All right, >> good evening. It's now 5:00 PM and I call this workshop of the Victoria City Council to order. Our workshops are informal. So, with that, we're going to dive right into our agenda, which is we just have one item on the agenda this evening, which is our 2026 budget
discussion. Presenting on that this evening is our assistant city manager and finance director, Trisha Pollock. Miss Pollock, welcome. The floor is yours. >> Thank you. Good evening, mayor, members of the council. Tonight is our fifth budget meeting and the final meeting before our truth and taxation hearing
and adoption of the 2026 budget and levy. We're going to be discussing the 2026 proposed budgets for the water, sewer, and storm water and Victoria recreation center funds. Staff is seeking input
from council on these four proposed budgets. The discussion will also cover the city's 5-year capital improvement plan and an update on the final general fund budget and tax levy. We will start off by looking at the VRC
budget. Staff project 1.3 million in revenues for 2026 with 71% of those revenues coming from the Eastern Carver County School District either through the city and district's lease contract or through reimbursement for staffing and
maintenance costs. The remaining 29% of the revenues are generated from memberships and facility rentals. Revenues are 6.2% higher than in 2025, mainly due to an increase in the school district lease and charges for services
due to an increase in the last year's membership rates. >> Trisha, can you remind us um how long that lease with the school district is? >> Yeah, so it goes until 2032. 23,
>> which is the same time frame as the debt payments on the building. Operating expenses for 2026 are projected to be 839,000 which is a 7.8% increase from 2025.
The increase is primarily due um to an increase in wages and utilities and also supplies and repairs to add a skating program. 23% of the expenses of the 300 is
$340,000 is for the debt service on the facility that um I just mentioned, which again is paid off in 2032. There is $102,000 in planned capital outlay for 26, which includes replacing
the flooring in the rec center, renovating the multi-purpose room, refinishing the gym floor, and painting the exterior building arches. These investments will help address the many comments the city received in our
park system survey about the recreation center space being tired, looking dark and outdated. Any questions about Victoria Recreation Center fund budget before I move on to our next slide? Council questions,
comments on this? >> Just a comment. Um, uh, the flooring in the rec center, was that the entire flooring out obviously outside of the gym and stuff, but throughout the whole rec center? >> Um, I believe that was they were just
looking at replacing the flooring in the multi-purpose room. Is that correct, Melissa? >> So, nothing with the lock, >> not the not the lobby area. >> The lobby area. Got it. Thank you. with this not being done this year most
likely. I'm just guessing the renovations and the flooring aren't going to be done. Is that going to be carried over into next year? >> Correct. So, it just carries over the fund balance. So, we have to repudit it because Okay. >> Um the fund balance will just remain in the fund. >> So, I figured Thank you.
>> Do we know what the fund balance is on this? >> Um we're at about a million. >> Okay. and we we keep that fund balance for for repairs and maintenance on the facility.
We normally don't show um really much of a um a profit for the building. So um we try to leave that for those major expenditures um planned expenditures. So, um
>> the uh compressor that has to be So, is that that hasn't been accounted for being taken out of that? >> It has. >> Oh, it has. Okay. >> So, we should be right around a million dollars. >> So, we were at closer to 1.5, but it because it wasn't. >> It actually ended up being like
250ish,000. >> So, considerably less than what I think we Okay, that's good. >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. Any other thoughts, comments on this? >> Seeing none, we're moving on. >> All right, great. So, before diving into
the enterprise fund budgets, I want to present some rate information for our utility funds. We're not proposing any increases in the water base or water consumption rates. Um, however, the Minnesota Department of Health is increasing their safe drinking water
service connection fee, which was $940 or $9.72 a year, and they're increasing it to $1522 per year. Um, this is a pass through fee that we put on the monthly utility bills.
Um, we will be proposing some rate increases for our sewer rates and the storm water rate. And I'll provide more detail about those increases in the next couple slides. Um, but this chart shows where Victoria lands in comparison to
its market city's monthly utility bills. Um, with all rates being based off of $6,000 gallon or 6,000 gallon per month usage. Um, so the Victoria household
that uses the 6,000 gallons of water would go up from $75.82 a month to $79.89 a month. So an increase of $4.7 a month.
So this just kind of shows where we fall into with those proposed rates. And of course these rates of our market cities are 2025 rates. I don't have data on 26 yet. So it does keep us kind of in the
>> Can you talk about what drives that a little? Right. Like you know we see cities here that are obviously pretty good size bigger than us that have higher rates but then bigger cities than us that have lower rate. Like so what is the biggest driver? Well, I mean like
Carver for example, because I live in Carver, they, you know, they have a new water treatment plant or fairly new within the last couple years. So, I know they had to issue debt and I don't think they had a lot of it's not had like a huge um cash balance for that to build
that. So, I would assume that that's kind of what that is. Wonia seems to have kind of higher storm water because they do a lot of storm water reuse. So, I think that is what I've heard drives their bills up a little higher. Um, so those two I kind
of just have an inkling on, but I guess it's really kind of depends on, you know, how much it costs them to operate their plants and how much they're investing in, how many water treatment
plants they have andor. >> Um, also I would say most of these are on the Met Council for sewer. So that should be basically similar um costs, but there might be a
couple in here that aren't too. You don't have that data, but So looking at the sewer rate, the proposed increase in sewer rate is going to be 9%. Um the base fee will increase
from 1463 to$,5.95 per month. Additionally, staff are proposing an increase in the consumption rate for sewer. So for a home with an average usage of the 6,000 gallons, their rate would go from 1915 to 2086 per month. So
the overall impact for the average home for sewer is $3.3 per month. This is the second year of what I have in a fiveyear planned incremental increase. I'm just trying to catch up with the fees in the sewer
fund. Um, mostly due to the med council annual fees that have increased year-over-year. And I do have data on those year-over-year increases on an upcoming slide as my sewer presentation. So, we are also proposing a change to
our winter sewer averaging. Currently, we have been charging sewer year round based on the average water usage of January through March. So, we're proposing to change this to charge actual sewer based off of water usage
for the months of November through April and then use that average to bill May through October, which is the irrigation season for residents. Um, these two examples are a couple of accounts that I tested.
Um, I've tested several, but I'm just showing you an example of two of them. Um, so in that first example, you'd see that this would be in a 12-month period. Um, in the first example, they would
save $942 under the new structure. And then in example number two, they would pay an extra $7.52 over the course of a year. Um, so I don't anticipate that this
change is going to really swing us one way or another. I think it'll kind of wash itself out. Um, but I wanted to give a couple of examples to kind of show how that calculating um, might work. Um, we do get questions
from residents wondering, well, why is my sewer higher than my water usage? Well, that's because of the averaging and it's really hard when you're averaging just three months to really get the full picture of what that
offseason usage is. So by using six months of actuals billing one for one on actuals I feel like we're getting a truer picture of and a truer billing for the residents of what their actual usage
is while they can still take an advantage of not having to pay for sewer on that irrigating um during the summer months. Ju just one point on that. I think if we explain it on the bill, >> the residents maybe would understand it
or maybe we already do that. I don't know if we're changing it or averaging it or >> however then it might >> lead to less calls into >> I don't know. >> Yeah. And we do have it in our fee schedule, but yeah, I know it it gets confusing. We get phone calls. I mean
the other part of it too is that then we have our snowbirds who are not here in the winter so we can't do averaging. So then those accounts go one for one year round up to 10,000 a month and then also when you have a new resident you don't
have averaging history on them. We have to do the same. So, it can get a little um kind of confusing for people, but at the end of the day, it it does give them the break on not having to pay for sewer
on that irrigation usage and then they don't have to also purchase like a second meter. You know, some cities will do that where they just build have all this all the water they build sewer on and then if you want to irrigate, you
can go get a purchase a second meter, but then you have to have a plumber come and plows and so that can get expensive. >> So, um, this is typically the best method of averaging. Um, and I think
that the six months actuals and the six months averaging will be a truer picture than our three month of averaging. >> So, >> we're just changing it to be more accurate. >> That's yes, that that is my goal is to
be more accurate and cut down on some of those phone calls of why is my sewer higher than my water. questions, comments. Great. Moving on. Okay, so then looking at the storm water, um the increase that
I'm proposing is 8%. So that base fee would go from 1283 to 1386 or $13 per month. Um, as you know, we've expanded our storm water department in the past two years, and we've been making great progress with storm water maintenance
projects, and we anticipate that this will continue with all the MS4 permitting requirements. And we'll monitor the future increases as we begin to build the fund balance to support those projects. So, this does 426
um start to edg us towards um the the top half. However, um again, like I said, we'll keep an eye on that fund balance, but we do know that we're going to be doing a lot more storm water projects. Um and it would be helpful to
build up continue to build up that fund balance to be able to pay cash for those Okay, now we're going to take a look at the water fund. Um, so operating water fund revenues are projected to be at
2.18 million and nonoperating, which includes connection fees and interest earnings are at 624,000. Again, staff are not proposing increases to water rates for 26. and our utility
team continues to monitor water usages and water conservation efforts continue to be a priority um with sending letters um for continuous usages and um having those data reports run for um residents
as they request them um every month. The expenses for the water fund are 3.1 million of which operating expenses are 997,000, a 2.2% increase over 2025.
