making order. First order of business would be the pledge of allegiance. Please stand if you can. 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. like to welcome everyone to our January 20th meeting. usually one of the coldest meetings of the year.
And we will jump into consent agenda which includes our regular council meeting minutes for December 16th, 2025 resolution 26-01 approving our 2026 boards and committees resolution 26-02 accepting donations to
the city chamber of commerce premier rental request and request to approve Michael Edstrom's successful completion of probation. of the consent agenda. >> I'll second motion and a second on the consent agenda.
Want to publicly congratulate Mr. Aram for completing his probation who have been a great addition to the public works team and truly appreciate his work and is here. >> Hi >> Colton. Hi Leon. >> Hi
>> Randy. Hi and David will move. We will jump into public input and I believe most of people on this list have spoken but just a general review of when we do our public inputs. This is
for every council meeting. Um when you approach the lecture in here make sure you introduce yourself and state your name and your address and we are just asking everybody to conduct themselves in a civil manner as we've asked before. Um there's no tax or name calling. This
is a public input and we are just asking for people to be able to participate. Uh I am going to just be a reminder and asking everyone to show respect and avoid interrupting the speaker. Um we are asking you to avoid silent conversations. Last time we had some issues with that. I'm just asking you to
avoid that. So our people listening online can hear and avoid any positive or negative reactions which includes clapping or booing as this may discourage someone else from speaking. Just a friendly reminder on that and um
we will get going. So for tonight we have Brady. Are you Brady? Any brand corresponds? I didn't see any. >> We do not have any correspondence. All right. Brady, are you
public input? Mute. Okay. Darcy, you are off to the right turn. We are doing two minutes. I'll do verbal 202 warnings. Welcome. My name is Darcy Simpson. I live at 2008
Street Southeast. Tonight, I ask once again that you pause this project. The PUD and application and cup are inadequate and should include stronger conditions that ensure public health and safety. The only
reason to push this project through without ensuring safeguards is money. Corporations have always chosen profit over people. When I expressed my concerns regarding noise pollution to Ryan company representatives, their
response was quote, "We're within the law." End of quote. While in the same breath, they agreed the law was not adequate. Then they provided an application for development that didn't include the safeguards they know exist. They are certainly following governing
law but definitely not ethical law. The tech industry is well aware of the harms of hyperscale data centers to public health and safety and they are aware of the mitigations to ensure public health. But those mitigations cost money so they
choose not to protect us. It is the worst kind of greed. Only when the law finally catches up might they do something. But it's always at their harm. I have been a healthc care provider nearly my entire adult life. I work with
children who have significant health conditions to help them recover from hospitalizations. It is unconscionable to me that our city council members would knowingly choose to put the health of children in our community at risk for the promise of
money. You have the power to set the parameters that mitigate noise and air pollution as well as construction traffic risk into the pud and cup. All of the parameters have been provided to you in the article
that I sent. You don't have to wait for the law to catch up. You just need to do the right thing now. >> Thank you, Mr. Leonard. You are next. Two minutes,
sir. 18 islands for Northeast Minnesota. Oh, in the last city council meeting native we talked about disrespecting you in the post.
Dave, you cannot demand respect. You must earn it as earned through actions, integrity and character and not force or position demanding is offensive. Fact is the city leadership is disrespecting by residents. Residents were simply asking
the city leadership to pause the data center project until crit critical questions were answered such as electricity generators, cooling, emissions, noise, etc. Why are you being so naive? City leadership is simply
being taken advantage of and is being blinded by running companies propaganda of full-blown lies, lack of information, misleading information and verbal promises. just ran through. Proceeding without
answering critical questions is disappointing, disrespectful, insensitive, and naive. You certainly have the cart before the horse. I really detest bullies and puppets, and that is how I perceive city leadership acting
right now. We deserve better. You should be accountable to the residents of Pine Island and not Ryan Company's interests. answer our questions first instead of telling us that legally you do not have to answer our questions.
What kind of democracy is this? Stop approving and get the critical questions answered first. What happened to the promise of no approvals until a lawsuit was settled with environmental advocacy? Or was that a lie too? Also,
hypers steel data centers are not light industrial. They are heavy industrial scale data centers are new to Minnesota and simply not classified yet. And no, they do not have face the same
regulations. As city administration previously stated, heavy industrial face deception >> give you one second. Your reason for for class is light industrial is simply unjust and
disgusting. >> Thank you. >> All right. Lauren Simpson, you're next, sir. >> Minutes. >> Lauren Simpson, 2008 Street Southeast. Um, I stand here before you with the document that Darcy referenced. Each of
you received this a week and a half ago. Um it's called key data center zoning ordinance component to gain data center benefits without harming area residents. It states um it is found the most effective data center strategy is to
urge local elected fish officials to institute a moratorum while putting in place zoning ordinance amendments safeguarding residents from noise, air pollution, and other impacts while ensuring economic benefits are maximized. It talks about incorporating the most
effective and reliable measures for preventing um impacts. It says they'll likely become essential to the local economy. It would be unwise to depend upon enforcement alone to safeguard area residents. It goes on to state that it
meets um it could possibly meet all the criteria presented um to satisfy light industrial if you follow what's in the document. Um it goes on to talk about noise. Um in
this it gives details about a weighted decibb, c weighted decibb, octave bands. It talks about the noise of of backup generators. It talks about air pollution. It talks about public health. It talks about all of these items within
here. It also talks about the economic benefits and how to go about making sure that we receive those economic benefits. It gives you the blueprint to do what is right. Um at last week's meeting,
Elizabeth was asked about low frequency noise pollution. Your dad asked about that. uh she basically said that since the state hasn't addressed it, the town of Prine Island won't either. The problem with that approach is we know that data centers can be a huge source
of low frequency noise and we know that that is harmful for humans. We also know that there are ways to limit and mitigate low frequency noise. You guys have the opportunity to do something about it. Be leaders.
Don't be followers. Stand up. do what's right. >> Um, next we have Reverend Dixon. >> Thank you, sir. >> I live at 340 Brian, Minnesota.
This evening, I just want to talk about the whole zoning. the zoning for it to be quote as light zoning. Uh according to the league of Minnesota cities, I'm reading right off of one of the web pages variances are generally for the dimensional standard such as setbacks or
heightenments. They cannot allow use that is prohibited in particular zone district. Why is that your name? Well, a letter was written by Mr. Craig sent to Elizabeth on December 5th of last year
and I'm quoting from this letter over uses. The coal permits a range of light industrial activities within I2 but excludes heavy uses like waste treatment or high voltage transmission.
That's 100 kilo definition for high voltage. Even if we're just following the rules, this should not be zone like industrial according to those directions. But there's more. Just because something's legal doesn't
mean it's ethical. There's something called the golden rule. The golden rule has been with us for thousands of years. Says, "Do unto others as you have done unto you." Can you sit there and say that you would like the concerns, legitimate concerns
that are of your neighbors dismissed if you're in the same position as they are tonight? Would you want things to be slowed down so that they could hear the answers they so desperately need about this development? That's what the golden rule
asks for. That's what it demands. even go by far to say something's legal with us against ethical and I would just by say walk the walk don't just talk the talk we're asking about transmission of
energy and we know the number let us know the number or don't be surprised we don't believe anything you say that being transparent thank you sir Jason sir have two minutes. >> Good evening council members and mayor.
My name is Jason at 106785th Street Northwest in Pound. I am a a longtime Pine born and raised resident.
