►
From YouTube: City Council Meeting - 07-20-2020
Description
City Council Meeting - 07-20-2020
C
D
C
D
C
A
A
C
F
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Now
is
the
time
for
public
comments,
so
this
is
time
reserved
for
anyone
who
would
like
to
make
a
public
comment
to
step
forward,
and
do
so.
Please
state
your
name
into
the
microphone
for
the
record
before
making
your
comment
and
if
your
comment
is
related
to
an
agenda
item,
please
wait
until
that
agenda
item
is
taken
up
by
the
city
council.
Is
there
anyone
here
who
cares
to
speak
or
online.
A
We
have
item
h
and
I
we're
going
to
move
up
because
I
think
there's
people
here
to
talk
about
that
move
those
up
until
after
e
and
so
then
we're
I'm
going
to
put
the
item
c
from
the
that
I
just
moved
off
of
the
consent
agenda
after
b.
A
C
C
D
C
C
C
D
C
A
F
A
B
A
F
Do
you
want
to
explain
to
the
public
what
what
the
purpose
why
it
needs
to
go
back
to
the
board
of
adjustment?
I
I
know
if
this
happens
every
once
in
a
while,
but
just
explain
why
the
board
of
adjustment
gets
involved
in
this.
G
C
A
At
the
fitness
of
the
applicant,
but
both
of
those
things
have
to
be
considered
before
it's
totally
approved.
Normally
we
would
do
the
board
of
adjustment
first
and
then,
as
soon
as
the
council
approves
it
it's
done,
but
they
haven't
done
that
step
yet
matt
are
you
popping
up?
Did
you
want
to
say
something.
C
Yeah,
I'm
not
sure
if
this
is
what
councilman
vilhauer
is
getting
at,
but
you
know
this
location
had
previously
been
approved
as
a
bar
tavern
use
by
the
board
of
adjustment.
Historically,
it
had
been,
but
what
we
ran
into
here
is
that
it's
sat
unused
as
a
bar
tavern
for
more
than
a
year,
and
so
that's
the
reason
why
this
particular
location
needs
to
go
back
to
the
board
of
adjustment
to
be
reapproved
because
it
sat
vacant.
F
F
A
C
E
G
F
D
F
A
C
D
C
A
A
So
that's
the
first
c.
F
A
D
A
C
D
C
F
D
A
Carries
thank
you.
The
second
c
item
is
application
for
a
new
retail
on
off
sale,
malt
beverage
and
south
dakota
farm
wine
license
to
back
roads,
coffee
house
and
lunch
box,
llc
doing
business
as
back
roads,
coffee
house
and
lunch
box,
llc
at
1519,
4th
street
northeast
and
I'll
add
they've
already
gotten
their
conditional
use
approval
from
the
board
of
adjustment.
A
B
D
That
is
a
good
question,
so
the
mall
beverage
is
the
actually
malt
beverage
and
then
it's
south
dakota
wine
and
then
the
other
wine
and
cider
is
for
wines
outside
of
south
dakota
and
then
kind
of
like
your
cider
beers.
Those
are
considered
into
this
classification.
B
A
Redundancies,
one's
more
of
a
liquor
base,
that's
what
the
audience
tells
us.
So
luckily
we
have
an
expert
in
the
audience,
any
other
discussion,
all
right,
I'll,
look
for
action,
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye,
kristen
roll
call
vote.
Please
albertson.
D
C
G
G
D
C
D
A
A
A
D
C
G
C
F
D
Thank
you
mayor.
This
is
the
second
reading
of
ordinance
2023.
This
will
actually
create
a
budget
supplement
that
will
account
for
the
remaining
sales
tax
revenue
bond
dollars
that
were
spent
in
2019
and
reimburse
fund
212
in
2020.
This
does
allow
the
city
to
meet
the
requirement
for
spending
all
the
bond
proceeds
and
will
actually
help
us
with
our
future
refunding
that
is
set
to
take
place
in
about
september
of
this
year.
If
there's
any
questions
from
the
council,
I
can
answer
them.
F
D
So
a
little
bit
of
it
accounted
for
that
we
have
had
a
few
current
expenditures
take
place
for
the
ice
arena,
a
little
bit
of
architecture
fees
and
then
the
other
big
part
was
that
we
did
have
quite
a
bit
of
the
cost
of
issuance
that
we
were
able
to
put
towards
that
dollar
amount.
A
C
D
C
C
F
D
F
D
A
Carries
thank
you.
Okay,
I'm
gonna
skip
to
item
h,
which
is
the
first
reading
of
ordinance
number
20-27,
amending
the
zoning
map
of
the
city,
watertown
for
a
portion
of
stony
point
from
our
one
single
family,
residential
district,
c2,
local,
commercial,
district
and
a1
agricultural
district
to
cl
lake
commercial
district-
and
this
is
just
a
first
reading.
So
there
is
no
need
for
action
here.
A
H
Yes,
thank
you
mayor.
This
is
the
first
reading
of
a
zoning
map
amendment.
This
zoning
amendment
has
been
proposed
by
stony
point
investments.
They
petitioned
to
rezone
the
legally
described
property
within
the
city,
watertown
known
as
stony
point
from
r1
single
family,
residential
district
and
c2
local,
commercial
district
and
a1
egg
district.
All
those
three
into
cl
commercial
lake
district,
the
re-zone
request,
is
mostly
consistent
with
the
city,
watertown's
2020,
comprehensive
land
use
plan
and
the
recently
completed
lake
compesca
master
plan.
H
We
say
in
our
summary
here
the
the
staff
summary
mostly
consistent,
because
there
is
a
portion
in
both
of
those
plans
along
the
west
side
of
this
property
that
was
shown
as
open
space
or
green
space,
but
the
rest
of
it
was
indicated
to
be
mixed
use:
commercial,
residential
that
portion
along
the
west
side
of
the
stony
point
property
that
was
indicated
in
those
comp
plans
to
be
green
space
or
open
space
is
anticipated
to
be
continue
to
be
a
protected
jurisdictional
wetland
that
the
developers
are
not
proposing
to
develop
at
this
time,
but
they
are
proposing
to
re-zone
that
area
to
help
comply
with
the
terms
of
the
cl
zoning
district
and
the
required
open
space.
H
As
you
recall,
that
cl
district
was
recently
created
here
a
couple
few
months
back
through
a
zoning
text,
amendment
that
created
that
district
for
its
use
around
the
lakes
lake
copesc
has
largely
developed
as
r1
single-family
residential
making.
The
community's
desire
for
commercial
development
difficult
to
achieve
this
cl
district
has
specific
design
standards
to
protect
those
existing
residential
zoned
areas
around
the
lake.
H
H
The
setbacks
that
they're
required
to
follow
in
the
cl
district
and
the
green
space,
the
aforementioned
green
space
that
I
discussed
a
moment
ago
that
are
all
inherent
to
the
cl
district
requirements
that
would
have
to
be
followed
by
the
developer.
If
this
rezone
were
approved,
the
planning
commission
recommended
approval
of
this
rezone
at
their
july
9th
meeting
by
a
vote
of
six
to
one,
and
they
did
also
approve
that
motion
with
an
amendment
that
the
re-zone
would
eliminate
parcel
three
that
was
originally
proposed
as
part
of
the
rezone.
H
And
so
parcel
three
included
apologize
for
the
delay
in
the
generation.
