This transcript has been formatted with the appropriate speaker names based on the context provided and the audio cues within the text. [0:05] [Music] **[0:54] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Yeah, we're missing Mr. Essler tonight. I'd like to call the regular City Council meeting for Tuesday, June 18th, 2024, to order. Please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you and welcome everyone. First up, approval of the agenda. Is there any additions or corrections to the agenda? **[1:41] Logan Martin:** No, sir. **[1:42] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Seeing none, I'll move the agenda. Is there a second? **[1:44] Paul Theisen:** Second. **[1:45] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All in favor signify by saying aye. **[1:46] City Council (All):** Aye. **[1:47] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Opposed? We have an agenda. First item: presentations, proclamations, and acknowledgements. DARTS 50th Anniversary Proclamation. Looking at Mr. Martin. **[1:55] Logan Martin:** Thank you, members of the Council. Yes, our partners at DARTS reached out; they're celebrating their 50th anniversary and we're really excited. We have President Ann Bailey here tonight and it would be wonderful if Ann wants to pop up and give us a bit of an update on their 50 years and what they're doing to celebrate and remind us of the really critically important role that DARTS plays for so many members of our community. So with that, I would turn it to Ann. Thank you very much. **[2:27] Ann Bailey:** Welcome Mayor, City Council. Thank you for allowing us this time and pausing for a moment to celebrate 50 years. We have been traveling around the county; as you know, DARTS serves the southeast metro, so primarily Dakota County, Southern Washington County, and Rosemount was one of the early areas that we hit when we began to expand. So we started with transportation, getting people to classes, Community Ed classes, and it grew from there. So 50 years later, we have a lot of services supporting our older residents. We do a lot of lawn and yard work and shoveling here in Rosemount, as well as supporting those caring for an older adult, which is always a good reminder that we all have older people in our lives—that if we need a little coaching or support as we're on that journey helping that person, DARTS is here to help that. I also would say that DARTS does not survive 50 years... we started because of community and we survived because of community. So many thanks to the city staff for all that you do for the support that you all give us, keeping the word out, referring residents to us, making sure people know that there's a safe place to go if they need a little information. This is how we survive. Obviously, we're a nonprofit, so we also survive with donations, and there is an opportunity right here in beautiful downtown Rosemount on July 22nd—so the Monday of Leprechaun Days. Take a break between the band, go over to the Omni Brewery and Winery, and everything that you purchase at the Omni that night is DARTS Night (or that day is DARTS Day). So a dollar from anything that you purchase goes to benefit DARTS. So fun night, we’ll be there later in the afternoon doing some sort of drawings, raffles... so a fun night to celebrate us in the community and we're glad to do that in Rosemount. So thank you very much for having us. **[4:14] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Excellent, thanks. All right, with that then we'll move the Proclamation and we're going to do our round-robin of this, so I will start here. Whereas, the City of Rosemount is committed to providing residents access to a high quality of living as they age in their communities; and whereas nearly one in three Minnesotans are above the age of 55... **[4:49] Heidi Freske:** And whereas, since 1974, DARTS has served older adults, their families, and caregivers with the mission of creating connections that enrich aging and empowering independence; and whereas in 2024, DARTS is celebrating its 50th anniversary of providing services for older adults across the southeast metro, including Rosemount. These services include housework, outdoor chores, home repairs, caregiving resources, resource connections, fulfilling volunteer opportunities, and transportation... **[5:15] Paul Theisen:** And whereas, the first DARTS bus rides were provided in 1974, transporting older residents to our area Community Education classes; and whereas, DARTS's ongoing commitment to collaboration, excellence, inclusion, responsibility, and service in its communities has helped ensure a 99% client satisfaction rate... **[5:36] Tami Klimpel:** And whereas, volunteer dedication has allowed DARTS Learning Buddies and Pen Pal programs to reach more than 80,000 students, connecting older adult volunteers with local classrooms for intergenerational learning experiences; and whereas, DARTS is able to fulfill its mission thanks to generous ongoing community support and from area Champion Partners at Flint Hills Resources, Southview Senior Communities, and SKB... **[6:00] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** And whereas, the City of Rosemount celebrates the 50th anniversary of DARTS and all of the services it has long provided to our aging residents. Now, therefore, I, Jeffrey D. Weisensel, Mayor of the City of Rosemount, do hereby proclaim Tuesday, June 18th, 2024, as DARTS Appreciation Day in the City of Rosemount. Dated the 18th of June, 2024. Thank you. **[6:45] [Applause]** **[7:08] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** That completes our first presentation. Turn it over to our Administrative Services Director. **[7:10] Teah Malecha:** Good evening Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. So each year the city's financial statements are audited by an independent accounting firm, and the goal is to provide reasonable assurance that the city's financial statements are free of material misstatement. It's been a big, busy year, especially with the two projects we have with the Public Works/Police campus and with Life Time, and we are fortunate to have good auditors and good staff that have helped us with another successful year. Our records have been audited by MMKR this year. Aaron Nielsen from MMKR, Principal there, is here to provide more information on the successful audit, and then a copy of the financial records are available for the public's view, either in our office here or they will be published on our website. With that, I'll turn it over to Aaron. **[7:55] Aaron Nielsen:** Welcome, thank you very much. I appreciate the opportunity to be here tonight. Mayor, council members, and members of the public. My name is Aaron Nielsen, I'm a partner with MMKR. We have three reports before you this evening: the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, for which