[0:00] [Music] [0:58] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** This is the library in the Steeple Center, the high school, middle school—really nice. Good evening. I'd like to call the regular city council meeting for Tuesday, September 17th, 2024, to order. Please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. [1:15] **All:** 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. [1:30] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Welcome everyone, those in the audience and on TV this evening on cable. Are there any additions or corrections to the agenda? [1:45] **Logan Martin:** No, sir. [1:47] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Seeing none, I'll move the agenda. All in favor signify by saying "Aye." [1:52] **Councilmembers:** Aye. [1:54] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Opposed? Okay, we have an agenda. First item up this evening: presentations, proclamations, and acknowledgements. Special event update. Mr. Schultz? [2:08] **Dan Schultz:** Thank you, Mr. Mayor and council members. I just wanted to remind the council and the community that this Saturday will be the sixth annual Rosemount Food Truck Fest. We are going to be operating the event from 4:00 p.m. till 9:00 p.m. down in Central Park. We've got 16 food trucks, we've got a beer vendor, and we've got live music. From 4:00 to 5:30 p.m. will be the band Triple Dog Dare, and then from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. will be the band Ragtown. And we are expecting good crowds. I was told by our Communications Manager that we had over 2,000 people who are interested in the event, so she says that's a good thing. So we're looking forward to another great year with a lot of variety of food vendors. We did change over some of the vendors this year from years past just to kind of keep things a little bit new, a little bit fresh, and so we will have a good variety for everyone who comes out. And you know, we will try to run this event rain or shine. There is some talk of maybe a little bit of rain coming on Saturday, but we'll do our best to get this event in and go from there. And I will stand for questions. [3:25] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Open to Council. Any questions or comments? [3:30] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Just a quick question about the food truck vendors who are coming. How many of them are like from Rosemount or...? [3:39] **Dan Schultz:** We have—I want to say—three from Rosemount right now. I mean, if they are from Rosemount, we do our very, very, very best to get them into our event. I know Ryan from Las Tortillas, Old Smokey Barbecue, and I can't think of a third one that I think is also from town. [4:02] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Great, thank you. [4:05] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Remind me, what year is this for us? [4:08] **Dan Schultz:** This is our sixth annual. [4:10] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Sixth annual. So this is getting to be quite a premier event for us. [4:14] **Dan Schultz:** Yeah, and I think all of you know that our goal is to do some remodeling down in Central Park and expand that park a little bit. You know, we'd like to get up to 24 trucks at some point in time and make this quite a bit bigger event. Right now we're really limited to the space we have, you know, with allowing for runners for all the different trucks and things like that—we need parking for that. But I think as we expand Central Park and do some things a little bit different, we'll be able to make this a bigger and better event, probably expand the time that we run it—you know, maybe go from 1:00 to 9:00 or something like that. But I think while I stand here, I'll also plug Oktoberfest, which is a new event this year where we're working with North 20 and Omni Brewing on that event. That's going to be October 12th. That's going to be from noon to 7:00, off the top of my head, and we're going to have food trucks and different things kind of related to Oktoberfest. So another fun special event for the community to take part in. And I just noticed I think we posted that Monday on our Facebook page; I think we have about 600 people already interested in that. [5:30] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Excellent, another fun event to take part in. Good. I was going to give you that opportunity to mention that if you didn't, so appreciate that. All right. Anything else? All right, that completes 3A. Thanks. Move on to four: Response to Public Comment. I don't believe we have any items to respond to this evening. We'll move to item five: Public Comment. Anyone wishing to address the Council at this time on subjects not part of the meeting agenda may do so. Typically these replies are to concerns expressed and can be made via letter or phone call within a week to respond to those items. So if you're wanting to address the Council, please step forward, state your name and address, and your comment or question. Welcome. [6:14] **Al Valle:** Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Councilmembers. Al Valle, 14235 Azalea Path. My request—currently not knowing the Council's intent on the proposed consent agenda—I'm asking for item E be pulled for further discussion. That's my request. Thank you. Thanks for the opportunity. [6:45] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Thank you. Anyone else? Anyone else? All right, we'll close the floor and consider item five completed. Next item up is our Consent Agenda, items 6A through G. We have bills listing, minutes of our September 3rd work session and regular meeting minutes. We have an approval of an encroachment agreement for property at 14372 Davenport Avenue. We have a request by RGA Holdings LLC to rezone 21.11 acres of land from AG to B2 Employment, which during public comment was requested to be pulled. The approval of permanent easement along Akron Avenue and the BMR Frana Addition accepting public improvement. To Council, anyone wishing to pull any items for further consideration or comments? [7:43] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Just E. [7:45] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Just E. Yep, I think E was kind of a unanimous thing here. All right, so 6E removed. Can I have a motion to approve the Consent Agenda with 6E removed? [7:53] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Motion to approve the consent agenda items 6A through G with item E pulled. [8:00] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** I'll second. [8:02] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion by Essler, second by Freske. Roll please. [8:06] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Aye. [8:07] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** Aye. [8:08] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Aye. [8:09] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Aye. [8:12] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Approves 4-0. Call up 6E. [8:15] **Anthony Nemcek:** Thank you, Mayor and members of the Council. This is an item that is a request to rezone approximately 27 acres east of Akron Avenue and west of Blaine Avenue on the north side of County Road 42. The request comes from the applicant, RGA Holdings, as they have been working on site assembly, entering into purchase agreements for the various parcels that comprise the subject property. Staff's understanding is that the purpose of their request is to add clarity for marketing of the parcel for sale and development. The site is consistent with the city's Comprehensive Land Use Plan. As you can see, it is guided for BP Business Park, which is shown in purple on the map before you. The proposed rezoning would rezone all the parcels within the red outlined area there from its current AG or A2 Agricultural District zoning to B2 Employment, which is most consistent with the business park development that is located south of 42 and east of County Road 3 that is also zoned B2 Employment. Staff would also like to note that this was heard by the Planning Commission, which held a public hearing during its meeting last month. Public notice went out to approximately 80 property owners, including all of Talamore, which is immediately west of the site. I'm happy to speak to the request, answer any questions the Council may have. Also one last note: there was an AUAR, which is an environmental review, conducted for this site that anticipates two potential development scenarios consisting of either a distribution center or a data center. [10:15] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Okay, thank you. Then I'll open up to Council. Any questions or comments? [10:20] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** I'll start with one question. Can you explain the difference—you state that this is part of our comprehensive plan to be Business Park, but yet we have to rezone it. Kind of talk about the two different pieces and how they're related, and then the sequence of events of how that typically happens. [10:45] **Anthony Nemcek:** Certainly. And that's also a good example of why the applicant is requesting the rezoning because, while the city's Comprehensive Land Use Plan is the ultimate overarching guide for development, the zoning of a site dictates the specific technical details of that site development, such as setbacks, building height, lot coverage. So when someone is looking for land to develop, their first stop should typically be the city's comprehensive plan. The Met Council technically does require the rezoning of parcels within the city into conformance with that Comp Plan after its adoption. What we do here in Rosemount, as other cities in the kind of greenfield areas of the metropolitan area, we wait until development comes in to do rezonings because they don't always—or development doesn't always follow those perfect squares like you would see in our comprehensive plan. And oftentimes our land use designations allow for secondary zoning if there is an opportunity to put a convenience store in the corner of a business park area. So we've been basically waiting until development comes in