--------- Mhm. >> Good evening. It's now 5:00 and I called this workshop of the Victoria City Council to order. Our workshops are informal and with that we're going to dive right into our agenda. The item on our workshop agenda this evening is our 2027 preliminary budget. This is our
first look at the 2027 budget and the first of several budget discussions that will be held between now and December when the council finally adopts the budget. With that, I'm going to turn this over to our assistant city manager and finance director Trisha Pollock who will kick us off this evening. Ms.
Pollock, let's go. >> Thank you, Mayor and members of the council. Welcome to our first 2027 budget workshop. The agenda includes the 2027 preliminary uh property tax
projections, the preliminary budget, and then also we'll leave some time for discussion. So, this is a starting point for our budget discussions which will be held regularly over the next 6 months. While you're not voting on a budget today,
we'll be looking for direction and feedback. So, when we come back to you in August to discuss our maximum tax levy, we're on a path that reflects your goals for the community and the budget. Our budget calendar includes six public meetings
before the final adoption. Our July meeting will be hearing from our department heads who will give overviews of their departments and what their budget pressures are for the upcoming year. And then in August, we'll present fees
and charges from our proposed 2027 fee schedule and a max tax levy budget based off of your feedback from tonight's meeting. In September, we'll adopt the max tax levy and November, we will review the budget for the Victoria Recreation
Center, the enterprise funds which include the water, sewer, and storm water, and then we will also look at our 5-year capital improvement plan and a final general fund budget presentation before we adopt
the budget in December. How does the city budget process work? Well, we use both an incremental and priority-based approach. The incremental approach means that we start with current services and base those prior year expenditures off of a
3-year average. There can be some other indicators that that might change those projections depending on inflation and also pricing changes that we receive from vendors throughout the budget season.
Department heads will then review projections line by line and they may add new requests or remove items which are then reviewed by the city manager before they are included in the preliminary budget. The priority-driven approach determines
how effectively a program or service achieves the goal and objectives that are of greatest value to the community. So, these items are determined by council through their strategic plan. And another budget consideration is the
projected year-end fund balance. So, um as we've talked about before, our fund balance policy requires us to have at least 30% of the subsequent years operating expenditures in fund balance at year-end. So, this is
due to the timing of when we receive our first tax revenue payment, which comes um we just received our 70% of that first payment um this past week and then we'll get the other 30% early part of July.
Other tax considerations include the long-term financial plan. And we look out 10-plus years to project future debt and capital needs. So, from year to year, your property taxes might go up and down. So, why does that tax bill fluctuate?
There are a number of factors that can cause your property tax bill to change. And even though you may have a slight increase or decrease in your city portion of your tax bill, your levies of the county and school district and other jurisdictions can also affect your
overall tax bill. One mandate that's included in our 2027 budget is for the 2050 comp plan, which is a 3-year budget pressure um that totals about $250,000 over that 3-year period, um which we
have um a considerable amount budgeted for 2026 as well. So, when you receive your tax bill from the county, it's inclusive of all the taxing jurisdictions. The city's property taxes
right around a fourth of the total tax bill. So, as you can see here, for each dollar, the city's portion of the tax bill is 27 cents. Other taxing jurisdictions also make up your property tax bill, including the county at 28 cents,
and schools at 42 cents. Other jurisdictions include um like the mosquito control, the Met Council, the Watershed District. Um that's that smallest portion of about 3 cents.
So, school referendums are included in this calculation, and we want to point out that even for the same valued home, your taxes might not be the same depending on what school district you're in. We [snorts] have three school districts,
Eastern Carver County, Waconia, and Minnetonka. Um this model is based off of Eden um Eastern Carver County. So, comparing our 2026 tax levy to the benchmark communities, you can see here Victoria is hovering in
the lower end of the pack at 9.78 million. Um with our market cities levies ranging anywhere between 5.4 and 28.1 million. We get preliminary numbers from the county in June. These numbers can and
will change before we get to the max tax levy budget. So, residential market values are projected to increase by 3.37%. Um we've not received any fiscal disparity numbers for 2027 yet, either.
So, we're projecting that to stay the same right now. Um for the public's benefit, the fiscal disparities has a mandatory participation and is set by state statute. It is a revenue sharing program that applies to cities in the Twin Cities
metro area and on the Iron Range. And it's meant to support a regional approach to development, equalizing the distribution of fiscal resources, and reduce competition for commercial and industrial development.
>> Trish, on the fiscal disparities, can you tell us what it was for this year? >> Do you know that number? >> and I want to say 30-ish thousand, somewhere right in there. >> 430,000? Okay. >> I can get you the exact number, but it's
roughly in that range. >> That's fine. I was curious as to what the impact of that was. >> Yep. >> And And just to be clear on that's money we pay into the state and it's redistributed within the metro region and the Iron Range. >> That's correct, yeah. >> Thank you.
>> So, the median valued [clears throat] home is projected to increase approximately 3%. Um, so continuing to strengthen the city's tax base, total construction value is projected to increase by about 133 million.
Um, that includes roughly 32 million of apartment construction that's within a TIF district. So, just to note that. Um, for budgeting purposes, we're currently assuming 130 new homes for next year. The assumption is slightly below the 144
assumed in 2026. And does reflect a continued moderation in residential growth activity. So, new home permit activity will remain a key metric for staff to monitor through the rest of 2026. And we'll revisit this during our next
max tax levy discussion. Um, but through May, the city issued 38 new home permits, which is below the pace needed to meet that 144 houses for this year. So, although activity typically does
increase during the summer and the fall, um, we do anticipate permits could finish, um, below budget levels. Um, and if that happens, we would, um, need to use the revenue stabilization fund to offset that.
Um, revenue shortfall, which is consistent with its intended purpose. Lower annual permit totals do not signal of lack of future growth. Victoria does continue to maintain a strong inventory of approved lots and
development areas that will support growth for several years. Overall, the data suggests Victoria's shifting from the rapid growth of the past decade to a more moderate, sustainable pace, while the city's long-term growth outlook does remain to
be strong. So, an increase or decrease to individuals' property tax bills will largely depend on individual changes in their property tax value. So, as stated in the last slide, the median home value in Victoria will
increase 3%. Um, so, up $17,400 to the $600,500 um, valuation. Our focus is on the budget and the city levy cuz this is what the city can control. The county assessor assigns
those values to homes and state legislature sets the property tax rates. So, based on current projections, approximately 102 million in new taxable construction value is expected to come into the tax rolls for
taxes payable in 2027. This estimate I excluded that approximately 32 million of the apartments that are located in that TIF district. And as that value will not contribute to
the city's general tax base. The additional tax capacity generated by this new construction is estimated to produce approximately $307,000 in new property tax revenue. So with the preliminary levy increase
currently projected at approximately 324,000, um new construction growth would offset nearly all of the increase. As a result, only about 17,000 of the levy increase would need to be absorbed by properties
that were already on the tax rolls in the prior year. So in other words, approximately 95% of the proposed levy increase is currently projected to be absorbed by growth in the city's tax base rather than the existing taxpayer taxpayers.
>> [snorts] >> This slide shows um Victoria's tax base continues to be predominantly residential. And with a relatively limited commercial and industrial presence compared to more mature communities, um as a result,
residential property values and development activity continue to be the primary drivers of the tax base growth. So the chart illustrates the two sources of growth in the city's tax base, which is
appreciation in existing property values and the addition of new construction. So existing property values increased across all major property classes with residential values increasing about 3.4%
commercial and industrial values increased about 4.4% and apartment values increase approximately 7.4%. So, in addition to market value growth, new construction
continues to expand the city's tax base. Residential new construction added about 3.6% growth while commercial and industrial construction contributed about 0.8% in growth. The most significant increase
occurred with the apartments. Again, that category about 50.8% growth for that apartment project. Um the which would be the Roers building. Overall total property value growth for
2027 is approximately 8.1% consisting of 3.6% growth from market value and 4.5% growth from new construction. So, while Victoria remains primarily a residential community, the city's
growing multi-family and commercial sectors will continue to diversify the tax base over time and reduce the reliance on residential growth as a sole driver of its valuation increases. >> [snorts]
>> So, Trisha had a quick question for you on this last slide. >> Yep. >> So, this 50.8% increase for apartments, this is the property value that is added to the tax base that the city is can
attach property taxes and get funding from that, correct? >> So, that is the the 50.8% is the new construction. So, that is for and since that
that apartment building is in a TIF district, that's not adding to the tax base. >> You were going to my next point. So, we've added market value, correct? >> And but this market value isn't
funds that could flow back in the form of property taxes to be used in the general levy. That's sort of sort of earmarked, so to speak, to fund the TIF district that was done to improvement lighted properties, etc., correct? >> Correct.
>> So, I think it then becomes incumbent on that project to move off of TIF as soon as possible so that we're not s- taking too far from the future to fund for today and get those
TIF properties back into the general tax levy as quickly as possible. >> Correct. And that's a 15-year district. >> for 15 years we're in TIF and then after that that full market value then comes back and is able to be used to offset >> Correct. Yes. >> the opera- Okay.
