.
This
is
your
opportunity.
B
B
H
N
N
And
the
license
was
transferred
to
I,
think
kind
of
I.
Don't
know
if
it's
a
holding
company
of
the
bank,
but
this
was
the
old
Drake
license
that
got
taken
back
by
the
bank
and
then
it
got
transferred
to
this
location,
but
they
didn't
inactivate
it.
They
just
kept
it
active
and
then
sold
it
at
ringo's.
If
they
do
it's
a
malt
beverage,
it's
not
a
it's,
not
a
liquor
license
yeah.
B
Any
other
questions
they're
all
good
hearing,
none
I'll,
look
for
counsel
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries
number
4,
2016
street
improvement
projects,
assessment
role.
Resolution
number
16-3.
For
this
time
I
will
open
the
public
hearing.
If
there's
anybody
who
wants
to
speak
in
favor
of
or
against
this
hearing,
none
I
will
close.
The
public
hearing
I
will
look
for
a
motion,
a
second
for
discussion
motion
by
Bruce
second,
by
Dan.
A
B
C
C
We
did
receive
very
favorable
bids
throughout
the
project
and
we
also
included
storm
sewer
down
the
length
of
12th
Avenue
South
East,
commencing
at
the
west
end
of
really
essentially
right,
where
the
red
lines
are
and
extended
it
all
the
way
to
17th
Street
South
East,
so
that
we
can
expand
the
storm
sewer
collection
and
in
this
vicinity,
when
you
said
bring
that
out
is.
We
did
include
that
in
this
project,
but
we
paid
for
that
under
a
different
budget
item,
so
the
storm
sewer
work
that
was
done.
C
What
is
not
included
in
the
assessments,
so
we
did
that
with
our
annual
stormwater
budget,
and
it's
not
inclusive
of
that
in
these
assessments.
So
with
that
said,
I
will
say
that
the
east/west
world
here
12th
Avenue
southeast,
comparing
the
preliminary
assessments
that
we
had
prepared
in
the
actual
consistence.
At
the
end,
they
did
go
down
by
an
average
cost
of
10%
and
the
blu-ray
here
on
15th
Street
those
assessments,
the
average
deduction
in
pre
versus
post
assessment
costs
is
negative,
22
percent.
C
M
C
Through
our
standard
policy
and
I
do
want
to
point
out
that,
at
the
time
of
approval
to
go
forward
with
the
assessment
procedures,
I
believe
some,
the
motion
included
it
a
reduction
in
our
standard
interest
rate,
our
standard
interest
rate
for
our
assessment
procedure
has
been
10%.
This
project
was
approved,
setting
the
interest
rate
at
4%,
perfect.
B
So
then,
by
guiding
questions
for
Shane,
there's,
none
I'll,
look
for
council
action;
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries
thank
you
for
Shane
Shane
for
getting
that
done.
Number
5
ordinance
number
1620
in
many
sections,
41.0,
two
one:
zero!
Twenty
one
point:
seven:
three:
one:
zero
twenty
one
point:
eight:
zero,
zero,
six
and
twenty
one
point:
nine:
nine
zero
one
of
the
revised
ordinance
of
the
city
of
Watertown
to
clarify
punishments
for
violations
of
title
21.
B
I
Certainly
mayor
just
to
be
brief,
you
will
recall
that
this
measure
is
purely
a
housekeeping
measure
to
ensure
that
you
know
the
public
facing
document.
Our
revised
ordinances
provide
for
one
comprehensive
punishment
chapter
at
the
end
of
title
21,
and
so,
if
you
have
any
questions,
please
let
me
know
just.
F
I
B
B
Any
other
comments,
any
questions
for
her
Justin
on
this
hearing.
None
I'll
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say:
aye
opposed
motion
carries
number
six
approve
the
2016
update
to
the
long
term,
equipment,
replacement
schedule
and
capital
projects
plan.
Shell.