before rezoning into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. [12:08] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Okay. Does that answer your questions? [12:12] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Ask a follow-up. So I think you answer the question that the plan the city follows is really our Comprehensive Plan. There was some chatter on social media that the AUAR is the plan for the city. That's not accurate. Can you give a high-level overview of what an AUAR is? [12:28] **Anthony Nemcek:** Sure. So an AUAR stands for an Alternative Urban Areawide Review—sorry, Alternative Urban Areawide Review. And it is a type of environmental review similar to an environmental assessment worksheet (EAW), which is a way that developers, once they hit a certain threshold, are required to conduct. An AUAR is done before a project comes in, particularly when development would be occurring in phases. Rather than doing one EAW for each individual piece of that development area, oftentimes an AUAR will be conducted for the entire site. It is site-specific; it is not citywide. The city does have several AUARs that have been adopted by the Council over the years. UMore Park is the biggest AUAR area. The city's also adopted an AUAR for a piece of land east of Highway 52 for potential development there. The AUAR is done well in advance of any applications for development, and it is something that I understand to be somewhat unique to Minnesota, but it's often done ahead of time to prep a site for future development. Development must occur within the scope of that AUAR. So in this case, a scenario where the site would be developed as a distribution center was included, as well as a scenario for a data center. And all sort of impacts on the vicinity and on the city are analyzed for those different uses, and mitigation steps are identified. [14:28] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Okay, thank you. And on this particular AUAR, did you receive any feedback from any of the stakeholder groups that you recall? [14:40] **Anthony Nemcek:** So with this AUAR, when it came through the EQB Monitor, which is what the publication is that puts it out for the various agencies to review, initially the Met Council had objected to the AUAR due to the fact that it had proposed, when they had proposed the data center use, a water-cooling type system that was very dependent on water and required a lot of water use. And the Met Council objected to that AUAR. Since then, the applicant updated the AUAR to shift that to an air-cooled type system if the site is developed as a data center, thereby reducing its reliance and need for water from the city's system. [15:25] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Okay. And then obviously, you know, there have been several AUARs, and I know one hit the news last year right around this so-called "Project Mercury" just a little bit east of here. Can you tell us where—what is the status of that so-called Project Mercury, or what's moving on that one, do you know? [15:45] **Anthony Nemcek:** So that was done preemptively. In fact, staff wasn't even aware that the owner of that property had been marketing it for development. It's entirely possible that there is a developer that was just sort of kind of prepping the site ahead of making an offer or any potential development. Staff is not aware of any development proposals for that site, or if that is even being marketed for sale and development. Also on that note, regarding the subject property before you tonight, staff has not received any applications for any development of that property either. [16:17] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Okay. Yeah, I think over the past 18 months, we've probably learned a lot of lessons on how to continue to work with the public. And I think we've done a really good job; I think staff has done a really good job educating the public on what the process is. I think just maybe if you can expand a little bit on again, a reminder that the property is not owned by the city; this is a private owner. They are making the request to change the zoning from Agriculture to B2 Employment. So question for you is: if we knew that that was consistent with what the Comprehensive Plan was, why didn't we proactively—maybe explain why we can't just go proactively do it when we've got an owner of the property that's actually using it for potentially agricultural purposes? Right? Like, we can't go and just dictate that we need to change the zoning. Maybe talk a little bit about that and make it clear that the owner of the property is the party that requests the rezone, versus this isn't us proactively going to the owner and telling them we're going to do a rezone. Maybe expand. [17:35] **Anthony Nemcek:** Certainly. In this case, the applicant is the owner or in the process of acquiring all of the parcels within there. The application was signed by all of the property owners within that rezone area. The city is not preemptively rezoning this now. That isn't to say the city couldn't preemptively rezone land; it would create nonconformities, which is another reason why we don't typically rezone our entire city to be into conformance with our Comprehensive Plan. But the only thing really dictating how land develops and is used is first and foremost the Comprehensive Plan. But as I said, we do wait to rezone sites because we wouldn't want to create non-conforming uses that are allowed to continue. But until we know what development will be occurring and what it'll actually look like and what those boundaries will be, it's just been staff's practice that it's better to leave it in its current state. This is a private, market-driven action request. [18:45] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** And just again, due process for residents to understand: what's the normal practice? If this property owner who's accumulating all these parcels to market it is proactively getting the rezone trying to find a buyer to use it for the probably highest and best use, what's their process to communicate to the city? So when do we find out that there's a potential buyer for this property? [19:15] **Anthony Nemcek:** Well, typically we wouldn't know until we receive an application. A lot of times we'll get inquiries asking about the zoning of a site, or what uses would be allowed, or what the standards would be as they start to put together their site plans so they know what parameters within which they can work. If it has 75-foot setbacks or 10-foot setbacks, that can make a big difference on a site plan. So we do have conversations on a regular basis with a number of people, a lot of times on projects that don't come to fruition, and we're just providing information. So until we actually get an application before us—a complete application for development of the site—as far as we are concerned, nothing has happened. [20:00] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Yeah, yep. Okay. [20:05] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All right, thank you. [20:06] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Just one final comment regarding the process. So this has gone before the Planning Commission, they've done their diligence, and I see they unanimously recommended this for Council? [20:18] **Anthony Nemcek:** Correct. Before any development can occur on the site, site plan reviews would be needed. That is a public process. Any zoning to consolidate the parcels or subdivide them into a plat—that's a public process that would go through a public hearing as well. This is not the last time this subject property would be before the Planning Commission or the City Council. [20:47] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Thank you. [20:49] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All right. With that, any other questions or comments? Would anyone like to move the recommended action? [20:54] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** I can make a motion to adopt an ordinance amending the City of Rosemount zoning map for the subject property from AG Agriculture to B2 Employment. [21:12] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** I'll second. [21:14] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion by Essler, second by Freske. Roll please. [21:18] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** Aye. [21:19] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Aye. [21:20] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Aye. [21:21] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Aye. [21:23] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** That passes 4-0 on item 6E and completes the consent agenda. Move on to item number seven: Public Hearings. This evening we have a request by Independent School District 196 for rezoning, conditional use permit, preliminary and final plats, site plan and building design review, and a zoning ordinance text amendment to allow for a school with various sports fields and play areas to be built on site. Right, Miss Hogan? [22:04] **Julia Hogan:** Mr. Mayor and the Council. So a little bit of an overview of the requests. The applicant is requesting the following approvals to construct a new school on a 75.6-acre site south of 150th Street West or County Road 42 and east of Biscayne Avenue. The requests are: a text amendment to the zoning ordinance which would revise Section 11-10-2 Use Definitions to include a "Middle School" definition and revise sections 11-3-2, 11-4-2, and 11-7-3 to include the added Middle School use. And then they also are requesting preliminary and final plats, rezoning of the site from A2 Agricultural to R3 Medium Density Residential, and then also a conditional use permit. The Planning Commission did review their site plan review and building design standards, which they did approve, and that was the final action for the Planning Commission, so that is why that request is not in front of Council. [22:58] **Julia Hogan:** A little bit of an overview over the site location. Like I had mentioned, the site is located south of County Road 42 and east of Biscayne Avenue. It is over a portion of University