>> Yep. >> Thanks for clarifying that, Trisha. >> Any other questions about market values? >> So, you mentioned the Roers project, but you did not mention Olivine. >> Yeah, so this was for
trying to think if this was for both of them cuz Olivine is coming online, too. So, they would they're both in a TIF district, so. >> But Olivine, only a portion of it is, right? Aren't we Aren't we getting some of We're not.
>> No. It's the same deal as Roers. It's a 15-year district. >> Okay. >> So, both of those apartment buildings added value, but the tax taxes are going into the district, which are um you know, within the TIF district
notes, so it's getting paid back to the development. >> Understood. Thank you. >> Okay, so moving forward with the 2027 [clears throat] preliminary budget information. Um so the items showing on this slide
represent the primary drivers um currently incorporated into the preliminary 2027 budget. Some of these pressures are outside of the city's direct control while others reflect previous council policy decisions and strategic investments.
The first couple items relate to employee and staffing. A 3% cola for employees with the opportunity to earn up to 3% merit on their anniversary for going above and beyond is being proposed. This compensation strategy allows the
city to remain competitive within our market cities while also recognizing high performance based is on based on annual evaluations. The budget also assumes a 10% increase in health insurance costs. Final rates
won't be available until after max tax levy. Um they come out in October. So this remains an estimate and may be adjusted as additional information becomes available. >> Trish, can you give us maybe the last
3-year? What's our average increase per year over say the last 3 years on health? >> On the health insurance? So I believe last year I had put in a 9% estimate and it it came in at like 11%. So I went with 10%
this year, but the previous year to that we actually ended up changing plans cuz it had come in at like 20 some percent. And so we actually had to change plans. We went to a whole different provider >> Okay. >> um in order for us to get those to be
more reasonable. We also adjusted the cost to the employee. Um, previous to that it was, you know, it's usually like right around, you can figure at least like that between 8 and 12% is usually kind of where you expect to land. >> Okay. Good. Thanks.
>> Mhm. >> And then Trish, just a quick question. On your slide for to clarify for those who are watching at home. The The pluses that you're using on the left are more like bullet points, correct? >> Yeah. >> And then but when you're getting into the contractual services the
the what looks like a what's probably a dash >> Mhm. >> is truly a dash. It's not a decline of 9.6%, a decline of 37%. >> Oh, yeah, that's a dash. >> Okay. Yeah, great. So, I just I know that Abby is very skilled in Bitmojis
and emojis and things like that. [laughter] She probably do an up arrow like this to convey it. But, I just wanted it to be clear. Our packet says that it's increasing. I just want anybody who's following at home to say to understand clearly that these are
increases to us and our packet has the dollar amounts which is in this particular case is pretty substantial cuz those items are about $100,000 collectively. >> Yes. >> All right. >> You're talking the contractual services side. >> Yes.
>> Correct. So, that you know >> Yeah, there was a little bit more detail in the packet. Yeah. >> Thank you for that clarification, Councilmember Ivansky. It's an important one. >> Yes. Um, okay. So, moving [clears throat] on um, to the
infrastructure. Um, there's several infrastructure related costs continue um, that continue to place pressure on the operating budget. As the city's trail system ages and expands, annual maintenance needs continue to increase.
Um, likewise, the city's ongoing commitment to pavement preservation and transportation infrastructure is reflected in the proposed $1 million transfer to the long-term street maintenance fund. The proposed budget also includes funding for the Holy Family tennis court
resurfacing project that the city and Holy Family share um, maintenance responsibilities for those courts and the city's anticipated contribution is approximately $350,000 um, toward the overall project. Um, the
2027 uh, budget includes a $250,000 transfer um, to the park improvement fund with the remaining funding anticipated from existing fund balance.
Another driver is the city's 2050 comp plan, which is required by state law. And this falls into the category of unfunded mandates. And the total project cost, um, like I mentioned before, is about 250,000
with $150,000 being included in next year's budget um, to continue the planning process. The budget also reflects financial commitments associated with prior council investments. As part of the
downtown West redevelopment project, the council previously approved an interfund loan of up to $3 million from the water fund to support public infrastructure improvements. And the proposed 27 budget includes the first annual repayment back to the water
fund of $325,000. Similarly, the opening of the new fire station will result in ongoing operating costs associated with utilities, insurance, maintenance, and building operations. These additional annual expenses are
currently estimated to be at about $52,000. >> And just to be clear on that, Trish, that's additional to what's currently being paid, right? >> Correct. >> Okay, thank you. >> Finally, several contractual service providers are proposing increases that exceed
normal inflationary trends. Notable examples include the assessment services, prosecution services, police services, and the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. Um staff will continue to review these costs as part of budget development
process and will identify opportunities um if to offset any increases wherever um is possible. It's important to note that many of these costs are tied to the strategic priorities and investments previously approved by the council rather than them
being any new initiatives that um are being proposed. >> Can we spend a little bit of time on the contractual services? So, the assessment, prosecution, and police services are all coming from Carver County. >> Correct. >> And those are all increases from them. So, um
it when when they propose these increases, did we get some kind of justification about I mean, 37% in prosecution costs, that's pretty high. Do we have some context around the increases here? >> Yeah, I'm looking at Miss Hardy.
>> Um I can start if that's all right. >> Yes, please, Miss Hardy. >> It's fine. Um thank you, Mayor and members of the council. Just to talk about the prosecution contract is that one is is pretty significant, 37% increase. And so, the county attorney had been sharing some information with um the
different cities that you most cities in Carver County utilize um the Carver County Attorney's Office for prosecution services. I think I I believe Chanhassen I might I'll correct myself if I'm wrong, but um I believe Chanhassen does
go out for an RFP and hires like a private firm, like a Kennedy & Graven or something to do prosecution services for them. But most cities in Carver County do use Carver County for those services. Um and so the county just went through
kind of a an audit process to see what their overhead and their actual costs are. Um it'd been a while since they looked at fees. And so um there's a $109,000 gap between what it costs them to provide the service um
and what they are charging. And so they are spreading that cost to the cities over a 5-year period of time. So for 5 years we're going to see um some increases. This um it's my understanding that this year is the most
significant um adjustment and then the rest will be spread out um over that. So um a big piece and I'm pulling up um some information that they sent around that. So a big piece what they are saying is
driving that is that they had not been recognizing the salary increases of their staff. Um and those estimates are um the that is a big driver of that and then fine revenue. So um they're looking
at 3-year averages and so they're going to go back and look at adjusting based on a 3-year average to make sure we're staying consistent. So um those are the big big drivers um on that piece. And >> So what
what's the value of the prosecution services? I know it's going to be a $3,000 increase this year, but do we know what the What what's our contract with them? Is it $20,000 a year >> cost is? >> I can look that up and get back to you.
>> That's That's great. That would be helpful to know on um all of these, the assessment, the prosecution, and the police services contract as well. >> But is it fair to say that that's somewhere in the neighborhood of $10,000 for the year if 33,000 is represents 37%
we're in that sort of zone? So >> Yes. >> the I mean, as Madam City Manager points out, it somewhat is what it is. I mean, we are contracted with the county to
um, do this essentially like question would be um, does it economically make sense for us to pursue what other cities have done and and I'm not you know, my my immediate like reaction would be is
we're we're even though this is coming with an increase that they they did need to recognize their costs, we probably are not going to see something away from the county that's going to offer us a a better, um, bang for our buck, so to speak.
>> Yeah. I would also just say like with the police services, a couple things, right? So, I mean, we all know you know, we we've been short-staffed, right? And now we're increasing, right? Since we're still short-staffed. Um, right? But it's an election year, right?
We know we're going to have a new sheriff because he's not right, so things could change in the future based on who gets elected and, um, also, you know, I just for maybe even discussion at a later time is we've had really good luck with
our CSO, uh, and partnering with Carver County. And do we ever Is there savings there where, you know, maybe we do look to hire a deputy or someone ourselves and partner with Carver County versus going directly through them, right? Like we
did with our CSO. So, um, you know, that's that I'm more concerned about just because I don't think we've necessarily got what we've paid for necessarily in that um just because again we're been short-staffed. We haven't had to right so um
just things to think about I think in the future so. >> Ms. Hardy you have comment on that? >> Um thank you Mayor Motors of the council. Yes, I will just say that um our CSO program that council member Roberts noted is a pilot program and I think
we're in our second full year of that. Um so it's unique to Victoria. There are CSO pro the county itself has a CSO program. The county CSO program is different than what we have. And so um when we first
set out to do that program just to provide a little bit of context um is we wanted to have a staff person that number one could provide um some assistance to our deputies to free
up their time because a lot of the calls that they're getting are can be handled by a non-licensed peace officer. They're non-emergency, they're more nuisance, they might be code related, and so you didn't really need a licensed peace
officer to manage that caseload. And then we also wanted a visibility so boots on the ground developing relationships with somebody in uniform that can help with public education that can help make connections with the businesses that can be that point of
contact for um things like parking citations or um you know during snow emergencies so you're not taking away a deputy from being on the streets and dealing with real emergencies. And that program has been really successful. So
the our CSO augments the work that they do so they're freeing up that time. And so, it's unique in Victoria because we were part of that hiring process, and our CSO reports directly to our fire
chief. So, she is embedded in our organization, um and reports to the fire chief, but also on the county side has a sergeant that And so, then the sergeant and the fire chief work very closely together to um look at workload and how she's
spending her time and everything. Now, we did that because we as a city without a police department don't qualify under the state and the state laws for being a law enforcement agency.