The capital outlay includes 24,000 for oversizing the quick trip water infrastructure, a rehab of well number three for 92,000, and the two final filter replacements um at the water treatment plant for
300,000. replacement of the water department truck for 65,000 and 650,000 to paint the water tower which was originally planned for this year but is getting pushed to next year. And then there's infrastructure along
rolling acres road from highway 5 to interlock in um which is projected to be about 800,000. The debt service is the principal and interest for the 2023A bonds um for well
number six and the Ster Lake um West project. >> Any questions about water? >> Yeah, so that um that year-end balance at 8.4 million. Yes, it looks to be it looks high to me, but tell me about is
there you know we know that our AAA bond rating is is important to us. Is there suggested um levels we need to keep all these funds in for to maintain our AAA? Um I
know we some of this stuff is because we anticipate we're going to need that money so we're sitting on it for a couple of years so we can buy buy our next water tower with cash, that kind of thing. >> Yeah, great question. So um yeah there
our recommended um fund balance um they don't necessarily say you have to have you know this specific amount but what we um base our what we our goal is is to make sure we have always have three
months of expenditures at all times and then also you have to make sure that you have money um for your following year's debt service payment. So that's like bottom bottom of the barrel that you have to have and then the rest of it gets is considered
for um you know other infrastructure needs. So, um, for example, when we look in a few slides under the CIP, we'll be talking about like a $4 million, um, water storage tank that, um, potentially we wouldn't bond for something like that
if we had fund balance, which would save us, um, quite a bit of money and interest. So, um, sometimes the fund balance can be a little bit misleading, too, because you might get a bunch of connection fees in one year and you haven't quite finished putting in the
infrastructure and or you might have issued debt for it. So, you want to make sure that you have that fun balance and that can go towards other projects so that you don't have to issue that debt because you had issued debt and collected fees for a different project.
So, it's kind of a balancing act. And we also talked about, you know, what we could potentially use this for um for other projects and other funds if we needed to. Okay. Council questions on the water fund.
>> All right. Seeing none, we're moving on. Okay. Sewer fund revenues are 1.76 million with the proposed increase of 9%. Primarily again related to that year-over-year increase from the Met Council. Um nonoperating revenues
include a $700,000 bond issuance for a lift station 18 upgrade. Um and then connection fees and interest earnings are also included in that nonoperating Looking at the expenses, um they're
actually decreasing slightly. The reason for that is um we had a Zumbra sewer repair that had been in the last year's budget, but the project's being pushed out to align with a future neighborhood road project. Um so that really lowered
that um year-over-year budget. Um the med council increase is 6.4% for 2026. um couple outlay projects. Again, the lift station 18 upgrade that we may bond
for um depending on um fund fund balance at the year end. And also um that would be a generator with that project. And then the oversizing costs um for quick trip infrastructure of $183,000.
The 253,000 in debt service is for the um south area project um bonds and the um stagger lake west project bonds projected year and fun balance of just over three million.
Any questions about sewer also? Okay, moving on. Okay, storm water um revenues are projected to be 741,000 which is as stated earlier includes that
8% increase uh to the rates. Operating expenses are remaining flat with wages increasing slightly but contractual services decreasing slightly. There is no capital outlay planned in this fund until 2030 when we plan to
replace the street sweeper which we um would um pay out of fund balance which is probably going to be about $450,000. So we're end up saving up on this fund as well. >> Okay. So based on the fact on that um
what would happen if we decided not to do this rate increase for the storm water? What's the what's the risk benefit balance on that? >> Um I mean we could um and then we just probably evaluate again next year for
it. We've been doing it 8% for year over year quite a few years now. I'd have to go back and look. I know it's been at least probably six or seven years and that's because we kind of had just developed this fund for storm water maintenance and really needed to start getting a fund balance in there. Um I
mean as you can see like the expenses um and revenues I mean there's you know 120,000 or some change in you know where we should be ahead at the year end to
add to our fund balance. I would say if we took out that increase then you know we wouldn't realize much of an add to the fund balance. It would stay kind of more a lot closer to flat. It's not going to be that significant, but it's going to
take from that add to the funds. >> You said um we're purchasing a sweet street sweeper. Is that >> we will be in 2030. >> Currently, we share that, right? >> Um or >> Well, I mean, we Yes and no. The contract is been proposed to be
terminated by the county and we're trying to negotiate through that with them. Um, we haven't come to a termination agreement yet. Um, but ultimately, yes, we're going to have to purchase our own street sweeper is what
we've kind of decided is going to happen. And ours is 2012. Um, so yeah, the life of those is going to be probably 2030 if not sooner. Depends on we're looking at
getting it kind of revamped a little bit. the current one. >> So, you can still use that. >> So, we can keep it another five years. >> Yeah. >> I'm just looking at some of these things with our We've got healthy balances and
I'm just wondering with all the other stuff we're spending money on with roads and infrastructure and stuff this year if this might be a place where we could shave some savings out of. I'm curious what my council colleagues feel about that.
I mean, I always am for budgeting for just a little bit of that just in case, right? Like like you said, right, like the three months or whatever you So, I I I'm fine with how we what it's proposed, I
guess. >> I mean, I'm I'm comfortable with it's a $12 increase and the we have Uh for years it feels like we've sidestepped what could be a looming problem in any
of these storm water ponds with you know going in and dredging them and finding that you know there's contaminants in there that we had no expectation of being in there and then boom it's a huge uh ecological nightmare that if we have
reserves for we can cover it but it would be a bit of a hard pill to swallow. to have to find that we didn't have the money then have to bond for those kind of unexpected expenses and you you get no return on that. So, um it's one of those
where I I feel like this is just a a a cautionary approach to and it's frankly it's not a it's not like we're asking now for $25 increase a month to cover this. It's $12 for the year.
I would agree. I think it's reasonable with at a rate increase of 8%. I don't think that's and it builds in some potential risk as we've outlined. So >> covering potential risk as you say. >> All right. Any other questions,
comments? >> I mean, what if we it you said we've just been doing the 8% for storm water. What if we just did 4% this year with that? I mean, instead of going up $12, we go up $6. Is that what does that do?
>> Um, yeah. I mean, we definitely could do that. I mean, it's just going to reduce the amount of money that we add to the fund balance at the end of the year. Again, like I said, I mean, it's, you know, like like the dollar a
month, but I again, I I like to see the smaller increases than find us in a situation where we need to um, you know, add up it, you know, double it or whatever it might be. Yeah. >> Um,
>> which is kind of why I I like to do the smaller incremental increases. And same with the sewer cuz we did find that we were really dropping because we weren't keeping up with Met Council. Could we have done a 24% increase in one year and got caught up?