of Minnesota-owned land and is 75 acres in size. A little overview of the rezoning requests: so the applicant is requesting that site be rezoned to R3 Medium Density Residential. The future land use designation for the area is a mixture of Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential, which you can see outlined on the right-hand side. Due to that area having a larger MDR designation, staff is recommending that R3 Medium Density rezoning of the site. [23:44] **Julia Hogan:** A little overview of the preliminary and final plats: the applicant is requesting the plats for Rosemount School District Fifth Edition. The proposed plat shows a total of the site to contain 75.5 acres. The land south of County Road 42 and east of Biscayne Avenue. The plat shows that there's two buildable lots as well as two outlots. The main Lot 1 will consist of 59.7 acres of land, which is where the school and sports facilities will be located. And then Lot 2, which is located directly north of the Boulder Trail extension, is planned for a future city lift station. Then Outlot A will be 5.1 acres in size and will contain various easement areas, which is located on the northwest side of the property close to County Road 42. And then Outlot B will consist of 2.6 acres of land which is dedicated right-of-way for the future extension of Boulder Trail, which you can see is located on the southeast portion of the plat. [24:38] **Julia Hogan:** So the proposed text amendment in front of you: back in June of 2024, the updated zoning code and map proposal went before Council for adoption. Many of those changes made within the city code—specifically within the zoning code—included changes and additions to the definitions chapter. In the previous code, elementary schools, middle schools, and secondary schools were all identified uses. But in the newly adopted code, it only shows elementary schools as a conditional use within residential zoning districts and also as a permitted use within the Public and Institutional (PI) zoning district, but did not identify middle schools. Staff, in consultation with the city's consultant team, had initially recommended the elementary school definition be altered to include specific primary education grades, but after the Planning Commission's review of it, they did advise City staff to add an additional "Middle School" definition to include within the city code. So you can see that proposed definition outlined right here under the bold "Proposed Definition." That definition will outline a building used for the purpose of public or private middle school education as defined in Minnesota State Statute 120A.05, including special needs education which meets all the requirements of compulsory education laws in the State of Minnesota, and not providing residential accommodations. And then, as also mentioned earlier, this will also be revised in Sections 11-3-2, 11-4-2, and 11-7-3 to include that Middle School definition within those portions of the city code. [26:09] **Julia Hogan:** Little overview of the site plan: the site will contain the main school building with two main parking lot areas and a service lot area. You can see that the school is shown to be in the central-western area on site. That main lot is going to be located to the northwest of the main school building, and then that bus lot is going to be located to the southeast, and that service lot is directly southwest of the main building. There are also baseball fields, practice fields, and softball fields, and also a tennis court shown throughout the site. There are ponding and infiltration areas on site that are shown to be located south of that bus area and also north of that future Boulder Trail extension. The proposed building will have a capacity to hold 1,350 students with plans for 47 homeroom classrooms. The plans submitted show a combination of classrooms, common space, gymnasium, pool, performance stage, media center, etc. And they do have a plan to have the school open by Fall of 2027. [27:08] **Julia Hogan:** A little overview of the access and parking: like I had mentioned, they have those two main parking lots as well as that service lot. There will be one main access into the site which is off of Boulder Trail, which will extend north. Then they do split east to west. The split to the east will be for the main bus lot and then additional parking, and then that access road will continue north to the main lot, and then we'll loop around and then they will exit through that main access into Boulder Trail as well. And also this Middle School site has a network of sidewalks and trails providing access internally and around the site as well. So you can see sidewalks on the south side of County Road 42, and then it also gives access to all the sports facilities around the site as well. [27:56] **Julia Hogan:** Little overview of the traffic: staff did receive a traffic study from the applicant in July which includes existing conditions on the site, traffic forecasts, traffic analysis, and conclusions and recommendations. The study did examine weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed project at multiple intersections that would be impacted by the school site. The study also included a review of pedestrian and bicycle school connection impacts related to the proposed project. That traffic study was included as an attachment with this item. Area improvements were identified which included: installing traffic signal controls at County Road 42 and Biscayne Avenue, providing separate turn lanes (through and right turn lanes) on the westbound approach for Biscayne Avenue and Boulder Trail, providing dedicated eastbound left turn lanes and dedicated westbound right turn lanes on Boulder Trail, and providing two exiting lanes with one left turn lane and one right turn lane. [28:55] **Julia Hogan:** Little overview of the landscaping: the applicant worked with staff to update the landscape plan. That was one issue when this item went forward to the Planning Commission—the landscaping deficit. The original landscape plan had 466 trees provided on site. The updated landscape plan now has an additional 106 trees added, which brings the total to 555 trees on site. This does bring the site closer to the 866 minimum tree requirement. Under the landscaping, screening, and buffering standard in the zoning code, there is a section outlined for "Fee in lieu of tree replacement" or "Replacement trees planted in public areas." In this section, it does state that the city recognizes that there are instances where a total amount of tree replacement required cannot occur on site, and the city can accept either a fee in lieu of a replacement or allowing planting of trees in public areas. Since schools are viewed as public areas, the city would allow for part of the landscaping deficit on the Middle School site to be made up on the tree count on the newly approved Elementary School site. Because of that standard, they did have an excess amount of trees over on the Elementary School site, so that's why we were allowing for that deficit as they do meet that count on the Elementary School site. [30:17] **Julia Hogan:** Then a few architectural elevations. The building elevation plans that were submitted by the applicant show the exteriors of the principal building will be a mixture of brick, precast walls, panels, and metal panels. I'll show a few renderings as well. Here was a submitted floor plan showing the mixture of classrooms, gymnasium, media area, pool area, and other classrooms. Then here are some of the renderings that were submitted by the applicant as well, panning around the site. This is looking northeast area with the tennis courts in view. And then here's looking north from the bus lot towards the middle school. And then a conditional use permit is required for elementary and middle schools within the R3 Medium Density Residential zoning district. The City may approve the CUP upon finding that the use at the proposed location meets the eight standards, and staff has determined that the school did meet those eight requirements. Then there are four motions in front of the City Council today: a motion to approve the text amendment, a motion to adopt a resolution approving preliminary and final plats, a motion to adopt an ordinance amending the City of Rosemount zoning ordinance to change the zoning, and a motion to adopt a resolution approving a CUP for the middle school. At this time I can take any questions that the Council may have, and I do know that there are also representatives with the school district here as well. [31:45] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Okay, open up the floor for questions. [31:47] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Yeah, so we're as—I'm sure everyone is—we're excited about it. I do have a question on some of the recreation opportunities. Just to make sure I'm understanding what the plan includes: it looks like there's four fields for football, lacrosse, and soccer. That's what I think I saw, right? You've got inside the track, next to the track, and then two over by the baseball field. So four fields used for football, lacrosse, soccer, rugby potentially. Three baseball fields. Do you know how many lanes on the track there will be and what quality? And again, maybe this question's for the school district, but what's the quality of the track going to be? [32:38] **Julia Hogan:** I would maybe defer to the school district on that. [32:41] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Okay. And then the basketball courts, are they two full-size? So that would allow for practicing for four teams? Do you want to do it as we go or...? [32:51] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** It doesn't matter. Is that okay? We can just have them get your questions out. [32:55] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Okay. The pool—I've got questions on the pool in terms of if we're going to be able to use it for competitions like we do at the current middle school. And then I just got a question on the trees for you, probably. So it sounds like we're treating two separate projects, looking at them combined. Just