you received the Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reporting for several years from the GFOA (Government Finance Officers Association); you have our special purpose reports, the reports we issued with relation to the audit; and then as well as our management report which we use to summarize the results of our audits. So I do have a PowerPoint for us to walk through—really no surprises in there for you. It's simply some information I pulled from the management report to keep us all on the same page. So I'll get right to it with our role as independent auditors to provide that opinion on the financial statements, whether they're fairly stated as of December 31st, 2023, and for the year then ended. So we've issued an unmodified or what is known as a clean opinion that they're fairly stated for this past year. We did have a new audit standard we implemented with GASB 96 for subscription-based information technology arrangements; you may see some changes with additional assets reported there and related liabilities. With regard to the internal control and compliance over the financial audit process under government auditing standards, you can see within our special purpose report we're pleased to report we had no material weaknesses or instances of non-compliance to report with regard to that testing. So exactly what you're looking for. And then with regard to the Minnesota legal compliance manual, which is from the office of the State Auditor, there's seven broad categories with many individual tests within there that we complete and inquire and ask various individuals throughout the office, and we're pleased to report we had no findings with regard to any of those procedures we completed this past year. The rest of my slides I'll move through pretty quickly. It's simply some information showing comparisons to prior year, a little more historical information in some cases. As you can see here, we talk about the governmental funds with this slide—so we're not including the utility funds or business-type activities of the city at this point. As you can see looking at those governmental funds, as mentioned by Teah, you do have a lot going on within the city this past year. I think you issued more than $70 million in bonds were issued, so you can see the large increase in the governmental funds and really that's representing the dollars that hadn't been utilized at that point. And you can see the increase in those restricted dollars from the bond proceeds, largely in the Capital Project fund; you can see some in the Debt Service fund that are restricted. With regard to that, when we move to the next slide, we do have a couple to focus on the general fund—the primary operating fund for the city. As you can see what I noted here is really you've had a stable operation for many years guided with fund balance policy, and as you can see you've generally been able to increase the cash and fund balance levels with the size of the organization. Measured using our bar for revenues there, then I have just a couple slides for revenue and expenses. One for revenues here where we show a little history of your revenue sources. You can see that concentration of property taxes making up the funding for the general fund operation, how you finance the operations of the general fund, intergovernmental, and then all the other captured there. A couple of things that stood out for me: if you look at intergovernmental revenue, kind of a spike last year and then coming back down—that was largely due to the COVID funding we recognized or the city recognized last year that we audited. With regard to the "all other" category, you see a significant increase there, and what's happening with that change from the prior year: you may recall there was an impact on the investment earnings in 2022 where it was driving your investment earnings down; that had rebounded slightly, and so we're seeing a rebound in the investment earnings this year. Increase in that as well as continued contributions and growth within the city with charges for services and other types of work that are done with the growth within the organization here. When we look on the expenditure side, you can see we have a similar table here with five years of history. With the general fund, public safety is the primary spending function for the city, common with the cities we work with. This past year the expenditures total about $17.5 million; that represents an increase over the prior year. Expenses did come in over what was anticipated in the budget, but well within the amount where revenues were over budget as well, so covered by the favorable variance within revenues. The table I have before you now is looking at the Enterprise Funds (what's known as Enterprise Funds in governmental accounting standards). I think more in my cities they are commonly referred to as utility operations for your water, sewer, storm water, street light, and arena funds. When we look at it on an entity-wide basis they're considered business-type activities. So I share that because we'll see in a later slide it's very similar. On the top half you can see the net investment in capital assets and the unrestricted components of the equity or net position of the utility operations/Enterprise funds, and then the breakdown by each individual fund. So you can see you had increases in each one of your utility operations with just that slight exception of the arena fund, which was basically a break-even compared to the prior year. The other thing I like to point out with your Enterprise funds—the utility operations—you can see there's a heavy concentration in infrastructure with regard to that. So you see the large component of the net position in investment and capital assets. So you can see that change from this past year, that increase of $11 million; that's due in part to the investments you've made as a city in your own utilities within the street projects as well as what was contributed with development projects throughout the city. Then I'll just click through the slides here; they really don't share a lot just because of the size of the operation, but you can see the change in the water fund this past year. We saw an increase with regard to the revenues and then you can see the increase in total position or cash balance and operating revenue this past year. The sewer utility also looking like a stable operation, an increase in cash at year-end; you're managing that with your utility rate studies and how you operate from year to year with regard to that. We have a similar slide for the storm water fund; you can see that stable operating revenue from year to year, continued increase in that cash balance and then the related equity. A similar story with the street lighting fund; it looks a little more dramatic but really due to the scale of the graph of the change from the prior year. And