This
map
here
take
a
second.
H
Parcel
3
included
this
portion
of
the
the
newly
proposed
roadway
that'll
lead
into
the
subdivision
that
comes
off
of
prairie
hills
avenue
and
it's
on
the
southerly
end.
Here
reason:
the
planning
commission
entertained
and
agreed
to
remove
this
from
the
rezone,
as
they
did
not
want
this
portion
immediately
adjacent
to
this
residence
and
the
residents
to
the
east
to
be
zoned
in
the
cl
district.
H
The
rest
of
the
property,
however,
was
approved
or
recommended
for
approval
by
the
planning
commission
through
their
amendment
and
it's
before
the
council
tonight
and
first
reading
and
will
be
second
reading.
Public
hearing
at
the
next
council
meeting,
brandi
hanton,
the
urban
planners
online
with
us
and
we'd,
be
glad
to
help
answer
any
questions.
Anybody
might
have.
F
This
is,
this
is
deja
vu
all
over
again
from
those
of
us
have
been
the
council
for
any
number
of
years,
but
a
question
I've
got.
Is
I
remember
last
time
this
came
before
us
that
this
thing
was
studied
to
death.
I
mean
there
were
study
after
study
done.
I
I
so
I
guess
my
question
is:
I
have
heard
nothing
from
I'm
going
to
reference.
F
Two
different
groups-
isaac,
walton
league,
I've,
heard
nothing
from
the
lake
camp
esco
water
district
and
both
those
groups
were
very
much
opposed
to
this
development
last
time
around,
and
I
have
heard
nothing
from
either
one
of
those
at
this
point.
Can
I
just
ask:
does
anyone
know
where
you
know
I'm
assuming
they're
aware
of?
What's
going
on,
they've
been
a
loop
on
this?
Where
do
those
groups
stand
on
on
this
project?
Anybody
have
any
comments
or
awareness
of
that.
A
You
want
to
speak
the
I
I
went
to
the
lake
compescua
water
project
district
board
meeting,
and
it
was
stated
that
they
liked
seeing
that
the
development
was
going
through
each
of
the
steps
in
our
development
process
and
not
skipping
any
steps
and
that
made
a
difference
to
them.
They're
abiding
by
our
laws,
they're
intending
to
do
water
quality
facilities
on
their
site
for
the
whole
development,
so
that
reassured
them.
I
haven't
spoken
with
any
of
the
isaac
walton
league
folks,
though,
or
anyone
else
have
you
heath.
H
No,
I
haven't
directly
heard
from
them
either,
but
just
through
meetings
that
the
mayor
and
some
of
my
staff
have
attended
recently
they've
leaned
into
being
along
the
lines
of
wanting
assurance
that
you
know
the
processes
were
being
followed
and
which
is
a
level
of
assurance
we've
given
them.
There
have
been
some
active
grading
permits
issued
on
this
site.
C
I
watched
the
plan
commission
replay
on
this
one
and,
of
course,
as
expected,
it
got
pretty
well
vetted
out
or
a
lot
of
discussion
on
that
one.
I
just
want
to
remind
myself
and
others.
This
is
a
first
reading,
so
no
vote
tonight,
but
really
what
we're
talking
about
here
there's
a
lot
of
detailed
questions
that
I
got
on
this
one
and
those
are
things
I
think
that
have
to
be
decided
so,
but
this
is
really
just
a
rezoning
to
cl.
That's
really
the
decision
before
us
or
will
be
before
us
in
two
weeks.
C
B
The
to
don's
point
is
exactly
correct:
the
thing
that
we
put
together
for
the
master
plan
I
mean
this
is
one
of
the
things
that
was
identified
so
the
commercial
lake
district
or
lake
commercial.
However,
you
want
to
call
it.
You
know
that's
something
that
the
community
has
looked
forward
to
to
talk
to
a
couple
concerned.
Citizens
just
said
that
you
know
as
community
our
job
is
to
make
sure
that
everything
that
we
say
needs
to
be
followed
has
followed.
B
H
If
I
could
may
or
refer
to
brandy
brandy,
have
you
had
any
formal
support
or
opposition
to
no
tier
in
the
first
reading.
H
D
A
A
Not
yet
I
moved
h
and
I
up
and
then
so,
if
tyler,
if
you
could
bring
that
up,
this
is
an
ordinance
that
we
have
on
the
books.
That
is,
there's
a
proposed.
Pretty
substantial
revision
amendment
to
it.
So
watertown
has
the
fair
housing
ordinance
which
was
adopted
in
1980,
and
it's
really
hasn't
been
touched
much
in
that
in
the
years
since
then,
but
it
is
in
need
of
an
update
for
sure
the
fair
housing
ordinance
prevents
discrimination
for
housing,
and
what
is
proposed
here
is
far
more
than
just
housing.
A
It's
a
it's
expanding
the
non-discrimination
to
employment
and
also
to
public
facilities.
So
it's
a
more
holistic,
non-discrimination,
ordinance
and
brookings
already
has
a
similar
ordinance,
and
so
I
just
used
brookings
ordnance
as
a
boiler
plate
compared
it
to
our
fair
housing
ordinance
and
made
the
updates,
which
are
should
be
in
the
in
there.
Can
you
not
find
it
tyler.
A
Basically,
in
my
opinion,
the
the
main
benefit
of
doing
this,
there's
a
provision
in
there
for
having
a
board
that
can
hear
claims
of
discrimination
and
take
some
action,
and
so
the
main
benefit
in
doing
this
ordinance
revision
is
to
give
citizens
a
free
sounding
board
of
fellow
citizens
to
air
their
complaint
without
having
to
go
to
court
if
they
feel,
like
they've,
been
discriminated
against.
Yes,
there
are
federal
laws
and
everything-
that's
in
here
is
covered
by
a
federal
law.
A
So,
but
if
you
want
to
follow
the
federal
law,
you
have
to
go
to
court
to
prove
your
case,
so
I
think
this
is
helpful
to
our
citizens.
What
it
says
is
that
watertown
does
not
tolerate
discrimination
of
any
kind
and
our
fair
housing
ordinance.
It
already
makes
those
points,
but
it
only
pertains
to
housing
and
the
amendment
is
broadening
to
include,
as
I
said,
employment
and
public
accommodations,
but
it
also
broadens
the
definition
of
discrimination
that
we
have
from
1980,
bringing
it
into
conformance
with
the
current
federal
laws
for
discrimination.
A
So
this
is
a
service
to
our
citizens
and
it's
unlikely
to
be
used
very
often.
I
know
that,
but
when
it
is
needed,
it
can
be
life-changing
for
a
person
who
who
feels
that
they've
been
discriminated
against,
and
so
this
is
why
I'm
in
favor
of
it-
and
I
see
that
brett
reese
is
in
the
audience-
he's
been
encouraging
and
helping
helping
us
to
get
more
in
line
with
the
discrimination
rules
that
we
have-
and
I
know
he's
very
passionate
about
this-
he's
spoken
before
to
the
council
and
he's
here
too.
A
G
They
haven't
seen
any
challenges
or
issues
with
that
in
case
that
was
a
concern,
but,
as
you
know,
in
june
we
talked
about
discrimination
in
our
city
and
how
we
had
interest
in
forming
a
human
rights
committee
to
investigate
that
and
make
sure
that
that's
not
happening
in
our
city,
and
so
this
is
kind
of
the
law
and
policy
to
back
our
word
on
that
it
would
formally
establish
the
human
rights
committee
that
would
hear
these
concerns.