And so, if you're not classified as a law enforcement forcement agency, we cannot have access to the tools or that CSO does not have access to the tools they need to do their job effectively, mostly law enforcement data. So, being able to look up driver's license
information, being able to get CAD law enforcement data on the CAD system. And so, that's why there's a partnership in that contract. It's part of our police services contract. We have And I'm sharing all of this because we have had some conversations
with the current administration about taking that pilot program and potentially growing it into the deputy. It's worked really well for us, and we have been having some open and ongoing conversations about what if we took that CSO model that seems to be working
really well for us, and we made that into um piloted what a new model. So, evolving our current model of policing to something that looks a little bit different. And so, um it puts us as a
city more in the driver's seat about, you know, what we want municipal policing to look like in our community. And so those conversations have been ongoing and I feel good about um a about the open dialogue that we're
having. Um there are certainly some hurdles and challenges with it, uh but that could it certainly could be um a path forward for us. I I think um regardless of how things land, I I feel
um that there's some good momentum there and we've got a really solid program that's working well for us that could be easily translated into something different. >> Would Would that Could that evolution Could we take anything from our sister cities or
peers? Have they done any of this evolution that we could latch onto and maybe learn from or what do you think? I mean, is is it out there? >> That's an excellent question and that is the exact question that we just actually today asked when we were having this
conversation to say, "Do we know? Like what are the other counties that have this model? The Anoka counties? I think Scott County's dabbling in this. What are they doing and can we learn from them?" And that is exactly the next step. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> One more question before we leave this.
Police services, this 9.6% increase does not increase our service level at all, correct? >> Correct, Mayor, members of the council. So the way that the increases in the contract for police services are um
are being passed along to us. There's a lag. There's I think it might even be a two-year lag. One year It's at least a one-year lag and it's based on um it's mostly driven by what the actual overhead costs are and then the actual
wages. And so um so and it must be a year lag. So this year we're paying what the real costs They're Those real costs are getting passed to us and they're driven by the wage increases are through the union contracts. So, as contracts settle um
and we know what we're doing, they pass that along to us. And then, if we have um shifts that go um we don't have They're not They're not covered, we get um money back. We use
that to offset overtime and other costs uh throughout throughout the year. But, those unfilled shifts get credited back to the city. Um and then the the change in service that we have this year cuz to Council Member Roberts'
point, there has been some challenges uh with staffing. Um and this year we've actually had um the probably the best, I will say, stability in terms of staff staffing um
that we have seen in a really long time. Um and that said, um there still were some challenges. And so, we have taken one shift that was like perpetually unfilled.
And we translated that into the sergeant position. And so, Sergeant Josh Baker has been assigned to the city. We share Sergeant Baker with the city of Carver. And with that, um we are essentially
having one deputy shift go unfilled. So, originally, the intent was to have a 24/7 coverage, and we do have a gap there.
There It's roughly 9 hours a week. Um what we get in return then is Sergeant Baker being here being able to flex time. So when we have for example classic car night or community event, we're not paying the overtime costs
for those deputies. We can keep them responding. We're not pulling them off the streets. He can flex his time. It's an 8-hour position, not a 12-hour position. And so and there are other things that just his
rank allows us to to be able to manage more efficiently. And so that has been piloted for 26. We're doing that right now. And there's some things that need to be worked out,
but I think both the city of Carver and and we at least operationally feel like there's some benefit in doing that. So I think our recommendation is to continue with
this model that would have that gap roughly 9 hours a week. Um to continue this for another year and then re-evaluate for 28. >> Thank you. I I'll just >> [cough]
>> This is becoming an increasingly thorny issue that the city of Victoria does need to think about because with $73,000 being under 10% increase um
we're probably staring down $800,000 a year for police services. Trish had a nice slide up that said our population is 13,600 projected. We're starting to look like the critical
mass where we need to start asking the hard question, should we evaluate the prospects of having our own police department? And what does that look like? You know, I think everybody's familiar that Chaska did that
and chose to go away from the county. The makeup of the city of Victoria within Carver County is completely different as we well understand of what it has been over the past 10 years.
I'm going to make um the mayor feel a little bit old here but when we started our Odyssey together in in serving the city of Victoria, I can recall that it was probably around 400,000 when you
and I were on finance committee and when I joined finance committee our costs were about $200,000 a year. So, you know, in a in a relatively short time pick a number it's 600% or 200% increase over what we've had in the past and it
it may be instructive for us to start to you know, get some ideas down the road workshops maybe get a consulting firm to look at and say what does it reasonably look like to have a policing model for the city of Victoria. I mean, if we're doing gun
permits and liquor license renewals and you know, those are the kind of meat and potatoes of what our police force is responding to totally different than having that not that it couldn't happen but you know, there are other instances of crime in
other communities or what I'll say more concentrated on resources to investigate and prosecute those crimes that we that we don't have here. So, it may be time to for us to start at least getting
a little bit of a view on does it look like it makes sense for us to do that and that could also shape the decision-making when the county is sitting there and putting together what they think they should charge the city of Victoria. I think it probably a case
could be made that they're not expending the amount of really tough policing on our community than other parts of the county. >> When do we sign the like I'm assuming it's a January through December and then when like is it just at the end of the year that we kind of just So,
okay. And can you remind me so I think the mayor and I are the only two So, how many years ago was it that we we had a workshop all day workshop where we had two consultants [clears throat] former
police um that did a big kind of this kind of discussion that you're talking about and I'm assuming a lot of that stuff is still relevant. I mean, obviously we've grown more since then, but um maybe 4 years ago or something something
like that I want to say. >> Yeah, that's about right. Yeah. >> So, maybe even re-bringing up that information that we had to share with the new the council members that have joined us since then. So, cuz that was very really good discussion that we had. >> Yeah.
>> I don't know. Ramping up a police department seems like a big job and an expensive job. $3 to $5 million minimum. I I would say it's probably got to be a little bit more than that. I I I was just actually trying to Google
and see what the city of Chaska spends on their police department every year and they're about twice our size. But I do know that we have had conversations in um just amongst ourselves uh in Chanhassen it doesn't feel like they're ready yet to stand up their own police
department, but I think the I mean, I I the question is a worthy one. At what point does your population become big enough where you have to start to consider a police department? >> It is maybe it's a start of right like you said this this
pilot that we've done with the CSO if they're willing to talk more about that that's a good starting point and then you know and then you know if 5 years if that works for 5 years great and then in 5 years maybe we're we are ready I don't for you know our own police station but
feels like there's an in between maybe first. >> That might be a good phase. >> Two neighboring towns combining forces >> Yeah, part you know pun intended. Um is not a model that's unfamiliar in America so
there you know that potentially addresses Council members Patterson's comment about startup costs cuz they are substantial. We probably need a place to park bad people for a little while till we can get them over to the county jail. We probably need a place for
you know our officers to maintenance vehicles >> equipment >> Okay, very good. >> We are vacating a fire station and have some space. >> thinking about that too. >> [clears throat] >> Pop in some squads there.
>> [laughter] >> I mean my biggest concern just for those watching at home you're looking at you know the assessment services prosecution services three grand police services is 73,000 $6,000 increase for Lake Minnetonka the Conservation District that means we're paying 30 grand to the Lake Minnetonka
conference conservation district. What are we getting out of that? >> Yeah, Ms. Hardy please. >> I'm going to >> And is it something we can cut? >> Um that contract by the way I looked those up and the the LMCD is going to be
35,000 next year. 35,000 And then the sheriff is 838,000 the assessment contract will be 105,000 and then the prosecution contract will be 11 5. Thank you. >> So, Mayor members of the council
>> Yeah, the hard numbers scare me more than the percentages. You know, $3,000 the judges, we got to pay them. So, anyway. >> Yeah. >> What is What do we get for LMCD? >> Councilmember Patterson, Mayor members of the council, LMCD LMCD's
um the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District's primary driver for the increase was they had a depletion of their excess reserves, which helped them keep their levies flat for a period of years. And so, as they're
looking at their long-term plans, they're looking at starting to rebuild the reserves so they can continue to do their core mission in um with that um with the things that they do, and then um they hired an executive director
um position, which increased their personnel expenses. So, it's Those are the two primary drivers. Um they had had a part-time consultant in there, and when they um knew that they were going to have a longer hiring
runway, they reduced the levy for us or at least kept it um steady. So, they didn't not pass those increases to us. And then um I just want to make a note on the assessment um contract. There is a formula that the
the county uses on a per parcel basis that's dependent upon um agriculture, commercial, or residential land. And they too went through an audit process and um adjusted their formula, um resulting in an
increase to um those per parcel fees. And so, the number of parcels that they're evaluating, so as our community grows, your assessment contract grows because you're evaluating more parcels, but also um now we have that added increase with
the adjustment of their fee increasing. >> To answer your question about what they do, they're actually an over kind of an overarching umbrella organization that coordinates between I think it's like 14 cities, Hennepin, Carver County,
just to preserve Lake Minnetonka. It's all focused around Lake Minnetonka's health, its vitality, and making sure it stays a great asset to this region for years to come. So, they do a lot of good conservation work. Um you'll hear them talking about things
like um shores, um you know, maintaining the shores, making sure that the waters are used in appropriate ways. They they manage the um I'm trying to remember what those boats are called where you do the
jet boats. >> Mhm. >> You know, >> Mhm. >> making recommendations about how far offshore they need to be to protect the shoreline and those kinds of things. So, it's all about making sure that Lake Minnetonka stays a healthy, vital body of water.