then the similar with the arena fund—a slight uptick in the operating revenues and increase in the cash and then the equity balance there. And I believe my last slide here is on the entity-wide statement of net position. To this point, I'll kind of skip right to the business-type activities. So I mentioned that earlier with regard to the utility funds. So if you look at the lower half here, that increase of 17 million: the 11 million for net investment in capital assets and 6.2 or 6.3 million for unrestricted. That matches exactly what we talked about with the utility operations on the earlier slide. And the reason for that is because they're under the same method of accounting—a full accrual accounting where it includes capital assets and long-term obligations. So when we started, we talked about the governmental funds where it's a different focus; it's the focus on what resources are available for your programming or available for you to invest into the city. We talked about the big increase in equity with regard to the bonds that were issued this past year. You're not seeing that big jump at the government-wide because we incorporate the related liabilities to it. So when you look at an entity-wide basis, it's simply an increase of assets and an increase of liabilities, which is different than when we talked about it on the governmental funds. So overall, what I like to say is like the governmental activities at the entity-wide is a long-term perspective compared to the governmental funds which is a short-term perspective. And you can see here on the entity-wide basis you're seeing an increase even at that long-term perspective as well. The continued investment by the city into the infrastructure—in this case, the actual streets. The restricted increase largely with debt service dollars that are restricted for the new debt that came on board this past year. And then a decrease in that unrestricted, but that was really using some of the assigned dollars that you had in capital project funds for street projects. So with that, I know I went through quite a bit of information pretty quickly. The comprehensive financial report is a very long document with a lot of information, but if there's any questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them. **[17:58] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** We open up the floor to Council. Any questions or comments from council members here? Boy, that's amazing... no questions? We're missing a council member. Did want to ask just kind of a general thought: so a community our size, about 27,000, growing community—what you're seeing here from other cities... are we seeing similar type things in the numbers that we have? Are we maybe better or worse, depending on how you look at that and what those actually mean in the financial analysis? **[18:44] Aaron Nielsen:** I'm sure my answer won't surprise you, but many common themes that I see with my other cities that we present. I don't want you to go and look at it online at my other presentations because it's very unique with everyone, but I say that jokingly. Investment earnings everywhere, you know, has been a big change this past year. What isn't common from each city I work with is obviously you've been a very active growing community here, and so that's not always the case in some of my inner-ring suburban cities. So they don't have maybe the increase in charges for services year-over-year with permits and that kind of activity that you're having at this time. So again, couple of big projects going on that are one time that were different this year and you know will wrap up, but kind of a period here of increased construction with a couple of very large projects you have ongoing. **[19:40] Paul Theisen:** Yeah, I guess there is something I wanted to say. One of the things that kind of stands out is that with all these big projects that we do have going on, we continue to get this certificate of achievement and excellence in financial reporting, which is—I think they said—the 27th year the city has gotten this prestigious award. So even with all the growth and the things that we're doing here, it seems like we're... I give credit to the staff and then you as the auditor for making sure that we're accountable to this, that they're doing a great job, right? They're doing our fiduciary responsibility and not only that, getting awarded for it or getting recognized for it, right? **[20:17] Aaron Nielsen:** I probably don't do a good enough job explaining... you know, this every... it seems like it comes together very quickly and my presentation goes pretty quick, but I think your staff could attest it's a long process from when we begin, you know, shortly after the end of the calendar year, and here we are in June already, mid-June, presenting. So it's a long process. And I was actually talking to your Finance Director just prior to presenting that we need to talk about, okay, how can we gain efficiencies in the future? And now where are those projects at? Because it's different phases—you're closing out the projects versus gearing them up. **[20:53] Paul Theisen:** Sure. No, I appreciate all their efforts as well. I guess I just wanted to recognize just all the hard work that staff and Administration does to make sure that not only are we taking on these big projects but also really following through on the reporting and following the rules. So thank you. **[21:13] Aaron Nielsen:** Thank you. **[21:14] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** So with that, I'm going to move the motion. I'm going to change it slightly. I'm going to move to accept the 2023 Financial Reports and record a note of appreciation to the finance department for their continued excellence in our financial and budgeting. **[21:30] Paul Theisen:** Second. **[21:31] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** We got a motion by Weisensel, second by Theisen. Roll please, Clerk. **[21:35] Sarah Saunders:** Weisensel. **[21:36] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Aye. **[21:37] Sarah Saunders:** Theisen. **[21:38] Paul Theisen:** Aye. **[21:39] Sarah Saunders:** Freske. **[21:40] Heidi Freske:** Aye. **[21:41] Sarah Saunders:** Klimpel. **[21:42] Tami Klimpel:** Aye. **[21:43] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** That passes 4-0 and completes item 3B. We will move on now to item 4, responses to previous public comments. I understand we do not have any this evening, so we'll move on to public comments. Anyone wishing to come before Council and have a comment or statement or an issue may do so. Please state your name, address, and your comment. **[22:19] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Seeing no one moving to the podium, we'll consider the public comment closed for this evening and move on to the consent agenda. Agenda having a little problem, little