G
As
a
committee,
like
the
mayor,
said,
it's
a
much
easier
process
than
having
to
go
to
court.
You
would
go
to
this
committee.
The
committee
would
conduct
an
investigation
and
if
the
committee
decides
that
there
has
been
a
act
of
discrimination,
there's
kind
of
a,
we
would
turn
that
over
to
matt
who
would
kind
of
mediate
between
the
parties
and
whatnot.
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Councilwoman
manti,.
E
Yes,
hi
thanks
for
being
here
brett.
I
just
want
to
give
a
little
context
to
this
that
the
mayor
and
I
shared
quite
some
time
ago,
and
we
found
that
the
fair
housing
board
hadn't
met.
What
mayor
since,
like
20
years,
20
years
or
something
like
that
and
in
the
meantime
I
had
been
taking
calls
most
of
the
discrimination
regarded
mental
health
issues,
financial
and
to
the
point
of
having
to
reference
federal
law.
E
I
did
find
it,
but
I
had
to
really
look
through
title
eight
and
some
of
all
the
other
chapters
in
the
federal
law,
and
we
also
talked
about
it
prior
to
the
covid
stalling
everything
about
how
could
we
make
the
fair
housing
committee
and
that
and
the
law
exactly
what
we've
done
now?
And
so
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
if
we
think
this
stuff
is
not
going
on
in
watertown,
that
would
be
a
false
statement
because
I've
been
dealing
with
it
now
for
at
least
a
year.
E
So
I
guess,
in
my
opinion,
like
sarah
said
it
benefits
everybody
and
I
always
say
when
we
take
care
of
one
group,
we're
taking
care
of
all
the
groups
and
it's
a
benefit
to
the
citizens
and,
like
I
said
it's
something
that
I
feel
has
been
needed
for
a
long
time,
and
I
know
sarah
agrees,
I'm
sure
some
of
the
others
on
the
council
agree,
but
there's
not
been
a
one
concentrated
place
where
people
could
say.
E
You
could
go
on
every
website
everywhere
in
the
whole
city
and
state,
and
you
wouldn't
find
an
exact
place
where
you
could
file
that
complaint,
necessarily
without
going
through
a
bunch
of
other
hoops.
So
I'm
guess,
I'm
speaking
in
support
of
this
and
giving
my
history
that
I've
had
with
issues
like
this,
and
so
I
think,
we're
on
the
right
track
with
this
definitely
on
the
right
track.
Thank
you.
A
And
there's
a
lot
of
work
left
see
we
there's
other
things
that
we
could
follow
up
with,
but
this
is
one
step.
The
the
fair
housing
board
already
exists,
and
this
proposed
ordinance
change
broadens
its
scope
to
be
more
than
just
housing.
It's
not
just
fair
housing,
it's
it's
fair
employment
and
it's
fair
public
accommodations.
A
I
too
reached
out
to
brookings,
and
I
spoke
with
the
city
manager
there
and
he
told
me
that
they've
had
like
three
cases
come
to
them.
Two
of
them
were
dismissed
by
the
commission
and
one
went
on
to
have
some
action
against
someone
that
and
the
person
who
was
aggrieved
felt
satisfied
with
the
outcome.
So
what
it
says
is
in
this
community.
We
protect
our
margins,
you
don't
just
have
to
be
mainstream,
we
we
everyone
has
rights
and-
and
we
protect
them.
So
I
guess
I'd
like
to
answer
any
questions.
F
A
couple
questions
either
of
a
mayor
or
brett
or
matt.
I
mean
okay,
so
you
I
know
it's
my
first
reading,
you
pretty
well
drafted
this.
Sarah
I
mean
I'm
assuming
matt
will,
as
our
city
attorney,
will
be
going
through
this
absolutely
in
the
meantime.
Okay,
just
a
comment,
then
a
question:
you
you
referenced
our
meeting
a
couple
months
ago,
brad
and
I
was
one
that
that
made
a
recommendation
that
we
look
at
putting
together
some
sort
of
group.
So
I
I'm
I'm
glad
to
see
this
happen.
Now.
F
A
A
Well
and
I,
the
commission
has
some
ability
to
for
enforcement,
but
in
speaking
with
the
brookings
city
manager,
he
said
that's
a
very
minor
component
of
what
they
do.
They're
very
active
and
their
primary
goal
is
education
and
they're
doing
a
lot
of
outreach
and
speaking
to
people
and
just
trying
to
get
understanding
between
various
groups
that
make
up
our
community.
F
C
A
procedural
question:
this
is
first
reading.
We
we
didn't
get
this
document
until
today.
Are
you
going
to
follow
normal
process?
This
will
be
a
second
reading
in
two
weeks
or
what's
your
timing
on
that?
Well,.
A
A
Ordinance
is
still
there,
but
it's
wider
now,
and
so
there
was
a
lot
of
red
ink
to
add
those
other
components,
but
it's
still
the
same
kind
of
a
thing.
There's
a
body.
If
you
feel
aggrieved
you
can
take
your
complaint
to
this
body.
The
name
of
the
body
is
changed.
You
know
added
a
whole
bunch
of
definitions.
A
It's
still
the
same
basic
thing,
though,
and
I
haven't
changed
the
a
lot
of
the
meat
and
potato
parts
of
it
where
you
know
enforcement.
The
judicial
review
remedies
that
kind
of
stuff
is
still
the
same.
I
unless
I
hear
from
the
council
that
they're
uncomfortable
with
a
second
reading
at
the
next
council
meeting.
A
B
B
Right,
well,
I
I
understand
that
portion,
but
really
what
we're
looking
at
is
it's
a
human
rights
board?
It's
what
it
is
now.
You
could
actually
put
fair
housing
under
that
particular
item.
I'm
just
wondering
if
that
would
be
a
better
better
way
of
doing
it.
You
know
because
it
should
be
fair.
Housing
all
should
be
in
employment
and
also.
A
B
I'm
I'm
actually
envisioning
as
one
one
item
with
sub
groups,
underneath
it
I
mean,
if
you're
going
to
have
an
anti-discrimination
or
a
whatever
you
want
to
call
the
commission
really.
That
should
be
the
main
focus
and
then
the
fair
housing,
the
employment.
Those
should
be
subsections
of
that.
That's
why
I'm
wondering.
B
Maybe
we're
splitting
hairs
in
the
whole
deal
of
it,
but
you
know
that
that's
something!
That's
where
I
I
didn't
get
a
chance.
I
mean
we
got
it.
A
I
don't
know
I
I
worked
on
it
over
the
weekend
and
I
didn't
have
a
chance
to
let
matt
weigh
in
on
it
and
I'd.
But
it
is
it's
following
the
same
lines:
it's
just
broadening
it
councilman
vilhar.
F
I
guess
to
those
to
those
points
that
I
think
don
and
adam
are
raising.
I
want
to
see
this
move
forward,
but
I'm
not
so
sure
that
we
shouldn't
have
shouldn't
let
matt
weigh
in
on
this
clean
it
up
title
it
properly,
etc
and
then
bring
it
forward
to
us
as
a
first
reading
next
next
meeting,
and
then
you
know,
go
from
there
with
the
second
reading.
I
just
I
don't
want
to
rush
this
through,
because
it's
an
important
document,
so
I
just
think
it.