>> Yeah, I'm not going to make any friends on that, but isn't it the DNR's job once we go past the shoreline? >> So, Mayor members of the council, just real high level, um and if you think it would be helpful, we can have Ann Helscher, who's our representative, come
in and just do a really like a real brief um 101 on things, but um the legislature has actually given some specific powers to the LMCD to do some of the things that would traditionally be reserved for the DNR. So, you're not
necessarily wrong in that, but the they do they have been empowered by um the legislature to do some of the things that they're doing. >> So, then we're just required to contribute, or could we say, "No, we we only have 200 people that live in the city of Victoria that live on the lake.
We don't want to contribute anymore. Um that's probably not possible. Again, I said I'm not going to make any friends with this one, but >> Yeah, I'm not sure what I I guess I would have to do a little bit more research on what mem- How does that work? Does the legislature
require like I I would have to do some more research to understand what our options would be? Um but I do know because we have >> or whatever? >> I do know because we have property that
is on the lake shore um that we do get a representative and our representative is actually uh the board chair um and has been on for a very long time. So, I'm sure she's a wealth of knowledge on that and I can
>> Yeah, we can tap into her answer some questions. That's That's That would be a good exercise, I think, for all of us. >> I agree. >> [clears throat] >> Okay, thank you. Okay. >> [cough] [clears throat] >> Any other questions on this slide?
Otherwise, we can move forward. >> We kind of beat it up, didn't we? >> We did. We went on a rabbit hole, for sure. But, good stuff. All right. >> No, it's great. >> Ms. Pollock, please continue. >> Okay, so this chart shows the revenues that we are projecting for 2027 in
comparison to the 2026 adopted budget. Um starting at the bottom, I guess, taxes and franchise fees continue to be the largest source of revenue um accounting for more than 85% of the total general fund revenue.
The increase shown reflects growth in the city's tax base, um modest increases in property values, and the preliminary levy assumption that we've included in the 2027 [cough] budget. Um license and permits are
projected to decrease slightly with the number of new home permits that it we are reducing it by um compared to 26 um which reflects staff's current expectations regarding the pace of the residential growth.
And also based on current inventory and what is anticipated through develop developer or property owner elimination. Um and then looking at the um intergovernmental revenues um those are
expected to be um fairly um steady. And then oops missed my slide. And then um looking at the um charges for services. Now that
includes um >> [clears throat] >> items such as the antenna lease revenues, um planning and development fees, and plan check fees um that are part of the building permit process. And that slight increase
reflects um there's always like a 5% increase year-over-year for those antenna fees. And then other revenue includes um things such as fines and investment
earnings. Um we're just budgeting a very slight increase for those. Um any questions about revenues? We're going to get into like fees and charges in our August. So we'll go a little bit
more in depth in some of these, but um >> Very small. Are we losing the lease for the antennas on the water tower now that they've got that other pole up instead? >> No, the only reason they have that pole up is cuz they're going to paint the water tower.
>> Okay. Well, I was just thinking like >> [clears throat] >> are they losing 3 months of time of lease of the water tower? Okay. I was just curious. Thank you. >> Mhm. >> Okay, moving on to these um expenditures. >> [clears throat] >> So,
while revenues remain stable and continue to grow, several key cost drivers are putting pressure on the 27 budget. Um so, overall, the preliminary budget reflects an increase of about 7.25%
compared to the 26 adopted budget. A significant portion of that increase is within the transfers category. This increase is primarily attributable to the first annual repayment associated with that downtown West Redevelopment um interfund loan
payment. And as mentioned in the previous slide, the 27 budget includes that repayment first repayment of 325,000. Um so, moving forward, that's going to be a year-over-year um payment back to that water fund.
Despite inflationary pressures, expenditures within the Parks and Rec and Public Works remains relatively stable. Um increases have been offset by elimination of the Parks and Rec director position. And that was budgeted for in 26, but removed from the 27
budget. Um public safety's increasing um as we just talked about primarily due to the inflation and contractual services associated with the city's agreement um with the county. Increases in the general government is
primarily driven by employee wage and benefit adjustments, increases in contractual services, and additional insurance and operating costs associated with the new fire station. Um it also includes some expanded insurance for expanded park
assets um and the funding of the city's 2050 comp plan as previous previously mentioned as well. Any specific questions about expenditures on this slide?
We'll go more in depth into the transfers in a upcoming slide. All right. Moving on. Um so before discussing those proposed transfers, I wanted to provide some background on the city's park and trail capital funds.
The city currently maintains two separate funds related to parks and trails. Uh the first is a trail gap fund which was originally established to receive transfers from the general fund for purposes of connecting trail segments
throughout the community. Over time, however, the cost of standalone trail construction has increased significantly. And as a result, many trail connections are now more efficiently completed as part of roadway reconstruction projects
or through private development projects rather than through dedicated trail gap projects. So the second um fund we currently have is the park fund which that is um primarily um funded through park dedication fees from
developers. And those funds are restricted and they can only be used for acquisition and development of new park facilities. So they cannot be used to um pay for any of the park and trail
capital improvement projects um involving any type of existing infrastructure. We previously had heard council ask for additional information on park dedication fees and we are going to be sharing that information during our August meeting
um when we discuss fees and charges. So, we will be addressing that question then. And then as our park and trail system continues to mature, we are seeing fewer new park development projects and a greater
demand for capital improvements, rehabilitation, and replacement of existing assets. So, staff is recommending that the trail gap fund be renamed and repurposed as park and trail improvement fund.
This would create a dedicated fund for general fund transfers which support capital improvements to existing park and trail infrastructure while allowing staff and council to more easily plan for and track these investments over time.
This recommendation leads into the next slide which will include the proposed transfer to establish funding for park and trail improvement projects. >> Trish, are we proposing to put the
trail maintenance in this fund as well? >> Yes, Mayor and members of the council. What we would like to do is for some of like those larger trail rehabilitation projects such as like the Duck Trail one is the one that we're
trying to get completed this year. In the future then those would be funded through this fund instead of having that one line item budget amount coming through just in one year. So, because some of those projects are you
know well over $100,000 um it would be more manageable for us to be putting a transfer into a fund and being able to save up for some of those larger projects versus trying to fund them and increasing the levy
a larger amount in just a single year. >> I think I like it. >> And we can we'll have some more um information discussions about that, too, um towards in a couple other slides here, but um this is just kind of I wanted to mention this ahead of time before I go to this plan transfers cuz
this is where it would show that that plan transfer the proposed $250,000 transfer, which we would have put into the park fund and had to keep separated for that Holy Family um tennis court project, we would put into this fund
instead so that um we can maintain the integrity of that park dedication fees and making sure that those restricted funds are tracked appropriately and that these funds that are for these improvements are tracked separately so that we can
um more easily manage those projects and those funds. Um so that's what this slide is showing that um $250,000 um transfer is for. Um that $75,000 transferred last year, even though that park wasn't created,
that would have been what we transferred into that park fund for the Holy Family tennis courts for '26. Then what I would do then is take that money and put that into this fund from that park fund. Since that's not dedication fees, we'd be able to do that.
Um and then the balance um then would be coming from a fund balance that we currently have in that trail gap fund, as well. >> How much is in that trail gap fund? >> about I had that
in one of my slides as a note. About 230,000. >> Okay. >> Is what we're expecting to have at this year end. We have a larger balance in there now, but we are planning to use some of those funds for the Rolling Acres Road trails. So, there's some
monies that um we we would have needed to come up with to to do those trail that trail work. So, this is the fund that we were planning to use it for. It seemed was the most appropriate fund to use. >> Yeah. >> This makes sense to me. Feels clean.