I'm currently residing on a piece of land that five generation of Lindals have farmed. Um my heart is for this city, this town, this community. Um the lands in which we are stewards of and understand the uh
difficult choices that this council faces. I do want to support the project skyway with everything I have as a father, husband, grandson, and son. This is a an economic
opportunity for our community. I do appreciate the the opportunity here. This is uh proving to be a little harder to talk um in my own community and uh but it it just goes to show you that uh when your heart's in it, uh
nerves can have a little something to say to. Um, Project Skyway represents meaningful meaningful investment in our local workforce. It will create construction jobs for skilled trades people who already live
in this community and want to continue their careers here. It does that by providing work close to home. The project reduces community burdens and allows workers to spend more time with their families. As an electrician who
has traveled to support my family, I would appreciate that and I know my fellow trades workers would as well. Building locally benefits our community by supporting local businesses, household stability, and long-term growth.
I am very proud of my town. I'm proud of the work my colleagues and I do. And I believe the project Skyway is a responsible and positive investment in our future of our community. Thank you for your time and consideration. >> Thanks
W. Mr. W. Welcome 2 minutes. >> I'm Wend 838375th Avenue Northwest Orno operated business on the north end of
town the last 55 years Mr. Mayor, Council, Staff, >> I've attended uh hearings and reviewed the information presented by the Ryan Company
and I find it logical and compelling. As you know, I'm an advocate of commerce and industry. have talked with the city engineer, the city staff, and they've answered the questions that
I've had about the development. Therefore, I recommend a positive vote for this project. I look forward to the other business that company will sponsor in the future
in this development. Pine Island needs this for our future. Thank you, sir. Next. part of your prayer of peace. I stand
again and before you asking that as my neighbors have asked that you pause to do your due diligence before continuing further. the zoning commission. We see the document that is already mentioned um that highlights exactly gives you that that framework of how to do this
development well in a way that is ends up being a win-win situation where you get what you are supposedly claiming without residents becoming collateral damage in the process. You have received solid evidence from multiple sources
multiple times from multiple community members throughout this process and the ask has been that you heed it so that we again don't become the collateral damage. You are supposed to be representing us
and we have been trying to help you to do that in a way that is responsible and ethical. The zoning commission went on public record last week that they can be bought and sold by a billion dollar company and they don't care the cost. They don't care if their own town's residents are
harmed in the process. When you have resources and the capacity to prevent harm, yet you actively choose to ignore those resources, you are intentionally choosing to cause harm instead of actively choosing to preserve and protect.
What does that say about you as people? And what does it say about you as elected official? What are the values that you are proclaiming by intentionally choosing to cause harm and ignore all avenues that have been available to you that might have erased
that harm in the first place? >> Thank you, Mr. Paul. >> Hold on two minutes. Good evening. Jonathan Paul, center of 7 Wind Court Northwest in Laureno. Prior to that time, I spent 40 years in this
town and I still own property in North Main Street. As a former resident council member, I'm here again tonight to hopefully show my support for project skyway. There's an age-old age-old adage you describe towns that may be growing or you are dying. Project Skyway is truly an investment into the future of P
Island and this is exactly the type of thing you should be looking for as elected officials. Developers have addressed construction traffic. They have addressed light pollution. They've addressed water usage. And they have addressed noise pollution. And they're reading through the documents. Every single one of it is below thresholds as
set by the state of Minnesota. The 150,000galon daily water use is an estimated amount based on the development completely built out, which is a 10 to 15 year endeavor. The developer has made commitments to both the city and the school to partner with them financially. the school specifically. They are committing $24
million paid directly to the school over 20 years. That is in addition to property tax dollars. I urge you to continue to proceed forward with Project Skyway. I also commend city staff and the council for the efforts that you truly have put forward to be transparent, including 12 public
meetings, open houses, and workshops, as well as the online resources that both the city and developer have put forth. I also understand that you have finally begun to receive communication from people who are positive. This is not just something that is negative. People
are finally stepping forward. They are finally emailing. They are finally letting their positive voices be heard as well. I will finish the same way I did last month. Having been a resident of this town for 40 years and watching it evolve over those 40 plus years.
Change is scary. Change is emotional. and change is still inevitable. Thank you for your time, sir. You said no. Yeah, I may have a few things I'd like to kind of
summarize a little bit from the last time zoning and just some general question stuff that's been going on. Um, we've been at this project here for the last project now for at least 10 months. We've gone through the urban area wide
review um including many state agencies having input into the final design and drafts of plan follows Minnesota state parliamentary procedures for our meetings. We allow public input from both residents non-residents etc. It's not a public debate time. Council
members, commissioners, etc. take notes when people are speaking and assure the best we can that the information they are asking about is noted and posted in the city's website. With a project of this size, there are many phases of PCO development. Numerous government
agencies and utilities are involved. The major contributors to this is like the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Natural Resources, the Minnesota State Historic Preservation
Office, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, the City of Panel, the Pine Township, the Vision County, Excel Energy, etc. There's a whole list of people that have had input into this process. I just I won't go into the details for
each area. They've been noted in the preliminary and final draft plot drafts and the planned unit development. This is all contingent on a conditional use permit and how the land will be used. Most of the items has met or exceeded
what our city code requires. The 482 acres for the project Skyway do fall into our comprehensive plan for the city of P Island with underlying I2 light industrial district zoning as being requested. Couple of items I want to
note here that were discussed at the planning and zoning meeting. Uh Craig Britain from our Lindsay can fill in more details on this when we get to that. The proponent 285,000T data center that in the project one phase one will have a closed loop
cooling system. Upon initial filling, there will need to be a chemical flush to clear out impurities from the system. That water will need to be recaptured and disposed of properly in accordance with the MTCA regulations. Any violations will be subject to fines etc
from the MTCA. There are 12 conditions for the provision of the final flat as I will defer that Craig as well and he can get into that. Um note that the city of P Island follows a Minnesota state
guidelines for communities. That's planning developments. They do have guidelines on high frequency noise. There have been some public input comments about low frequency noise. It is true at this time there is no state guidelines or recommendations on low
frequency noise that I could find. Some say that state is just trying to catch up with this development that is happening throughout the state of Minnesota. I would believe that to ensure future acceptance of PUD submissions to the city by W companies that they would want this first phase to
be a huge success not jeopardize any future development. Hence, I believe they will do their best in using acoustical noise damping chambers or whatever they can to mitigate this low frequency noise. In closing, the state
of Minnesota changes or updates to PUB in the future. Any submissions made after those changes have been enacted will need to adhere to them as each submission by Ryan Cley must follow the state's community guidelines at the time of submission.
So, thank you. I'll hand it to um also want to publicly call out uh congratulate and thank our school board. We recently observed National School Board um day and want to publicly thank our school board for all the work that
they do. We've been very fortunate to have great leadership up there as well as I think this week is National Tara Day or National Profession. >> Yes. And that is a that is a job. So
been that for about a year. So I fully appreciate and want to commend our paras and our school district for the work that they do in supporting our teachers and their students. I publicly thank them. Well, uh let's jump into administration. We
got our first item which is resolution 26-03 which is approving annexation quest. Who's taking? >> I can speak to this one, Mr. Mayor. Um so the city received an application for annexation from Ryan Companies um
requesting approximately 440 acres be annexing the city limits. Um this area was um recognized as part of a 2025 orderly annexation agreement that we have with Pine Island Township. Um both the town board and city council um
jointly approved that orderly annexation agreement. It outlined um an area recognized for future annexation. Um the purpose of those early annexation agreements is to um a streamline the annexation process. Um since both bodies
are agreeing um we can now annex land um by petition of the land owner followed by a resolution from council. Um the order of the annexation agreement also allows for the township to request a certain price um per acre for reimbursement for loss taxes. Um since
that would be land gets moved into city limits. they start paying city taxes, the township loses out on that tax revenue. Um when there are not orderly annexation agreements, um they are subject to reimbursement set by state statute. Um those reimbursement levels
are quite low. Um so as part of the um or the annexation agreement, the city will reimburse the township. Um I believe it's $495 an acre and then every year that we wait to annex um it goes up
by 5%. So the total um tax is generated that the city owes the township is $226,975.32. That cost is then reimbured to the city from the developer. So again, the city is not out any money on that. Um that annexation reimbursement is paid from
the developer to the city passes it along to the township. So um the resolution in front of you is just approving the annexation of that 440 acres as depicted. the um there is a handout of the annexation resolution. Um
there was one minor tweak um to the very last um line that reimbursement where again it talks about the city will reimburse the township. The um developer then reimbures the city. Um that way the city can kind of just
control when that reimbursement goes out um and when that paperwork gets sent on to the state for annexation. So do we have any questions? Otherwise, that's what we're looking at for resolution 2603. >> Hey, Stephen, you mentioned that the egg was 440. Is that because of the paroles
that were in the city already? >> Correct. Yep. So, later on when we talk about the um that total area is 480 acres, right? >> Um there's already about 40 acres um that was part of the AU that is already in city limits. So, this is the
remainder of that property. >> Yes, sir. make a couple of highlevel comments about uh the annexation process. Uh and I'm going to be council I'm going to be repeating myself a little bit probably from things that I said when you considered back in 25 last year entering the orderly annexation
agreement with uh Pine Island Township. You did that uh mid early last year uh and I talked about it then we got a lot of people in the room and I sort of want to say the same thing again to give context uh to what's going on here. So the background on annexations is this.