technical issue here, just a minute... that's dead. All right. So this evening consent agenda includes Bill listings, minutes of the June 4th regular and work session, the performance measure program, Fire Relief Fund benefit proposal, the use of cannabis in public places, the City Council compensation, Metronet reimbursement agreement, the approval of utility access charge assessment agreement, Criminal Justice Network JPA Amendment, request by Maplewood Development related to Amber Fields 18th edition, request by Enclave Companies for approval of rezoning of the subject property (this will be related to Amber Fields' 6th edition), receiving proposals and authorizing work for the Connemara Trail and Akron Avenue roundabout, and the Dakota County National Opioid settlement Joint Powers Agreement that we received. Would any council members wish to pull anything for further discussion or comment? **[24:14] Paul Theisen:** Nothing here. **[24:15] Heidi Freske:** Nothing here. **[24:16] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** The only item I will pull is 6M, just to highlight future work that'll be going on there. So with that, anyone wish to move the consent agenda items A through N with M pulled for further discussion? **[24:28] Paul Theisen:** So moved. **[24:29] Heidi Freske:** I'll second. **[24:30] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion by Theisen, second by Freske. Roll please. **[24:33] Sarah Saunders:** Weisensel (Aye), Theisen (Aye), Freske (Aye), Klimpel (Aye). **[24:37] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** And that completes consent agenda items for that motion 4-0. We'll pull up 6M for further discussion. I will turn that over to Director Egger. And really it was the point of—we are doing something at this intersection now, recognizing the growth and everything that's going on there. Correct? **[24:55] Nick Egger:** Thanks Mayor, and good evening council members. This item is to begin the process of making plans for and designing a roundabout intersection at Connemara Trail and Akron Avenue. This has been something that I know is very high priority on the Council's list of addressing traffic concerns around the city. And clearly from all of the activity that's been happening in that area over the last year and a half, two years with construction and the continuance of that, it'll only be presenting additional traffic flowing in and through there. And so what we... this is kind of the second stage of exploring solutions there, where last year we did a traffic study that kind of told us a roundabout is appropriate for resolving traffic-related issues there. But now we have to move into the detail work: designing it, getting things ready to create the necessary right-of-way spaces for it if we need to do that, and of course delivering a construction project. And the intention is for that to occur in 2026. I don't want to say that we could do it any sooner than that, but we'll explore the possibility as we go through the process of whether it could be built sooner. I think there that's a pretty outside chance, so '26 is really in the crosshairs for us in collaboration with the County to deliver that project. And so we solicited proposals from five engineering firms and all of them are very good, but the one that rose to the top just by a little bit was that of Kimley-Horn. So that is who we're recommending we proceed with to begin the process. **[26:56] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All right, thank you very much. And with that, would anyone like to move the motion 6M forward? **[27:01] Tami Klimpel:** I'll move item 6M to authorize a contract with Kimley-Horn to perform professional services for the design, project management, and construction observation and contract administration for the upcoming Connemara Trail and Akron Avenue roundabout project. **[27:16] Paul Theisen:** Is there a second? Second. **[27:18] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** And a motion by Klimpel, second by Theisen. Roll please. **[27:21] Sarah Saunders:** Theisen (Aye), Freske (Aye), Klimpel (Aye), Weisensel (Aye). **[27:26] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** And that completes 6M, approved 4-0. That completes all of the consent agenda items. We move on to public hearings: SKB IUP Extension. Mr. Kienberger. **[27:45] Adam Kienberger:** Thank you Mayor, members of the Council. Give me one second to pull this up here. Great. All right, before you this evening, we have a public hearing to be held for SKB's interim use permit, which is the IUP extension which was originally approved in 2018. And the request is to extend it through December 31st of this year, 2024. So just to orient everybody a little bit to the site, the operations of SKB here on our eastern side of town. Again, you can see Highway 55 and then the subject parcels outlined in red. And I'll run through a little bit of the timeline related to their request this evening. So back in October of 2018, their current interim use permit was approved, which has a shelf life of five years. And then in June of 2022, the IUP renewal with their expansion was approved with some conditions tied to that. Typically those conditions are related to other agencies' permitting approvals, that type of thing, and that will kind of get into the reason for the request this evening. And then in early 2023, the MPCA (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency) indicated delays in the review process. They've had a lot of staff turnover (a number of state agencies have) but they attributed the delay in approving their permit to that, bringing us to October of 2023 where the City Council took an action to extend that IUP through June of 2024. Here we are today. MPCA still hasn't been able to get through and issue that permit, so the request this evening is that that timeline be extended an additional 6 months to allow them to get that wrapped up. Couple of progress notes on the presentation in front of you and included in the memo from our Senior Planner: it's currently being reviewed, they have a draft permit from the Pollution Control Agency, there's some other technical issues that are currently under review and in process. They have been actively working on it, so I want to make sure that that's heard as a part of the public hearing this evening; it's not something that was forgotten about or delayed. It's due to... you know, it's outside of their control. Dakota County permit issuance is estimated to be another 45 days following the issuance by the MPCA. So tying it all into the request for the extension, SKB is requesting an extension of their current IUP that expires this month to allow operations to continue until the new IUP goes into effect. The conditions contained within their original one in '18 remain in effect, and the new IUP with their expansion will not