B
And
that's
fine
and
I
talked
to
brad
right
before
the
meeting.
I
just
I
told
him
the
same
thing
I
mean
if
you're
going
to
do
it,
we
need
to
make
sure
it's
done
correctly
and
we
don't
we
don't
rush
anything
through
there.
I'd
also
like
to
know
what
our
enforcement
options
are,
what
the
penalties
are.
What
are
we?
What
do
we?
What
is
our
teeth
to
the
to
the
whole
ordinance
as
well?
I
mean
those
are
items
that
I'd
like
to
see.
B
You
know
just
so
that
when
we
do
finish
it
up,
it
is
correct
and
it's
it's
accurate.
We
don't,
we
don't
miss
something
I
mean
I
don't
want
to
see
where
we
have
to
make
42
revisions
on
something
just
because
we
kind
of
quick
pushed
it
through.
So
that's
we're.
B
G
Yeah
just
to
address
those
concerns
based
on
conversations
I've
had
with
the
mayor
and
matt's.
The
substance
of
this
bill
as
it
is
written,
is
most
likely
not
going
to
change
drastically.
G
G
I
understand
you
guys
didn't
even
have
a
chance
to
read
it,
but
that
is
all
already
included
in
the
bill
or
the
policy
like
mayor
karen
said
this
is
what
brookings
uses,
and
so
they,
this
has
already
gone
through
their
whole
system
as
well
and
their
readings
as
well,
not
saying
that
there
aren't
little
tweaks
to
be
made,
but
I
don't
think
as
a
policy
in
general,
it's
going
to
be
drastically
changed
once
matt
gets
to
take
a
look
at
it,
yeah
just
to
address
those
concerns.
G
I
would
also
like
to
point
out
in
this
policy
that
there
is
in
case
you
hear
concerns
there
is
a
religious
exemption
section.
This
would
not
apply
to
churches,
employment
and
it
would
not
apply
to
church
church
buildings
and
church
activities.
F
I
think
just
just
to
point
out
that
I'm
not
disagreeing
with
you
brett
that
probably
won't
change,
but
the
first
first
reading
is
not
only
just
for
us
for
the
public
as
well,
and
the
public
is
not
not
seeing
this
at
this
point.
So
I
think
that's
another.
Another
reason
that
I
I
would
like
to
defer
this
to
two
weeks
for
our
first
reading,
so
to
have
the
public
a
chance
to
also
see
it
at
that
ahead
of
time.
A
I
I
What
I
had
to
go
out
for,
thanks
to
my
daughters,
for
putting
up
my
top,
I
got
my
windows
up.
Does
anyone
have
a
towel
anyway?
I
would
also
very
much
like
to
see
this
go
to
a
first
reading
at
the
next
council
meeting,
and
I
just
don't
see
that
there's
any
rush.
I
Just
looking
through
this
I've
caught
a
couple
questions
with
terminology,
two
incidents
of
grammatical
errors
that
I
thought
should
be
cleaned
up
and
like
these
are
like
things
that
can
be
cleaned
up
outside
of
a
council
meeting
like
I
could
just
email
matt.
It
just
makes
it
a
lot
nicer
to
to
do
that,
and
I
just
don't
see
any
hurry
on
it.
I
mean
you've
said
that
the
fair
housing
board
hasn't
met
in
20
years.
I
don't
think
two
weeks
is
going
to
be
putting
us
out
anything.
A
No,
it
isn't
for
sure.
That's
that's
true,
and
I
I'm
happy
to
do
that
and
I'm.
B
And
it's
an
important
document,
I
mean,
let's
be
honest,
I
mean
in
the
world
we
live
in
today
I
mean
discrimination
is
constantly
one.
Everyone
has
to
deal
with,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
we
get
it
done
correctly
and
that
we
don't
have
things
that
slip
through
that
we
did
envision.
So
let's
make
sure
that
we're
fully
fully
involved
in
that.
A
C
I
guess
I
was
just
going
to
suggest
that
between
now
and
next
meeting,
if
there
was
a
subset
of
the
council
that
wanted
to
maybe
meet
to
go
over
some
of
the,
if
there's
any
concerns
or
questions
or
anything
like
that,
if
anybody
wants
to
have
a
subcommittee
to
review
this
before
it
comes
on
for
a
first
reading
at
the
next
meeting,
I
would
just
make
that
suggestion.
I
Mayor,
even
if
there's
no
one
else
willing
to
step
up
for
a
sub-committee,
I'm
always
in
favor
of
avoiding
committees
when
possible,
but
I
would
be
glad
to
work
with
you
on
this
mat.
I
because
I've
been
reading
through
this
in
the
short
time
that
we
had
since
the
mayor
emailed
it
to
us.
But
I
had
some
ideas,
some
at
least
suggestions
that
I
would
like
to
bring
forward
for
inclusion
or
exclusion
in
the
proposal.
A
H
Absolutely
thank
you
mayor.
The
planning
commission
discussed
this
particular
topic
in
in
relation
to
information
brought
forward
by
staff.
H
This
all
goes
back
to
the
effort
of
wanting
consistency,
wanting
efficiencies,
streamlining
our
processes
where
available
or
where
we're
able
to
and
what
we
found
recently
was
that
the
way
we
were
administering
public
notices,
which
is
what
this
amendment
specifically
relates
to.
It's
the
public
notices
related
to
chapter
21,
the
zoning
regulations
of
the
city
and
in
chapter
21.
There
are
certain
there
are
certain
things
that
we
need
to
give
public
notice
for
such
as
rezones
conditional
uses,
variances
and
things
of
that
nature
that
will
be
going
to
the
public
boards
for
consideration.
H
We
were,
of
course,
meeting
the
requirements
there
and
then
also
I
talked
with
the
planning
commission
on
you
know,
what's
appropriate
for
watertown
over
and
above
what
the
state
statutes
require
of
us
in
a
in
a
nutshell,
summary.
What
brandy's
worked
up
here
for
us
is
a
draft
that
addresses
those
inconsistencies
and
it
spells
out
when
public
notice
will
be
given
and
to
what
distance
those
public
notices
will
be
provided
for
for
the
adjacent
and
adjoining
land
owners
within
that
area.
H
Essentially,
on
that
piece
alone,
the
way
the
language
will
read
is
that
public
notice
will
be
given
to
landowners
adjacent
to
or
within
250
feet,
whichever
produces
a
greater
number
of
notices
from
the
legal
lot
of
record
petitioning
for
a
change
such
as
a
rezone
or
a
conditional
use
or
a
variance,
and
so
that'll
bring
consistency
for
those
types
of
cases
for
us
to
apply
those
at
a
staff
level.
H
It
also
talks
about
those
notices
being
provided
by
first
class
mail,
some
notices.
We
were
providing
certified
mail
which
comes
at
a
larger
expense
for
the
applicants
and
the
larger
amount
of
time
being
consumed
on
a
staffing
level
to
issue
certified
notices,
but
switching
to
a
first
class
mail
notice
helps
streamline
that
process
dramatically
and
also
meets
the
state
statute.
Requirements
that
we're
abided
to
that
were
required
to
abide
by.
H
That
sign
will
be
created
by
provided
by
the
city.
So
it's
got
consistent
language.
It's
it
reads
consistently
for
every
conditional
use
application
that
we
get
that
way.