Um there are several statutes in Minnesota that address uh the expansion of cities, organized cities like the city of Pine Island. Those statutes set out conditions, a variety of different conditions depending on which statutory
provision you're looking at that give cities, frankly, I'm speaking bluntly here, give cities the ability to annex land that's in adjoining townships, whether the township agrees to that or not. Uh that understandably is the cause
of a lot of friction between cities and townships. the fact that the legislature have given cities the ability under certain conditions, carefully prescribed conditions, but under certain conditions, cities have the ability to annex land and townships uh without the township board's agreement to that. Fair
amount of friction uh historically for decades created by that framework. The other way annexations occur is this way by agreement between the town and the city. I will tell you that that has become a more common way that cities and
townships are working out annexations. This city has used the statutory process in a couple of cases historically, but we have much more commonly had agreements with your surrounding townships. And the the bottom line, as the kids say, TLDDR about um uh orderly
annexation agreements is that cities and towns can sort of agree to whatever set of conditions they want to or the annexation of chunks of land in the township, chunks of land that then become part of the state. That's what's occurred here. You've reached an agreement with the the adjoining
township with Pine Island Township about the conditions under which you're allowed to annex. And I guess the bottom line of what I wanted to say here is that the terms of that agreement, that agreement that we entered last year, are identical or virtually identical to your other agreements that you've had in the
past with other townships around you and with Pine Island Township. Uh it's a very simple agreement candidly. Uh all of your agreements have been very simple and straightforward. The primary thing addressed is just what is driving it. Is there some development potential?
Townships don't want to see cities taking land from them for speculation or for not planned developments. And so there is a condition that there be a real development proposal in front of you. And there is a provision for reimbursement to the township of taxes
that it will lose when that land is no longer in the township. It is now part of the city. That is a very common maybe in every quarterly annexation agreement in the state. I don't know. but it's in the vast majority of them that there is some reimbursement to a township that is losing a chunk of land and thus losing
that tax revenue. So I guess the bottom line is I want I want you to know that the agreement that you have with the township that you entered last year very very common among all cities and towns. It's exactly the same as your other agreements that you've had with surrounding towns including Pine Island
Township. And uh I think your staff has now reported to you and I would agree the conditions of that annexation agreement are met here. So it's appropriate if you want to uh to move forward with the annexation. Thank you. >> I'll move resolution 253 approving the
annexation request. >> I'll second a motion and a second on 26-03 which is the annexation request. Um any other discussion? Like I already said, Bob stated, you
know, we've gone through this process with neighboring townships and very thankful we have the working relation with our township boards around us. So otherwise, Delena, >> hi. >> Colton, >> hi. >> Vernon, >> hi. >> Brandy,
>> hi. They will be I. Which brings us to resolution resolution 26-04 accepting a donation for $79,148.88 from the Pan Fire Relief Association. You taking this one, Stephen?
>> I am indeed. So, um this is something that we're we're lucky enough to do um every year. Our Pen Island Fire Relief Association um through their charitable gambling um donates a portion of that money to the city every year. Um the city then accepts that in um to be used
on expenses for the fire department throughout the year. Um so for auditing purposes, I know we do um a monthly resolution accepting donations that we kind of have trickle in. um just due to the size of this one. Um we have it split off in our own um resolution one
just again for auditing purposes, it's easy to find um to pass along to make sure we're doing everything um correctly there. And then also just to kind of show our appreciation for that donation fun association for use on our fire department.
>> Does that donation go into the fire department pension fund thing that we support too or where does it go? No, it's it yeah, general fund should just be used on on fire budgeted fire department expenses.
>> It's donations between governing bodies of the rural fire and the city profession. >> Okay. >> Donations from the fire relief association. >> I'll second that. >> Motion in a second. Any discussion? I'd
like to thank our relief association for their work. >> All right. Belina, >> I burn. >> Hi, >> Randy. >> Hi. >> And David I >> which brings us to resolution 26-05
which is counting of writing votes for municipal elections. We got elections coming up this year. >> We do indeed. And this is kind of just a housekeeping item um for the upcoming election. Um prior to um write in votes
that came in on city elections, um the city was required to count all votes um regardless of what is written in whether it is a real person or not. Um the federal election, state election, and county elections were all given the option to impose standards on writein
candidates. Um, one of them that, um, staff is opting for or suggesting here is all right in candidates who intend to receive votes during the election must notify, um, the chief election um, officer at least 19 days prior to the
election. Um, just so we know that there will be writein candidates. We know who to look for when we're looking through writein um, options. So the state um passed legislation to expand that requirement um and give that power to municipalities as well. Um so now all
levels of government have that option to adopt a resolution that lays out that framework. Um so that is what staff is recommending at this time um through resolution 2605 um that 19 days prior to an election um individual would have to notify um in this instance the city
clerk um 19 days prior to the election that they intend to be a writing candidate and receive votes. So it should just make for a little more efficient counting of ballots on election day. We appreciate our watching judges.
>> Resolution 2605 coming of writing vote for the board of election. >> Second motion a second for resolution 26-05. This can help our election that any questions not Delena.
>> Hi. >> Hi >> Randy. Hi David. >> All right. Goes to item B which is you amend the extensions to economic impact analysis that you I apologize. I did not I was
going to try to pronounce your last name but I didn't ask beforehand so welcome sir. >> Hello. Uh my name is Aiden Opats. Um I am the community economics educator for southeastern Minnesota for the University of Minnesota.
Um I have completed a at the request of the city uh economic impact analysis of the proposed data center. Um again this is purely an economic impact analysis. So I'll start with a few definitions. Um
when I mean direct effect I mean the initial change. Indirect effect is business to business impacts. Induced defects is customer to business impacts and labor income is employee compensation plus proprietor income.
So assumptions and limitations of my analysis. These numbers measure the potential impact of construction and operation of the data center in a good company. Um these numbers will vary depending on the potential employees who
decide to live in Pine Island. This also goes for um construction workers at least limited the economic impact will be limited um by how many uh construction workers decide to live in
Pine Island or currently live in Pine Island. Um these numbers uh will vary depending on what percentage of the budget is for mechanical, electrical and plumbing. Uh further referred to as MEP. These numbers will vary depending on the
type of data center built. Construction costs um this is has actually been updated. Um the construction cost will be 700 million over two years. um and projected maximum of 100 permanent
employees. So I'm going to start with important questions to consider and ask when looking through this data and there is a report that goes along with this presentation. What type of data center is being proposed? What does the developer
already have? Um does the developer already have occupant an occupant or occupants in mind? Um how many employees would business need? Where will they work? Where will they live?