Sure. But I think that the impact of that is just kind of too much for one year. So to spread it out over like a fiveear span and kind of >> monitor it each year um makes more sense
to me. But could we do it the other way? Definitely, we can definitely do it that way. >> Yeah, I I mean, I do favor smaller increases over over time. I mean, I think that makes sense. It's a little easier for everybody to budget and that sort of thing, but you know, uh that's I guess that kind of leads to my question
about the fund balances. We have good healthy fund balances. if we took a year off from increasing or cut the increase back, you know, would our fund balance wouldn't suffer significantly and it might give our residents a little bit of a break for a year while we do some
other things. And um I don't know. I'm just I'm looking at the whole picture. I know um the schools just all passed bond levies and and um operating levies and those kinds of things. So, so I'm sensitive to that and I I want to do our
part to I don't want to put us in any in a bad place financially, but I also I also understand that this is it's going to be a tough year. Carver Countyy's got a big increase coming. We've got two school referendums or all
the schools passed referendum. So, looking for some options here, I guess. Yeah. I mean in the in looking at the water yeah it's you know the fund balance is obviously like higher than um in comparison to the sewer and storm
water. However, it's really hard to know because you don't know if you're going to have a dry year or a wet year. And um you know we've been lucky you know the last couple years it's been wetter. So you know our revenues have actually been kind of going down with you know less
watering. But then you get one dry year and then people are watering like crazy and then of course your revenues are going to go up. So it's really hard to kind of that's one fund that's really kind of tough. The other two are pretty easy to >> project what we're going to have but as Brady knows too
>> as your water usage goes up your chemical costs are going to >> go right along with it. So I mean there's some a lot of operating costs that do go along with that. So >> I mean I just also look at it kind of like insurance right? I don't like paying for insurance, but when I get into an accident, I'm happy I have it,
right? So, you know, do would I would we like to reduce this? Sure. If that would be great, but then if something happens and we have to bond for it, I don't, right? Like that's like that's even worse than this, right? So, >> that's hard too. I get it.
>> What would happen that we'd have to bond for based on what we currently have in the funds? Is that even I don't want to say realistic, but you know, you find a bunch of contaminants, we could we have other funds that we could transfer to. If the 2.4 million or the 10 million
isn't enough to cover it, then we worry about it later. Um I don't know. I'm I'm I'd look at reducing them a little bit as the mayor um originally proposed, but um the rest of council feels that we
should keep the insurance policy. I'm fine with that, too. >> Yeah. >> I mean, it's not going to put someone in the poor house based on the fact their sewer bill went up $12 a year. >> I'm just the proponent of staying the course in this direction. The the other thing that we don't have a really, you
know, perfect view on, we never will, but the as we start to, you know, keep growing and adding more developments, they always come with more storm water ponds and that is more maintenance that, you know, we may not be able to
perfectly predict. Um, we we have Brady in the audience tonight. Uh I I think that he was able to shed a good amount of light on the difficulty that it's becoming for his team to increasingly go
into the storm water ponds in the neighborhoods, the access, the uh you know, the piping. You know, we've seen where they've struggled and I I don't want to be able to like be cutting back on this aspect for that level of
service. Okay, >> I see him nodding his head. So I >> generally, you know, >> is he giving me the stink >> equate that to concurrence with the idea? >> All right, good discussion. All right, let's move on.
>> Okay. All right. So, um, if there's not any additional questions on those enterprise funds, we'll move on to the capital improvement plan with obviously you can ask more questions about those funds too
at the the end of the presentation, but okay. So, each year staff asks council to adopt a five-year capital improvement plan. The adoption doesn't mean automatic approval as items over 20,000 will require separate approval by council before the purchase is made.
While we will review the 26 through 2030 plan today, know that staff does develop capital plans for 10 years and beyond um which we uh review annually with the department heads. The 26 capital fund
budgets do include expenses or financing plans um for the projects that we're going to um show you tonight. So, first up is the um fire equipment fund and civil defense. And um fire
chief is here to answer any questions um about any of these items that um are listed. Um the 26 budget um includes replacing con command vehicle number 19, which is a 2015 Ford SUV, and also the
replacement of the extrication tools, which have a 15-year life cycle. um in the 2027 through 2030. Um that includes the replacement of another command vehicle, portable
radios, um the unmanned aerial vehicle, the SCBA inventory, um a utility pickup, a grass rig, and the rescue boat. So, those are all replacements, not additions, too. Um, the department is looking to add a
ladder truck in 2030. Um, that purchase will have to be a lease purchase. So, that will be paid um over a probably 10 or 15 year um term.
Any questions for the chief about these items? I I don't really have any questions, but Chief, if you want to come up and um come to the microphone so everybody at home can hear you and see you. Do these replacement vehicles like these
old command vehicles and extra do they have any value on the market? Do we? >> They do. Um the air packs, the SCVAs, no. Um not very limited amount of um marketable value to that. Um they've lived their life and they're well used up by that period. Um the command
vehicles certainly there is a market for them. Sometimes smaller communities will purchase them to put them in service for themselves um if they don't have a need to have a vehicle that's maybe quite as new or maybe as reliable possibly as you might find with a new vehicle. Um but so
like any used vehicle there is some >> some value still there. >> Do we trade those in or do we just try and sell them off in the >> We've done it both ways. Um I think we've the last command vehicle we sold on auction um that was a 2002 model pickup truck that we sold and then um
yeah these three command vehicles that we have currently are the only three that we've got in the fleet that we've had over recent years. Um so it'll be time to make a decision whether it's to reuse it um for a different purpose within the fire department or a different uh organiz or group within the organization or sell it or trade it in.
We'll look to see what the best value is there. >> Sure. Any other questions for the chief? I >> have a quick one. So currently is we can handle is it four stories, fivetory building ourselves without additional help with a
>> we we ask for help from our neighboring communities for anything over our 30 foot ladders reach. So we've got ground ladders that'll go 30 ft. >> Okay. Okay. because I Yeah, because I know we've had the discussion, right, about not wanting to go over certain heights of buildings currently. And
>> so it can affect the is ISO rating. >> Um that's all factored into it. Um we currently leverage our neighbors for their aerial devices, which would be ladders or um aerial trucks that get us up to those heights and so we are able to use them in practicality, but not for
ISO rating. Okay. >> And that answers my other question. Thank you. Great. >> Anything else for the chief? Not sure this is the appropriate place. What's a grass rig? >> Grass rig is one of our We've got two of them. We've got a pickup and an ATV. Uh
both are used for going off-road to put out fires, whether they be, you know, in a field somewhere or in a marsh or a swamp. Also, we use them for rescues and things like that in off-road areas, too. >> Thank you. >> Anything else? Great. Thanks, Chief.