If
you
want
to
give
us
a
little
information.
N
There
were
no
changes
from
the
documents
that
you
guys
had
originally
received
during
the
public
hearing
meeting.
So
I
didn't
attach
it's
kind
of
a
big
file,
so
it
slows
down
your
download
ability.
It's
on
our
website
available
to
anyone
so
and
then
I
also
did
email
you
that
same
document
this
afternoon,
just
in
case
you
had
any
questions,
but
there
were
no
changes
made
during
those
public
hearing
meetings
and
so
I'm
asking
that
that
gets
approved
as
it
was
presented
and
as
it
was
discussed
during
those
meetings.
Perfect.
B
So
at
this
time,
I
look
for
a
motion,
a
second
for
discussion
motion
by
Dawn.
Second,
by
Randy
any
questions
you
have
for
Shelley
hearing,
none
I'll,
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say:
aye
opposed
motion
carries
number
seven
capital
outlay,
accumulations
for
2017
resolution
number
1635
she'll.
If
you
wanted
it
again
sure.
N
This
is
just
kind
of
basically
a
formality
to
complete
the
process.
This
allows
the
finance
office
to
set
funds
aside
for
future
capital
projects
and
it's
based
on
that
long-term
plan.
It
has
been
reflected
in
the
ordinance
that
you
guys
adopted
at
the
end
of
September,
and
this
again
is
just
kind
of
a
formality
for
the
auditor
to
show
that
you
did
authorize
those
monies
to
be
set
aside
for
future
capital
projects.
So
perfect.
B
So
I
will
look
for
a
motion
or
a
second
for
discussion
motion
by
Dan
second
by
Beth
any
questions
for
Shelly
hearing,
none
I'll,
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say:
aye
opposed
motion
carried
number
eight
resolution
authorizing
the
election
of
members
of
Watertown
Coddington
county
regional
railroad
authority
resolution
number
1636
at
this
time.
I'll
look
for
a
motion
in
a
second
for
discussion,
then
we'll
let
Justin
take
over
motion
by
who
was
it
down
there
bill
second
by
mr.
Bueller?
Any
questions
on
that?
Well,
I'm.
I
You
mayor
back
in
June
of
2002,
the
city
joined
with
the
county
to
create
this
railroad
Authority
and
the
authority
has
per
its
statutory
powers
the
ability
to
own
railroads,
as
well
as
to
maintain
operate
and
to
obtain
funds
through
the
governing
bodies
that
constitute
it
ie
the
County
Commission,
as
well
as
the
City
Council,
taxing
funds,
taxing
levies
through
property,
our
Railroad
Commission
has
been
very
dormant
or
relatively
dormant,
not
taking
on
a
lot
of
activities,
but
nevertheless
per
the
agreement.
Article
six.
I
Every
time
a
commissioner
leaves
another
Commissioner
has
to
be
appointed.
In
this
case
my
predecessor
left,
and
so
this
resolution
would
appoint
Shelley
and
myself
as
two
members,
the
two
members
that
the
city
gets
to
point
to
a
five-member
railroad
board.
The
other
two
are
provided
are
appointed
by
the
county
and
then
there's
a
fifth
at-large
who
is
Jim
sire
with
glacial
lakes,
energy.
B
Any
questions
that
we
have
for
Justin
on
this
this
board,
as
as
Justin
said,
it's
just
hardly
ever
met
I
think
we
didn't
mediate,
one
particular
time
for
the
glacial
lakes
energy
out
there.
So
it's
been
the
first
time
in
many
many
years.
So
if
there's
no
other
questions,
I'll
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries
number
nine
Plateau
of
Watertown
Sports
Complex.
First,
addition
to
the
municipality
of
Watertown
resolution,
number
1614
I'll,
look
for
a
motion,
a
second
for
discussion
motion
by
Beth
sang
Mike,
Bruce,
okay,
Shane!