So the types of data centers enterprise data centers a dedicated facility um that a single large organization owns or leases to house its critical IT infrastructure. collocation data centers, many independent companies all
seeing from one data center, uh cloud computing data centers, a whole enterprise data centers that focus on infrastructure related to cloud services than ISP data centers. Um enterprise data centers tend to have uh more people
uh working in the location or required to work physically in a location. um but tend to be slightly lower paying jobs. A lot of computing data centers are the AI what people tend to think of
when they think of AI data centers and these tend to be higher paying jobs but more of an ability to not live where they work. Um so construction again these are maximum
totals um and will be heavily dependent on where the workers actually live because what we have found is that people spend the money their money where they live not necessarily where they work.
So um in scenario one when the MEP is 70% there will be a maximum full-time equivalent employment of 750550 workers 755 workers um with ranges of the nearly
700 or 77 million um and this goes when MEP is 80%. So this range of 70 to 80% is what professionals usually um and experts in this industry usually find the ME budget
to be. Um but with math with 80% MEP um the employment will be 640 uh with nearly $66 million worth of wages. But again this is heavily impacted by where people live. Um and
this is that is the direct uh impact. So this is directly the employees that will be hired to construct the data center in the table two it is the total. So this includes indirect and induced as well.
So in order to build a data center, materials will have to be purchased um and then people who have wages will spend those wages and those will impact local jobs. So um we see a maximum of
100 1,120 uh full-time equivalent equivalent jobs impacted with nearly $und00 million worth of wages. And this is um the other end of this range. Again, maximum is 990
uh jobs impacted with $87 million worth of wages. These impacts, so the uh indirect and induced impacts will be seen most likely in food service and drinking places, the restaurants and bars, professional,
scientific and technical services. This includes lawyers and then merchant wholes wholesalers goods. Again this is where buying building materials will come into play. So more importantly the long-term
impacts which is the operation of the data center. Um so I have uh created a range of if 100% of the projected maximum 100 employees were to live and work in Pine Island what that would be
and then down to if 25% of the employees would live or work um in Pine Island what the impact would of that would be. I used um median income as well as wage statistics for data centers in Minnesota
to determine how this would break break out. And we see a range of uh about the total impact of $16 million worth of labor impact per year to down to uh $2
million worth of labor impact per year. uh with the direct impact being under 10 million to um just above 1 and a half million of labor income.
Again, the jobs that will be uh indirectly um and in the due effect will be administrative and support services. So this would be people helping uh file taxes or file work with the city if
people are going to be moving here. Um again restaurants and bars and then real estate if people do end up working or living here um they will need to find a home. And so if you have any questions
um feel free to reach out to me. Again, I work for all of southeastern Minnesota. So, this I can be contacted by both city and residents. Um, I will also state that it is important to
consider what the current housing stock availability is and vacancy rate. If it is under 5% already, then you do have um what is considered a housing shortage and therefore the projected number of
people who are able to live here um will be significantly smaller as they won't be able to find a home to live. That is all >> question. Are you are you're with a few of them. Are you out of Rochester since
you do southeast Minnesota or >> Yes, I'm based out of Rochester. >> Um council, I did just want to make one comment also. Um I'm not sure if Aiden covered it in there, but um all of the economic impact is based off of the
figures for phase one. So this is not full buildout. Um this is just based off of um the information we have for the proposed phase one this report is on the city website. >> Yep. So this uh sorry um the slideshow
will be on the website as well as he had mentioned um he has like the full technical report that gets a little more in detail. Um both of which will be available. Can you pull back to the U construction right there in scenario two where you
got a decreasing there in the contribution in the wages and stuff and employment is that because you know from 70 to 80% it's getting completed or no um so what that means is uh if a high
percentage of the budget is goes towards mechanical Electrical plumbing means those that industry tends to be higher more specialized and therefore um there will be fewer laborers. Um but if you I
believe if you divide the actual wages by number of laborers um it still stays relatively same. >> Okay. Thanks. Thank you. Good morning. Anything else for Thank you.
All right, Mitch. >> All right. So, up next, we have the the property valuations and tax estimates for projects guide. Um, and I'll make Stephen has the slide pulled up so everyone can see. Perfect. Uh so first I want to just go over how property taxes
in Minnesota are calculated. Um so the very first thing that is determined is the taxable market value. This is determined by the county assessor's office. Um and then we use this uh number that they provide to calculate
the net tax capacity and that is a formula provided by the state of Minnesota which essentially is the taxable market value times the classification rate. Um, and then that rate will eventually go to determining the property taxes. So I have a couple different things laid out for you that
are the most common. Uh, so the net tax capacity for local taxes on class 3A property that's commercial industrial that's above project sky would be. Uh, so how those are how that net tax capacity is calculated would be first $150,000 of taxable market value is at
1.5% and then everything over is at 2%. Uh, and then the next one there is the taxes on class A, which is residential homestead. That's just where you live typically. Uh, so the first $500,000 of taxable market value is at 1% and
everything over is 1.25%. So then in order to actually calculate how much property taxes you have to pay, you take that net tax capacity number, multiply by the tax rate uh for the uh given tax authority. So here we're
focusing solely on city taxes. Um so for example uh that I have there is if a residential and commercial property were both valued at $500,000 and how that gets broken down as you can see the residential uh property would be
$4,100 in uh city taxes. That's assuming an 82% rate which was the tax rate for Pine Island in 2025. Um that number can fluctuate so just as we continue moving forward keep that in mind. And then the commercial, as you can see, is 7,585.
Um, so it's nearly double the amount of city taxes for commercial versus residential, which is why it's so important that we continue to grow commercially, not just residentially because if you grow too much residential versus commercial, that tax uh the taxes
the tax burden is pushed off onto the residents rather than the commercial bid. So on to the next slide. So I want to preface this one with their all just estimations and projections. We won't know any final data until a building is
constructed and the county assessor has given an exact value. Um but what we do have is an estimated value from good counties assessor's office based on information that the developer was able to provide to the sensory. Um so with that they have an approximate value of
about $45 million. And to put that in perspective, the current taxable market value for all existing commercial and industrial property in 2025 of Pine Island was $47,640,200. Um, so the taxable market value would nearly double for commercial industrial
the first phase that's being proposed. Um, so again, what does this mean for property taxes? That net tax capacity based on the formulas that we just talked about would be $899,250 and the city property taxes as you can
see would be 737 thou 737,385 annually. Again, that assumes that is valued at 45 million and the city tax rate is 82%. Both of those numbers could change. We won't know for sure until
everything is built and assessed. in your estimate the land is for the pool project skyway. >> Yep. So um just the phase that's being propo proposed the one data center office and the land
the land's not for the 482 acres. Uh, no. The 45 million that's including I think it's the 85 acres. Yep. Okay. >> And the one building and the >> Okay. Y uh so potential future investment. Um I
just have listed out what was listed in the A about what could potentially be built. Um so we've all seen that number before. I won't go into that in too much detail. Uh but going down to what would be taxable market value of future uh buildings um of equal size. So if they
were all the same size as what's being proposed, the taxable market value of just the building would be approximately $37 million. Um that would not include any land that it sits on because we don't know how much land it would sit on if that's 10 acres, 20 acres, 30 acres,
we don't know. Um so then the difference between those two the 37 million and that 45 million comes down to it having the one data center building the office building and that land. That's why there's that difference in values there.