take effect until all conditions of that approval are met—namely the issuance of the MPCA permit and then approval by Dakota County, the two permitting agencies tied to their operations. And with that, I can certainly stand for any questions. The applicant is here this evening. And to remind the Mayor and council members that it is a public hearing. **[30:52] Paul Theisen:** Just to make sure I understand this: so the new IUP would be another 5-year extension? Correct? Or that's... **[31:01] Adam Kienberger:** I believe that's the case. I don't have that one in front of me, but... **[31:05] Paul Theisen:** Okay, perfect. I don't have that one in front of me either. And once again, nothing's changed out there? It seems like it's more of a logistical situation from this agency getting the permit rather than... **[31:16] Adam Kienberger:** Correct. Nothing is changing on their site that's causing this action to happen. It's a delay in their... no suspension, none of that is going on. This is just literally to get this done because... in fact, wasn't there somebody that left the agency that that's why this started or something? **[31:32] Adam Kienberger:** Yeah, I don't want to speculate on exactly, but they attribute it to staff turnover causing delay on the issuance of their permits. **[31:37] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Okay, great. If there's no other questions, we will open up the floor for comments in the public hearing. Again, anyone wishing to speak on this matter may do so by coming forward to the podium, state your name and address, and your comments. The floor is open. **[32:20] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Seeing no one making their way to the podium. Going once, twice... I'll move to close the public hearing. All in favor signify by saying aye. **[32:28] City Council (All):** Aye. **[32:29] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Opposed? Our public hearing is closed. Any other questions? Back to Council for staff. **[32:36] Paul Theisen:** I'll make a motion to adopt a resolution approving an extension to the 2018 interim use permit for SKB Environmental until December 31st, 2024. **[32:45] Heidi Freske:** Second. **[32:46] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion by Theisen, second by Freske. Roll please. **[32:48] Sarah Saunders:** Freske (Aye), Klimpel (Aye), Weisensel (Aye), Theisen (Aye). **[32:51] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** And it passes with a 4-0 vote and that completes public hearing SKB action on the IUP extension. Next item up is new business 9A: receiving bids, award contract, declaring cost to be assessed and set the assessment hearing for the Aspen Avenue Extension project. City Project 2024-02. Mr. Egger. **[33:14] Nick Egger:** Thanks Mayor. I have two resolutions for the Council's consideration tonight pertaining to the Aspen Avenue project. So the first one is to receive bids and award a contract and I'll talk about that here. The city solicited bids for this project a couple months back in the month of April and we got 12 bids back on April 30th. So there was quite an extensive amount of competition for this and all of the results were below our construction cost estimate, which was very promising. The lowest bid from the group was that of Northern Lines Contracting, who we do have three active contracts with right now going back to 2023, that being the Akron Avenue Extension, the 2023 neighborhood improvement projects, and the Dog and Pickleball Park. There have been some concerns along the way that staff has noted that ordinarily gives us pause with respect to considering capabilities of a contractor. And so we went into this process with a bit of hesitation knowing that. However, because there are some disputes about perception between the city staff and the contractor staff that haven't been resolved yet, in consultation with the City Attorney, we've concluded that the safest course of action is to stand by proceeding with just a low bid contract award versus some other form of action. So that's why we're bringing this to you tonight, recommending the award of the contract to Northern Lines. The amount that would be for this contract is $579,974.70. So I'll stop there and can stand for questions. **[35:10] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Council floor is open for Council. **[35:12] Paul Theisen:** So just a question: when this was put out for bid, was it published as a low bid project or how was that advertisement pushed out? **[35:22] Nick Egger:** That's correct. It was the standard type of procedure: lowest responsible bidder. Yep. **[35:26] Paul Theisen:** So if I heard you correctly, you're asking us to award this bid to Northern Lines again because they came in as the low... which is great because they came in as the low bid, that helps keep prices down for our residents. But yet we have two other projects right now with them as well? **[35:46] Nick Egger:** Three projects that are still active. This would be the third... or this would be the fourth. **[35:50] Paul Theisen:** So it would be the fourth, correct. Okay. And the first one being the Simons neighborhood project? **[35:58] Nick Egger:** Yep. **[35:59] Paul Theisen:** Yeah. And how's that going? **[36:01] Nick Egger:** We're still in the final stages of seeing that one completed physically this spring. There's a few major tasks left to do, namely the final paving of that along with some restoration and completion of a trail segment. **[36:15] Paul Theisen:** Yeah, the reason why I asked is because as being on City Council now for two years, that's one of the things I hear is that that particular project seems to be kind of something that we get a lot of questions about, right? It's not done... you know, kind of a timely factor. So that one's one. And then what's going on with the Pickleball/Dog Park? How's that going? **[36:44] Nick Egger:** Well, I may not be the best staff member to ask about details of that. Director Schultz is here and could speak to that a little bit. My understanding is... well, I'll just allow Dan to come up since he's halfway there already, because we're working with two different departments here. **[37:05] Dan Schultz:** So Mayor and council members, it's just one of those projects where I cannot say that it's been flawless. We've had some issues with communication, we've had some issues with follow-up on erosion control—things like that where, you know, there's been a month period where we haven't gotten any action out of the contractor. You know, I think they're turning the corner on some of those things, but you know, these things have happened in the past and so they're still front of memory when we think about the project. But you know, it's all been documented; we have the emails asking... you know, I've laid it all out, shared that with Mr. Egger and the