C
Right,
our
plan
was
prepared
by
Helms
&
Associates
in
its
a
portion
of
the
project
that
was
in
conjunction
with
the
development
of
the
five
Plex
Softball
Complex,
which
is
unlocated
in
the
lower
lower
part
in
block
lot,
1
block
2
and
also
reserving
space
for
the
future
potential
Ice
Arena,
look
which
would
be
located
in
block
one
lot.
One
just
give
you
a
little
better
idea
of
where
that's
located.
C
It's
located
in
the
southeast
portion
of
town
along
17th,
Street,
southeast
and
below
14th
Avenue
southeast.
It
did
create
two
additional
blocks
of
Street,
the
extension
of
14th
Street
southeast
and
the
creation
of
17th
Avenue
southeast
going
east
and
west.
So
without
any
questions,
I'm
glad
to
answer.
B
So
if
not
hearing
any
more
I'll
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say:
aye
opposed
motion
carried
number
10
resolution
establishing
a
standing
council
policy
to
authorize
the
mayor
to
enter
into
any
execute
contracts
from
municipal
hangar
leases
pursuant
to
set
s
DCL
9
1-5
resolution
number
16,
37
I
look
for
a
motion
in
a
second
for
discussion
by
Bruce
second
by
bill
and
then
Justin.
If
you
want
to
take
that
for
me,
certainly.
I
Mayor
this
resolution
is
in
keeping
with
SDC
l
9
1
5.
Now
that
statute
provides
that
contracts
with
the
municipality
are
to
be
authorized
to
go
through
the
City
Council,
but
that
statute
also
allows
for
the
city
council
to
delegate
that
authority
to
enter
into
a
certain
type
of
contract
via
either
ordinance
or
resolution
to
an
individual
within
city
government.
So
the
reason
why
this
particular
hangar
lease
issue
came
up
is
because
of
the
unique
nature
of
this
type
of
lease.
I
But
suffice
it
to
say
because
of
that
particular
nature
of
the
lease
being
month-to-month
folks
coming
in
folks
coming
out
in
order
to
respond
effectively
with
those
narrow
timeframes,
Todd
syuri
with
the
airport
suggested
it
might
be
a
good
idea
to
get
that
special
authority
to
the
mayor.
Only
for
those
very
particular
type
of
leases,
hangar
leases,
so
I
see
Todd's
back.
If
you
have
any
questions,
substantively
I'm
sure
he's
happy
to
answer
any.
J
O
E
I
That's
a
very
fair
question
that
you
poor
possibility.
You
propose
councilmen
within
our
Home
Rule
Charter.
We
have
a
blanket
provision
regarding
conflicts
of
interest
and
so
that
mayor
would
have
to
be
beholden
to
that
conflict
of
interest
provision,
as
would
every
member
of
this
board,
as
well
as
every
officer
in
state
government,
employee
or
in
city,
government,
employee,
etc.
P
O
B
Any
other
questions,
hearing
none
I'll,
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor
say:
aye
opposed
motion;
Kate
thanks
number
eleven
renew
with
a
flexible
benefits
plan,
an
administrative
agreement
with
will
mark
at
this
time,
I'll
look
for
a
motion,
a
second
for
for
a
discussion
in
motion
by
Bruce
second
by
Beth
and
Shelley.
If
you
want
to
just
touch
on
that
for
us,
yep.
N
This
is
something
that
we
do
each
year
we
approve
the
the
third-party
administrator
to
our
flexible
benefits
plan
for
our
health
and
day
care,
and
there
were
no
changes
to
the
plan,
no
changes
in
the
administrator
fee
or
the
monthly
amount.
The
only
variable
is
the
number
of
participants,
because
it's
per
participant
we've
been
very
consistent
with
the
65
to
68
per
year,
so
we
usually
budget
about
69.
So
if
you
have
any
specific
questions,
I
get
your
answer
them.