It's
not
left
to
the
subjectivities
of
the
applicants
to
figure
out
what
that
has
to
say
so
that
that
information
will
be
provided
by
a
sign
that
we
provided
the
applicants
and
then
they
post
accordingly
on
their
property.
H
Those
are
the
two
biggest
changes
there,
the
the
distance
in
which
we're
providing
notice
and
then
the
sign
inclusion
in
our
ordinance
to
be
in
line
with
the
state
statutes
and
again
brandi's
online
with
us,
and
the
planning
commission
did
recommend
approval
of
this
to
the
city
council
at
their
july
9th
meeting
unanimously
by
a
vote
of
7-0.
B
Heath
on
this
one,
he
says,
250
feet
is
that
of
all
like
of
the
boundary
of
the
property.
Is
that
what
we're
looking
at
so
basically
the
where
the
lot
line
is
type
of
deal.
H
B
H
Yes
and
that's
the
direction,
we
would
hope
to
provide
a
staff
when
we
give
them.
The
sign
provide
some
some
guidelines
and
some
detailed
information
on
where
that
sign
should
be
placed
not
only
to
meet
our
sign
ordinance,
which
is
a
very
good
point,
but
also
just
to
meet
the
the
regulations
as
a
whole
in
the
state
statutes
for
notifications.
B
When
I
could
see
that
realistically
put
a
sign
in
someone's
yard
they're
not
going
to
be
very
happy
about
you
sticking
a
sign
in
their
yard.
Until
so
I
mean
those
are
some
of
the
things
that
I
would
maybe
caution,
city
staff
about
taking
under,
but
those
are
just
a
couple
things
that
I
just
had
questions
on
that
that
signs
one.
I
think
it's
a
good
idea.
A
C
Just
a
question
about
the
certified
mail
piece
certified
mail
is
is
absolute,
it's
certain
somebody
signs
for
it.
You
know
it
got
delivered,
but
most
people
aren't
home
to
get
it,
so
they
have
to
go
down
to
the
post
office
a
lot
of
times.
People
just
won't
do
that,
so
you
switch
to
first
class
mail,
which
I
understand
why
the
question
is,
though,
what
do
we
do
when
somebody
says
I
didn't
get
the
letter.
H
I
think
the
best
response
to
that
is
that
you
know
first
and
foremost,
we
want
to
make
sure
we're
meeting
state
requirements
and
we
are
with
first
class
mailing
and
matt,
and
brandy
did
a
little
more
research
on
that
than
I
did
so.
I
I
believe,
I'm
speaking
accurately,
there
matt
you
can
chime
in
otherwise,
but
that's
first
and
foremost,
we're
meeting
the
minimum
state
statute
requirements.
H
You
know
we
do
on
our
certified
mailings.
I
couldn't
tell
you
a
percentage
but
you're
absolutely
right.
There
are
a
number
of
those
that
never
do
sign
for
those
certified
mailings
and
if,
if
you,
if
you
look
at
it,
that's
where
staffs
looked
at
it
and
assessed
it
and
questioned
it
with
the
planning
commission?
Is
it
worth
doing
that?
Is
it
worth
the
expense,
the
time
the
energy
for
what
to
you
know
and
obviously
the
for
what
is
well.
H
We
have
some
documentation
about
some
of
the
people
that
got
those
letters
and
we
know
who
didn't
sign
for
them,
but
then,
where
does
that
leave
us
and
the
gist
of
it?
We're
just
wanting
to
make
sure
we're
getting
the
public
notice
out
there?
We're
getting
them
a
letter
providing
them
an
opportunity
to
come
to
the
public
hearing
to
speak
any
any
opposition
or
support
for
a
case,
and
you
know
letting
letting
it
rest
on
the
fact
that
we
are
meeting
the
state
statute
requirements.
I
Thanks
and
I
applaud
the
the
commission
for
bringing
forward
the
suggestions,
I
will
register
a
little
bit
of
unease.
I
have
worked
on
open
meetings,
laws
for
a
long
time
and
I've
always
the
world
has
changed
so
dramatically.
Regarding
them,
I
mean
on
the
state
level
you
have
to
post
it
in
a
newspaper.
Very
few
people
get
the
newspaper
nowadays.
I
Very
few
people
answer
their
mail
on
a
regular
basis
anymore.
Personally,
I
would
like
to
see
if
there
wouldn't
be
a
way
for
watertown
to
move
into
the
future,
and
you
could
probably
find
someone's
email
address
or
do
a
phone
call
where
you
have
two
people
so
that
you
have
a
registration.
You
call
them
up
in
the
phone
and
say:
look
there
will
be
a
public
hearing.
I
I
just
wanted
to
let
you
know,
and
that
way
you
can
confirm
that
the
person
knows
because
it
it
does
happen,
a
lot
where
people
don't
look
at
their
mail
or
you
know
you
get
a
mail,
you
get
a
you
get
a
letter
and
it
doesn't
look
urgent
you're
not
going
to
either
open
it
or
there's
a
chance
of
throwing
it
away.
So
I
wouldn't
mind,
seeing
maybe
a
new
procedure
brought
forward.
A
B
The
certified
mail
you
have
to
sign,
for
I
mean
you
know
that
they
get
that
I
had
a
neighbor
that
went
for,
went
for
a
you,
know,
board
of
adjustment
type
deal
and
obviously
it
wasn't
there.
I
knew
that
a
certified
mail
from
city
watertown
I
had
to
go
get.
I
thought
they
could
have
called
me
myself,
because
I
know
they
got
my
cell
phone
number,
but
that
that
is
a
bit
of
a.
B
H
C
I
was
just
going
to
reiterate
what
you'd
already
stated
that
you
know
it's
not
a
it's,
not
a
requirement
of
statute,
we're
already
going
above
and
beyond
statutes.
You
know,
one
of
the
things
to
be
to
consider
is
the
cost.
I
believe
it's
seven
dollars
per
letter
or
something
like
that
now.
I
think
that
more
notice
is
better,
of
course,
but
that's
certainly
something
to
be
considered.
C
I
was
going
to
comment
on
councilman
hollen's
suggestion.
I
mean
it
seems
to
me
that
in
this
day
and
age
of
technology
that
we
could
you
know
we
do
capture
people's
email
addresses
when
they
sign
up
to
receive
notifications
of
meetings
and
that
sort
of
thing
it
seems
like
perhaps
down
the
road
there
can
be.
Some
sort
of
you
know,
field
that
would
capture
their
address
and
location
of
town.
They
would
receive
address
specific
notifications
via
email
that
you
know
could
be
explored
in
the
future.
C
I
was
just
going
to
mention
too
during
plan
commission.
It
was
brought
up
how
we
would
do
an
affidavit
of
the
notice
that
we
sent
out
just
to
prove
that
you
know
to
have
ever
to
have
that
that
information,
at
least
if
if
it
would
ever
move
forward
the
250
feet.
Also,
can
you
guys
hear
me.
A
Okay,
anyone
else
all
right,
we'll
move
on.
Thank
you
item
g
is
the
first
reading
of
ordinance
number
20-26,
establishing
the
zoning
designation
of
r1
single-family
residential
district
of
the
south
88
feet
of
the
west
100
feet
of
lot,
4,
cook,
cold
subdivision,
and
this
no
action
it's
first
reading.
So
heath
want
to
tell
us
about
this.
Please.