City Administrator to understand the kind of the struggles we've had. The project is not complete and probably will not be complete until later this summer. Not pointing fingers at anybody as to why it's not going to be done—you know, there have been some weather issues and some different things that we've had challenges with, but there's also been some challenges along the way with the contractor. **[38:13] Paul Theisen:** Is it my understanding then that the project's not going to be done the way we thought? Or as far as the timeline, is it getting pushed back or is it still in time? **[38:18] Dan Schultz:** That's a challenging question to answer because one of the things that started right off the bat was last fall when we tried to kick off the project, there was a slight delay in us getting the property from the developer, and so that slowed down them getting going on it. And then there were some other things that happened that just slowed down the process of getting started. At the same time, we had the Akron Street project that we had to kind of work together on back and forth, you know, to access the property they had to kind of look at going through that site and they were in the middle of working. So it'll get done close to what we're looking for, but I know there is the potential of them asking for an extension and we have not yet responded to that ask yet. Not that I don't think they need it; I think they're just trying to be careful if they do ask for that extension. **[39:13] Heidi Freske:** Go ahead, sorry. Is there an opportunity to incorporate a service level agreement with awarding them the business? **[39:24] Nick Egger:** I don't know the answer to that question. I'm not sure... we have City Attorney here and she may have some commentary on that. I'll just say it may be a little more tricky being we didn't enter into the bid process stating that such a thing would be required. This would be more of an after-the-fact condition imposed. That's just my gut read. **[39:50] City Attorney:** Mayor and council member, I agree. I think that if that had been a requirement as part of the bidding process, then perhaps I think it would be something we could do. But I think, you know, the bidding laws are very strict and there's a process that needs to be followed. And so all of the same requirements have to be put out to all of the bidders ahead of the award of the contract. And so I do think that that might be a problematic suggestion. **[40:24] Paul Theisen:** So the reason why I bring this up—and thank you, Dan, for coming up—is this: that we have over $8 million for these projects kind of invested with them. And as much as we love the low bid part, that you know they're coming in as the consistent low bidder, we also have constituents that are looking for that pickleball court, right? They're looking... they're excited about it, which is awesome. They're excited about having Simons kind of complete. I guess that's just one of a little bit of a frustration I feel in awarding this contract. I guess I continue to move forward following the process of what we asked for, but I'm just a little reluctant because of the fact that it feels like they're not being good partners right now. So hopefully that gets better in the future. **[41:19] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** We do have one question regarding the specific recommended action. It's very stated: "awarding". There is in the recommendation report... that recommendation was "with great reluctance". Is there any legal standing of using words like that in the motion? Or... I know there's reservation across the board here. Is there anything that if we see something down the road that we can at least point to and say, "Yeah, we awarded this but we kind of had to based on the low bid awards and we're just really concerned about this particular contractor performing"? **[42:07] City Attorney:** Mayor, I certainly think if there's consensus with the Council that there's some reservation about this, I think there's no legal prohibition; you can insert that into the motion if you wish to do that. I will say that with the bidding laws, standard is the "lowest responsible bidder". And so the issue became: is this a responsible bidder? And through much consultation and review of the issues, we determined that... you know, I didn't feel that we were quite at the level where it would be prudent for the Council to not award the contract to them. Having said that, though, I think that there is a fair amount of evidence and documentation that there are pending issues that the contractor is, though, disputing. And so to be fair, a number of those issues have been disputed by the contractor, and so that played into the legal analysis in terms of moving forward with this. But certainly, you know, if this goes forward, staff will be paying close attention to their performance, and in any future contracts certainly that's something that we think could potentially be taken into account for future awards. **[43:24] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** I guess the second point I was going to raise—and I think we've talked about this in work sessions too—maybe tightening up or broadening, I guess however you want to look at that, our RFPs that go out so that maybe we can be a little more selective, I guess, when it's what we deem is responsible and past performance could be taken into consideration or something like that... whatever legally is allowed type thing. **[44:03] Nick Egger:** Yeah, I apologize, I failed to mention that when I was speaking earlier. I think going forward into 2025 we can start to wrap in a contractor qualification element or "best value" element. We've got to formulate what that looks like and how it gets activated within these programs. It may not be fitting for each and every project that we do, or we have thresholds for instance of: how much does a contract have to be worth before we implement it? Because it does come with more rigor and more review efforts and so forth. So there is a time component of that that can impact, you know, project delivery and getting things online. But certainly needs to be kept in the mix and certainly want to make sure that it's not pointed necessarily at a specific contracting entity. This is, I think, is important for our residents to feel that they're getting the best service of the activities that are going on that we're contracting for. So to provide that in that spirit or that light would be certainly important. **[45:26] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All right. So, did you want to go on? Or wishes to take specific action on this one at the moment? **[45:34] Logan Martin:** I think maybe it's a good moment, if the Council wishes to consider the first resolution for the award of the contract, and then we can move to the next