So, moving on um with the additional transfers Uh so, the proposed $325,000 transfer, we talked about that to the downtown redevelopment fund. Um the transfer to the capital equipment fund
is actually being decreased in 2027. Um in prior years, the city's been building reserves towards the eventual purchase of a ladder truck for the fire department. So, this capital fund is includes both the public works and the
um fire equipment fund. And so, while we have two separate funds for the slides' sake, they are combined together. Um but, we are proposing to postpone that transfer into the um
fire equipment fund as we reevaluate the need for that um fire ladder truck. So, it's a very large expensive piece of equipment. And this would allow us to lower the levy um
by reducing that transfer. And they're still able to use the fund balance that's in there for the equipment that they have in the CIP that is set for them to purchase over the next couple of years. So, um it was just we were starting to build that up in preparation
for the lease on a ladder truck. Um and then the capital facilities fund is being increased a little bit um up to 250,000. We're trying to build reserves um to build a cold storage facility at the
public works campus on the Berry Road. Um this facility would of course replace the storage building that's currently on the former public works site, which has reached its end of life and the use of that space might be transitioning to um
something else in the future and this would allow us to be able to have that cold storage um for the public works equipment. And then finally, the long-term street maintenance fund um the transfer is
consistent with the 26 budget. These funds uh support the city's pavement preservation program, including mill and overlay projects, and staff is expecting to complete the pavement management plan later this summer. And we might
recommend some adjustments depending on how that um that assessment comes back. So um you'll notice that several of these transfers are really about planning ahead and whether that's
replacing aging infrastructure or maintaining existing assets um or preparing for future equipment and facility needs. Any questions about transfers? Seeing none, we're moving on.
Okay, so the levy change. Um when we consider the changes in both revenue and expenditures, we arrive at the city's proposed levy. So the levy represents the amount of property tax revenue needed to support city services and
obligations, including all of the things that we mentioned, police and fire, street maintenance, snow removal, debt service, and all of the municipal operations. So, the preliminary '27 levy increase
currently is projected at 3.31%. It's important to note that an increase in the levy of 3.31% doesn't mean that people's property taxes will change by that percentage. The levy increase simply reflects the
difference between the amount of property taxes needed in '27 compared to the prior year. So, the actual impact on an individual property owner will depend on several factors, including the changes in the
property values, the growth in the city's tax base and from new construction, and also the distribution of values across all the property types within the community. What does the 3.31% increase in the city's levy mean for your property tax
bill? This chart shows a comparison from 2026 to 2027. And um the value is taken by 1%, and then that amount is multiplied by the tax rate.
I rounded to the nearest dollar to simplify, but while the preliminary budget includes a 3.31% increase in the city's levy, the tax rate is projected to decrease from 30.08%
down to 29.02% due to the continued growth in the city's tax base and increases in overall taxable market values. So, this chart illustrates the estimated city tax impact at various home values
using the projected '27 tax rate. And under these assumptions, properties at each value level would experience a decrease in the city's portion of the property taxes despite the increase in the lobby.
So, for example, the $500,000 home would see a decrease of about $53 a year. $700,000 about $75. $1.1 million about $117,000. So, it's important to note that these
estimates assume no change in the properties market value. So, your actual tax bills will vary based on changes in individual property values. Um the final tax rates established by other taxing jurisdictions and of course
um changes in the overall tax base. The median valued home um as well would [clears throat] go down. About that six greater than that $60 range. So, here's how the monthly change in
spread [cough] out between [clears throat] city service functions. So, I'm using the median home value tax of $145 a month um as an example. And think about some of the other bills you might have as a homeowner, cell phones, internet,
cable, satellite TV, electric or gas. But, comparatively for 11.75 you're paying to have the streets in good repair or plowed timely after snow event. Um for 45.97 per month, which includes debt service for the new fire station
and the operation operational budget for the fire um department, you're ensured the community is safe and someone responds when you call 911. And this is just a different way of thinking about your property taxes and what services and value that you get
from paying your property taxes. As you can see here, we're looking at a fairly steady levy over the next couple of years. So, um right now projecting in that 5% range over a couple of years
there before dropping back down. But fairly steady, lower than um we saw in the prior 4 years. Okay, so as Victoria continues to grow, future budget discussions will increasingly focus on maintaining
existing infrastructure and service levels to a growing number of residents while also planning for long-term capital investments. So, growth in service delivery pressures include maintaining current service
levels for a growing population, evaluating staff and operational needs as development continues, and meeting service expectations of our community members. We also have facility and capital needs,
um cold storage relocation and replacement, um as we just discussed, um future public works facility expansion, redevelopment of the former public works site, and then reuse and future operations of the existing fire station
once the new fire station opens. And as the city of Lakes and Parks, there will be ongoing maintenance and stewardship of our parks, trails, and public spaces such as maintenance and replacement of aging park and trail infrastructure, funding improvements to
downtown West public spaces, long-term asset management of community amenities. And there's also ongoing transportation and infrastructure budget pressures including Highway 5 corridor improvements, funding local street
construction and pavement preservation projects. So, many of these items are not immediate and um but represent future policy and funding decisions that will require council consideration as the community continues to
evolve and grow. So, the first discussion item tonight relates to staffing. The preliminary budget does not include funding for additional positions. If all positions were approved, the estimated levy impact
would be about 2.56% on top of the 3.31%. So, before discussing the individual requests, it's important to recognize that city staffing has not grown really at the same pace as the
community. And over the past several years, Victoria has experienced significant growth in residents, housing units, lane miles, parks, trails, facilities, and public spaces. At the same time, staff has intentionally delayed several
staffing requests while the city's been focusing on major capital investments including the new fire station and transportation improvements, downtown West infrastructure, and other strategic priorities. So, as a result, departments have
absorbed additional responsibilities and workload growth without increasing in staff. While staff continues to maintain service levels, doing so is becoming increasingly challenging and is not sustainable over the long term.
Continuing to defer staffing investments will eventually impact service levels, response times, project delivery, strategic initiatives, or employee retention. The positions are intended to address
service demands that have developed over time and to ensure organization can continue meeting the council and also ex- our growth. So, the first the first position I have on the list
here is GIS. Um so, as you may know, for many years the city has participated in a shared GIS model through Carver County. And under this arrangement, one GIS professional provided services to four
communities, which allowed Victoria to access specialized expertise without funding a full-time position. The city recently learned that the county GIS employee serving in a in this role is leaving the organization.
So, the county's currently re-evaluating whether it will continue the shared service model and creating uncertainty regarding the future GIS support. So, Victoria currently receives
32 hours of GIS service per month, but the existing workload already exceeds available capacity. So, as a result, GIS resources are primarily focused on maintaining current operations, leaving
many efficiencies, as asset management, mapping, permitting, utility, and public engagement opportunities unrealized. So, staff is proposing funding for GIS services in 2027 either through a continued contract arrangement um
depending on the outcome of the county's evaluation, but regardless of the delivery model, additional GIS capacity would address immediate operational needs while positioning the city to leverage technology and
more efficiently. So, um we would we're asking about for the support of the long-term asset management initiatives, not just like the current GIS needs that we're
receiving from Allison um for the 32 hours per week or per month. And then the second position is public works. So, public works has experienced um
significant growth over the past several years as the city's added roads and utilities, parks and trails. Um while the department has successfully maintained service levels and staff believes the current staffing model will become
increasingly difficult to sustain over a long term. So, at a high level, the department's experiencing growing needs in three areas. Operational leadership and staff supervision field coordination,
inspections, and contractor oversight asset management, work order administration, customer service coordination and administrative support. So, staff believes that additional
resources will likely need to be phased in over time and we're still evaluating the best organizational structure um on whether those needs are best addressed through supervisory position,
technical support position, or some combination of both. But, there may also be opportunities to offset a portion of the future staffing costs um through the utility-related funds um funding sources, reducing the impact on
the general fund levy. And then there is the Park and Rec. So, as I mentioned earlier, as part of the '27 budget process, the Park and Rec director position was removed as a temporary measure
assisting to assist in reducing the um levy while staff evaluates the long-term structure and needs of the department. While the city successfully maintained service levels, the continued growth of Victoria's park system, trail network,
facilities, and public spaces has increased demands on existing staff resources. Um the key areas of need for this position include day-to-day parks operations and management, staff
and seasonal employee supervision, park planning and long-range system development, capital project management implementation, contractor coordination and oversight, asset management, and maintenance planning. So, as the city trans-
transitions focuses more on maintaining and reinvesting in our existing facilities and amenities, staff believe additional resources may be needed to support the long-term service delivery and asset management goals.