H
H
So
this
is
out
along
golf
course
road,
where
we
have
these
residential
lots
that
are
currently
annexed
and
zoned
within
the
city
limits.
There
are
these
smaller
outlets,
I'll
call
them
that
this
particular
one
that
this
homeowner
would
like
to
see
annexed
and
zoned,
and
that's
the
first
reading
this
before
you
tonight,
the
the
owner
petitioned
to
see
this
annex
and
zoned
r1
and
then
combined
with
a
subsequent
re-platting
of
their
lot
to
incorporate
this
back
lot
into
their
primary
lot
and
that's.
H
They
actually
went
through
the
planning
commission
and
that
discussion
commenced.
There
were
some
nuances
brought
out
in
that
discussion
that
relate
to
the
decree
of
utility
utility.
What
I
like
to
call
buyout
service
buyout
responsibilities,
and
there
is
a
a
particular
one
related
to
soro
sue,
ro
water
and
their
ability
to
serve
this
area.
That's
not
within
the
city
limits
and
matt.
H
The
city
attorney
has
to
do
some
research,
additional
research
on
that
and
hopes
to
have
some
more
sound
recommendations
or
some
guiding
some
guidance
to
the
council
by
the
time
of
the
second
reading.
For
this,
for
this
action,
and
essentially
what
that'll
boil
down
to
is
whether
we
feel
under
the
decree
that
was
put
out
a
handful.
B
Heath
on
these,
if
I'm
looking
on
that
map
there,
what
you
just
had
up
those
lots
that
are
to
the
west
and
east
that
are
those
in
city
limits.
Have
they
already
done
that,
or
is
this
going
to
be
kind
of
a
one-off
deal
where
that
lot
is
the
only
one
that
technically
is
in
city
limits?
At
that
point,.
H
B
H
Yeah,
my
other
understanding
is
that
the
county's
zoning
regulations
wouldn't
allow
for
the
construction
of
what
they're
wanting
to
build
here
on
this
lot.
B
H
D
D
B
C
Well,
I
think
that
those
were
before
the
joint
jurisdiction
was
in
place
and
then
also
by
policy.
Then.
C
H
D
C
Suggested
that,
but
to
put
the
burden
on
the
one
petitioner,
the
one
applicant,
would
I
mean
that's.
We
can't.
C
C
And
then
facilitate
it
that
way,
instead
of
putting
it
up
on
one
applicant
that
that's
a
good
point,
my
response
is:
would
it
be
only
one
fee
if
they
came
in
as
a
group
or
they're
all
going
to
pay
individual
fees?
No
matter.
C
Yeah,
so
it's
pretty
clear
if,
if
we're
owing
the
fee,
if
it
turns
out,
we
are
owing
the
fee
as
a
result
of
the
annexation.
Here,
the
fee
is
the
same
up
to
35
acres.
C
After
that
the
fee
goes
up
proportionally,
but
correct.
Councilman
roby
is
that
if
we
brought
all
those
in
at
once,
assuming
that's
not
35
acres,
it
would
reduce
the
overall
cost
that
we
would
pay
per
acre
and
there's
the
incentive
for
the
the
homeowner
right.
Randy
make
a
good
point,
putting
the
burden
on
them
to
have
to
gather
all
those
people
up,
but
just
a
thought.
A
B
A
A
D
Thank
you
mayor
before
the
council
is
the
approval
of
resolution
2032.
In
february
of
this
year,
I
actually
brought
forward
resolution
2008.
that
was
to
refund
the
2014
and
2015
bonds.
D
Just
recently,
it
came
to
came
to
light
that
we
can
also
incorporate
refunding
of
the
series
2012
bonds,
and
what
this
will
do
is
it
will
actually
remove
the
requirement
for
the
city
to
have
a
reserve
account
it's
one
of
our
smaller
bonds.
So
it's
not
a
huge
cost
savings
in
terms
of
the
interest,
but
it
is
the
only
bond
that
the
city
currently
has
that
makes
the
city
have
the
requirement
for
the
reserve.
D
Some
of
the
benefits
to
adding
this
one
into
our
refunding
process
is
that
we
will
shorten
the
term
of
the
bonds
essentially
by
buying
down
the
principal
with
the
funds
that
have
been
restricted
into
the
reserve
right
now.
It's
looking
like
it'll
take
a
year
off
of
the
bonds.
D
We
will
no
longer
have
to
set
aside
the
reserve,
which
in
turn
is
a
cost
savings
to
the
city.
The
two
things
that
I
do
need
to
make
make
it
known
that
if
we
do
incorporate
the
2012
bonds
into
the
refunding
process,
two
things
will
happen.
The
biggest
thing
is
2.5
million
dollars
worth
of
cash
will
go
out
at
the
close
of
this.
D
This
cash
is
already
set
aside.
It
is
restricted
in
the
capital
improvement
fund.
We
didn't
have
access
access
to
it
before,
but
that
2.5
will
leave
the
city
and
go
towards
the
bond
and
the
other
thing
that
happens
is
when
these
bonds
are
callable
and
we
start
the
process
which
is
looking
to
be
around
october.
D
Essentially,
our
december
payments
would
be
due
at
that
time.
There
again,
I
do
have
that
cash
set
aside
for
for
that
december
payment
already,
so
it
just
kind
of
moves
the
payment
up
a
couple
months,
that's
kind
of
what
is
adding
to
the
refunding.
If
there's
any
questions,
I
can
try
to
answer
them.
F
Not
not
that
I
don't
agree
with
what
you're
doing
and
the
advice
you're
giving
us,
but
you've
also
been
working
with
with
our
bond
council
or
advisors
through
this
as
well.
So
that's
their
recommendation
as
well
that
they're
giving
you.
D
That
is
correct.
I've
been
talking
with
tom
through
with
colliers,
and
he
is
actually
the
one
who
brought
it
to
the
attention
that
they
did
a
little
bit
more
looking
and
that
the
series
212
bonds
are
the
ones
that
are
holding
us
essentially
to
have
to
have
the
reserve
funds.
D
So
the
biggest
thing
that
this
does
is
going
forward.
It
makes
our
our
bonding
process
a
little
bit
easier
because
we
just
don't
have
to
meet
that
requirement.
B
D
Well,
in
terms
of
the
reserve,
there's
still
other
debt
covenants
that
the
city
has
to
follow.
This
one
is
actually
a
re.
I
guess
you
can
look
at
it
as
a
reserve.
There
are
still
the
requirements
that
we
always
keep
our
next
principal
and
interest
payments
for
the
year
that
won't
go
away
with
any
of
this.
This
is
just
actually
considered
the
reserve
fund.
For
these
we
will
have
one
bond.
D
D
Yes,
and
we
still
have-
I
mean
we
still
have
to
meet
our
debt
covenants
and
essentially
yes,
we
always
have
to
make
sure
that
we
have
our
next
year's
principal
and
interest
payments
in
total
in
cash.
Okay,
thank
you.
A
D
A
A
A
J
J
A
J
So,
just
a
quick
refresher
on
march
2nd,
we
appeared
before
this
body
and
asked
for
permission
to
apply
for
the
cops
grant.
We
answered
some
of
your
questions
then.
Hopefully
we
put
your
minds
at
ease.
On
march
11th
we
submitted
the
grant
and
on
june
25th
we
received
notification
that
we
had
received
the
award,
and
I
would
just
like
to
read
the
first
sentence
of
that
word
letter,
because
it's
it's
pretty
pronounced.