piece. **[45:44] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** We'll take action on the first recommendation. I would offer a motion to receive the bids and awarding the contract with reservation. **[45:53] Paul Theisen:** Second. **[45:54] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** I have a motion and a second. Roll please. **[45:55] Sarah Saunders:** Klimpel (Aye), Weisensel (Aye), Theisen (Aye), Freske (Aye). **[45:57] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** And then back to Mr. Egger for the second recommended action. **[46:00] Nick Egger:** Thank you. This one's far more simple and straightforward now having awarded the contract and having that contract amount set. The next part of the process here is to declare the cost that will be assessed to adjacent properties. Again, this is a brand new road project that has special benefit to the adjacent parcels, and we've gone through a feasibility study to lay out the amounts for each parcel that is impacted and benefiting from the project. The number I will note here also accounts for the overhead costs of design and project management and all of those things that are not construction activity related per se. So the amount that would be declared to be assessed is... 761,000. $761,216.82. And with that, we would then be asking you to set the assessment hearing for the assessments, which we would propose to be July 16th. So about a month out from now. And that comes with certain posting requirements and publication requirements in advance of that. **[47:23] Paul Theisen:** Could you repeat the... I don't think I see the amount that we're going to be assessing. **[47:26] Nick Egger:** The amount to be assessed would be $761,216.82. **[47:33] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All right. Any questions or comments from the Council? Anyone wish to move that motion forward? **[47:38] Heidi Freske:** I'll move a motion to declare cost to be assessed and setting the assessment hearing. **[47:43] Tami Klimpel:** Second. **[47:44] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** I have a motion by Freske, second by Klimpel. Roll please. **[47:47] Sarah Saunders:** Klimpel (Aye), Theisen (Aye), Freske (Aye), Weisensel (Aye). **[47:50] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** And both those motions for item 9A pass 4-0. Moving on to 9B: receiving bids and award for the Rosemount Greenway. Mr. Schultz. **[48:19] Dan Schultz:** Thank you Mr. Mayor and council members. This evening before you there is a request to receive bids and award a contract for the Rosemount Greenway Flint Hills segment. You may recall that recently we entered into a Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County to pay for the construction of these trails that we're proposing out at the Flint Hills Athletic Complex. These trails serve a couple different purposes: they serve some internal use from the park users, then they also are part of a larger Greenway that runs through this area and will run from Lebanon Hills down to Vermilion Highlands. And so we had this out to bid and we... in your packet there is a listing of all the bidders and a letter of recommendation. We had nine bidders on this project and the actual estimated construction cost was... the low bid was submitted by Swan Companies in the amount of $365,573.91. **[49:40] Paul Theisen:** So, Dan, the total cost for this whole thing is what? Like five? **[49:44] Dan Schultz:** The cost for the design was about 35,000 and then we'll do another roughly 30,000 for delivery of the project. And so the County is paying for the 365,000 that we're approving tonight. **[50:00] Paul Theisen:** We're being asked to approve tonight, yes. Yep, that's the County. We pay it up front and then we do a reimbursement. Right? **[50:11] Dan Schultz:** They cut us a check and we give the money back. **[50:13] Paul Theisen:** Thank you. Yep. I was just going to say I think this is great. It's great that this is extending all the way through and I'm excited about this. So this is great. **[50:23] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Questions, comments? **[50:25] Heidi Freske:** I concur with the excitement. **[50:27] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Yeah, Greenway... you didn't seem quite as excited but all right. Anyone wish to move the motion? **[50:35] Paul Theisen:** Yeah, I'll move a motion to approve accepting the bid and awarding the contract to the low bidder, Swan Companies, in the amount of $365,573.91 for the Rosemount Greenway Flint Hill segment. **[50:50] Tami Klimpel:** I'll second. **[50:51] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion by Theisen, second by Klimpel. Roll please. **[50:54] Sarah Saunders:** Theisen (Aye), Freske (Aye), Klimpel (Aye), Weisensel (Aye). **[50:58] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** That completes 9B with 4-0 approval. And moving on to 9C: Life Time facility change order number seven. Mr. Schultz. **[51:10] Dan Schultz:** Thank you Mr. Mayor and council members. Back in May of 2023, the city began awarding contracts for the construction of the Life Time facility that the city will own and we will lease to the Life Time company to run the club there in Rosemount. And throughout this period we've had to make some changes. Some of them were requested by our partner in the project, Life Time; some of them have been requested by contractors for changes that have to happen during the project. But tonight we have some changes that are being requested that will actually add and benefit the users of the facility and they will be a benefit to the customer or the club members. What they're asking for is to actually add additional mirrors to the workout rooms and then also add LED lighting behind these. The goal here is to really enhance the quality of the experience; they want to make that experience as high level as they can. And so the contingency fund that would pay for what you see in change order number seven would bring our contingency to $490,679—that would remain in that account after tonight should this be approved. There are some additional changes that might be coming in the future, but that amount I think will cover a majority of them. And if not, we have a backup plan to get other things done if we need to. I will just mention that Heather Oaken is here in the audience. Heather is the project manager for Life Time. She does a great job wrangling in all of these contractors who are on site—the electric, the plumbers, the sheetrockers, the roofers... you know, they're all coming independently and working with us as we publicly bid this project, and I just want to call out what a great job she does to keep us all on track and keep things moving forward. So with that, I will stand for questions and answer as you wish. **[53:23] Heidi Freske:** I just have just one question. If my math is mathing