curious—I know it's the same owner/developer with being 196—but is that normal that we would do that? [33:23] **Julia Hogan:** So no, this is definitely a unique circumstance in that aspect. So kind of a little overview: back when the elementary school came forward in earlier this year, it was under our old zoning code. With our old zoning code, there were no landscaping minimum requirements for projects within the PI district and schools. Though they have a zoning of residential, we look at their standards under the Public and Institutional standards just because they more follow under that. So there were no landscaping requirements for that. The elementary school did not have a requirement for landscaping; they did have an excess of trees on site though because there were a lot of buffering around the railroad that they didn't have to take down. And so they did end up planting 311 trees on that site, but they still exceeded over a thousand trees on site. So again, with that fee in lieu, we could either take that fee or plant them in a public area, and since 866 trees was a hard requirement for the school district to meet on this site, it was a "best of both worlds" being able to allow for that existing count on that elementary school site on this site since both of them are owned by the school district as well. If that makes sense? [34:49] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** So just in the spirit of a fair compromise, that's where you landed. [34:53] **Julia Hogan:** Okay, yep. [34:55] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** I just got—if I can get you up there again. So as you probably are aware, I mean, fields, courts, rinks—everything's at a high premium, especially in a growing community like ours. Every opportunity we want to take to get more facilities for our residents. We're quickly—as you guys are fully aware—we're growing quickly and we're running out of space, out of courts, out of facilities. So I just really have a lot of questions around making sure that we're taking every opportunity with this facility. And if there is an opportunity where we can partner with the school district—where we can even get more facilities out of there—I'd love to just pursue that. We're three years away from opening the facility, so I just wanted to have some questions around that. So just making sure on the fields: it looks like football, lacrosse, soccer, all three sports would be able to play on the four fields that we've got. [36:00] **Dave Ray:** Yeah, let me introduce myself. I'm Dave Ray with Bolton & Menk. I'm the civil engineer for the project, so I do everything on the outside design. Our office is in Plymouth, Minnesota. I'll answer your outside questions. The running track—I think you had a question on that to start with. It's designed as an eight-lane running track. The surfacing will not be a resilient surfacing like you would see at the typical high school site; it would be an "egg lime" surfacing. Egg lime is the same material that's used on softball field infields, baseball field infields, that sort of thing. And that's consistent with the other middle schools in the district. However, we are setting this project up so that if that was something that the district wanted to modify in the future, they could work from the ground up versus having to dig out a lot of soils and have a lot of expense. So we're setting up for flexibility in the future, if that makes sense. [36:53] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Yeah. And just ballpark, what's the delta in cost in one surface versus the other? [36:59] **Dave Ray:** Yeah, I don't know the resilient surfacing. Just the surfacing is a couple hundred thousand dollars, and there's the asphalt pavement which is another—you know, it might be a half a million dollars. And again, don't—I'm doing the best I can on that one. But it's quite a delta in the cost. [37:25] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** And the reason the track is important is because the high school is getting overly used. It's hard for RAAA track—again, they're growing, there's one RAAA association. Back when I was on the board, it's continued to grow and it's getting much larger. It's getting more difficult to get access to the high school track. So if we had another track that we could get access to and be able to use—you know, if the RAAA could use that—they've obviously become accustomed to using the surface at the high school, but now if they end up having to relocate over to the middle school to do their track meets, it's going to be a little bit of a different experience. So I'm wondering, would the school district ever consider looking at that—you know, again, that becoming the primary youth track facility? [38:13] **Dave Ray:** Honestly, that's a better question for the District. But I can say that it is set up for flexibility in the future. [38:22] **Sale Bagley:** Good evening everyone. I'm Sale Bagley with Wold Architects and Engineers. So actually that very topic has been a little bit discussed lately. The district is always trying to balance kind of consistency and experience across all of the middle schools with all of the things that you just said. We also have a whole series of projects as a part of the bond referendum. We want to make sure that we can responsibly deliver on all of those promises across all of the communities. So before we give a "want" or maybe an "above and beyond," we do have to get through a very significant volume of bidding in the next six to eight months. Right? We have all four high school projects. So we're really excited to get through this gate check, and if the district's in the happy position a year, two years, three years from now where more things can be done, it's already on a list, I guess is what I can say. So I can't say either way like "yes, we're going to do that" or "no," but you're right in line with the conversation. Somebody at the school district has flagged this as a possible "want" for given our needs. So I completely commiserate with what you're talking about. [39:24] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Awesome, thank you for that. And again, not to beat a dead horse here, but if you look at when I was on the RAAA board, a lot of times we worked with the school district. Sometimes we had to really encourage them to look at the differences between the four different high schools. What's different about us is—and they know this—but we're growing quickly. And the uniqueness is, if you look at Eagan, Apple Valley, and Eastview, those three aren't getting the pressure on the track that we are because of the numbers we've got. I want to make sure that we don't use a cookie-cutter approach on the four high schools, that there are some uniquenesses to the different communities, and just want to make sure that's recognized. [40:02] **Sale Bagley:** Absolutely, absolutely. [40:04] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Awesome, thank you for that. Okay. Do you want to—which one do you want to cover next? The baseball, basketball...? [40:11] **Dave Ray:** I'll cover the baseball. Since we're on the site, I got them all. Remind me of your question. [40:16] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** So clarification: there's four fields for football, lacrosse, soccer? All four full size? [40:24] **Dave Ray:** They are sized for all of those athletics events, yes, correct. Identically sized. [40:29] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** The baseball fields—what age, given the outfield, what age can these be used for games? [40:35] **Dave Ray:** So clarification: there's one baseball and two softball. Just for clarification. So the baseball is in the—on this diagram—in the middle of where it says "North." That is the baseball field, and that is sized for High School athletics, up to that age group. The two softball fields are flexible; again, it could be Grade 7 and 8, it can be High School. Again, because of this overlap, there's no really defined outfield, so it can be flexible use for youth sports. It could be used for youth baseball, yes, potentially. [41:15] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** For sure. [41:16] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** For sure. [41:18] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Okay. And then also moving to indoors: two full-size basketball courts? [41:25] **Aaron Aing:** I'll go to the floor plan so we can get there. Here we go. I'm Aaron Aing with Wold Architects, working with Sale, Project Manager for the project. So yes, correct, there are two competition-size NFHS standard-size courts for basketball inside that include volleyball courts on either side. [41:45] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Okay, so they can be used—really four different teams could practice than half courts? [41:52] **Aaron Aing:** Correct. They have divider curtains in between them, and they actually for PE have them so they can divide them into kind of four quadrants with curtains. [42:01] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Was there any discussion or consideration of having a third? [42:05] **Aaron Aing:** What I would say to that is that we have a total amount of square footage that we worked closely with the building administration to make sure we could achieve all of the goals. So this was kind of the end outcome of that—of making sure that we get academics, athletics, and performance balance. [42:22] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Yep. Okay. And the pool—I'm assuming it'll have the same ability as the existing middle school to host competitions then? [42:30] **Aaron Aing:** Yes, correct. It'll have all the same kind of scoreboards, timing systems, bleachers—built-in bleachers, elevated bleachers, team seating. The intention will be then that'll become the Rosemount location for competitive swimming and diving. [42:47] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Okay. I think that's it on my questions. Thank you. [42:58] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** You mentioned swimming and diving. Is there a diving well associated with this? [43:03] **Aaron