J
Congratulations
on
your
agency's
award
for
three
officer
positions
and
375
thousand
dollars
in
federal
funds
over
a
three-year
award
period
under
the
2020
cops
hiring
program.
I
think
this
is
a
an
excellent
opportunity
for
the
city
and
for
the
police
department
to
get
to
appropriate
staffing
levels
that
we
need
and
that
the
community
deserves
these
grants.
Don't
come
out
that
often
the
last
one
we
think
was
eight
or
nine
years
ago.
We
didn't
dig
out
the
actual
cops
grant
application
from
back
then,
but
we
think
that
was
about
eight
or
nine
years
ago.
J
J
So
with
that
being
said,
I
would
turn
it
over
to
you
for
any
questions,
or
hopefully
approval.
C
J
Well,
the
fourth
year
is
a
requirement.
You
have
to
keep
the
officers
on
for
a
fourth
year
so
after
that
fourth
year,
if
things
are
still
bad,
we
can
lay
off
or
reduce
the
force
at
that
point
in
time,
but
it
is
part
of
the
cops
grant.
We
can't
supplant
and
pay
for
current
officers
with
that
type
of
stuff.
It
has
to
be
new
hires
and
those
type
of
things,
so
we
have
to
sustain
it
for
the
fourth
year
three
years
of
funding.
Fourth
year
is
all
in
the
city,
follow-up.
C
Mayor,
so
the
question
then,
is
that
it
doesn't
hurt
requirements.
These
are
new.
These
have
to
be
new
officers.
Does
that
mean
they
can't
have
experience?
They
got
to
be
rookies
or
my
point
is,
you
sure,
want
to
hire
someone
you
want
to
keep
and
help
retain
people
and
train
people,
and
you
guys
that's
always
a
struggle
with
everybody
these
days.
So
I
just
hope
that
you
know
if
this
goes
through,
that
that
doesn't
become
a
impediment.
J
B
Chief
question
on
that
are:
are
we
looking
at?
Is
a
patrol
officer
or
are
we
looking
at?
You
know
upper
level
I
mean,
do
they
put
a
minimum
in
there
what
they
need
to
be
or
maximum?
They
can't
be.
You
know
corporal
or
you
know
some
along
those
lines
are
they
do
they
have
to
be
new
coming
in
patrolmen,
starting
to
go
from
there
or
there's.
J
Several
caveats
to
the
grant
and
steve
can
get
into
more
detail
if
you
wish,
but
there's
certain
programs
that
you
can
have
them
be.
We
plan
on
having
them
be
patrol
officers
in
the
car,
but
they
also
may
have
various
tasks
or
we
may
re-task
another
officer
or
a
corporal
or
a
sergeant
or
detective,
with
some
other
duties
to
kind
of
fulfill
and
backfill
that
need.
J
J
J
Certainly,
I
think
we
all
like
the
idea
of
getting
more
policemen,
and
especially
this
day
and
age.
But
where
are
we.
D
Okay,
in
terms
of
the
2021
budget,
it
looks
like
the
city's
responsibility
would
fall
between
about
the
80
800
to
100
6500.
So
I
would
say
the
responsibility
in
the
first
three
years:
it
isn't
super,
it's
not
large
by
any
means
it
does.
Take
some
planning
what's
difficult
about
this
in
terms
of
asking
well,
can
we
you
know,
can
we
make
it
work
within
the
budget
2021?
You
know
we
can
determine
that.
We
have
some
heads
up,
2022,
2023
and
2024.
D
We
know
we
have
to
make
it
work
within
the
budget.
So
the
one
question
I
guess
that
is
probably
a
little
bit
more
relevant
than
can
the
budget
sustain
it
is
you
know,
does
the
council
feel
that
the
police
department
is
in
need
of
those
three
positions
and
if
it
is,
then
I
would
say
that
those
become
the
priority.
I
the
mayor
and
I
are
still
currently
working
on
the
2021
budget
and
I
will
say
that
there
was
a
significant
amount
of
asks
for
personnel
within
the
general
fund
in
this
year.
D
So
the
nice
thing,
with
the
cops
grant
stepping
up
and
helping
is
it's
also
offset
some
of
those
costs
for
those
positions.
J
Lee
is
this
the
only
non-principal
do
we
have
to
hire
three,
or
can
we
do
one
or
two
or
do
we
have
to
do
all
three?
Well,
when
we
submitted
the
grant
we
submitted
4-3,
there
is
a
possibility
that
we
could
restructure
the
grant
to
contact
cops
people
go
through
the
process
of
redoing.
That
way,
I
suppose
we
would
have
come
back
for
council
again
to
get
authorization
for
some
of
that
stuff,
but
we
feel
three
is
a
real
need
and
we
feel
like
going
anything
less
than
that,
especially
with
the
cops
grant.
F
Leah,
if
we
approve
this
and
you
bring
on
three
new
positions
within
your
force-
that
that
then
pretty
well
covers
you
going
forward.
Then,
as
far
as
your
needs,
I
mean,
if
we
you
know,
if
we
look
at
that
fourth
year
fifth
year,
I
mean,
are
we
gonna
be
looking
at
more
asks
at
that
time
or
do
you
feel
like
you're
gonna
be
covered
for
quite
a
while
with
these
three
new
positions.
D
F
J
B
Councilman
lom
a
couple
just
quick
questions:
when
do
they
have
to
be
on
set
by,
I
mean:
when
do
they
have
to
be
hired.
J
There's
kind
of
a
couple
different
things
on
that
latim
we
set
the
grant
out
and
we
said
that
we'd
hire
these
after
january
1st,
when
we
received
the
grant.
It
says
that
we
can
actually
start
expending
funds
right
away
july
1st
of
this
year.
Our
intent
would
be
to
probably
wait
for
now,
but
we
possibly
might
entertain
sooner.
We'd
have
to
visit
with
kristin,
of
course,
and
mayor
and
matt,
and
maybe
even
council,
to
see
if
that's
an
authorization,
but
when
we
submitted
the
grant.
We
said
july
or
january,
1st
of
21.
J
F
B
Sorry,
I'm
going
to
keep
asking.
Evidently
you
guys
are
still
sitting
there
so
from
a
from
a
real
estate
aspect.
Do
you
have
places
to
put
these
folks
whoever
you
hire.
J
Well,
they're
patrol
officers,
so
they
would
be
sharing
cars.
We
have
enough
cars
to
share,
we
have
enough
equipment,
we
may
have
tires
or
purchase
uniforms
for
them.
We
do
have
an
equipment,
room
full
of
used
uniforms
and
some
of
them
are
good
and
okay
to
reuse
and
some
are
not
so.
The
only
additional
expenses
will
be
additional
uniforms,
possibly
a
patrol
belt.
We've
got
the
firearm
and
we
possibly
would
have
to
purchase
a
taser
or
two.
We
did
talk
about
re
signing,
maybe
some
from
command
staff,
because
tim
doesn't.
B
E
Well,
everything
I
want
to
say
somebody
asks
us
the
question
and
then
lee
answers
it.
So
that's
why
my
hand
goes
up
and
down
everything's
been
answered
so
far.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
F
Just
one
final
comment:
I
think,
in
light
of
everything
that
that
your
occupation
has
been
going
through
across
the
country
right
now,
I
think
this
is
definitely
a
vote
of
confidence
that
we're
expressing
to
the
community
and
and
how
highly
regarded
the
service
that
you
provide
for
us.