I'd be happy to pick any questions if anyone has any. >> Any any questions for me else on that one? And like he said, a lot of he's not. So
>> yeah, I appreciate that. >> Thank you, M. >> All right, we got let's go to preventing commission 181, which is including the B. Who's taking this one? Stephen,
I can kind of start on here. Um so before you um is a request for a zoning amendment. Um just kind of some background on zoning amendments before we get to the actual proposal. Um city code 11.61
govern zoning amendments. Um so this outlines kind of the timeline, what's included in applications as well as um the public hearing process and things like that. Um this petition for zoning amendment is subject to Minnesota statute 1599. That is the one that lays
it out. Um the 60day timeline for a council decision. Um we received these final applications in um mid December. Uh the 60 days would fall before the February council meeting. So that is why it is here before you in January. Um the
planning commission um is tasked with holding the public hearing for any zoning amendments. Um the planning commission did hold that public hearing on the 13th. Um following that they issued a recommendation of approval of the zoning amendment um 50.
Um in here I just kind of briefly list um I touch on it much more in depth in the actual memo in your council packet, but these are the factors um council should consider um when thinking of zoning amendments. Um they are consistent consistency with the city's
comprehensive plan compatibility with current and future land uses uh conformity to code standards accommodating um or being able to be accommodated by existing public services and then traffic generation u being handled by streets serving the property. Um, like I
said, I uh we lay out findings for each of those um in the staff report as well as the reszone ordinance in front of you. Um, ordinance 181. Um, so that is what you look at when it comes to um
zoning amendments on a whole. Uh, moving into the application that we've received, um, we received the petition for annexation, which brings land into uh, city limits. all newly annexed land um annex into city limits is designated
as agriculture um just by default. So the reszone application is requesting um a reszone from agricultural to light industrial. Um the light industrial also includes a PUD overlay. Um we'll get to that later on here, but essentially um
I2 or light industrial is the base zoning district and then the PUD would allow for um revisions to that. If it is not addressed in that PUD, it reverts back to that light industrial designation. Um so when you're looking at light
industrial according to our city code, um there's the definition in 1151. Um the purpose of light industrial district is to provide for an area for industrial light manufacturing and office uses that are generally non-intrusive and which they serve as a transition between intensive sites and residential and
business land uses. Um the city finds that this is consistent with um city staff finds that this is consistent with the proposal before you. Um the AU lists out again those manufacturing um land use possibilities
as well as um office use. Um when you look at the definition of heavy industrial within our city code um the definition itself is very similar. However, the proposed uses or the permitted uses um have a much more um
heavy transportation footprint. Um it accounts for um distribution centers, transportation hubs, um areas that would have um large traffic counts, um large trucking footprints, um and then also
large amounts of discharge, whether it's wastewater or other pollutants. Um that's not the case with this. Um based on the traffic study done in the AU um the traffic footprint of the proposed uh development scenarios here are much
lighter than what is considered and found in uh your traditional heavy industrial. Um beyond that we also look to the state for further um guidance when it comes to the definitions of um certain facilities. So um according to
the Minnesota administrative rules, the environmental quality board defines light industrial facility is a category of industrial land use with a primary function other than manufacturing and that has less than 500 employees. Um the primary function again here is not um
manufacturing at this time. Um it is um more office space warehousing and then it would fall under that 500 employees. So that is where we sit as it comes to definitions within our code. And then just for a reference um some of these
standards for approval um speak to the consistency with the comprehensive plan. Um and on the screen you can see this is the future land use um map for the city of Pine Island. Um and the area that we are looking at reszoning has a future
land use designation of industrial. Um we went back to the 2011 comprehensive plan as well as they did like a mid mid decade comprehensive plan in '05. Um and both the 2005 and 2011 had this area
designated as industrial and or commercial. Um so it has always as far back as as we could find um has always been slotted for this type of development. Um we spoke with some members of the planning commission and council members who were on future
planning um committees in the 90s and they they had similar things to say. Um so that is uh the consistency that we're looking with the comprehensive plan. So um I can answer any questions you may have or like I said um there's a lot more detail on uh the findings of those
conditions and in the memo and the ordinance. questions for Stephen. So by first place right Stevens that means back then they were thinking of another
section of um being like industrial or commercial in that area. Is that right? >> Um the maps back then were a little less technical. Um they were they were they were handdrawn essentially. Um so
the the line in which they um >> we got 195th in our comprehensive plan, >> right? So everything um in all the prior ones everything from 195th uh >> to the east or to the west to 52 was all
um industrial and then everything north of 500th was not addressed in those comprehensive plans. Um we hadn't moved that far north at that time. Um, so it it wasn't designated at all >> for residential or otherwise.
>> Mayor, >> yes sir. >> I made a sort of one comment slash question to Stephen. Uh, I know I've heard that public comment tonight and then public comment at the last meeting and I suspect uh the same comments were made at the planning commission maybe
twice now. uh that um this proposed use or the two alternative uses laid out in the AU are not a perfect fit for what your I2 district is described as in your code. Uh and of course that's true. Uh
it is true that it is not a perfect fit. That is the reason for item C on the agenda tonight. Right. EBD approval that's being requested is to make some modifications to the underlying I2 to accommodate the differences or the discrepancies between
what's being proposed and your IT. So it is true that it is not a perfect fit. I think and this is I guess the question Stephen my understanding is that uh this the staff inclusion that's now supported by unanimous vote of the planning
commission is that in effect the I2 district is the closest and most compatible district for the uses that are being proposed here and I will just tell you based on what you see in your pack of the overarching language about
what the purpose for your I2 zone is I think that's absolutely correct right your I2 zone is intended for light industrial which your code then describes in a couple of ways. This set of these two proposed alternative um
scenarios fit quite comfortably within those descriptions of what the purpose for your I2 zone is. There are again some discrepancy in terms of height of buildings and things like that, but the basic purpose for your I2 district
matches quite comfortably uh the alternatives uh that you have in front of you. So, I just want to spell that out because that's the comment that I think you've heard now already. You probably heard it outside of public comment and public hear it yourselves individually in other ways. And so, um I
mean that just has to be recognized. That is the purpose for a PUB in a city's code and that's the reason there is a request here for a PUB. More questions council action >> table.
Mayor Mayor before you take the vote just so I this is just for efficiency sake because I would be able to make this comment on each of the ABC items here by Stephen's presentation assistant administrator's presentation points out the uh deadline the timeline for action
with the legislature and public I will tell you as a lawyer for a bunch of cities I'm sympathetic to the uh request the argument that you should pause I think that's been immediately released by a number of writings you should pause the process I'm sympathetic to that I mean I I've faced many situations as a
consultant lawyer to cities where it would be nice be able to pause things. You can't the legislature has said that once an application is made of this type. There are deadlines for action. And just to be clear, I know you know this, but to be clear, it's not as though a city that fails to meet those
deadlines is just acting outside the law and might be sued over it. It's that the law says if you fail to act, the approval is granted. So, it's not as though you can just ignore that and pause things and then sort of hope that you don't get sued over it. That's not how it works. The approval is granted if
you don't act. So, it's it's it's not there isn't there isn't much of them. I wish as a lawyer for the cities that there there would be frankly, but there isn't. >> Thank you. >> Second. Okay. Um, anything else? >> Thank you, Bob.