F
N
I
draw,
who
is
our
HR,
Coordinator
and
I,
were
working
on
the
compliance
aspect
of
the
Affordable
Care
Act
for
all
of
our
part-time
variable
art
employees,
which
is
all
pretty
close
to
450
of
them.
Both
of
us
soon
learned
that
with
the
complexity
of
the
laws
and
how
many
different
situations
we
have
that
we
just
did
not
have
the
time
or
the
expertise
to
find
the
policies
that
we
needed.
N
The
procedures
that
we
needed
to
put
in
place
the
education
piece
that
we
needed
to
put
in
and
then
the
tracking
mechanisms,
and
so
once
we
we
determined
that
we
needed
some
additional
help.
We
kind
of
looked
at
our
time
frame
and
it
was
narrow,
and
so
we
did
some
research
and
we
contacted
Howell
McDowell.
They
do
have
a
very
large
staff.
N
They
do
have
one
particular
gal
Abbey
who
were
working
with.
Who
is
their
ACA
expert?
She
spent
three
years
doing
nothing,
but
but
helping
companies
like
us
get
a
say
compliant
and
we've
asked
that
this
be
done
prior
to
the
end
of
the
year,
so
that
we
know
in
open
enrollment
that
we
are
in
compliant
and
that
we
have
things
set
up
to
start
the
2007
senior,
so
we're
kind
of
running
on
a
little
bit
of
a
short
timeframe.
N
But
what
this
is
gonna
do
is
they
will
help
us
create
policy
and
procedures
they're
going
to
help
us
put
a
tracking
mechanism
in
place
for
both
new
employees,
which
have
a
different
tracking
timeframe
and
the
current
ones.
Then
we're
also
going
to
do
an
education
piece
and
implementation
piece
to
our
of
our
department,
heads
and
anyone
who
tracks
manages
deals
with
with
these
various
part-time
employees.
So
you
know
we
were
grateful
that
with
most
insurance,
companies
are
dealing
with
renewals
right
now,
and
so
they're
really
pressed
for
time.
N
Without
this,
their
the
city
does
have
a
large
potential
liability
that
gets
opened
up
for
not
doing
this,
not
tracking,
this
not
being
in
compliance,
not
showing
that
we're
doing
our
due
diligence
to
make
sure
that
ninety-five
percent
of
our
population
that
works,
an
average
of
30
hours
or
more,
is
getting
offered
insurance.
And
so
we
just.
We
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
we're
doing
our
due
diligence
on
that
and
putting
what
we
need
to
in
place.
And
so
that's.
B
J
N
And
I
think
that's
that's
probably
just
standard
language
that
came
in
in
there.
Quite
you
know,
I
asked
them
for
something
in
writing,
contractually
that
they
would
do
for
the
money
that
they
were
asking
and
they
just
kind
of
gave
us
some
standard
contract,
language
and
I'm.
Guessing
that's
where
that
that
came
and
they
they'd,
given
it
to
us
I.
Think
in
September
and
now
we're
coming
to
this
point
where
we're
gonna.
F
N
F
Forward
comment
in
our
profession:
we
have
seen
I
mean
I
wholeheartedly
support
going
through
this.
We
kind
of
refer
to
the
ACA
and
our
business
has
a
law
of
unintended
consequences.
It
is
hurting
so
many
parties
that
it's
intended
to
help,
and
it
is
a
terrible
piece
of
legislation.
In
my
opinion,
you.
B
Any
other
questions
this
is
this
actually
folks
is.
It
is
a
good
move
on
on
the
city's
part,
with
Shelley
and
Audra
working
on
this
tightly.
Okay,
any
other
questions
and
hearing
none
I'll,
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say:
aye
opposed
motion
carried
number
13
consideration
of
additional
airport
staffing.
This
is
for
one
additional
person
at
this
particular
time
unless
our
Airport
just
starts
going
crazy,
but
what
I
would
like
to
do?