>> Thank you. The public works equipment capital fund identifies the purchase of a roller compactor. Asphalt maintenance requires regular replacement of small to medium areas of pavement to effectively finish
the asphalt spaces. A roller compactor is used to prepare the newly paved surface for years of service. In years past, public works has used a rental unit for finishing these projects. So due to the size, nature,
and frequency of these repairs, work efficiency would be optimized if the equipment was readily available to properly finish the road work. That's the first item. Also in 26 um is the replacement of truck number
120, which is a 2011 pickup with a liftgate. um the addition of a Toro workman which we had in the CIP previously as a replacement but we're proposing to keep the old one and make this an additional
workman. Um and we are also asking to add a fertilizer trailer and sprayer spreader. Um, we currently spend 35 to 40,000 a year on fertilizing contracts with a third party and we would like to buy the
equipment and do the fertilizing ourselves, saving the city money in the long run. Um, we currently have a licensed fertilizer professional on our staff who will lead the process and allow us to do a better job um, and also be able to expand the areas that we're
treating. Um, and then we would also be having additional staff get licensed to do the process in future years. >> Just to comment on that, great efficiency on that. So, we're paying $35,000 annually and we're going to pay this onetime fee and so saving
ultimately 35,000 for the next year, right? Yeah. Is that ultimately or close or >> Yes, that's true. Except for um we will have to buy the chemicals. So, um there is a budget for the chemicals. Um so, it's going to take probably we figured
about 3 years to make get a return on our investment. >> Got it. >> Um we think is we're going to be able to do so much better work in the green spaces and the parks um because we can treat it when it needs to be treated. We don't have to get on a list and wait for
the person to come out and do the treatments. So, we're really looking at expanding our service level with um being able to purchase this equipment and be able to do it in house. Like I said, we have a professional um person on staff that is going to
>> with this sorry, with this added work, will we have to hire another FTE then? >> Not because of the fertilizing. We feel like our parks department will be able to handle this. >> Yeah. >> I love that we have that expertise in our great team. >> We're very fortunate. Yes. >> Yeah. Great. Um, so,
uh, seeing that, you know, there's a few added, you know, two mowers in 2027 truck, another truck, how I know we're going to have our old fire station available for storage. How are we doing on between the old public works site,
the current public works, and then are how are we doing, I guess, on space? Are we like how close are we are thinking? I know the public works site was designed to be doubled at some point. How are we doing, I guess, with these additions? >> I'm gonna let Brady speak to that
because he's there. >> Mr. Lee, come on up and and tell us also what a Toro workman is. I don't even know what that is. >> Good evening, mayor, members of council. Thank you for having me. Good questions. Toro workman is the little um it's got a
box on it and a little lift gate on the back. It's all-wheel drive. it's goes on all the turf and all the parks and doesn't run them up. So, we were actually intending to get rid of our two bob or one of our Bobcat UTVs and then so that that's kind of going to be the swap. We don't need it anymore.
It's been super high maintenance for us. We put two motors into it. Toro Workman has been far more efficient and does a lot better in the parks than getting around. So, that's why we're wanting to keep the old one, get rid of the old UTV and add this workman for it. As far as
space, um, we're very tight right now with everything, even with the couple of additions. Um, the addition of the fire station will be crucial for us. We don't know exactly what equipment we're going to put up there. In my mind, we're going to put a bunch of our utility equipment
up there. Um, just for emergency use because that building has the generator. So, if we need generators or we need certain piece of equipment, we can use that one. But also, we'll work out of it. We'll have storage for it. Um, what makes me more nervous is what we're going to do with the old public works
site. Once we get rid of that, then I think it's going to be really time to look into what we're going to do at the new public works site off of area as far as cold storage or adding the addition of the shop. But also again, you have
downtown west coming, which is a bunch more equipment, a bunch more staff to maintain. So, I mean, break room space at the current shop is also very limited, but the fire station now could help with that as well in the meantime, but all things we're thinking about.
>> Yeah. Uh, good question. I in our CIP, when do we have an RCIP that addition on to that public works building? >> Yeah. So, um, we've been pushing that out, um, because of the being able to do
the water treatment plant, um, and the fire station. So, and I I do have some more slides that kind of >> Oh, does that a little bit? Okay. >> But we do have in um the CIP for under the facilities to add a cold storage
building in 2030, which um we would decide then if that would be best placed maybe in the south growth area with with the the new water treatment plant number two which is planned for that year or if that would be a part of um an addition
at the um public workshop. I guess we would decide closer to time. It kind of makes sense that we might want to store some equipment in the south growth area. Um like maybe what the plow truck that's um utilized down there, mowers, whatnot,
instead of hauling stuff across town. Um so that would be something we would plan for, but we do have that in our budget. Okay. Um but the actual like $5 million expansion of the public works building, we have pushed that way out just because we did gain this this space um with
building the new fire station, being able to utilize that for public works. So that has really saved us by being able to push that out. >> Do we have a end of service date for that current cold storage building over on the trail? We really don't. Do we?
Miss Hardy, please. >> Thank you, mayor, members of the council. Great question. So, this is something that we have been talking about. We did incorporate some data into uh the space needs study that we did and finalized back in 2020. Um that we've
been using to kind of drive some of these uh these facility decisions. That said, we know that that building, the old the old public work site, so where our cold storage is, is end of life. Um
and you council previously made decisions that um that we weren't going to make any major investments in that building. And so we um one of the things on our strategic plan for this period
has been to look at this new period 2025 to 2027 is now to look at that long-term. We've made decisions about the current fire station, the public works building. We've got all the data. Um, and the next
thing that we're going to do is have a conversation about what the potential could be for reusing that old um public works site. So, we were stepping into that, had just
dipped our big toe into that earlier this year um with some uh with a consultant on some potentials, just exploring options for reuse of that site. And we have since put that on pause and we'll be revisiting that
spring once we make decisions about what downtown west is going to look like, what those public spaces are. Um and um as part of that we're looking at adding a community building. So there could be a storage component there. So we want to wait until all of those pieces get
finalized. Kind of tracking along the same same timeline is looking at as Trish mentioned the um we need to make a decision about where the future water treatment plants the second water treatment plant is going to go. And
we've been looking at um from an efficiency, operational efficiency, but also financial efficiency to look at the potential of adding storage there. All of these are important decisions because it might inform our decision on what
actual square footage what are our needs for repurposing that building. So um so if we can look at how um how all these pieces fit together um we just that would be to our best interest. So we um
intentionally have put that revisioning of the old public works site on pause uh until we can gather some of this more data to help drive that decision long term. So we're not making a a near like a near or midterm decision.