>> Elena, >> I spluren. >> Hi, >> Brandy. >> Hi, >> David. Willie, I thank you, Bob. Brings us to item B, resolution 26-06, which is including a final flat. But
before, want to take two tape in that? >> Yep. I'll start out and then I'll kind of pass it on to Craig um as we get going here. So um again just a little bit of background on um the platting process. The platting process is governed by um city code section 12 or
chapter 12. It's considered a subdivision code. Platting is essentially subdividing land with multiple smaller parcels. Um flat submissions undergo both a preliminary and final review and approval by both the planning commission and city council. Um the planning commission
again is tasked with um holding public hearings for um matters that come through the subdivision code. Uh the planning commission had a public hearing on the 13th of January and issued a 50 recommendation of approval. Um final
plat submissions um come along with the official plat document. Um it outlines um what the subdivision of those parcels looks like. Um it incorporates uh recommendations
that were made during the preliminary process. Um along with that, it is submitted with grading, development, and erosion plans. Again, those are things that come in during the preliminary. Um staff provides feedback um as well as multiple state and county agencies. And
then um the final submission incorporates those. Um when it comes to grading and the erosion plan um that was uh linked to you um the final grading plan was um amended and had some updates made to it. Um I can kind of pass it
over to Craig here and we can talk about those changes that were made and kind of some of the comments that were incorporated and what we need to still incorporate going forward. >> Mayor and council. So, um, yes, I'll run through the, uh, the conditions. So, as council member Paul had mentioned, uh, there were 12 conditions that were
placed on the, uh, on the final plat. Um, and those were recommended to the planning commission and, uh, ultimately recommended for approval uh, unanimous unanimously to the council. Um the reason that we have 11 uh conditions that are shown um basically the first
condition that we had for the uh preliminary plating commission was that they the developer show include all the appropriate approvals and signature blocks on the um on the title page for the final plat. Uh that condition was met so that we removed that condition um
as a condition of approval. So, um the uh the other items we did, uh reword some of the language there, but um with the other 11, I can brief you run through those if you'd like. Um but like Stephen mentioned, we did touch on the storm water management plan and review
as well. Um so the first item is u that the PL would be subject to uh the PL opinion by the city attorney boss. So he looks it over and uh just make sure that the PL is in compliance with state statutes and city's requirements. So uh
that's one thing that um um that Bob will be reviewing. Uh the storm water uh treatment um again we did review the storm water management plan that has been um reviewed. We did provide comments to the developer. They provided uh responses to
those. Uh so the uh storm water management plan shows that uh they are meeting u the uh storm water requirements um in place by the MPCA and uh and so we're um um also recommending that pond maintenance agreement be
entered into. So uh there are two proposed public ponds uh that that collect uh the runoff from proposed rightway and those would be maintained by the city. um the rest of the ponds within the development would be um would
be maintained by the developer. The um another um condition is that the developer issue a title policy included the city on. So this protects the city in the event that there's any defect in title. Uh so it shows that the developer
um or the proposer has bigger title change of property. Um the construction plans uh specifications and uh drainage report. Um so uh we do have a final development plan but there are also construction plans that are provided by the developer uh both for the off-site
improvements. So the infrastructure that has uh extended out to the property and then also within the property. Uh so um staff reviews those and then provides uh review comments to the developer u to address. Um items five and six deal with
public easements. So there's a proposed water need uh that's that's going to be extended um along 500 street. So when the final alignment is determined then we ask that that is provided in the public fees for in favor of the city. Um
and also item six that there um like I mentioned there are proposed um public ponds and those would be storm water pond and those would be you would need to have those in a in a drainage easement so the city could access that for uh for maintenance. Um item seven is
a um the development agreement. So that's um in front of me here tonight as well for review. Um and uh item and so that's a condition that um the developer enter into that development agreement with the city. Um item eight uh deals
with other agencies. So MDOT um we'll also look at the access requirements and also the um any work within the right of way requires MDOT's approval. Um um and item nine is um an access permit. So um
any sort of access on to highway 52 will require an access per. So um they have also reviewed the plat and provided any shortcomings to us. Um item 10 the final plat um shall incorporate any revisions
by MDOT the county surveyor and county recorder. So, uh, those documents were sent over for their review. Um, and we just ask that they incorporate, um, any, uh, required revisions, uh, that that are, um, that are stated. And then, um,
and then finally that the final PLA be recorded by any of the acquisition of a property. So, uh, those are the 11 conditions. And, um, happy to answer any any questions that you might have. >> I have a couple for you, Greg. Um, in
regards to say the uh number five here with the public facility easement, do we have to specify on there the uh provisions with a loop coming back to county 11 and a rightway easement for that?
>> Yep. So any um any sort of um public infrastructure that would be outside of public rightway would require these things. Yes. or should not included a number five as well because it only says about 195th and 500 street to 52
>> from 52 then also back on the west side back down the county level. >> Yeah. So we're unsure if that's going to need an easement there. Um so that's that's the only reason that we wouldn't have that as a condition. Okay. Okay. But yes, any any sort of um public
infrastructure that is outside of a red play would need to be met. Yes. >> I was just making sure that that's covered, you know, through the land of Rostead and or however that's going to be done with with men and everything involved.
>> No. And that's right. We we could add that to um just and we could state it as that if if we added to item five that any public infrastructure outside of the rightway would require um >> things I would continue to have at least
an open here so that you've got that loop system covered there are issues that arise from that. >> Sure put that on that would be great. >> Yeah. Mayor, yes, if I may, I think the easiest way to address that good point the council
member would be I think you you probably fix that in one word. Um you could add the word including between public water main and then along. So in other words, public utility in favor of city shall be required for the public water main including along 500 street. So, we know
we know one place where we're going to need these, but there may be another place where we need additional and by putting the word including in there, that would cover that. >> I just want to get the the west half of the coverage too. >> Sure. Yep. Good points.
>> And I do have a question on the drainage ponds that we will respond for. Um, Mr. Robinson, there any issues that you see with the plan or anything from a public? how I deal with them now.
I mean, it's it's something that happens without all the developments. >> I mean, is that will these ponds be like what we have on say out there at the end of number three here where there's a drainage pond is that the type of pond that we're talking about? Yeah, the the
detail on the ponds, we'll we'll be getting a little more detail on those as well, but uh but yes, either in um infiltration or excuse me, filtration basins or um or wet sedimentation basins. So, the wet set basins do hold
water, but the filtration basins uh draw down because there's a sand under layer and then a subdrain that discharges. >> And these are the Yeah, these are specified as So I would assume they're the draw down ones. >> Yep. There there are some reasons. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Mayor Council, the the predictable concern uh the city would have there is that uh we don't want to enter an arrangement where we're required to do maintenance of a facility like that that we can't do or would have a difficult
time doing. Uh and that's intended, as I understand, to be covered by, as you see in this condition, a public drainage easement in favor of the city shall be established to address this. So to be clear, that easement, an easement is an agreement. That agreement will address
the city's maintenance requirements and we aren't going to enter, we aren't going to propose to you, that document. It'll have to come back to you. Uh we aren't going to propose to you any conditions that uh public works and and Craig indicate would be infeasible for us today to do, right?
they will need access and that's where the season comes in. Y you wanted to add that or you know mayor since he offered it up of course I can't say no um uh the first condition about a plat opinion um you will have seen plat
opinions from my office in the past they're usually kind of boilerplate looking little things this is not going to be that I guess maybe I'm saying this for Ryan's benefit but um uh anytime you've got assemblage of a number of different parcels uh in this case I
think quite quite a number 7 8 10 11 something like that um with all with different ownership arrangements that the purpose for the plat opinion the basic purpose for the plat opinion is to make sure that all parties that have interest in the land being platted
consent to the plat they agree to the plat okay because the plat is impacting their property rights in that property. So, they have to consent to it. So, the key thing that the flat opinion does is identify all of those interests, easements, mortgages,
other types of interests that folks may have in addition to outright ownership of the property. And that that will all have to be satisfied. And I'll tell you, it's going to be I think quite a few easement andor mortgage or ownership interests here. They're going to have to be addressed. So there'll be some work
for Ryan to do on that after we get the plat opinion out and I'm assert that they've already looked this themselves and are starting to work on that. But there will be quite a few quite a few folks that will need to sign off on this to to make happen. >> Thank you. >> Anything else?
Um I do just have one more point that is it's repeat information but just for the sake of um saying it um on the screen you have uh a picture of the south portion of that property again um so the Pine Island Industrial Platt that's the
name Pine Island Industrial um in proposing again just the platting of lot one block one um it's the 80 or so acres abudding Highway 52 um the rest of the area um on the southern portion as well
as on the northern portion um will just be divided into out lots of A, B, and C. Um so they're they are proposing subdividing into at this time four lots. Um if there is future development planned for outlaws A, B, and C. Um again, it would have to be replatted to
do so. >> Thank you, Stephen. else otherwise this could be an action item. >> I'll wait for approval of the rule 247 >> a motion and a second on the floor for resolution 26.06.