And then finally, administration. Um As we've grown, um administrative responsibilities have also increased. So, today a significant amount of administrative work it's being absorbed [cough] [clears throat] by department directors,
managers, and professional staff. So while this approach has allowed the city to avoid adding positions in prior years, it's becoming increasingly difficult to sustain an organizational demand um
as we continue to grow. So key areas um of need include first point of contact for resident queries and customer service requests, uh phone coverage and issue triage,
scheduling and coordination, contract administration and tracking, public meeting support and minute preparation backup, publication and legal notices and required public communication, correspondence
preparation and distribution, special projects and organizational support functions. So what we're facing isn't just the volume of work, it's who's doing the work. Right now many tasks are being handled by senior staff whose time is better
spent on project management, strategic initiatives, departmental management and leadership. So adding administrative capacity would help us align responsibilities at the right level
and improve efficiency and give managers and directors the space that they need to focus on higher valued work. Our team has done a great job absorbing growth and taking it on more responsibilities over the past
several years. Um as council looks at future staffing investments, the conversation is less about today's workload and more about making sure we can continue delivering the level of service our residents expect as the
community grows. So, the policy question before Council this evening is whether they are supportive of staff furthering further evaluating resource needs in the areas that we highlighted and returning with additional information as a part of
the maximum tax levy discussion. Okay. >> Council. >> It was a lot of information. >> It was a lot of information. I would agree. [laughter] >> Dana and I are open for questions. >> Yeah. >> I get one point of clarification on the GIS position.
You said 32 hours a week and 32 hours a month. >> I meant 32 hours a month. >> Okay. Thank you. And so with that work like if we hired someone, would that be kind of like how our old IT thing would like it would be not necessarily on
demand, but like they'd work so many hours they wouldn't be a FTE a whole full or would it be a or is that what you're asking us to look into more to do cuz I guess my my ultimate question is like since we're sharing we were sharing
with at the county, is that something where we partner with another city again, right? Like we've done in other situations to save costs, I guess. >> Yeah, Ms. Hardy, please. >> Thank you, Mayor members of the Council Council member Averix. Um great questions. I think you're asking the
same questions that we're asking internally and so um we are underutilizing GIS and there's there's a we're just scratching the surface with what it can be what can be done and the number of hours. I mean, we're we're barely
keeping up. There is a backlog of work to do just to keep up with data inputting with the growth that we're having. So, one of the things that we're evaluating is do we have enough work currently and long-term
where are gaps? What don't we know? What Where are those opportunities for growth? And do that Does that investment offset the um the additional cost for having a staff? And can you keep somebody busy
long-term? We're going through that analysis right now. We um it What we're hoping to do is just get a flavor from council tonight on just your level of support. Do you see this as being an opportunity for growth in in
this position to leverage other efficiencies across the organization? Cuz this touches every department from administration and elections to public works to planning to communications. There's so much that
the that GIS can do that we're just not utilizing cuz we don't have enough hours dedicated to that. So, it's definitely a growth area for us. Um it could even be a bridging year. So, do we look at doing
contracted services to better understand where those gaps are and work with the contractor? If the county is making a decision, and we don't know, that's part of what we're going to find out in a couple of weeks. Um if the county's even going to make make allow us to continue
to have contracted services through them. They might say, "We're done with this program. We're shifting away from that. Cities, you're on your own." If that's the case, then I think we'd be looking at, "Okay, is there an opportunity to partner with other cities? Do we have the same needs? Or are we just wanting to use the tool more
in a more sophisticated state than others are ready to do?" Those conversations and analysis still need to happen. And so, we feel like by the time Max tax comes around, we're going to have a better idea of exactly what our gaps are, how How we using it today,
what are we missing? And then what is that long-term plan? Um we are getting quotes from other organizations that provide contracted services so we can look at does it make sense? It may not make sense for what our needs
are. Um >> Can I I I have a question about the actual GIS tool. Do we would we have to buy that as well? >> That's part of Mayor, it's an excellent question. That's part of what we're trying to understand. Right now,
the county hosts our data. It's an expensive tool and so you need to have server space either you're buying that in the cloud or an on-prem server and you're buying licenses. So not only
the admin license to administer it, but every user and there's different levels of using if you're just looking up data versus if you're actually inputting and manipulating the data. And so there there's a lot to understand
yet. Um and we'll if the county decides and we don't know yet, but if the county decides that they're no longer going to provide the staff service, one of the questions that we will have will be will you continue to host our data for us? Um
there is a benefit we believe to doing that. That could be and we we're trying to collect what those expenses are if that's not an option. >> I think from my perspective 32 hours a month to funding a full-time person to
160 hours a month feels like a big leap for GIS and I I I would really before we go that road, I would really want to understand the benefit of having somebody on staff. In the meantime, I
support your you know, your efforts to learn more from the county, see who else might be able to um contract this service that we might have something through our engineering firm. Maybe that could be done. Um but I guess on this list of priorities, I think the GIS for me falls
at the bottom, especially considering what we're using now and not being able to understand fully at this point what the oper- uh the opportunity is. >> I mean, I guess I would just say they're basically, I think I my understanding is like you're just asking
for basics right now. Like you just want us to tell you like can we look into this more? And to me, it doesn't hurt anything to like >> Mhm. >> just yes. I mean, if you're telling us we might need more people in these four areas, yes, look at it. And then if you come back to us and are like
yeah, it's going to cost, you know, this much money to hire a person in this, but we're only going to use, you know, then we can say no, like it's not worth it. But it to me, it makes sense to at least dig in and see what are our options for all these, what is it going to cost, you know, can we even keep someone busy in
any of any or all these positions? So >> Well, and I I agree and related to GIS, a lot of what we're going to do is dependent on what the county's going to do as well. Or at least our options, let's call it that. But the one thing on all these positions I look at is we're thir-
going to be 13,640 people. We haven't hired a lot. >> Yeah. >> Mhm. >> So that comes to mind, right? >> So >> Statement. >> I think we have to bolster our staff. >> Yeah. I agree. >> Maybe bolster's a I don't know if that's the right word, but I think it's
>> even I don't even think that bolster's I it from our our narrative in our packet, um you would budgeted actually one FTE down. I I I think before us is to say we need to correct that cuz we're going to start
pushing into service level. So, I I would I would be supportive of having this preliminary budget put that one person back. Then let's have a discussion about cuz I'm if if if I'm interpreting what I'm
seeing here, there's a five-person need. There's one that we're already down that we should have that we're we've left out of the budget, and then now we're talking about the four additional people to drive that 2.56% increase, correct? >> do want to clarify that. Yeah, I want I
want to understand that. So, the Park and Rec director we we decided to take a pause. You guys did a lot of work on what is what does this position What does this department need? So, if we put that person back in, is that the Park and Rec thing along with the
uh maybe some uh Are you looking for putting that back in and then getting another one? >> Um Mayor, members of the council, that would just be to put back the one that we took out. So, it probably wouldn't be a director position like the same as what we had. That's part of the
evaluation process. Um but it would be to add an FTE back into that department to um but not two positions. >> Yeah, okay. Understood. >> Maybe a program manager? Is that what it Okay. >> Okay. So, I know we're running short on
time here. Um so, I think there's consensus from the council here to continue the exploration, bring us back more data. Um and for for the purposes of our preliminary levy, we should include the this number in the preliminary budget.
>> So, the number that we're you're advocating is to at least get the one person back. >> Yes. >> So, that we can have a preliminary budget that reflects that. >> So, the Yeah, the levy >> then we can discuss what does the 2.56 represent? Does that represent four
people, or is it three, or is Is all five? >> That it actually represents three and a half positions. The half being the administration we were budgeting to put in as a half half the year.
Like to put in mid-year. So it's basically three and a half positions. Roughly, you know, it's just projecting for those three. So three and a half FTEs. >> Great. Do we have other things that you need some feedback on?
>> I have like three sides up. >> Okay. So um the next discussion slide is um staff continues to receive feedback from downtown businesses, um residents and visitors regarding the
parking visibility and wayfinding, um connections between regional trails and downtown businesses, and then also promotion of community events and amenities. Um so two potential initiatives have been identified.
Um a digital welcome sign, um rough estimate of $100,000. And then also downtown signs and banners, um estimated about $75,000. So um
the digital welcome sign um would give community event promotion, business visibility, visitor and information, community branding and identity. Um downtown signs, banners, and wayfinding could improve the public
parking visibility, um connect trail users to downtown, enhance navigation and visitor experience. Um Highway 5 reconstruction is anticipated, as you know, to occur through much of next year. So council
might wish to consider implementation of a digital welcome sign um could be best pursued during construction or it could be deferred until the corridor improvements are complete. Um so neither initiative is
currently included in the proposed budget. Um both initiatives were added um the impact would be approximately 1.7 >> Okay, on this item, I I would favor kicking the digital welcome sign into 28
and prioritizing the wayfinding. >> Could we split it over 27 and 28 or eight like so that it's not just one big, right? We've got 2 years to do it. So >> I'm not sure the mayor is viewing this feels like this is putting the cart
before the horse a little bit on this one. The we've seen our parking surveys that have come back and commented about I'd like to know where more spaces, but I just don't know. So I think the the the sign initiative feels like we'll get more
bang for our buck. Um I think we need the dust of Highway 5 to settle because we might be faced with what's the right thing to do. Do we do we really need it once that's done or do we need two? Do we need one at one end of town and one at the other end of town? And we still
need to see how the pedestrian crossing comes over with the existing welcome sign that we have. Um so it feels to me like this is something that um we can look to move that to the future of the
I'm I'm supportive of the wayfinding and things like that to to get the public to understand that there is uh space to put cars in this town. >> I think the wayfinding is critical now because of what we're going into. I agree.