>> Yeah. the um so the old public works site is obviously a very convenient location for you guys with downtown and then obviously downtown west um I mean how convenient I guess like would
you you like you'd have to cross Highway 5 which is now going to become four lanes uh if you have stuff at the old fire station or the what's the current fire station um I guess like from a logistics standpoint point just thinking of the future like where would be a
convenient spot for you guys to have at least some because I mean you're doing a lot of work in our downtown area. So like having it in the south growth area doesn't make a lot of sense from that standpoint but I don't know where we can put it downtown either. I mean, it's
it's hard to know without knowing, right, what everything's going to happen. Um, >> if we continue growing south, especially with the size of those parks and stuff down there, it might definitely help to have piece of equipment there. I think having equipment at the current fire
station, will be very beneficial because it is close to downtown and downtown west and in theory should just be a roundabout to get through. So, it shouldn't be overly difficult. Um, I think the big headache, um, with that is just going to kind of be like, what are we going to do with
composting? What are we going to do with a lot of other things that we use that site for? >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Very good. Any other Thank you. >> Any other questions, comments, thoughts
on this now that we know what a workman is? >> Yeah. I mean, just a couple other items to note maybe. Um, as you can see, the add addition of the trucks um to the fleet, that's just um whether or not we
add staff in those years, that'll um that's kind of fluid with when we hire the core a fire for the parks turf maintenance. So, that's um really to um start working more on those ball fields and um be able to take those at um take
care of those at a higher level. um the snow um removal um machine for the sidewalks. Um right now we don't have a great solution for um removing snow from
sidewalks. So that um would be a huge um benefit for their department. The brine making equipment is something that there's a lot of cities out there right now that are starting to brine roads. um um it really helps with our um storm
water um not putting so much salt on the roads and you can pre-treat the roads. So, it's something we really want to doing a little bit, but we really want to start ramping up and getting um getting that process going. And then, um
there's just the couple of replacement trucks and then a dump truck out in 2030 um that would be at end of life. So, just kind of a quick summary of those. If there's any more detailed um information you need, obviously Brady's
here to answer that. I just had to go back one quick question on so the snow removal sidewalk machine. Where are we planning on using that? I mean, is that seems like one is that to cover
downtown? Is it uh you expect that it's wide use or >> Hi, Brady's back. >> Yes, good question. Um, so currently we have a 2017 John Deere mower. That's a
front deck mower that we put a broom on and then we have another one that has a snowblower. Um, that's what cleans the sidewalks through downtown up and down road 11 and back. Um, just because it's smaller, it's narrower, it's 60 inches wide. Um,
we've been buying new brooms like every other year for three grand for as long as I can remember. Um, they've just been super high maintenance. Those mowers are at end of life. We don't use them for mowing anymore. We only use them for snow removal. I don't know exactly what
that machine is going to be. So, I'm in talks with salesman of saying, "Here's my downtown area. Here's what I need it to be. Here's what it needs to be able to do. bring me some options. So, that's where we're at right now is I'm still looking at options. I would like to get
something that's multi-use that I can use year round, but I mean, the main thing is it has to fit on the sidewalks, be safe around cars and narrow areas and things like that, and something that will probably be used in downtown west as well, >> right? And and to be clear, which I
don't think I was, I wasn't driving at, you know, why do you think you need it? more along is this going to be enough given that we have downtown west that we're working on a plan and that's I mean the let's be honest the this when
that comes online to the extent that we expect it to be >> um it's going to double the capacity that you need >> correct >> uh do you have what you need at the time you need it with this or should we take that >> we will probably >> back and take that into consideration
>> I I would take that into consideration of adding whatever we get another one for downtown. >> Probably all of the great majority of the equipment that we use downtown here. If we start at 3:00 a.m., we're lucky to be done by 600 6:30 is when people start showing up. We're going to have that
same expectation in downtown West. So, I mean, we're going to need all of that equipment and staff and people. So definitely >> and I suspect that we're going to have more really more publicowned space there to take care of as well. It's
>> in somewhat downtown there's there's building owners that are responsible for cleaning up >> where >> they need snow removal, but this the city's responsibility seems like it's going to be larger. And I'm just concerned that do you have what you need
to get this done? And this isn't used for the trails. The trails have another piece of equipment. Correct. >> The trails do have another piece of equipment. However, all of the bridge space um over slooh and wetlands and stuff
like that. Our current equipment can't go down because they're too heavy. So that's when we go back and we use the smaller lightweight machine to get across those bridges. And >> so with this new one, could you use that for the bridges potentially? >> Yes. I don't know exactly what the new
one is, but I'm hoping to Yes, >> that's the plan. >> That's the intent. >> Good. Good. All right. Anything else? Again, thank you. All right. Any any further last minute thoughts on public works equipment?
All right. Moving on. >> Okay. So, the 2026 capital facilities fund um includes the annual payment back to the sewer fund for the purchase of the fire department land. Um the 5-year CIP also identifies um what I had
mentioned a little bit ago with the 500,000 to replace the public works cold cold storage building. Um, it also includes replacing the facility specialist vehicle um and to add a vehicle and equipment to
perform janitorial services in house, which we currently just um had a three-year agreement um signed, but we anticipate that we could possibly um it might be more efficient for us to
do it in-house. So, we just put it out there in 29 um as a placeholder for planning purposes. Um but we will evaluate what the costs and the benefits are at that time. >> Any questions, thoughts on this?
>> When when you say janitorial equipment and vehicle, what what is what do you what vehicle? I guess cuz we >> So I mean it would probably be like a van or something that this person could
um you know move around from facility to facility to do those janitorial duties. Um and we would need to purchase probably another um floor scrubber um vacuums, you know, which a lot of times
we'll have, you know, one assigned for each facility, but currently the people that do the cleaning are using theirs. So, we would have to purchase that if we would were to bring this in house. >> Okay. I I mean the question similar to
that I had for Brady and obviously there's a question of how we would pay for it but in terms of planning we've we've heard a number of different proposals bandied about water treatment plant maybe we could tack cold storage
maybe you know the downtown west will need something should we consider starting to in this cap in this particular particular facilities fund have an acquisitions
line item to fund the the possibility that we might need to actually purchase land from someone in the course of these developments that we're putting in the south area because unless we're successful at squeezing
developers for a portion of land in these spaces and we always seem to be fighting ing back and forth with park dedication fees and not willing to offer what we're really going to need real estate. We don't go about it that way. Should we be putting aside
um funds so that it camps down how much a future acquisition of land costs will be? We know we had to get creative with the the fire station. Um, you know, that's my head is thinking about that
far in the future. Should we get ahead of this today? >> It's a good question. Um, so intel on that for us. >> Yeah. So, I mean that would probably I mean that would be a water fund expense. So, um, we wouldn't we wouldn't place
that in this capital facilities fund because this is supported by the general fund transfers. Um, but that would be something that then it we we could possibly use some of our fund balance to pay for like the purchase of
the land. Um, you know, we would have to see depending on what that cost would be, but that would be my my initial thought would be to use um fund balance from the water fund to pay for land purchase for the water treatment plant.
We do have in our CIP which we'll um get to as well the um like 25 million for the second water treatment plant in 2030 with a million dollars in the year prior for planning. So um we are starting to
kind of plan which is why we want to keep a and maintain a healthy fund balance in the water fund um for those purposes. We know there's a lot of infrastructure needs coming up and not having to bond for every single thing that pops up is um going to be an
advantage for us to not have to issue debt that much debt for all of those things. >> Do we know how much land you actually would need for a second water treat? Like what what are we talking about? >> Cara has mentioned Dana can maybe
answer. I don't recall. Um, yeah, Miss Hardy, >> mayor, Council Member Roberts, members of the council. Yes, I think ideally we'd be looking at a minimum of about five to six acres. Okay. >> And then if we were looking at doing facility storage, if any to address some
of that, we probably would want to look at maybe additional acre or more, but five to six acres would be the minimum. >> And how much Sorry, go ahead. >> How much land do we have out on public works yet? And that's I want to say that's pretty
much all buildable, right? Or no, >> mayor, members of the council, it it is buildable, but for cost savings, when we first did the project, we chose not to grade the rest of the the parcel. So, we
only graded what we are currently using today. And so for us to do anything additional, so even that mirrored expansion, um that would include some significant grading of the balance of that that site.
>> But the good news is we own it. >> We own it. Absolutely. >> And is I mean to Greg's point I guess is you know when we did the fire station stuff, right, we had someone go out and look, right? Like I mean does it make sense at some point? I I don't know when
that is because we're talking in the future, but yet like start looking to see where the you know the ideal spot is and what it would cost for those different locations. >> Yeah. M >> Mayor, uh Council Member Roberts, member
the members of the council. Yes, we have been doing that. In fact, we've also had some conversations with developers as projects come up to see if there's an opportunity for um negotiating some sort of of deal. Um and so we've been having
uh those conversations. They they've been prevalent and um and pretty regular for probably the last year or more. Um so we have a sense of where we think it needs to be. We've done some very preliminary engineering work with our
city engineer and their group around um ideal locations um just based on land that's coming that's in develop um or has been recently developed. We've looked at those opportunities um to do something concurrently or at
least get the land. So far has not panned out because they were not the locations that worked from a from an engineering lens for that purpose. But we continue to look for those opportunities and are actively seeking
um what would be uh a good location for us. >> I don't someone mentioned a second water tower earlier. I don't remember who did but like is is that like at some point we will have to have is that like in conjunction like you always have one with a second water treatment plant or
>> I don't know if it's in in conjunction. However, in our planning and in our needs, we do need uh we do need additional water storage and uh what we are looking at currently does include a potential water tower. Is that accurate?
Okay. >> All right. Anything else? All right. Okay. So, the long-term street maintenance fund identifies about four and a half million of street overlays um
in the five-year plan. Staff are recommending these projects to keep our current infrastructure maintained. Other projects include the ADF street reconstruction, which would be partially assessed to benefiting property owners,
the downtown west future phases um for around three and a half million. the Olivine area parking and green space project and the rolling acres road to highway 5 pro and highway 5 project um
for about 1 and a.5 million. Um the 2027 through 2030 projects um include another 4.5 million in street projects that we plan to pay for with um either through bond issuance and or state aid money.