correctly, then this amount of the change order is roughly 24% of the contingency fund before we approve it, right? And then we end up with the 490 later. So how confident are we feeling in the remainder of future change orders so that you know this significant chunk, 24%... like, we don't want to deplete the whole thing of it. **[53:49] Dan Schultz:** Council member, Mayor Weisensel, we've talked with Life Time about that situation. And they understand that if more changes are requested—things that come from Life Time (and I think there's probably a couple in the hopper)—that if it's something that would go over that contingency, they would then cut a check to the city to cover that cost. **[54:19] Paul Theisen:** Today we haven't seen anything on the... what is it, the exterior? I don't know what's the right term... the piece outside. We talked about the pictures that we saw when we were out there. **[54:30] Dan Schultz:** That's coming in July. **[54:31] Paul Theisen:** That's coming, yeah. Because that was a big change, right? **[54:33] Dan Schultz:** Yeah, I haven't seen the numbers on it yet but we're expecting it to be sizable. **[54:38] Paul Theisen:** Okay, like a lot? **[54:39] Dan Schultz:** Yep. **[54:40] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Other questions, comments? Quit making changes and get it built, please. **[54:46] Dan Schultz:** They're working on it. **[54:47] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** We'd like to see it finished, but yes. This looks like a use of funds here to make it nicer for all the users and stuff. So looking forward to that. **[55:00] Paul Theisen:** All right, I'll make a motion to approve change order number seven for the Life Time facility as listed in the executive summary and in the attached documents. **[55:10] Heidi Freske:** I'll second. **[55:11] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Had a motion by Theisen, second by Freske. Roll please. **[55:14] Sarah Saunders:** Freske (Aye), Klimpel (Aye), Weisensel (Aye), Theisen (Aye). **[55:18] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** That completes 9C with a 4-0 approval. Thank you. That completes item nine. We'll move on to 10: announcements. Look to Mr. Martin for City staff updates. **[55:34] Logan Martin:** Thank you Mayor, members of the Council. Two items the staff would like to remind Council on tonight and educate the public on. First I'll take, and Chief Thomas may come up after I finish the first one here. We want to make residents aware that we did a little public outreach today on a state requirement—actually a federal requirement—as we investigate lead water service main services in your home. And so for folks that really need to pay attention are folks that have a home built prior to 1985. And so homes built after 1985 can disregard our public outreach and what I'm about to say. But if your home is built before 1985, we'd ask you to pay attention to some of the public outreach that we've done on social media, on our website. Very briefly: there's a nice video on there that explains what we'd ask you to do. It's going into your basement, checking your service line for a physical or visual appearance of what could be lead or copper or galvanized steel. And again, a nice video on there that shows you quick, easy ways to do some scratch tests, things of that nature, to confirm what type of line you may have. We ask you for a photo, quick couple of pieces of info to help us build an inventory of any homeowners that we might need to partner with to assist and help them connect with some grant funds, etc., to replace any of those lead services. So if your home is built before '85, ask you to plug in and learn more about that and pay attention to that. And then Chief can talk about our exciting week in the park. **[57:15] Carson Thomas:** Thank you Mr. Martin. Mayor, members of the Council. Just wanted to throw a pitch in for Public Safety in the Park. It's this Thursday from 5:00 to 8:00. It has become a fan favorite in the community for hanging out with public safety—so that's not only police and fire, but public works as well, our partners there. So there's a lot of big trucks. I'm not going to speak to the public works trucks—they're big and orange... and there's more than just orange... **[57:37] Nick Egger:** Yellow. **[57:38] Carson Thomas:** And there's some yellow ones too, yes. Lots of colors. Our big fingers crossed that we don't have rain this year. If we do, we're still going to try to throw the event and the free food will be there. We're going to move the food into the garage, we'd cook in there and we've got some tents prepared to serve under. So rain or shine, we're hoping to have it despite any big thunderstorms. We'll have the helicopter landing, K9, armored vehicles... there'll be the SWAT obstacle course again. Our staff, ambulance medics, different utility vehicles from Dakota parks, lakes and trails... so it's a pretty fun event for all ages. I think last year I got caught doing the Cupid Shuffle. I already told the DJ: do not call me out, because I will fake an injury. So come on out 5:00 to 8:00 Thursday night. Thank you. **[58:21] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Awesome, thanks. All righty, open up to City Council. Any announcements or things they want to share? **[58:28] Paul Theisen:** Not... **[58:29] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** I do have one. I was asked to remind or at least invite Council: next Monday, the County Manager interview presentations start at 5:00 at the Apple Valley Galaxy Center. So take a look at our potential new County Managers and see if you want to meet them. And so with that, I'll continue with first items up: City Hall tomorrow, June 19th, is closed for celebration of Juneteenth. Just mentioned Public Safety in the Park on Thursday, June 20th. The Utility Regular Commission meeting is on June 24th; Monday from 6:30 to 7:30—is that correct? Hasn't changed? All right, correct. The Parks and Recreation Commission meeting noted for June 24th later that evening has been cancelled. Planning Commission is on June 25th, 6:30 to 7:30 here at City Hall. The Youth Commission meeting on June 26th from 3:45 to 4:45 at the Steeple Center. And the next City Council work session and council meeting on July 2nd, with the work session beginning at 5:00 to 7:00 and the City Council meeting from 7:00 to roughly 8:00. With that, if there is no other business to come before Council, I'll move to adjourn. Is there a second? **[59:51] Paul Theisen:** Second. **[59:52] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** I have a motion and a second to adjourn the meeting. All in favor signify by saying aye. **[59:54] City Council (All):** Aye. **[59:55] Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Opposed? And we are done before 8:00. Thank you. **[59:58] [Music]**