B
O
So
Jeff
service
has
been
going
very
well
at
the
airport,
been
very
receptive
in
the
community.
As
we
see
our
numbers,
just
keep
skyrocketing
weekly
is
what
it's
going
up,
but
just
to
give
you
a
little
background
on
the
the
current
rules
and
regulations.
Obviously
the
the
federal
government
doesn't
follow
our
calendar.
There
are
federal
fiscal
year,
so
they
start
October
1,
hence
I'm
here
today
and
not
back
in
July
asking
for
this,
so
I
apologize,
but
our
current
jet
is.
O
O
We
have
that
jet
on
the
ground
for
four
ARF,
so
how
we've
alleviated
that
issue
currently
is
the
fire
departments
are
supplying
one
person
and
my
staff
got
certified
along
with
myself
to
cover
the
lapse
in
any
times
we
have
currently
even
overnights
we've
been
taking
that
as
well.
So
another
thing
they
put
into
effect
is
the
our
cam
system.
It's
a
runway,
condition,
assessment
matrix
this
one,
no
effect,
October
1st
through
the
FAA
they're,
coming
out
with
a
lot
of
new
advisory
circulars
lately
seems
like
the
last
year.
O
We've
had
about
three
of
them
that
have
hit
pretty
hard
with
with
smaller
airports
of
our
size.
You
know
they
never
tell
you
how
much
staffing
you
need.
They
just
tell
you
how
much
job
duties
you
have
and
then
it's
up
to
the
cities
to
command
them
in
case
of
any
accidents
or
anything
they'll
come
back
and
look
at
all
over
paperwork.
Of
course,
the
growth
at
the
airport
is
just
tremendous.
I've
been
fortunate
enough
to
see
the
last
three
years
and
how
general
aviation
has
just
exploded.
O
We
went
from
26
based
aircraft
three
years
ago
to
54
based
aircraft,
a
few
jets
and
a
helicopter,
so
I
was
just
on
the
phone
the
other
day
with
prairie
lakes
and
for
the
next
20
months.
We're
gonna
have
all
of
the
helicopters
coming
in
for
transfers
landing
at
the
airport,
so
that
will
add
additional
work
hours
for
myself
and
my
staff,
but
but
we're
happy
to
take
it
on.
O
So,
as
far
as
the
other
revenue
sources
that
we
have
commercial
fuel
sales,
we're
doing
just
in
the
jet
we're
doing
1200
gallons
a
day
at
four
cents,
a
gallon,
that's
not
including
any
of
the
private
jets
coming
in,
not
including
any
of
the
the
100
low
lead,
smaller
aircraft,
they're,
all
at
four
cents,
a
gallon
as
well.
So
we've
been
seeing
a
real
big
uptick
in
that
number.
O
We're
actually
ordering
glycol
for
the
airline's
currently
and
we're
charging
them
two
dollars
a
gallon
for
every
two
hundred
and
seventy
gallon
tote.
We
charge
them
two
dollars
per
gallon
for
that,
above
and
beyond
our
cost.
The
airline
is
actually
buying
a
diesel
and
unleaded
fuel
due
the
fact.
That's
a
little.
It's
pretty
unsafe
for
them
to
drive
their
tug
and
they're
in
their
carts
and
such
down
the
road
to
the
gas
station
to
get
fuel
go
across
the
highway
and
then
come
back.
O
So
we've
set
up
an
agreement
with
them
that
they
could
buy
fuel
from
us
at
a
cost
we
have.
In
the
past,
we've
had
a
charter
opportunities
and
we've
taken
advantage
of
those.
You
know
that's
something
that
the
mayor
and
I
have
been
looking
at
very
diligently
and
and
I
think
we're
getting
close
to
to
something
of
that
nature
arising
again
for
a
revenue
source
and
also
last
thing
I
can
add,
is
all
the
leases
we
redid
this
spring
and
we
added
a
2%
increased
clause
to
all
the
leases.