Um, so once we get through kind of this whole highway 511, Rolling Acres Road, we can see what we have left for state aid um that we could possibly use um in those um for those projects in 2029.
>> Does this um you have rolling acres in Highway 5, but that's I'm assuming right for what's currently going to be built in the next two years. >> Yep. We don't have though in our budget through 2030 and maybe
like because we have right the portion there's that small portion right between I guess barely basically Dairy Queen and like the downtown area of Highway 5 like what our costs are going to be there. Are we not that's not included on this graphic?
>> We had that all scheduled in 2025. >> Okay. So, um I know that some of that got delayed, but um because we've already we're going to be using state aid and we've got the the federal and county
um aid that we're in and state aid that we're going to be using that um we we kind of already have accounted for those. So that's why they're not on here, but they're still showing being paid in the fund.
>> Sure. Okay. >> But because they're like a 25 project. >> Okay. >> Any other comments, questions? >> The I just the the rolling acres in Highway 5.
We had a conversation in our some of our transportation updates when we met with the county and were given proposals of some of the things that could be done at a minimum, could be done middle tier,
could be done upper tier. Um, and I think we all had a pretty unified vision of what we wanted that to be. And I think that if I recall that vision wasn't, you know, a a vision of getting it done on the cheap or being light that
these this is one of the arteries that comes through the Victoria that we really wanted to make a presentation about what this community is about. Does this budget support where we were um to be able to deliver on that?
>> Yeah, my understanding is yes. Yeah, these are the most recent numbers that I've gotten from Cara. So that um 1,470,000 that actually includes 50,000 of like we're going to use trail funds for because there's a trail component in
there that we can use our trail money for. And then the 1.42 would be um state aid eligible is what um that's the information I've gotten. So, as far as um what she's had got up to date, um that would be included in this number. I
haven't gotten anything more recent from her. >> My understanding was is once we had kind of decided on that vision and there was consensus, Miss Hardy shaking our head that that would be included in the cost of the project. So, those all that stuff that we had envisioned should be
included in this as well. Those nicer finishes and that kind of thing. >> And we can follow up with Cara on it. So, >> okay. Yeah. That'd be great. I mean, just I I wouldn't want us to be facing those decisions and then, you know, having the
it come back that we didn't budget for that and we now need to downgrade. I think that we'd be doing a disservice, especially given all of the disruption that a project like this brings. You know, it in some respects you can view
it as maybe it's a little bit bold to call it a reward to the citizens of Victoria for living through it, but at the end of the day, I mean, we this is this is what we were put here for. All right. Anything else on this?
All right. Moving on. Okay. So, um we spoke about the water um CIP earlier. Um but just another item to note in the 27 through 30 years um would
be that water storage facility which um we are planning for in 2027. Um and then the water treatment plant renovation um which would be the renovation of the current fire station to um accommodate the utility public
works utilities. Um, and then it will also be due for a roof replacement. So, we're kind of incorporating that into um, one project. Um, and then we expect to begin the design work on the second water treatment plant
in 2029 um, with um, construction in 2030. At least that's where it's at right now as of today. Any questions about those? >> Do you do you anticipate that being has
there been talk about that being needed sooner or later or >> you don't that that feels right. Brady's nodding his head. Mr. Lee, please. >> Yes. Uh, that seems about right to me. I
think more importantly for the city of Victoria at this time would be that water storage facility >> before that water treatment plant. But I think that water treatment plant's right on pace with our growth. >> Okay. >> In the south growth area. >> Okay. Got it. And then that 2027 water
storage facility is more of a priority >> at this point. Got it. >> Correct. >> All right. Thank you. All right. Any questions on this? These are big numbers, friends. You know, >> I think Mr. Lee is going to surpass his
contemporary Chief Sugar with amount of facilities money. >> Not it's a not that it's a contest. >> Okay. So again, um we mentioned those 26 uh capital items already in the sewer um
capital fund, but for 2027 through um 2030 um items to note would be the county road 18 sewer replacement. Um and then the um lift station E force main um would be development driven in
the city's west growth area. Um and then construction of lift station A as well in the south area of um County Road 10. So those are just some future projects
potentially based on development. Okay, any questions on this for anybody? All right, we're moving on. All right, then. I think um Brady is probably exhausted from all of
those, so we're going to move on to it and parks. Um so the 2026 information technology fund identifies purchases for routine switch and computer monitor replacements,
server replacement, and network switch replacement. Um, these replacements are done on a rotational basis with annual incremental replacements in order to keep equipment up to date without needing to replace them all in one
single year. Um, 2027 um through 2030 includes security camera additions, fiber connections, and phone system replacements. Any questions for Alyssa about IT fund?
I love the addition of this. We This is something new just in the last few years where we put it in in a capital expenditure or CIP plan. So, good to see it. Any questions? Everybody's good with
this. Okay. Okay. I'm going to turn it over to parks and trips. Miss Nelson, welcome. >> Thank you, mayor. Thank you, council members. Um, so the first on our list here is the Holy Family tennis courts. Um, as you are aware, we have a
partnership with Holy Family to offer eight tennis courts on the Holy Family site that's available to the public as well as Holy Family students for games, practices, athletics, whatsoever. Um, they are reaching 20 years old now and throughout the years we've been doing
minimal maintenance towards them, crack sealing, recealing what we need to. Um, however, we're at the place where there's reconstruction that needs to happen to the courts. We do this periodically to our own tennis courts that are on city property. Um, so that is what this item for 2027 is looking
at. For our contract with Holy Family, we have a 50/50 cost shares part of this. So that is the 50% of the city's cost share. The Holy Family will cover the other parts of that cost. >> Still keeping the eight courts. >> Still keeping the eight courts.
>> Completely reconstructing. Yeah. Okay. Um then we have new park development for 2026 at $750,000 for three park projects that are coming our way. Um we have vacant land that have come through development uh which is Huntersbrook, Marsh Hollow, and then
Brookmore. Uh we spent a significant amount of time this summer to do some public engagement for the Huntersbrook and Marsh Hollow projects. um our park staff, parks and recreation committee and senior advisory committee went to those parks on site, invited the
neighborhood to come visit the parks and just discuss what they would like to see for those areas. Um as we're looking at development, we also did a survey that went out to the community. I think we had about 600 responses. Now, I'll put an asterisk on that. About 40% were Victoria residents. A smaller percentage
were actual neighbor or people that are from those neighborhoods. Um but we did get significant feedback about what people are looking for. the parks and recreation committee reviewed the Hunters Brook and Marsh Hollow Park um at their last parks and recreation
committee and since then we've see we've received even more feedback from the residents of what they are looking for or better uh what they're not looking for in those park areas. Um so we are going to revisit those two park amenities. uh really in just transparency, what was being proposed or
discussed were amenities that might have had higher traffic uh draws to them like a splash pad or or regional uh soccer fields. Um so looking at those neighborhood parks as neighborhood parks and and making sure we're not disrupting the neighborhood feel of that area and
community. Um we're going to take that back to the parks and recreation committee for further review and reconsideration of what's going to be placed in those areas. So just to comment on that, will there be a chance for people kind of to do another survey,
more targeted survey once we revisit the additional information that we have and back or what do you think is a good next step? >> That that's a great question and something staff can explore. What I will say is the survey that we have, we did ask if people were from that neighborhood or not from that
neighborhood. So, in those 600 responses, we can whittle it down just to um those residents specifically. Um so, we do have a pretty good amount of information about what those residents may be looking for for that neighborhood park. >> Got it. Thank you.
>> Then we have an outdoor ice rink. Uh we have $175,000 that we earmarked for next year. This is a new item. um with the understanding that our outdoor ice rink at Lion's Park is not necessarily well used. We can't necessarily uh keep the ice frozen on there because of the base.