Aing:** It is not a separate diving well. It is similar to the current Rosemount where it's one that has integral diving. [43:12] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Okay. Any questions? [43:16] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** None above and beyond those. These aren't for you guys, but thank you for your answers. [43:24] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** My questions for you around traffic: I just want to make sure I understand that we do have a commitment from the County to put in a four-way or the stoplight at County Road 42 and Biscayne? [43:55] **Logan Martin:** I want to hesitate to say the word "commitment" because the signal that is recommended and all of that is still something the County Board has to approve on their Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). I don't—I'm not worried about that not happening, but it's an official action they have to take at the end of the year when they update their CIP plan. So between City staff, County staff, School District, we're all on the same page in terms of what needs to be done and will be done there. And the delivery of that project would be prior to the opening of the school. [44:38] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Okay. Seems to be aligning properly there. There's a lot of work left to do to design all this stuff and to figure out cost splits and physical impacts and those sorts of things, but we're diving into that as we speak. [44:55] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** I know the County has their timeline and their process they follow in order to meet that timeline. I know three years sounds like a long time, but design takes at least a year usually. When do we need the County Board's blessing to ensure that we're going to meet the date? [45:15] **Logan Martin:** I think that comes at that CIP, and that is late this year. [45:24] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Perfect, thank you. [45:26] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** One follow-up. They mentioned the lights, the surface crosswalks, and things like that. Is there anything else that's being considered in that location? I think during some discussions I recall maybe an underpass trail or something being considered. Is that happening or where is that right now? [45:45] **Nick Egger:** The process of looking at that closely is just going to begin in 2025 in terms of feasibility for that—where it might be possible to cross underneath the County Highway, what sorts of things would be needed to facilitate that. Really the book hasn't been opened too much yet. It was a bit of a revelation in feedback that we got in discussions with the County along the way with the traffic study. It seems like there's a great opportunity there for safety and the amount of foot traffic that may go through there with 42. [46:18] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Just so we know you're on it. [46:21] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All right. Any other questions or comments for staff, for the school district? All right, we'll take this time then to—if I understand this right—we're just opening up the floor for the zoning ordinance text amendment. All right, it's not about any of the rest of the motions that are on there. Floor is open for comments to be received on the zoning ordinance text amendment—basically the Middle School definition. Anyone wishing to speak on that may do so at this time. Please come forward to the podium, state your name and address, and your comment. Zoning ordinance text amendment. Seeing no one making a fast move to the podium, we'll consider the public hearing closed and we'll start moving to motions. [47:46] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** I'll make a motion to approve a zoning ordinance text amendment revising Section 11-10-19D, 11-1-2 Uses, 11-4-2 Uses, and 11-7-3 Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards to include the added Middle School use. [48:08] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** Second. [48:10] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion by Freske, second by Klimpel. Roll please. [48:14] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Aye. [48:15] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** Aye. [48:16] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Aye. [48:17] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Aye. [48:21] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** First motion 4-0 is approved. The second motion? [48:24] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** I can make a motion to adopt a resolution approving the preliminary and final plats for Rosemount School District Fifth Edition subject to all conditions approved as part of the City's site and building design review for the project. [48:38] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** I'll second that. Motion by Essler, second by Weisensel. Roll please. [48:43] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Aye. [48:44] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Aye. [48:45] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** Aye. [48:46] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Aye. [48:50] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** That completes the second motion 4-0. Third motion? [48:54] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** I'll make a motion to adopt an ordinance amending ordinance B, City of Rosemount zoning ordinance, to change the zoning of the site from A2 Agricultural to R3 Medium Density Residential. [49:09] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** I'll second. [49:10] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion by Klimpel, second by Freske. Roll please. [49:14] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Aye. [49:15] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** Aye. [49:16] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Aye. [49:17] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Aye. [49:19] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Completes the third motion 4-0. And the fourth motion? [49:22] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Move to adopt a resolution approving a conditional use permit for Middle School to be located on the Rosemount School District Fifth Edition. [49:28] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Second. [49:30] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion by Weisensel, second by Essler. Roll please. [49:34] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** Aye. [49:35] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Aye. [49:36] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Aye. [49:37] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Aye. [49:39] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** That completes the fourth motion 4-0. Thank you very much. Can you speak to the next actions regarding any of this, Miss Hogan? Would that come before Council—anything else? [49:50] **Julia Hogan:** Not with this request. [49:52] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All right, so we're done with it. Yeah. [49:54] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Can I ask a quick question? Sorry, I should have asked this earlier. Question for the applicant: how are you going to communicate out like these renderings and all that kind of information to the public? We know everybody watches us religiously, but maybe there's a few people that missed it. [50:15] **Mark Schwartz:** I'm Mark Schwartz with the school district. So we do have a website dedicated to the referendum projects, and I can't recall if the renderings are on those projects yet, but they've been included in presentations that we've been giving and so forth. And so if they aren't on the website, first thing I will do tomorrow is to make sure they get put there. But yeah, we're really excited about this project and really proud of the planning and the work that's happened up to this point. So thank you. [50:41] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Is there a project icon or anything when they go to the thing to find it? [50:46] **Mark Schwartz:** I think it just refers to "Referendum Projects." [50:48] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Referendum, okay, yep. Great. [50:50] **Mark Schwartz:** And we have many referendum projects going on as you well know. So Elementary School is moving along. If you haven't driven up there, footings are in, foundation is going in, and it's starting to look like a building. [51:10] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** And just a reminder, that'll open what season? [51:14] **Mark Schwartz:** That'll open Fall of 2025. [51:16] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Fall of 2025, so next fall. Good. Thank you. [51:25] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Good stuff. Yeah, thank you Council. Thank you. So that completes our public hearings for this evening. We'll move to item eight: Unfinished Business, which we have none. New Business: Request by Kwik Trip for approval of a conditional use permit. I think there's a lot of residents waiting on this. Oh yes, very excited. Mr. Van Oss, can you share the update? [51:45] **Eric Van Oss:** Yes. So we have Kwik Trip. They applied last month to construct—oh, this is the wrong presentation. Well, I can work with that. Kwik Trip is requesting a final site and building plan and a conditional use permit for a new gas station near the Akron intersection where a lot of our development's been happening. They're planning to construct an 11,000-square-foot convenience store, a single-bay detached car wash, and then an automobile fuel station on the almost 5-acre site. Here's a site: it's right on the intersection in the northwest quadrant, kind of right south of where the Roers Apartment project is going in. As I said, the site is 4.79 acres. It's designated Community Commercial. The store will be in the southern portion of the site. The gas canopy and fuel stations will be directly north of that, and the car wash will be on the east side. There'll