O
O
G
B
G
B
B
F
N
At
this
time,
no
because
I
work
on
a
flexible
budget
because
he's
an
enterprise
fund
we
wouldn't
have
to.
We
will
need
to
like
I
mentioned
in
there,
that
that
twenty
two
thousand
dollars
that
would
be
needed,
whether
we
did
nothing
or
added
staff
that
will
have
to
be
addressed
because
that's
outside
of
the
2017
budget
numbers.
So.
P
B
O
B
Okay,
any
other
questions.
Hearing
none
I
will
look
for
council
action.
All
those
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries.
Thank
you.
Todd.
Thank
you.
Number
14
authorization
for
the
mayor
to
sign
an
agreement
with
prayer
lakes,
health
care
for
temporary
ambulance
transport
services
to
the
airport.
This
time,
I'll
look
for
a
motion
in
a
second
for
discussion
solution.
A
B
Q
And
so
we
do
that
service
to
the
hospital
for
all,
so
that
the
helicopters
for
somewhere
is
up
to
20
months,
and
so
what
we
did
is
we
came
up
with
a
contract
that
would
supply
that
service
to
the
hospital
for
a
flat
rate
fee
that
we've
provide
that
service
as
long
as
they
need
it
by
the
contract
standards,
roughly
looking
at
anywhere
from
10
to
20
flights
a
month
on
average.
So
that's
that's!
What
this
contract
basically
covers?
What.
G
Q
A
F
F
Q
Q
B
B
Other
questions
for
for
the
chief,
okay,
none
I'll,
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries
thanks
chief
number
15
authorization
for
the
mayor
to
sign
a
long
term
lease
agreement
with
glacial
lakes,
energy
regarding
municipal
property,
adjacent
to
the
GL
II
property
for
purposes
of
a
rail
loop
track.
At
this
time,
I
will
look
for
a
motion
in
a
second
for
discussion
and
then
we'll
turn
it
over
to
Justin
ocean
by
Bruce,
second,
by
Glen
Justin.
If
you
want
to
take
that,
certainly.
I
Mayor
G
Elia,
and
we
have
Paul
here,
Hawkins
from
G
Ellie,
who
might
be
able
to
answer
any
of
your
more
substantive
questions,
but
in
terms
of
the
the
lease
document
here,
G
Ellie
came
to
the
city
in
regards
to
its
rail
Loup
expansion
project
and
asked
for
a
certain
swath
of
territory
that
are
of
municipal
property
and
asked
initially
if
they
could
obtain
an
easement
from
the
city
where
the
city
would
give
over
access
to
that
land
in
an
easement
form
to
Jiali.
In
looking
at
the
relevant
statutes
we
come.
I
We
came
to
find
that
the
city's
ability
to
give
over
land
is
relatively
limited
directly
to
private
parties
and
easements,
as
far
as
we
could
see
were
not
envisioned,
as
in
a
city
being
able
to
give
an
easement
over
to
a
purely
private
entity.
So
instead
we
hit
on
the
idea
of
a
long-term
lease,
this
being
a
99-year
lease,
because
statute
clearly
provides
Authority
for
a
municipality
to
enter
into
leases
with
private
entities.
So
that
gives
you
the
legal
background
on
why
this
is
a
long-term
lease,
a
99-year
lease
and
not
an
easement.
I
The
reason
for
the
long
duration
is
the
nature
of
the
investment
that
G
le
is
making
in
this
property,
as
as
rail,
a
rail
loop,
it's
a
very
capital,
intensive
investment,
long
term
investment,
and
so
that
is
where
this
lease
agreement
stands
again.
A
term
of
99
years
nominal
consideration
a
dollar
per
year
and
indemnification
protecting
the
city,
so
I
think
the
description
of
what
we're
talking
about
in
terms
of
property.
We
have
it
there
on
exhibit
a
in
the
document
language.