It's grass-based. Um and then we have wood boards around it that need some strong tender loving care. Um so we are looking at finding a a different solution for our outdoor ice rink in next in the next year. Whether that be a permanent site or a temporary site, that
has not yet been determined. um but it's something that we would like to look for. And then for transparency, we have considered um neighborhood parks um specifically the Lake Lakeside Estates neighborhood as some as an option for hosting this. But again, thinking about um the feedback we received from the
Hunters Brook neighbors um considering having a hightraic amenity in a neighborhood might not necessarily meet the uh intention of a neighborhood park. So, we're taking another stab at potential locations for an outdoor ice rink somewhere in our community. What
have you guys looked at upgrading? You know, the one in Lions Park that, you know, could we pour a better base so the ice would freeze? Can we do some work on that? Um, you know, Lions Park is just such a nice location. It's got great parking, all the things there. So,
um, I'm sure that's part of your evaluation is upgrading that to a workable rink. >> Yeah, Mayor. Um that is absolutely, you know, one of the locations that we'll continuously look for. And if you look at closer to the bottom end of the the table there, the other item is Lions
Park revisioning. Um we know that that's our major community park. We have a lot of traffic that goes to that park. We have great parking. We have a great amenities. We want to make sure that that park continues to be a great park for the next 50 plus years and making sure it feels really cohesive with the
design. So in intentional u making sure that the new features we put in there or reconstruction features really meet the intent and the space of that park. Making sure that we're we're utilizing um that park and that land because it isn't finite. We'll eventually run out of space at Lions Park. Making sure we're using that to the best of our
spaces. So um the outdoor ice rink in that location is 100% a possibility. It's a strong possibility. Um we just want to make sure that as we're looking at doing things to Lions Park that it's intentional um in the design of the park. >> Sure. Understood. >> Okay.
>> Um then we also have the the bike skills park. So that's your mark for 2027. That's another new item for you all for consideration. Um, as we well I should start by saying the parks and recreation committee um had one of their items in the work plan which was to really
identify underutilized spaces in our park system and and develop opportunities for utilizing them better and being more imaginative in our park spaces. Um so they were looking at some of our vacant park areas um or natural park areas that are underutilized per se
and developing something that you could put in them. And one of the solutions they gave us is maybe a bike skills park. Um this also came under consideration because we had extensive conversations about bike um ebikes this last summer and finding a place for our increase of bike traffic manual and
ebikes someplace for them to go. So maybe a pump track or a a bike skills park might be a solution for us. That location also hasn't been identified. Um, but that would be uh if this is something council would like to move forward with, that would be a direction of staff to look for a location that
would best meet the intent um of, you know, what we're looking to do here. Um, but also have a space that's close to the Lake Minnotonka Regional Trail. We know that a lot of people frequent that trail that, you know, we have some people that just drive by and Victoria is just a stop
along the way to wave. Um, but we have a lot of people that stop here for a couple hours on end, whether it's getting a bite to eat or shopping. So, why not offer them another opportunity to stay a while um, and hang out in in Victoria and and leverage our lakes and park system. So,
then we have another revisioning project. It's Bayfront Park. Uh, specifically the area that's on the north side of the trail, the the vacant gravel pit, I'll nicely call it. Um, really trying to identify what that space could look like. uh we put this as a revisioning exercise similar to Lions
Park. This wouldn't obviously be to re or to do the park. It would be that exercise of creating that master plan for both these areas. Um doing stakeholder engagement with um Three Rivers with our business owners um with Carver County because that's who
operates the trail here. For Lions Park, it would be Vicks, Lions, Holy Family. um to really and doing public engagement on top of that to really develop that that plan for what those two specific parks could look like. And then last item on here is paving the
Lake Manitonka Regional Trail. There is a small section of the Lake Mitonka Regional Trail that is gravel. Um even smaller chunk of that will be taken care of and paved through the Arboritum area transportation plan. Um however, at the end of that, the Arburrito married
transportation when that's done um there'll still be a part of it that will be left unpaved and left gravel. So this has been um put in 2029 to finish that pavement project and and make the trail at least through Victoria's end um completely paved. >> So that that would be our responsibility
to pave that trail. >> Uh it has been earmarked. It has since it has been transitioned over to Carver County. staff has not had continued discussions with Carver County over the pavement of it. This has been something we've kept in the CIP for a number of years or so. So, something we haven't
taken out yet because we haven't had those conversations. >> One of the other questions that I have for you is every year we would see the um trail gap report. How's that coming along? I know we I know we made some progress on it this year. So, is there
still some significant projects on that? >> It's a great question, mayor, council members. So, the parks and recreation committee review that plan every single year and it is posted on our website um if anyone from the audience, anyone at home is interested in taking a look at what trail gaps they have um listed for
us. And I I believe that we might be at 10 of them and you're right, we have done a significant dent in that list specifically with the Arboritum Transportation Plan when that is done. Um there will be a number of those that will be um left for us to complete. The ones that will be left unfortunately are
going to be the hardest and most costly for us. whether they're going to be grading issues, wetlands that we'll have to go through, or there's property ownership that we'll have to go through. Um, and I know council, you've given the direction to staff in the past of, you know, we work with development. Um, when development comes through or when
transportation comes through, that's when we'll hit those really hard uh trail gap projects. >> Great. Thank you. >> Council questions, comments on the parks and trails. I think a comment that just like to put is um
council members, do do we think about the focus of the bike skills park and should we really bear down on taking that CIP item and look to get the biggest bang for our buck out of those
funds. Um my my mind is going to with Downtown West, we really want that to be a success. We want every single opportunity to avoid not delivering on that. That's a significant uh piece of
the community. It is going to set what I think a vision for Victoria is for the next hundred years. And we we want quality uh amenities along for public recreation in there. Should we be, you know, ensuring that we we take all the
appropriate steps and maybe use it some of this bike skills park? This is a pretty sizable number to ensure that we're getting the vision that we've we all know that we've spent a lot of time with ourselves and community input
delivering um everything and anything that we we've said we want to do there. So just to rephrase what I think you said is take some money from that and do a visioning project.