be five total pump stations as you can see here. In terms of site access, there will be access through a new private road to the north that will run between the site and the Roers Apartment project. That'll be the main access into the site. There'll also be a shared drive aisle with the newly-broke-ground daycare to the east that will be used primarily by people exiting the car wash to help with the circulation of the site. Here's a larger photo of access and where this private road will be. [53:45] **Eric Van Oss:** This is the building. I'm sure we're all pretty familiar with the Kwik Trip style; it will look very similar to the one currently in town, though it'll be a larger format. And here's the car wash—similar building construction. So last month there was a public hearing for this item. There were no comments received. The Planning Commission approved the PUD final site and building plan, so the only item up tonight is the conditional use permit for the site. For the conditional use permit, there are seven general standards; this application meets them all. Also 12 specific standards for fuel stations in and of themselves. There are two items that they did not meet: one was for the stacking of the gas pumps showing them on the plans, and the second one was for the width between pump islands. This was largely due to the change in our code—their plans had been being made prior to our adoption of the code, but they were submitted after the new code. So we just asked them to bring it into compliance with those new standards. They've indicated that that should not be a problem and they will submit those plans prior to pulling any building permits for the project. That's largely the presentation. The applicant is here if you want to ask them any questions, but we are recommending approval. Ignore the first one, but we're recommending approval for the second item for the conditional use permit. [55:40] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Just if you can go back to the previous slide. So the two exceptions—how did we get comfortable with those? [56:05] **Eric Van Oss:** They're not exceptions. I'm sorry, we're asking them to amend the plans to bring it into compliance. The plans they submitted would have been in compliance under the old code; with the new code, they are not. So we just asked them to make those minor changes. They've agreed to meet it, so there'll be no exceptions. It'll be completely within compliance of the conditional use permit standards. [56:30] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Okay. All right, thank you. [56:34] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Can you go back to the slide where it showed the entry into the Kwik Trip? So in my understanding, you can't get to it from Akron—you have to take the private road? [56:45] **Eric Van Oss:** Yes, it'll be a private road. So you'll have to turn in off of Akron or Abbeyfield Way to the west, and you can approach the site from this road. [56:55] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Is there a different map that would show that better? [57:02] **Eric Van Oss:** So the new road will kind of run from here to here. So you will not be able to get to it from 42 or Akron directly; this will be the main road, but there are multiple approaches to that private road. [57:20] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** I'm not following, because your mouse had you at Akron. [57:30] **Eric Van Oss:** I think when you say "get to it from Akron," I mean you can't turn directly into the parking lot from Akron, but you just hang a right onto that private street. If you look at this map, so the private road in the very top right corner will be accessible from Akron, but that's a shared drive aisle between all the developments within here. And then the access to the site will actually be right here from that private road and then also here. And that road extends down to the bank, right, and then the future daycare as well. Right? So that's how you're getting to the bank, that's how you're getting to the daycare. [58:15] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** So my only concern is I don't want to create a situation where we have like on Highway 3 where Clover and Starbucks is—where there's only one way in and one way out and it's really hard for patrons of those businesses to frankly get in and out of there. I feel like we're creating the same situation here. Tell me I'm not. [58:35] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** I apologize, I haven't figured it out yet—exactly what the way in and out is going to be. Are you saying there's no way to get on there direct into the parking lot from Akron? And if you want 42, you've got to go past it and backtrack on Abbeyfield? [59:00] **Logan Martin:** You know where the Roers apartment building is? Okay, so there's a road that goes from Abbeyfield to Akron that will be the access to every commercial site. That's the road on the north side of this. This will run all the way past the bank, past the daycare. All those commercial sites will be accessible from that private road there from and so you can approach it from Abbeyfield Avenue or Akron. There'll be two entrance/exits. [59:45] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** If you want to get there from 42, you've got to go down to Abbeyfield and then come back? [59:55] **Logan Martin:** No, you can take Akron. There's a turn in the top—come in off of Akron to the top of the site. Private road there from Akron; it cuts through the entire site. [1:00:05] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Okay. Is there any concerns, I guess—when the applicant gets up—any concerns of the access for you guys in terms of what's being required? [1:00:20] **Logan Martin:** One difference, Councilmember Freske, I might throw out—a difference thinking about the Starbucks—is that folks going westbound to Apple Valley, let's say, or to Highway 3, would likely go down to Abbeyfield to take an easy right-hand turn onto Highway 42 and get going on highway speeds very quickly. So you can exit from both sides—enter and exit from both sides. [1:00:44] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** That's what I was missing—is there's two. [1:00:46] **Dean George:** Dean George, speaking on behalf of Kwik Trip. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We're not concerned. And I think the congestion probably is not a concern for us because you cannot make a left out onto Akron. So half the traffic that goes back to the houses that head north have to use that private road to get back to Abbeyfield to go up to Connemara Trail. So it kind of splits your traffic naturally that way anyway because it is only a three-quarter movement onto Akron from our site. [1:01:25] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Okay, okay. [1:01:28] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Question since since we have you up here: what is the timeline for this? [1:01:34] **Dean George:** Break ground March 10th, finalized construction August 8th, probably open August 17th is the tentative timeline. [1:01:45] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** That's pretty specific, thank you. [1:01:47] **Dean George:** Pending no snow. Pending some stuff manipulating the schedule, it'll be next summer sometime. Whenever the final dates get set in, it's expected to be open sometime before the fall. [1:02:00] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** And for the—I think there's been some chatter about the current Kwik Trip site in downtown. As of right now, is there anything that you can say about that particular site? [1:02:12] **Dean George:** That site will remain open and in effect. We will still operate both. That site is too small for us to do anything to, and we service too many people there already. So we can't accommodate any of the new growth on this end of Rosemount. The new location will fit in nicely. [1:02:30] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** And the car wash is going to have the option of touch-free or the gentle touch? [1:02:35] **Dean George:** It will. [1:02:37] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** I love that. I go specifically to Kwik Trip because of it. [1:02:40] **Dean George:** Glad to hear it. This site is going to look exactly like the one we just rebuilt off 55—same size, same square footage, detached car wash. You just don't have a diesel island here. [1:02:55] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** That's awesome. Thank you. [1:03:05] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All right. With that, anyone wish to move the motion to approve the conditional use permit? [1:03:10] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** I'll make a motion to approve a conditional use permit allowing an automobile fuel station located at Lot 1, Block 2, Prestwick Place 24th Edition, subject to the conditions in the resolution. [1:03:25] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** I'll second. [1:03:27] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion by Freske, second by Klimpel. Roll please. [1:03:30] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Aye. [1:03:31] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Aye. [1:03:32] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Aye. [1:03:33] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** Aye. [1:03:35] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** And that passes 4-0. Thank you very much. Next item up, we've been waiting all evening for this—Logan is excited to go—establishing our preliminary 2025 budget levy. [1:03:50] **Logan Martin:** Thank you, Mayor, members of the Council. As usual, we stack the agenda with the exciting things and then the folks empty out. But this is an exciting night for Teah and I certainly, but City staff and certainly Council too. We've been working on the budget for many, many months. Appreciate the support from you Council, the leadership from the Council to get us to where we are tonight, which is establishing the ceiling for the city's 2025 budget and our levy. And then as folks know that have