A
C
D
C
C
F
D
F
A
And
we
don't
really
have
a
motion
unless
you
want
to
make
once
I'll.
Let
matt
just
give
us
an
update.
C
Thanks
mayor
just
as
a
reminder,
this
is
the
resolution
that
was
passed
back
in
march
that
we've
had
on
every
meeting
of
the
city
council
since
then
just
a
quick
rundown
of
kind
of
what
it
does
for
the
public's
benefit.
It
declared
an
emergency
related
to
covet
19..
C
I'd
also
originally
had
provided
that
certain
buildings
would
be
closed
down
and
that's
since
been
struck
from
the
resolution
and
finally,
it
provided
for.
I
urge
the
public
to
comply
with
cdc
guidelines
related
to
the
covet
19
pandemic.
B
B
So
maybe
the
park
board
could
look
at
that
and
decide
whether
or
not
looking
to
you
bruce
as
we
have
nationals
coming
up
in
a
couple
weeks
and
I
believe
there's
a
coed
tournament,
whether
or
not
that
is
still
a
requirement
as
I
I
kid
you
not
everyone
just
sat
next
to
each
other
next
to
the
bleachers
so
and
just
something
that
I
think
we
should
look
at.
As
far
as
I
mean
the
people
are
already
there,
they're
gonna
they're
gonna
bunch
up
either
way
so
give
them
the
ability
to.
B
E
I
just
wanted
to
piggyback
off
of
adam's
comment.
I
saw
that
recently
is
that
they,
I
think
it
was
an
event
in
sioux,
falls
where
they
did
identify
areas
on
the
bleachers
and
they
asked
that
only
families.
E
You
know
in
these
spa
spots
spread
out,
and
I
think
that
is
really
something
to
look
at,
because
it
made
for
a
kind
of
a
neat
seating
arrangement,
and
people
were
a
little
bit
farther
away,
but
families
could
stay
together
and
if
there
was
a
big
family,
they
just
sat
in
two
spots,
so
that
would
spread
people
out
a
lot
and
we
could
give
them
a
little
bit
of
an
idea
of
what
would
be
good
physical,
distancing.
B
Yeah
to
beth's
point
I
actually
have
talked
to
a
few
parents
of
the
fast
pitch
people
and
they
said
the
same
thing.
They'll
actually
look
to
see
where
they're
allowed
to
sit.
So
if
we
could
identify
you
know
different
spots,
I
think
that
would
actually,
I
think,
we'd
actually
get
them
to
spread
out
a
little
bit
more.
So,
okay,
there's
just
a
few
weeks
left
of
that,
but
it
would
probably
help
out
people
getting
farther
away.
C
Thank
you
mayor,
just
I'll
respond
to
that.
I
I
think
what
we
were
doing
for
everyone's
information
is
just
dividing
by
the
asa
recommendations
for
how
the
how
we
do
this,
and
it's
certainly
something
we
can
take
under
advisement,
doesn't
seem
like
it
makes
a
lot
of
sense,
but
I
think
that
that's
the
reasoning,
that's
kind
of
why
we
did
what
we
did.
F
Discussion
that,
along
with
the
shade.
C
Structures
so,
as
bruce
you
know
mentioned,
we
can
sure
bring
it
back
to
the
board.
I
know
there's
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
items
that
we've
requested
are
required
that
you
know,
as
I'm
out
there
in
terms
of
set.
You
know.
Truth
truth
be
told
that
they're
not
followed.
You
know
we
do
our
best,
but
definitely
bruce
as
the
liaison
and
myself
can
bring
that
back
up.
But
but
we
did,
as
bruce
mentioned,
followed
usa
softball
guidelines
to
keep
the
bleachers
closed.
C
Right,
yeah
and
you're
completely
right
councilman
I
mean
it's:
we've
we've
opened
everything
else
up.
The
bleachers
are,
you
know,
probably,
should
follow
suit
and
I,
like
best
idea,
you
know
two
mark
off
family
only
distancing,
but
all
they're
doing
is
congregating
into
another
area,
so
we're
kind
of
defeating
the
purpose.
A
All
right,
so
we
I
don't
think
we
need
to
do
anything
unless
you
wanted
to
change.
The
resolution
is
that
correct,
matt.
C
A
So
look
for
emotion
to
that
effect
motion
with
a
lollum
and
a
second
by
holeen,
and
I
don't
know
if
chip
is
on
he's
not
on.
A
So
this
is
a
standard
request
and
that's
already
been
approved
by
the
fire
marshal.
Does
anybody
have
any
questions
about
it?
Councilman
bill
howard,
who.
C
C
A
Yeah
lou's
fireworks
will
be
shooting
the
fireworks
and
it's
a
1.4
which
is
not
the
largest
category
consumer
fireworks.
B
A
C
D
C
D
C
F
A
C
Thanks
mayor,
as
you
recall,
the
last
council
meeting,
the
council
approved
the
approved
a
contract
dda
human
resources
inc
to
assist
the
city
in
our
recruitment
and
hiring
of
our
first
city
manager.
To
begin
next
july,
there
was
some
discussion
and
then
ultimately,
the
council
asked
for
a
revised
schedule
to
be
brought
back
for
approval
because
the
to
to
basically
push
back
the
the
potential
for
the
hiring
date
to
be
too
early
so
anyway.
So
what
you
have
in
front
of
you
here
is
the
proposed.
C
The
revised
schedule
that
dda
proposed
as
you'll
see.
The
highlighted
dates
are
the
dates
that
the
council
will
need
to
be
available
to
work
with
dda
and
would
just
suggest
a
motion
to
approve
this
amended
revised
schedule
and
go
from
there.
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Any
discussion
or
questions
councilman.
B
Matt,
I
would
assume
that
dda
is
the
one
that
brought
forward
the
schedule
I
mean.
I
know
we
asked
for
it
simply
from
a
hiring
timeline
situation,
but
they're
the
ones
that
recommended
this
correct
because
they
originally
had
in
theirs
early
early
march.
I
believe
it
was
for
the
hiring
date
so.
A
C
D
C
C
Just
a
quick
update,
cherry
creek,
the
request
for
quotes
did
go
out
as
that
project
continues
to
move
forward.
Just
wanted
to
get
that
in
the
public
record.
Thank.
H
My
apologies-
I
do
have
one
quick
announcement,
so
I
wanted
to
make
if
I
could.
Okay,
just
due
to
staffing
fluctuation
and
staffing
recently,
we
are
late
in
getting
out
this
week's
planning,
commission
and
by
agenda.
We
anticipate
doing
that
by
tomorrow.
Of
course
statutorily
we
have
until
24
hours
prior
to
the
meeting,
but
I
just
wanted
to
give
the
council
a
heads
up
in
case
they're.
Looking
for
that
information,
I
haven't
noticed
being
posted
yet,
but
we
are
looking
at
getting
posted
by
tomorrow.
So
just
a
heads
up
there.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
so
we
will
have
an
executive
session
this
evening
in
order
to
discuss
and
consult
with
legal
counsel
on
some
economic
development
proposals,
and
I
think
possibly,
some
contract
matters.
So
I
need
a
motion
to
go
into.
Second,
a
motion
by
vilhauer
in
a
second
by
lallam,
any
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye,
aye
royal
caval,
police,
kristen,
albertson.