Any other questions or comments? Thanks for clarification. Not Delena. >> Hi, >> Colton. Hi. Vernon, >> I Brandy W. I
Which brings us to resolution 267 approving the final development of planning condition and use. Who's taking this? I will I will start out again here. Um so in the packet um you received the um
Pine Island Industrial POD narrative document. That's their uh developer final um development plan submission. Um it outlines again the um the ways in which the proposed development uh varies
from code. That's why we're using um the PUD um to set additional standards or tweak um current light industrial standards um to address this specific development. Again, uh the PUD is approved via a conditional use permit.
Um so there are in city code a list of standards that um the development must meet for PUD as well as a list of standards for a standard conditional use permit. Um so there are in your uh resolution before you 2607 a whole
laundry list of um findings again goes much further into depth than I will go um in this presentation but uh there are findings for each of those standards laid out in the C conditional use permit um authorization and the plan unit
development authorization um and then as well as a list in the um findings of that resolution that lists again all of the areas in which the planned unit development strays from light industrial code. If it is not mentioned in there,
it defaults back to that underlying district of light industrial. Um so again, this came before you um last month as a preliminary development plan. Um the planning commission and city council um proposed changes and updates
to be made with the submission of the final plan, the preliminary plan. Um since most of those standards um exceed current code standards, there were not um too many recommended amendments. Um, one that I do want to touch on uh here
and on the next slide is the original development plan had an exemption from the noise standards for um emergency power generation generation testing maintenance. Um so generator testing things like that um and maintenance on the facility that has
been removed. Um there would be no exception for that. Uh those um testing and maintenance would occur during normal business hours as laid out in the resolution and would comply with uh those noise standards. So, um, noise again has been kind of the big, um, I
would say the topic that we've received the most feedback on. Um, again, looking to, uh, the MPCA, state noise standards is more restrictive than current noise standards within our city code. Um, so by adopting the MPCA standards for this
project, um, we're actually cutting down on the allowable noise from what we were to if our city code, um, stayed in place. Um so again uh as we kind of continue on with this another amendment that the city pushed back on was um any
future phase will meet MPCA standards at the time of building permit. Um so they the current MPCA standards that are approved now would not oftent times whatever is approved at the beginning of the development would continue on with the property um be grandfathered in as
we go. um that was not our intention. Um and we wanted to make sure that those standards were were continuously updated. Um so every time there is a building permit applied for whatever the current MPCA state noise standard is um that would apply. So if it continues to become more restrictive um those more
restrictive standards would apply. Um I also just want to make uh a quick point of Minnesota statute uh 116.07 07 um lays out powers described to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Um and it does not allow for local
governing units like municipalities to set uh standards that set maximum noise level more stringent than the MPCA. Um this goes for uh air quality restrictions as well. Um the city cannot
go above and beyond um MPCA guidelines for noise and uh and uh sound and air quality. Um so going forward um whatever those MPCA standards are is what would apply to this development. And then um
kind of in that same vein any air permitting um that would be needed through the MPCA would again meet those standards because we would not be able to describe something more strict. Um, I have listed here just other code considerations that the PUD touches on.
Um, we address each of these in the presentation we gave last month. Um, if you have questions or need reminders on what some of them are, we can certainly dig into that just for um, you know, the sake of time having the same presentation three or four times. Um, we
just wanted to list what those were and and give you an opportunity to ask questions. Um but again each of them are mentioned in that PUD narrative that is in the packet. I don't know if maybe Bob wants to touch on how our code is written when it comes
to the authorization of a PUB via a conditional use permit >> and just kind of explain >> why it is the way that it is. >> Yeah. Um, >> yes.
Um, yeah, I'm trying to think the the easiest way to describe that. So, uh, I heard again when I at a prior meeting, um, a reference to the city granting some variances here. Uh, and I think I
understand the point of those comments because that's right. Now, the city is granting some modifications to what would otherwise apply in the I2 district, but they now resone this property, too. Uh, and so I understand why some would refer to that as variances, but technically what's going
on here isn't a variance request. A variance in Minnesota uh has to meet certain specified legal standards. This is by state law. Uh and u I think the person making this comment previously and tonight said and you can't grant
uses that the zoning district doesn't otherwise allow by variance. You can't give a variance in a district that doesn't allow uh a uh processing plant. You can't grant a variance that allows a processing plant in that district. That's not the way variances can be
used. Um uh PUDs are distinct from variances. PUVs are much more akin to in fact I would say that they are really the same as a reszoning. It is the creation of a unique zoning district for a particular proposed use in a part of
the city. That unique zoning district has to be consistent with the comp plan. You've already heard about how that is the case here and you heard about how what is being proposed here really involves relatively minor modifications to the otherwise applicable I2 zoning.
So that's all in the way of background. What's unique about the way uh we do it here in Pine Island is that it's very common in many cities, many of the cities I represent for a city to create a PUB, a planning unit development district literally via a zoning
ordinance. In other words, cities will often literally make the PUD a unique zoning district. All right? By zoning ordinance, it is lawful to and what Pine Island does is we grant the PUB by
conditional use permit. You have got conditional use permit requirements. You'll have to be met and and the staff has laid out the reasons why they're met here. Uh but you you do your PUDS by granting a C fee. That's what's a little
bit unique is maybe an overstatement. It's not unique. There are plenty of cities that do it that way. I think the predominant approach is to literally do it by reszoning, but it is legal to do it by C and that's the way you do it. And so that's the somewhat unique is the
right word, but out of out of the the majority uh way of doing uh PEDs. So that was a lot of words. That was more than two minutes. But if you have qu that may not have made sense. So if that didn't make sense after I can talk for another 10 minutes about it
questions for Bob, >> right? I move resolution 2607 approving the final development planning conditional use permit. I'll second a second on the resolution. Any other comments, questions?
>> I do have one final comment. Um yes, sir. >> The copy of the resolution 2607 that you have as a handout. um does differ from the one in the packet just in the so this one includes exhibit A1 and A2
which are the two um property legal descriptions um of what the property is as it stands now and then what the property description will be um once that plat is imported. So that is what changed from what's in the packet to now is just the inclusion of those three.
>> Thank you. That's Stephen. Um, we have a motion to second. Correct. Yes. Um, anything else? Hear none. Delena. >> Holton. >> Hi. >> Vernon. >> Hi. >> Brandy. >> Hi. >> We thank you for your work on that one.