been paying attention—certainly as Council knows—tonight we call it the ceiling. All we can do from here is come down on the levy as we discuss more with Council. At least one more chance at a work session, likely in November, to talk about this with Council with any feedback they've received from residents between now and then, and then also as we get some more refinement on a few pending items that are in the budget as placeholders that we're still looking to shake out. [1:04:45] **Logan Martin:** So looking to set the ceiling tonight. That's the action before you. I'll do the fairly traditional presentation here as we walk through where we've come and where we're going and kind of how this aligns with the city's strategic plan. First, some headlines from this budget: I think there's no surprise to anybody we continue to have record-breaking growth in the value of our new construction. This was a bullet from last year and it's a bullet again this year, and we surpassed last year fairly significantly. And the spoiler alert is that 2026 valuation will certainly spoil and break the record that we're currently setting here for the budget of 2025. Our tax capacity valuation increased by 5.43%, which is a reflection of our growth and then also a little bit of a softening of the value picture across the residential landscape and some commercial/industrial softening as well. That specific number, $177 million in new construction value, is absolutely a record watermark for us. Comparables: in 2019, $47 million, which was a fairly good year for us. 2022 post-COVID, $138 million—a record at the time. Here we are in 2023, payable 2024, setting $177 million in new construction value. [1:06:05] **Logan Martin:** So that $177 million equates to about $2 million in tax capacity value—capacity that we can actually levy taxes against. So that saved a homeowner in a median-valued home $72 on their taxes. So the tax increase that we're asking you to set a ceiling for tonight is $85. That tax increase would have been $157 in the same budget without that $177 million in new construction growth. So really a huge headline that we like to remind people of. We get the questions of "what about all those new folks on the east side of town—what do they do on the lift?" That's the answer: if we didn't have a single thing growing or added, your taxes would have increased by an additional $72. Which really means we wouldn't have brought that kind of a budget to the City Council because that would be too large of a tax increase frankly, just on what the Council has given us for parameters. So we wouldn't have been able to accomplish what we're accomplishing inside this budget. [1:07:05] **Logan Martin:** In 2023, $32 was saved by new growth. So this is a big number to have folks quote-unquote "saving" on their tax increase. In previous years, we've had a larger valuation growth of a median-valued home. That's been a good thing to call out to say, "what would have happened to your tax picture had your valuation on your single-family home not changed?" This year, our median value home is actually decreasing by 0.74%, which is rare in looking back ever since I've been here—this is the eighth budget that I've worked on. We've never seen a median value home actually decrease in valuation. And again, as we've talked about, that's kind of that reflective picture looking backwards on valuations as the County Assessor sets a baseline for our median-valued home. And so this is the catch-up of the COVID slowdown, this is the catch-up of mortgage interest rates slowing down the market. And so that's why we're at that 0.74% decrease. And so that home is paying an $85 tax increase; if that home's value stayed flat, their increase would be $96. So again, encourage folks—they'll get their property tax notification from Dakota County this fall that'll tell them exactly what their home is assessed at. You should know what your valuation is doing, how it's changing, and then that your tax picture then is driven by that change. [1:08:35] **Logan Martin:** So a little overview: a total operating budget increase of 11.59% for the draft 2025 budget. To fund that results in a 10.90% levy increase, which is about a $1.799 million levy increase. As we've talked about now for the second year in a row, our Public Works and police campus is flatlined at a 4.5% approximately debt levy increase or impact every year. It's essentially flatlined to be about a $45 impact to a homeowner. So then the budget that you're seeing tonight that the city is operating on is a $40 increase to the median-valued homeowner and then a $45 increase to fund the Public Works campus. An all-in levy tax increase for a median-valued homeowner of $85 tonight, making their city taxes $1,383 in 2025 as compared to $1,298 in 2024. Of course, you guys know to stop me with any questions. [1:10:00] **Logan Martin:** Process: like I said, residents are notified of their preliminary taxable value in about February. That's that $53.748 million value—that's our tax capacity. That's that 5.43% increase as compared to 2024. Again, the market value of new construction is $177 million, which is nearly triple 2019. Really just astronomical numbers that we won't often see again, and then that's kind of why we can't rely on that being our year-over-year guarantee. Department heads submitted their requests. Teah and I met with everyone to talk about that numerous times and have worked through multiple drafts internally. And then, as I mentioned, we have met with Council in a number of work sessions to get to where we are tonight. Looking back a little bit: comparing our growth in operations—about a 36% growth in operations over a seven or eight-year window. And in that same window, roughly, we've increased about 104% in valuation. I've been calculating, based on Council direction for the past number of years, what a cost per resident is and what a cost per household is. So showing that growth there over that seven or eight-year window of how that number has changed for operating the city on a per resident and a per household basis. I think it's reflective of trying to stay really within our means of growing budgets and operations in correlation with how we've grown from a valuation standpoint as a community. [1:11:45] **Logan Martin:** Pictorial look back here of the historical levy and budget: average capacity growth of 6.61%. First budget I worked on was 2017—look back at a $28 million tax capacity, and then we're sitting here today at about a $53 million tax capacity. It is a pretty wild change for any community and something certainly that I think Council should be proud of in terms of a growth standpoint. Jumping into budget by budget: City Council—again, based on Council's direction, we have altered this budget to really pull out the things that aren't directly reflective of what the City Council does. So again, seeing a decrease in this budget—pulled out about $113,000 and reallocated those funds to Administrative Services to support our engagement efforts. This supports the work of our Communications Manager and Communication Specialist to really double down on the city's communication and engagement efforts. As we're growing so quickly, as the Council is looking to retain the city's hometown feel, how do we do that? Part of that is the Council putting their money where their mouth is in terms of focusing on that priority and moving money around to support communications even further. [1:13:30] **Logan Martin:** Admin Services then receives the bulk of that slide-over. For 2025 we're looking at an 8.24% increase. One of the biggest FTE items in there is an Information Technology Specialist. This is a really important hire for us both as we grow as an organization and as we increase our facilities. We've got a brand new facility right over at Public Works that has, frankly, more IT than the City Hall has. So how do we manage that building, how do we respond to IT needs at that building? Certainly a need for a third IT employee has arisen. This budget also sees the full impact of the Communication Specialist. Increased cost of IT licenses is just another thing that we called out here: spam filters, Microsoft costs, Adobe subscriptions—things of that nature live in Admin Services. [1:14:35] **Logan Martin:** Community Development: minor year for Community Development next year. The biggest thing is the need for some third-party assistance on our code enforcement pursuits. Council gave us the direction that the initial amount that we had kind of quoted and budgeted was maybe a bit high, so you'll notice this is a 50% reduction in that number. We're asking for $40,000 to begin the work of a contracted third-party consultant to assist with code enforcement. The reason why we're comfortable pulling that number down a little bit is that we've got some positions open in Community Development right now that we might be able to retool a little bit to let people do some inspection work and do some code enforcement work. But Mr. Kienberger feels comfortable with that number for a third-party contract to still give us some horsepower. As Council's aware, you get all the emails from residents; we are getting to be the size of community where code enforcement is just becoming a more and more regular thing. We have three building inspectors who are running and gunning full-time to do that growth we talked about, and those are the same folks we have to ask to do code enforcement. We don't need to use their horsepower for code enforcement quite so much, and so there are folks out there that will do code enforcement for us. This will be the first year of kind of beta testing that. [1:16:30] **Logan Martin:** Police Department budget: our biggest budget in the city. A 12.77% increase for 2025. Obviously, it's always about staffing inside of police, and so we have two FTE police officers next year. What you'll see there is that $170,000 budget impact number is reduced by about $100,000 from two grants we received. Chief Dahlstrom wrote and was awarded an ICPOET grant, which is a career transitions program for police. This allows folks that might have a four-year degree in another field to