With finding you know people need to know where to park and you hear it from not only the residents and the businesses, but uh people coming into town, right? That aren't from Victoria, they would definitely benefit from it. So, um I think the welcome sign could be a good
idea, but yeah, where do you put it? What's it look like? I mean, are we talking to um the levy impact with both of them is 1.79. So, roughly, if I'm doing my math accurately, you're under
you're 7/10 of a percent. >> So, yeah, it'd like the 75,000 would be like the 0.79 roughly, yeah. And then the >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other comments on this one? >> I'm there.
>> All right. And Okay. Agreed. Okay. >> And then this one we talked about, it sounded to me as if council was supportive of expanding the purpose of the trail gap fund to park and trail improvements, but I just want to get a
consensus. Um for sure that that not here. >> No. >> I'd be a yes, then. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> That looks cleaner and easier. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Consensus there? And then the last final um slide here, just uh is there any
direction to add cut services or increase reduce the levy or any additional items that you'd like to consider at future meetings? >> Um I am very curious about our old fire station and where we're headed with that
piece of property and that asset. So, um that would be something that I'd want to understand better. >> Other council members, anything else? >> I would say that we struggled a lot when we had the decisions about
what we wanted as a to bring for our community in terms of park products. And um we found that what would be beneficial and useful is a bit unattainable because we didn't
put a certain amount aside for it. And I think it merits us taking a deeper dive to say what can we do to >> [cough] >> fund what we saw was a a million dollar shortfall with where we wanted to provide the services
that we felt that community needed and the resources that we had to do it. So, given that uh we have I it seems like a favorable climate in terms of where we can come in levy-wise, I I I think it behooves us to uh
look to see if we can make some progress there as well. >> Right. Thank you, Council Member. >> goes back to fees, right? Cuz we've also talked about making sure we can get as much as we can, right? Like that we can legally do for >> of >> parks. Yes. Yes.
>> so >> dedication fees. But those are separate from Sure. >> Yeah, they are. Absolutely. >> all part of the larger >> Exactly. >> Absolutely, Chad. It's part of our larger discussion. We should absolutely have that on the >> Yeah. >> the future. >> You've heard me say before I like us to be the city of lakes and parks, not the
city of lakes and park dedication fees, so >> Fair enough. All right. Anything else that for direction for staff? >> When is the next touch point? Uh August. >> So, um we're going to be presenting the um
the the department heads are going to be presenting in July. >> Oh, July. >> So, they'll um all be here and then August we'll be presenting what we want to propose for that um final max tax levy in September.
So, um we can get some more information, updated numbers, um especially on the staffing and I'll add back in from what I heard the 75,000 for the um the wayfinding signs.
Um and then we'll get some information on the old fire station. I we are doing an RFP right now. It's out to do an assessment of that building. So, just to understand better like what
the condition a condition assessment of it to make sure that we don't invest a bunch of money and there's problems with um the building it being the age that it is. So, before we really determine on what the best use of
that building is, we want to make sure that the building is going to be with us for long term. >> Well, that's a good point. I think people are surprised at how old that building is. >> Yeah, that section of the building um
hundreds of thousands of dollars into make that into say a community space and we find out that the integrity of the building is um subpar. So, um that's currently while we do as you know we were doing the same
for the Victoria Recreation Center. So, we just lumped it into one and we added that space onto that RFP. So, um Alyssa is um working through that um to get some people to consultants to give us some idea on those buildings.
>> We don't have a timeline on that yet. >> We do. I just don't know what it is off the top of my head. >> do. Happen to know? I'll I'll let you look. Um but to Council member Rife's point, we we have a touchstone every month from now until
December on this budget. >> Yeah. Except for October you have off. >> Okay. Okay. [laughter] We'll probably need a rest. Okay. Very good. Um well, we can grab that information from you later. >> Sounds good.
>> Okay. Any last thoughts for staff before we adjourn [clears throat] our workshop? >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Seeing none, I will uh take a motion to adjourn. >> I'll make a motion to adjourn our workshop. >> We have a motion. Can I get a second?
>> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. We stand adjourned. We're going to take about Part: 2
The first item on our agenda this evening is announcements. We have a few announcements with our starting with our upcoming meetings. Our next budget meeting will be held on Monday, July 17th at 5:00 pm where department heads will present their department overviews which will include
information on budget pressures, cost-saving opportunities, and operational efficiencies. As a general reminder, all city council meetings and workshops are open to the public and held here in council chambers unless otherwise noted. If you would like to attend any upcoming sessions,
please contact our city clerk in advance. In other news, city offices will be closed Friday, July 3rd, in observance of Independence Day. Normal business hours will resume on Monday, July 6th. The next item on our agenda is
a proclamation recognizing July as Park and Recck Month, which I will now read. Uh proclamation 2026-6 recognizing July as Park and Recck Month. Whereas the 2026 theme for Parks
and Recreation Month, the power of celebrates the power of parks and recreation to bring communities together, strengthen health and well-being, and foster resilient, connected neighborhoods. And whereas parks and recreation are vital to the
health, vitality, and quality of life of the residents of the city of Victoria. And whereas parks and recreation programs and spaces in the city of Victoria, including parks, trails, open spaces, and recreational programs, provide opportunities for physical
activity, wellness, learning, and social connection for people of all ages and abilities while serving as gathering places that enhance community pride, environmental stewardship, and economic vitality. And whereas the dedicated park and
recreational recreation professionals, volunteers, and community partners who plan, maintain, and program these spaces make it possible for residents to enjoy safe, welcoming, and accessible recreational opportunities. And whereas parks and recreation play a
critical role in promoting mental and physical health, providing spaces for relaxation and renewal, and encouraging lifelong engagement in outdoor activities. Now therefore, be it resolved that the mayor and city council of Victoria
hereby proclaim the month of July 2026 as July Parks and Recreation Month and encourage all residents to recognize and celebrate the power of parks and recreation by exploring our parks, participating in local programs, and
thanking the individuals who make these opportunities possible. With that, the next order of business is to adopt the final agenda. Council, can I get a motion to adopt the final agenda? >> Motion to adopt the final agenda. >> 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. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. Next item on our agenda is the open forum. This is an opportunity for members of the public to address the council on items that are not on tonight's agenda or part of an active application that will come to the
council at a future date. No one has registered to speak in advance, but if there's anyone in the audience that would like to address the council at this time, please step forward. Seeing no one, we'll move on to the consent agenda. Items on this agenda are
routine administrative and do not require deliberation or are housekeeping um items that are required by law. They are approved with one vote unless someone requests an item to be considered separately. Miss Hardy, does staff wish to pull any items off the consent agenda for separate discussion
and vote this evening? >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. Yes, staff is going to pull 513 this evening. >> Very good. Council, any items from council that you would like to see pulled for separate discussion and vote or any member of the audience looking to pull something from the consent agenda.
All right, clerk, please let the record reflect that item 5.13 has pulled been pulled for further discussion and I am looking for a motion to approve the remaining balance of the consent agenda. >> Motion to adopt the balance of the consent agenda. >> I 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. Uh Miss Hardy, you have pulled item 5.13 for a separate discussion and vote. The floor is yours. >> Thank you, Madame Mayor, mayor, members of the council, um staff is pulling
this. If anybody's looking at our agenda this evening online, you'll notice that there is an asterisk in front of um the number, the agenda item 513, and it's noted as being amended. The item is to adopt a resolution authorizing continued participation in the Minnesota Council
on Local Results and Innovations Comprehensive Performance Measurement Program. Um the reason that this is amended um is that due to a glitch in our software uh that we noticed actually late this afternoon um after we
published the agenda um this item was not included on the agenda. So there it is a time-sensitive item. So, we wanted to make sure that council could take action on that. It's important because um this allows us to be eligible for
levy limit exemp exempts us from levy limits if we participate in this and we get a state aid distribution in uh per capita dispersement in the amount of about $1,700. So, it's not a lot of money, but it is something that goes to lower levy. Um this is a routine item
and so we wanted to just provide some transparency around what it is. Um and since we're talking about that um it is a program that we have participated in since 2019 and it just uh essentially provides some transparency around uh key
performance indicators um that we're reporting and making sure that the public is aware of some of um these key performance items that we're tracking. Um so and as I noted it does um by
participating in this council would have to adopt a resolution and by July 1st every year we need to uh get that information to the state and that participation allows us to be eligible for those levy exemp levy limit exemptions if they were in place and then to get the dispersement for state
aid. >> Okay, very good. Thank you, Miss Hardy. Any questions, comments from council on this? So, by approving this, we basically get ourselves 1,700 bucks. If we don't approve it, we don't get our $1,700. >> That's a very simplistic way of putting it, but yes,
>> I'd like to make a motion to adopt the resolution authorizing continued participation in the Minnesota Council on Local Results and Innovations Comprehensive Performance Measurement Program. >> Thank you very much, Council Member Patterson. 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. Okay. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. Moving on to our regular agenda. The first item on our regular agenda is item 6.1, which is a sketch plat submitted by Ebenezer Development for Atoria located at 2285
Arboritum Boulevard. Presenting on that item this evening is our city planner, Brian McCann. Mr. McCann, welcome. >> Thank you, mayor and council members. Tonight we will be reviewing a proposal for a residential development. Uh more specifically the sketch plat for Atoria
Lake Town from Ebenezer Development. As you're well aware, uh the sketch plan is just to provide feedback to the developer as they start preparing preliminary PLA plans for their project. There aren't any approvals taken tonight. It's just to provide guidance to the applicant.