>> Yeah. Either that or we just, you know, do we do we is a bike skills park the right thing here? Should we be investing th that kind of sum >> Oh, I see. >> into downtown west. Um and and again we
we want every opportunity for that to be right >> successful as we possibly can. >> Which brings up a a good question about there are not funds earmarked for any of that project at this point. Miss Hardy
>> mayor members of the council if you are referencing earmarked I just to clarify we're talking downtown west public spaces. >> Yes. Um part of part of what we've been discussing with the developer um has to
do with uh having partnering with the developer to create those spaces for us and then we would program and maintain those f those in the future. Now those are details that we're still currently working on but those are the assumptions
that we've been utilizing with um the conversations that we've been having with them. Um, does that answer the question? >> It does. >> For down. >> It does for me. So, >> it does for me as well. And is this I
mean, the bike skills park, we're not saying that it has to be for a certain part. I mean, this could be used for downtown, downtown West, those types of things. Correct. I mean, it's got some flexibility in this. mayor, members of
the council, it maybe just to give you some perspective on these. So, as you know, we're we're not necessarily there. Yes, there's a general fund levy component to these things, especially in 2026, but really the CIP is a planning document for you. Any project from here,
if it's greater than 20,000, would come back to you as a separate project for you to have a discussion and for you to consider approval on. And so what this does is give you um kind of an idea, a roadmap of where we think we're going
based on conversations that we've had, things that we've discussed that are in our strategic priorities, and then we bring those conversations back to the chambers to discuss and get final approval on. So we can certainly move
things around in here um because in these capital funds we do carry fund balance which we don't do and aren't able to do legally in our um general fund uh because we have to have a
um have to have that balanced at the end of the year. But we do have some flexibility. So, if you would like to um have some funds to do some additional visioning whether um we we can certainly
put that into 2026 and we can shift some of these things around. Um I that's not a problem. I'm looking at Trish to Yeah. So from from a the financial budgetary thing that we have to do just to get
that in there, we can do that. Um, one of the things that we've talked about um as an extension from our last all day workshop was to continue to have conversations about leaning into what does it mean to be the city of lakes and parks and what do we envision for our
park system. There are two key pieces that are coming up in 2026 that could help inform that discussion and might play nicely into um setting aside some very specific design or visioning funds here to to amplify that. But that's your
2026 community survey. We could discuss asking very specific questions around specific needs gaps as it relates to our park system uh for example, but we will get a pulse from the community uh that
is statistically sound about what we're doing well, what we're not doing well, where those gaps are. Park systems are one of those things that the one of the pieces that the community survey looks at. The other thing that's happening is we're kicking off the 2050 comprehensive plan and so that will have a parks
component, a very large parks component to that and we'll be doing a lot of uh engagement with the community and with property owners as it relates to parks visioning with that. So that'll be another piece of data that we can help
inform decisions. So um what you see here is just current placeholders based on previous conversation directions strategic priorities um but that certainly is evolving and can shift uh as needed. The >> survey that you talked about in 2026, I
mean are we um are we planning on specifically asking or could we specifically ask about what would people like to see specifically for downtown west like for programming type things? like do you want to see whether it's a splash pad down there or
>> I don't know like you know like cornhole or you know things like that right like are we are we planning on asking those questions specifically in that or are we going to have a separate one for downtown west >> this hardy >> so mayor council member Roberts members of the council great question um so we
had um so with the community survey and you might recall because we talked about this a little bit at one of our previous budget discussions that we had set aside $25,000 to do that survey. And part of that cost includes
um I think it's up to two questions that are open-ended or that are not that are specific to our community that maybe another community wouldn't wouldn't be asking. So, we wouldn't have a direct comparison, but also on something that's
important to us. any additional questions, we would have to pay per question, but we certainly could have flexibility to do that. We have not identified what those questions are. That's something that we would be bringing back to you as we kick off that
process. Um and and so we certainly could ask that question if there's an appetite and a consensus for for you all to do that. We have certainly also in the past done our own engagement and we
have done very extensive engagement around downtown west and how um the commu and the vision that we're working on right now reflects how the community envisioned that downtown west would evolve. And so we can build on that. We
could we could um work with our internal communications team to do surveys or pulse surveys. they're not going to be statistically sound if we went in that direction, but we do um have a fairly decent track rep record of getting about
two to 300 responses on those um surveys when we do that level of engagement. And we've got our trailer. we can um have very targeted question engagement with doing our mobile city hall by going out to different events and engaging with
the community um through different community events that are specific to that as well. I just my opin like I mean I think there's positive negatives to both. Um, but I think the marketing team, right, and uh in the parks and
recck group in general, right, have done a really good job of getting out with our mobile city hall and stuff. And I part of me thinks that that might be something right when next spring and and fall summer right when we're have all these big events that's you know a key and even if we're when we're going to
neighborhood parks right and and reaching out like asking those questions because I don't feel like those are probably questions that are as important to get the data compared to great because we're not it's it's something new right it doesn't benefit us to do a comparison to other communities because
it's it's new but you know I I I think are Kendra and her group do a really good job of >> reaching out to um you know the comm the the community and going to different neighborhoods and and like I said our our parks and recck groups seem to be
very willing to go to these different >> neighborhoods and interact with people. So I think we let them loose and >> I agree. I think we get better better data >> bang for your buck too, right? Like why spend the extra money? It's a great conversation and it feels less >> um dead end, you know,
>> and you you actually are having a conversation with someone versus just answering a simple question where >> you might not get the context you might not get right. So, >> I agree. I agree. All right. Anything else? >> Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. Um just kind of a
quick comment. So like whether it's part of like new park development or thinking about revisioning. One of the things I hear and I guess I don't know about the numbers this year but um I know our community gardens are always full and they want more. So thinking about maybe other areas that we can are there other
areas that we can do more. Is there you know I know we have some at I think Holy Family and then obviously some at the rec center but I I always hear like they fill up fast. So um and I think there's probably as we grow there's going to be more people that want to do these types
of things. >> Yes, Council Member Roberts, Council members, um we definitely know that our community gardens are a hot commodity and especially as we look at some of uh the new developments with smaller lot sizes, smaller yards. That is something that has come to our attention of people
might not have the space or or the space more or less to do the community or have their own garden. And so offering community gardens and finding locations to offer those community gardens is definitely top of mind for us. >> Maybe that's something, you know, if there's new developments and they're not
a real big park size, like maybe that's something we ask, I guess instead of doing a small, right, like a little tot maybe, you know, to that neighborhood type thing. But >> okay, anything else?
>> I know we're at time. I just have a few comments. You don't have to respond to them and it's probably too early for it anyway. But like Holy Family Catholic High School tennis courts other than practice, those things are almost never used. If there's a way we can retrofit some of those to include pickle ball, I
think that'd be beneficial. Bike skills park, I think the natural spot is not downtown west. I think that's for other stuff and that real estate is extremely expensive. Goodman Park is the perfect place for that in my opinion. Bayfront Park revisioning. I don't think $35,000
is enough for what we want to do there. And that's it. Thank you. >> I think the revisioning is just the ideas, isn't it? It it doesn't include any of the stuff we need to put in there once we decide what that is. >> Mayor, council members, that is correct. It would be that visioning plan, that
master planning for that part. >> I was just saying the revisioning for the dirt patch. I'd maybe like to see revisioning for all of it, but >> I call it the kitty litter box. >> Kitty litter box. I mean, I think it could the there's the rocks and all that are great, but it's
also, you know, you get quarter inch of snow or a dribble of rain and it becomes treacherous. So, yeah. >> Anyway, probably shouldn't say that out loud, but Okay. >> Anything else on this council? All right, Miss Nelson, anything final
from you? >> Nothing more. >> All right, we're back to you, Miss Pollock. Anything? Wrap it up. >> I just have a couple more slides. >> Okay. >> And then I um >> So, I'm just going to take a minute here. We're going to wrap up our our uh
workshop here. We will we will adjourn our workshop and then reconvene in our city council meeting very quickly after that. So, bear with us here for just a few minutes. >> Okay. So, I'm just we're just gonna um take a quick look at where we're at on
the final budget and levy. Um so, again, just as a reminder, our budget pressures include um that increase um in debt service for the new fire station. Um our long-term street maintenance fund um
with that million dollar transfer, and then um our health insurance premiums and benefits. um we got rates back and they increased 12%. Um and so did the deductibles. So we looked at other carriers but um staying
with our current carrier was the lowest um increase. The competitors were anywhere from 21 to 25% increases. So, um we are still in open enrollment
and so due to that uncertainty of um benefits elections um which we'll be finalizing it on Friday, we're going to continue to keep our levy projection the same as the max tax approved levy from September, which
is 9.96. So, if open enrollment goes favorably for the city, there should be an ability to lower the levy before that final certification on December 8th. Um, we did get an update from the county um last week and we they did adjust our
market values a little bit. So, our um the tax rate actually did go down a little bit. So, instead of like a 007 increase, it's actually going to be like a 0.1 decrease. So that's good news because we got a little bit more market value. Um, so other than that, I don't
have any other updates. So it's just if you have any other feedback for me, um, or comments or questions. Okay. So we kind of did this as we went along, but this is your opportunity, council, to provide any final thoughts or discussion
before the final preparation of the levy. I just say thanks for all your hard work on this and the rest of the staff. So >> yeah, ditto. >> Thank you. >> Thank Roberts and mayor >> others summed it up perfect. So >> all right, do you feel like you have
everything you need? >> I do. Thank you. Great. >> Appreciate it. >> All right. We see no further discussion or action necessary for this item this evening. So we are moving on. Um I am looking for a motion to adjourn this workshop. >> Motion to adjourn the workshop.
>> We have a motion. Can I get a second? Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. We stand adjourned. >> We will reconvene in about