go back for shortened training and then ultimately become police officers. Really nice program that allows us to attract maybe a more diverse skill set in the police department. This allows us to build the department maybe a bit faster than we would have been able to otherwise. The other employee that we want to talk about is the Crime Analyst. We have final interviews and offers underway right now, and so we've got the full impact of that person's employment hitting the budget in 2025. Again, Council funded that here in 2024—critical hire for the police department. Fee increases that we always see: our partners at Dakota 911 and Lexipol, which is our implementation software for policy tracking. [1:19:40] **Logan Martin:** Fire: the other very important critical task that we do. A big number here with a big caveat. We've always talked about that the big changes in fire are going to be coming, and we're starting to feel that now—most importantly with the full impact of a full-time Fire Chief. So we're looking to hire an employee here October/November; we've got first-round interviews with candidates actually this week. Really excited with the results of our recruitment. So that budget certainly is felt as that person comes on board in 2025. Chief Schroeder has continued to guide us towards EMT licensure for all the firefighters, looking to get the entire department licensed within three years, so you see a line item there. And then another thing—Chief Schroeder's vision on setting up the department's budget for a full-time fire chief. One of the things too is getting a second set of gear for all firefighters. This is a critical thing in the fire service; one of the most critical threats to firefighters is the carcinogens that are left on fire suits as they finish fire calls. This allows us to get a second set of gear to ensure that if they're on back-to-back calls, they can put on a clean set of gear before they go back out. [1:22:20] **Logan Martin:** We're building a mental health and peer support segment of the budget. Firefighters see the really hard stuff that police officers see, and they deserve a mental health check-in. You're seeing PTSD claims in the fire service already. Chief Schroeder is also bringing Lexipol over to the fire side, which allows for policy consistency. And then that $200,000 line item: 200,000 of the 451 is an accounting change. We received fire state aid from the State of Minnesota. Previously we've left that sit in revenues, and it's not been accounted for in expenditures. The Office of the State Auditor asked us to account for that in our expenditures as well, so we had to charge ourselves for $200,000 on the expenditure side. It exists on the revenue side, so it's not impacting your levy or the budget. [1:24:25] **Logan Martin:** Public Works: first budget is Government Building, 9.1% increase. I'm looking to hire a Deputy Public Works Director next year. This is a high-level leadership position that would really give PW Director Egger leadership support that he absolutely needs. In the original budget, we called this an Assistant City Engineer—same budget impact, same grade. Getting a person that's a bit more of that leadership-level position that can reduce our reliance on consultants. We were able to reduce our budget line item for third-party engineering consultants by $30,000. This improves our staff capacity to manage projects internally. Increased costs for janitorial services both on rebidding for the buildings that we have and then the cost to serve the new building over at PD/PW. Fleet budget: 4% increase, just an increase to the motor fuel and the small tool costs. Streets budget: the biggest thing to call out here is we continue to put pressure and funding behind our seal coat and crack seal program—a $30,000 additional funding. We just continue to add more lane miles of streets. Parks continue to grow; more parks mean more fertilizer and weed control, more fields that need chalk and field dry. [1:28:15] **Logan Martin:** Lastly, Parks and Recreation: not a whole lot of items to call out next year, 3.18% increase. Their registration software has been really well received. And then we continue to rent more equipment—frankly, this is portable toilets as we rent more throughout the community. Before I flip to my last slide: two items that the Council is being asked to approve tonight—the Insurance budget and the CIP. Council has talked about the CIP at a high level, but we'll dive deeply in here in February. What you're setting tonight on that CIP budget is just the amount that the levy is going to happen to fund the CIP. Same goes for Insurance; we're still working through our insurance quote from our medical and dental and ancillary benefits providers. Insurance committee meets this week to review the quote, and then those numbers then will get refined to Council as we come back in December. With that, Mayor, I take any questions. The truth and taxation hearing is Tuesday, December 3rd at 7 p.m. [1:30:17] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All righty. Floor is open for questions. [1:30:20] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** I'll just comment. I really appreciate the first slide where you broke out how the growth in the community is reducing what would have been to a taxpayer. So I do appreciate that call out, that's very helpful. Thank you. [1:30:35] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Just a general statement for all of staff's time and effort putting this together, working with us trying to get to a levy number and continuing working on that right up until December. With that, see nothing else. Thank you very much, Mr. Martin. Anyone wish to move the motion setting the preliminary budget as outlined in the action? [1:31:35] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** I'll move to adopt a motion setting the preliminary 2025 general fund operating budget, the preliminary 2025 CIP budgets, the preliminary 2025 Insurance budget, the preliminary 2025 Port Authority operating levy, and the preliminary 2025 levy and budget hearing date required by the City of Rosemount. [1:32:05] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Second. [1:32:07] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion by Klimpel, second by Essler. Roll please. [1:32:11] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Aye. [1:32:12] **Councilmember Tami Klimpel:** Aye. [1:32:13] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Aye. [1:32:14] **Councilmember Heidi Freske:** Aye. [1:32:16] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion passes 4-0 and that completes item 9B. So with that we'll move on to announcements. City staff updates? [1:32:30] **Logan Martin:** Mayor, I don't think I have anything for you tonight, so I can... oh, Dan? Yeah, go ahead. [1:32:38] **Dan Schultz:** Mayor and council members, I just wanted to remind everyone tonight that on Monday, which is September 23rd, we're going to be having a tour along with the Park and Rec Commission. I took the Park and Rec Commission on a van tour back in May, and we toured I think all of these same sites that we're going to be going to—which includes Amber Fields, the new parks we're building in the Amber Fields development, the pickleball court project, Talamore which is a new park, the Flint Hills Athletic Complex and all the new trails, and then we're also going to go to Dunmore. When we went by all of these projects in May, I think other than just the pickleball project, nothing had even been touched. And so I think even for our Park Commissioners, it's going to be kind of a fun opportunity to see all the progress that we've made this summer. We're going to have an MVTA bus going to leave City Hall at 5:30. So if any of the neighbors happen to see this bus driving through their neighborhood on Monday night, that's what we're doing. Feel free to come out and interact with us. I think we have until 7 o'clock to get back for Utility Commission? [1:33:45] **Dan Schultz:** Yeah, we have a Utility Commission meeting at 7:00, so we'll get you back by 7 o'clock to City Hall. But we're looking forward to it. Just a reminder: a great opportunity to hear about some of the projects, some of the ups and downs that we've faced this summer, but we're hoping you can all make it and join the Park and Rec Commission. [1:34:00] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** And are we having a joint meeting with them at 7 o'clock or just...? [1:34:05] **Dan Schultz:** No, at 7 o'clock you have a Utility Commission meeting. [1:34:09] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** I have a Utility Commission meeting, okay. Thank you. All righty, any announcements from any of the council members? None. All right, and so we will move to the upcoming calendar. We are at—which was mentioned earlier this evening—the Food Truck Festival this Saturday, September 21st from 4:00 to 9:00 at Central Park. The aforementioned Park and Recreation Commission meeting with the tour before from 5:30 to 7:00, and then at 7:00 to 8:00 is the actual commission meeting. Our Utility Commission regular meeting is from 7:00 to 8:00 p.m. again on Monday the 23rd. We have the city helping sponsor a Halloween costume swap September 24th from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the Steeple Center. Planning Commission on September 24th from 6:30 to 7:30 here at City Hall. The Youth Commission meeting September 25th, Wednesday from 3:45 to 4:45 at the Steeple Center. The next City Council work session will be on October 1st from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m., and the City Council meeting will follow from 7:00 to 8:00 p.m. And just a look ahead a little farther: the Fall Cleanup Day is Saturday, October 5th, 8:00 to 12:00 at Erickson Park. With that, any other business to come before Council? Seeing none, I'll move to adjourn. [1:36:12] **Councilmember Paul Essler:** Second. [1:36:14] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** All in favor signify by saying "Aye." [1:36:17] **Councilmembers:** Aye. [1:36:19] **Mayor Jeff Weisensel:** Motion passes, we are adjourned. Thank you. [1:36:23] [Music]