I
B
I
Correct
mayor,
the
ability
to
utilize
that
property,
if
you
look
at
you
know
there
still
is
a
good
deal
of
distance
on
that
exhibit
a
between
the
channel
and
this
property.
If
you
actually
go
out
there
to
take
a
look
at
where
the
stakes
are
in
that
GL
II
put
in
you'll,
see
that
there's
what
would
you
say,
Paul
in
terms
of
distance
between
the
stakes,
60
feet.
B
Perfect.
Thank
you
any
other
questions
for
Justin
on
this
hearing.
None
I'll
move
forward
here
and
then
then
look
for
council
action,
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion,
carries
number
16
authorization
for
the
mayor
to
sign
an
easement
agreement
with
glacial
lakes,
energy
regarding
municipal
property,
adjacent
to
the
goe
property.
This
time,
I'll
look
for
a
motion,
a
second
for
discussion
and
we'll
turn
it
over
to
Shane
motion
by
Randy
second,
by
bath,
Shane,
okay,.
C
Thank
you.
This
is
very
closely
related
to
the
previous
action
you
just
took,
and
essentially
the
city
but
prior
to
GL,
II
owning
the
the
property
that
the
rail
loop
project.
Design,
of
course,
was
a
Hanten
farm,
and
the
city
had
a
lease
with
the
Hanten
farm
prior
to
gles,
purchase
of
the
land,
and
it
was
to
access
this
little
building
here,
which
regulates
the
water
outflow
from
Pelican
Lake.
C
So
what
the
easement
did
was
at
accessed
South
Broadway
Street
through
a
gate
right
here
next
to
the
river
that
followed
this
berm
that
was
constructed
alongside
the
river
and
would
end
at
the
location
of
where
the
city's
property
commences
then.
So
what
we've
done
is
the
previous
easement
was
only
on
the
day
itself
and
because
this
is
a
improved
stretch
of
river.
In
other
words,
it
is
all
riprap
banked
stretch
of
the
river
and
we
have
multiple
stormwater
outfalls
along
the
north
side
of
the
river
here
from
highway
212
into
the
river.
C
So
we
included
the
entire
area
from
the
top
of
this
berm
over
to
the
highway
212
right
away
and
the
joining
property
boundaries
over
here,
so
that
we
could
go
in
repair
riprap.
We
could
take
debris
out
of
the
river
etc.
So
we've
really
kind
of
enhanced
this
easement
beyond
what
we
originally
had
and
we
think
from
an
operation
and
maintenance
standpoint,
it's
going
to
be
a
win-win
for
us
and
Julie.
I
I
was
tempted
to
jump
in
right
after
she
got
done,
but
I'm
glad
you
answered
that
court
that
question.
So
what
I
was
talking
about
is
the
city
providing
an
easement
to
a
private
entity
in
this
circumstance
we're
talking
about
a
private
entity
providing
an
easement
to
the
city
which
the
city
is
fully
within
its
rights
to
accept.
I
B
C
The
I
didn't
get
out
there
today.
What
I
understand
is
if
the
t-t
columns
us,
our
sections
will
be
delivered
first
part
of
this
week,
they'll
start
using
the
crane
that
put
those
in
place
and
then
once
those
are
set,
they
can
put
the
rails
on
the
sides
and
pave
the
pavement
surface
over
the
top,
so
should
be
fairly.
B
B
Are
there
any
liaison
member
reports
that
we
need
to
hear?
There
is
a
need
to
go
into
executive
session.
I
will
look
for
a
motion,
a
second
to
go
in
for
personnel
reasons
at
this
time,
so
I'll
look
for
that
motion.
A
second
motion
by
bath
second,
by
Randy,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
opposed
motion
carries
we
are
in
executive
session
I.
Don't
expect
anything
to
come
out
of
this,
so
the
news
I
wouldn't
think
you'll
need
to
stick
around.
Thank
you.