Loading...
RES 25-53City O' Elk River City of Elk River City Council Resolution 25-53 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Elk River Affirming Revocation of Solicitor Licenses WHEREAS, employees and representatives from Sunburn Construction, LLC d/b/a Everlight Solar ("Everlight") held solicitor licenses from the City of Elk River ("City") as follows: PS24-000032 Aetreus Kendall PS25-000012 Samuel Snitker PS25-000013 Evan Murphy PS25-000014 Jack Sweeney PS25-000015 Nathaniel Leistico PS25-000016 Wyatt Sander PS25-000017 Leif Sicora PS25-000018 Jake Baker PS25-000019 Wade Shepherd PS25-000020 Josue Her PS25-000021 Wolfgang Bellanger PS25-000022 Hudson McCoy PS25-000023 Derek Jon Brellenthin PS25-000024 Chandler Sanford PS25-000025 Brady Glause PS25-000026 Nathan Devereux PS25-000027 Ramaero Breitholtz PS25-000028 Kazmine Langness ("Licenses") WHEREAS, in July and August 2025, the City of Elk and Elk River Municipal Utilities ("ERMU") received complaints regarding Everlight employees and potential violations of City Code; WHEREAS, on August 7, 2025, pursuant to City Code § 38-35(e), the City Clerk summarily revoked the Licenses; WHEREAS, Everlight appealed the revocation of the Licenses to the City Council; WHEREAS, on September 15, 2025, the City Council held a hearing on the appeal; 2373230 WHEREAS, prior to the hearing, Everlight was provided the Request for Action, including all supporting documentation; WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed all materials provided by staff, including video, and considered any and all oral and written testimony offered by all interested parties. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council makes the following: FINDINGS 1. The above recitals are incorporated as if fully set forth herein. 2. On August 2, 2025, the Elk River Police Department received a complaint from a resident that an Everlight representative had come to his door to sell solar panels despite a "No Solicitor" sign on his home. 3. On August 2, 2025, the Elk River Police Department received a complaint from a resident that an Everlight representative had come to her door to sell solar panels and refused to leave after being asked several times. 4. On August 6, 2025, the City of Elk River received an e-mail complaint from a resident and ERMU employee regarding non -courteous behavior from an Everlight representative. 5. The City received another similar complaint on August 7, 2025, from a resident. 6. By August 7, 2025, an ERMU representative reported to the City that she had received 8 documented calls from customers and 2 complaints from ERMU employees about the aggressive sales tactics of Everlight representatives. 7. These aggressive tactics were also discussed by residents on social media. One of the licensed solicitors, Nate Leistico, engaged with the complaining residents, challenging their assertions and personal opinions about the aggressive tactics. 8. Among calls to ERMU were questions from residents about the affiliation between Everlight and ERMU. Everlight representatives were informing residents that they were partnering with ERMU. 9. The particular complaint of misrepresentation was supported by video evidence. At the hearing, City staff presented video from a doorbell camera of a resident interacting with an Everlight representative, Jack Sweeney. The Everlight representative appeared to be reading from a script on his phone at all times. The representative claimed to be with the "local net metering program" He said, "You've probably seen our utility trucks in the area. The program they've rolled out ... They is Elk River Municipalities" He also noted that "this is Elk River's program." The resident questioned his association with the City of Elk River based on his representations. 10. City CouncilmemberJennifer Wagner had a similar interaction with another Everlight representative wherein the representative was making a representation that he was there on behalf of ERMU. He was also aggressive and would not let her leave the conversation and go back into her house. 2373230 11. Everlight and ERMU are not partners in any programs. Everlight and the City are not partners in any programs. 12. Neither ERMU or the City endorse Everlight. Any representation made by Everlight to the contrary is false and misleading. Everlight representatives have made false and misleading statements suggesting an endorsement or association with ERMU and/or the City. 13. At the hearing, Everlight representatives claimed that the examples before the Council were one -offs of untrained or new employees. But Sara Youngs, ERMU Administrations Director, noted that such behavior had occurred before and Everlight was on notice of similar complaints within the last 3 years. 14 Furthermore, the inappropriate behavior of Everlight representatives in Elk River is not an outlier, but would appear to be company -wide practice. The Nebraska Attorney General has filed a lawsuit against Everlight for unlawful door-to-door tactics and misleading customers. 15. City Code § 414(c)(2) requires that solicitors: [C]onduct business in a reasonably courteous manner at all times, must not engage in offensive, obscene, or abusive language, must not push open a door not opened by an occupant, must not place any portion of a persons` body through an opened doorway without the invitation of an occupant, and must not physically attempt to stop an occupant from closing a door. 16. City Code § 414(c)(3) provides solicitors must "immediately leave private property when requested to do so by an occupant and must leave immediately upon completion of a transaction or an unsuccessful attempt to contact the occupant." 17. City Code § 414(c)(5) prohibits solicitors from making "untrue statements to the people contacted regarding the purpose of the contact, orders placed by the neighbors, or the goods or services offered." 18. City Code § 414(c)(6) prohibits solicitors from "indicating or implying city endorsement of their activities or products by the City" 19. City Code § 38-413(c)(3) provides that the City Council may consider "past fraud, misrepresentation, or misstatement in the course of carrying on business" in determining the need for revocation. 20. City Code § 38-413(c)(6) provides that the City Council may consider "providing false or misleading information" in determining the need for revocation. 21. Furthermore, City Code § 38-413(e) provides that: Failure of any person to comply with any of the ordinances of the city or the laws of the state, or any conditions/restrictions imposed on a license, shall be grounds for denying or revoking a license under this division. The city shall have the discretion to consider, in granting, denying, or revoking a license, any reasonable facts or circumstances relating to public health, safety, and welfare. 2373230 22. Based on the foregoing, and pursuant to the above City Code provisions, the City has sufficient grounds to uphold the revocation of the Licenses. DECISION NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ELK RIVER, MINNESOTA, based upon the information received and the above FINDINGS, that the City Council of the City of Elk River hereby affirms and upholds the revocation of the Licenses. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, Everlight and Everlight representatives may no longer engage in solicitation within the City of Elk River. Passed and adopted this 61h day of October 2025. 1 o n . i , Mayor ATTEST: Tina Allard, City Clerk 2373230