Which brings us to public works and engineering, which is item A, a request to approve P industrial development agreement. That was me. >> Yep. So, um, as you heard Craig touch on, one of the conditions of that final
plat is that the city enter into, um, a development agreement. Uh, this one is quite lengthy, um, in comparison to some of our others just with the size and the assurities that the the city wants to make. Um so some of the main things that are outlined in a development agreement
between a developer and a city is um mainly the construction of infrastructure improvements um that they've laid out um when it comes to public utilities as well as roadways. Um the development agreement includes an estimation of costs um that Craig has
reviewed um the estimated cost of about $16 million for those infrastructure um improvements as well as financial uh securities that are provided to the city. Um in the event that those are not completed by the developer um they provide us with financial securities
that it can be completed. Um, in that instance, I know our financial adviser, um, Mike Bubani with David Brown Associates has um, reviewed this actually as part of the the PUD um, to make sure that the developer has adequate funding to complete these
projects. And he did issue a letter to the city saying that he he has reviewed their finances and they do indeed have um, adequate uh, funds to to complete all of the improvements that they have uh, proposed. Um some other things that
are included in here would be um some standard items like calculations of fees associated with uh city utility access. So your water access fees, sewer access fees, storm water access fees. Um those are all fees that developers have to pay per acre um or per developable acre to
connect to city infrastructure. um these are used um for the maintenance of that infrastructure and the the public extensions that go to um different developments. Um I can kind of hand it over to Craig because he kind of knows
the ins and outs of the engineering side of the development agreement. >> Y mayor and council. So uh like Stephen had mentioned the u the number of developable items. So, as part of this phase one, uh, so lot one, block one, there approximately 62 acres of
developable land. So, all of the city fees that Stephen had mentioned, the sewer access, water access, storm water access, um, those all would be applied to that 62 acres. Um, and the current rate for the uh, for those city fees are
$2,500 per acre. Um, that's the the current rate, too. So, um, so those would be paid. The other thing um that uh the developer is responsible for because really the uh development agreement outlines um outlines the terms of the development. Um and then with
that within that we have um the responsibilities um of the developer and also the city but uh um a lot of the um um a lot of this falls on the developer for um because the public infrastructure is being extended to the property. So,
um, so all of the city fees, um, that's outlined in, um, section 3.4 and 3.8, um, all of the the city fees, so Bob's fees, the legal fees, um, engineering fees, any sort of construction observation, uh, those are all paid for
by the developer, um, and those are those are paid for um, um, upfront. And, uh, um, so the city costs are covered on that. Um but other than that I um happy to answer any other questions that you
have um on the on any sort of any of the sections outlined on the development agreement. >> Mayor. >> Yes sir. I can just two comments about the agreement. Obviously this agreement is near and dear to my heart. Craig and I and the staff have worked a fair
amount on this with Ryan folks and their legal council and um and uh part of my job is occasionally have to say unpopular things. Uh and I'm going to say two of those unpopular things now. Uh, one is that what's unique, a little
bit unique about this agreement is that um, most of the improvements that we're talking about, they're public improvements that this agreement addresses are offsite improvements, improvements that are not being made within the development property, but rather around it, uh, leading to it,
getting utilities to it, getting a turn lane made, things like that that are offsite improvements. It is very very common for developers to resist or flat out refuse to enter agreements regarding improvement painful improvements off the site of the developer. Uh that is not
the case here. Brian has agreed to I think essentially everything that we've asked for uh with respect to off-site improvements. The other thing I would say is that um your standard development agreement is standard. Um it is not unlike many cities development agreements. But because of the magnitude
of this development, the relative size of this development, a number of the obligations that we have that are standard are going to be quite expensive for the developer. And understandably um in a number of cases they asked to relax those requirements or get rid of them
altogether. And the answer has been essentially uniformly no. And here they are um agreeing to all of those requirements that again are going to increase the cost of this development. And so uh that's those are the facts. Um this is an agreement that we have not in
any material way um given away anything that's you know not a legal term but we have we have not negotiated away anything of significance here. Um and there are costs that are being imposed. Um and developers agreed to all that
council. >> Anything else? >> Appreciate clarification. >> I'll move over the industrial building. >> I'll second that. A motion to second floor.
Anything else? Stephen hearing none. I'm going to call Delena. >> I >> Vera >> I >> Brandy will be I
>> brings us to item B overhead doors. Let me take it council. Uh for the year 2026, we budgeted three
separate projects at the city shop and this is one of the three um replacement overhead or larger I'll just get our equipment in. We got three quotes or three separate
codes. One for construction put new header in and then the door cost and the old electrical and it comes to 17,83 but just looking for your approval to proceed with this project.
This is for the building to the north. >> Like Todd had said, this was budgeted project. We knew it was coming. So it was included in the 2026 budget, but we just like to keep you a breast of things that are going on larger price. So
>> there walked through it when you showed it is used to be a big overhead truck. The door in there. 1985 building. Yeah, that's not in good shape. >> I'll move to open the open my door.
I'll second it. Much a second for the overhead door vote. We'll need a time frame for that. Uh, we want to start here. >> Yeah,
>> on that. Thank you. >> Have Sam get some. All right, Bob, we're talked enough. I think I don't have anything I need to report. >> Let's jump into claims. >> One second.
A second on claim. >> Hi, >> I Vernon. >> Hi. >> Randy, >> hi. >> David, which brings us to the administration. Are you taking a look at this before? >> I am not. I will let the report speak for itself.
You don't Rachel. >> Yes. >> Library. >> One town, one title. I've got a half of audience here. Providing library programming is really important to me. And so I'm just going to highlight a couple of things for the one town, one
title programming coming up next month. We're going to be reading give a girl a nice. It's a memoir from a northern motan who became a New York chef. and um just kind of for a story in between both communities. Uh we've got a lot of
different things going on with local um programs or local people who doing the programs for us including um Michelle Trustad from the Whispering Trees and Honey Farm. >> Um she's the berry farm berry farmer in town here just outside of Pine Island.
She's going to be doing life on a berry farm and also a jam making presentation for us. Uh Tessa Ludig, who is a co-owner of the Sun Brewing Company. She's going to be doing um she's actually a chef in real life and she's going to be kind of doing a talk about
what life is like as a chef. Our book clubs will be talking about this on June 17th. That's our normal book club time. And then um we were able to get a legacy grant for a legacy artist who does things for us here in Sco uh the
Southeastern Libraries region. uh wild rice. So, we're going to talk about wild rice, gathering the food that grows on the water and that Drew is coming down from that. She's from Northern Minnesota. So, we'll be starting book distribution hopefully if the books come in at Winterfest and then we'll have
them available at the library, city hall, and the license bureau as they are available. So, that's pretty much what I have to highlight today. >> And mask is coming up end of this >> end of it's not this week of next week.
31st. Yeah. We'll also be having a book sale at the library for the 30th and the 31st here. >> So, come get the books. >> The call is welcome if you can hang around for a little bit. >> And if anyone would like to know my
lovely little program things, I've got a couple up here, too. So, let me know. >> Thank you, Rachel. Public works. I've been busy. I just uh say that we got the bar screening got going today after few
months of fighting with contractors. Well, it is up and running. Nice. Thank you to you and your crew for tremendous job and keeping our roads
clear. It's pretty interesting with the wrestling tournament. There's people from out of town in this in the city that was commenting on that. So, thank you for board. Any updates on that
a little bit? >> All right. EDA brand new year update. Sure. >> So, last Thursday we did have the first mural meeting. I thought it went really awesome. There's a lot of great ideas floating around. Um really excited to
see where that goes. Uh our next meeting with that committee will be February 12th. Um after that we'll kind of consolidate ideas down a little bit and then February 19th meet the muralist again. Um with a goal of getting the
drafts by mid March. Um then from there uh we will have those condensed down a little bit more to have a final draft in midappril to hopefully have the uh mural started to paint in the beginning of May. Kind of the goal of that timeline
there so it's done before she says >> yes that's the goal. That's This is exciting. It's something fun. A really diverse group of people. Thank you. Chief was not able to be here tonight,
but ended on a record year. So 516 calls, his only record. So it was a busy busy year. And I'd like to probably thank the crew up there for what they do. It's a lot of they're responding
sheriff's office. Okay. You want to say anything? Sergeant, mayor, how are you? Good. How are you guys? >> Mayor, councel Michael with Sheriff's Office. We don't have much. Um just first off public works great
relationship as far as a lot of snow events this year already which didn't have much last year but very appreciative of all that communication we have back and forth I think ultimately helps the city we don't really have community issues with the city of very appreciative of that. Um as far as other things go there's not much
really to pass on you guys have for us at all. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. No, I think we're very appreciative of uh citizens of county. Um we get thanked all the time and that means a lot to us or we're thankful for
you guys as well. So you guys have made that support. So thank you. >> Thank you very much. Go to the order otherwise hearing none. >> Close. I got to thank you everybody for being here. Please stay warm,
stay safe. On favor say you see