So you may be well aware of this site. This is the former Amamira project which previously consisted of a 147 unit senior living apartment building. Um the property address as it currently stands today is 2285 Arburedum Boulevard. It
consists of four parcels just totaling over 56 acres. There are two single family homes on the property currently. There's one here at the end of Sky Drive and then there's one further into the site in the center. They do have two or
a single full access to Highway 5 at the moment as you can see here, but they also have an additional access point from Sky Drive on the west. There are four parcels as I mentioned. The southern two are part of the future Lake
Minnitonka Regional Trail Corridor uh which the applicant is proposing to dedicate to the city to satisfy their parkland dedication. And so I'll get into that a little bit more later in the presentation, but there is also significant wetland coverage on the site as well as a stream that connects Auburn
Lake to the north and Carl Cray Lake to the southwest. The proposed sketch plaque consists of a 76 unit cooperative senior housing apartment building as well as six town homes between these three buildings shown here. uh one new single family
house and then the existing one shown here that's off of Sky Drive. They are proposing a surface level parking lot consisting of 63 stalls and then an underground parking garage with 104 stalls. So totaling 167 parking stalls
for the site. They would also be getting rid of that access to Highway 5 and a culde-sac on Sky Drive would be their main access for the site. Looking at the zoning and comprehensive plan, it's currently zoned plan unit
development with underlying central business district. This happened as part of the Amira proposal because they received preliminary plat approvals for that project. Uh the applicant is planning to reszone it to planned unit development again but this time as a R4
highdensity residential project and the reason for that is because of our comprehensive plan requirements for our central business district. Any project needs to have 24 to 75 units per acre if it has a residential component. As their
project currently stands, they'd be at at about 17 units per acre. So, as part of this, they would also need to submit a comprehensive plan amendment for highdensity residential instead of uh downtown mixed use.
Otherwise, the residential uses that they are proposing all comply with our R4 district and our R1 district for that single family house and they all comply with uses in our 2040 comprehensive plan.
Moving on to the Shorland Overlay District. As I mentioned, they have a uh stream connection between two lakes. So, they fall entirely within that thousand ft of the Shorland Overlay District. With that, they have a 100 ft minimum
building setback requirement as well as a minimum 50% open space requirement for the development. As part of this, we anticipate that they will submit for a residential shoreland planned unit development, which is just an additional layer to a planned unit development.
With that, they're going to have to look at a tier analysis to determine if their density is in compliance with the DNR's requirements. They don't want too many units too close to a shoreline. So, they're going to have to provide that analysis as part of their preliminary
plat submittals. And then also our central business district in our shoreland ordinance says that it can have up to 80% impervious but all other districts must comply with a 25% maximum impervious with an apartment
building that may be difficult for them to do. So we anticipate that they will be requesting to increase that maximum impervious uh from the 25% to an amount yet to be determined.
Then we did not receive any building material, lighting or signage plans. We will review all of those with a formal site plan application to be provided at preliminary plat where we'll look at any proposed uh building or monument signage as well as street lights or uh building
lighting. Then for landscaping and tree preservation, our ordinance requires that they have a minimum 25% development open space for our R4 district. They would need one tree and one shrub of
every,000 square ft of that required 25% open space for their project. They would also need to have foundation plantings around the apartment building and the town homes. We also would require buffers uh specifically two a 40 foot
buffer along the principal arterial here which is highway five as well as a 25- ft landscape buffer separating the single family homes from the town homes and the apartment. We would also require boulevard trees
every 45 ft along city streets which would just entail that public culde-sac here on Sky Drive. They would also need to provide plantings to screen the off- streetet parking areas towards any uh vehicular traffic. So, if they didn't
have a burm, they would also need to include some plantings to screen headlights from Highway 5 and Sky Drive. And then on top of that, uh there is a uh maximum 20% removal of trees on site without requiring mitigation. If they go over
that, you're well aware that they would need to um add trees into their project. So, we'll take a closer look at all their landscaping and tree preservation plans with preliminary plat. Then for streets and parking, as I mentioned, they're proposing a public
culde-sac here uh for the single family homes. Everything else within the site would be on a private entrance with a turnaround for the fire trucks and a private parking lot. Looking at their parking requirements, senior housing per our code requires one space per dwelling
unit as well as an additional space for every five dwelling units. That total for their project comes out to be 92 spaces. But as I mentioned at the beginning, they're providing 167 parking stalls. So, they're going well over their minimum requirement. And then we're going to have to look at the
single family homes and the town homes more closely to see if they can meet the requirements for enclosed parking for those structures. Then for pedestrian connections, I've highlighted three different kinds of pedestrian connections that they're showing for the project. Here on the
west end on the public street, they have a public sidewalk shown in green. And then internal to the site, I've highlighted in red all of their private sidewalks going around the building and the parking lot. And then lastly in the blue, this would be a trail connection
uh to the future Lake Minnitonka Regional Trail Corridor. Uh it's yet to be determined if they would allow public access for that trail, but it's a a section of sidewalk or trail worth mentioning.
Then for parkland dedication, we did the math and the requirements come out to be just under an acre for the project or $98,000 in parkland dedication fees. The developer, as I mentioned, is planning to dedicate the full 7 acre section of
the future Lake Manitonka Regional Trail in compliance with an easement that we have in our records for those two parcels. Uh this greatly exceeds the minimum requirements. And with that, we've been getting questions from the public about if we would require the developer to construct that segment of
the trail or acquire additional land that's outside of their project scope. In both cases, the city has not vocalized that we would require that from the developer. Then for wetlands, storm water management, and site utilities, they're
subject to the MCWD's rules and regulations. So they have to plat uh wetlands and buffers within city outlots that are deed to the city. Um we anticipate that they will be requesting as part of their PUD some deviations to the single family homes for this project
uh due to the proximity of the wetland buffer on these two single family lots. With that we might see some uh shorter lot depths uh larger lot widths things like that. So that's something we anticipate seeing with preliminary plats. Otherwise, they are proposing a
underground storm water uh system highlighted in green here and their site utilities are proposed to come from Highway 5 and Sky Drive noted in yellow on the plan. With this, the applicant did hold a neighborhood meeting at Winchester and
Rye last week. about 15 attendees um went to the neighborhood meeting expressing concerns regarding the additional traffic that would be generated on Lakes Parkway for the Lake Bridge neighborhood. And they also uh requested that the developer construct
the uh trail corridor or complete and purchase additional properties for that trail corridor. But there was also support for a lower project density than what was previously approved with the Amir project. and they were um hopeful about the dedication of the land for the
future trail as well. The parks and recreation committee also reviewed the project that same evening that the neighborhood meeting was held and they recommended the city council accept the trail corridor dedication to satisfy their full parkland dedication requirements. We also did receive four
public comments uh expressing similar concerns to those heard at the neighborhood meeting. Those were attached with the council packet for this evening. And then the planning commission also reviewed this development last week. They were generally supportive of the
project, stating the need for senior housing in the city and that the trail corridor is desirable for the project. Questions were raised though regarding access um and traffic and the previous traffic study that was done for the Amira project. Uh they also questioned
the building heights, the potential maximum impervious for the project overall. um how reggguiding to a high density district from the central business district would affect our city future land use projections as well as
the sidewalk or trail connections for the site and the possibility of adding one on Highway 5 for the residents to get to downtown instead of constructing the trail corridor uh for the Lake Mitanka trail. and then also exploring
the potential of a boardwalk connection instead of work this site along that trail corridor. So with that I have a couple questions to help guide discussion if needed. Otherwise staff can stand for questions
and a representative of the application is in the audience as well. >> Very good. >> Council questions comments. >> I have a few. >> I have a bunch too. Go on. >> Um, >> Council Member Roberts, why don't you go ahead and start us off?
>> Just to clarify, um, you've said town homes, but in the packet it actually says twin homes. Is what can you confirm which is actually correct? >> Yeah. Um, mayor and council members in their submitts, they have them noted as
town homes. Um, in my mind, a town home is a um four unit product or more. Three units as a triplex, two is a duplex or a twin home. Essentially, these are twin homes. Uh there two units in each structure. >> And so when we say six, does that mean
then there's 12 units to be in or is that six total? So it's really it's those three we see here. Yeah. >> Six total between three buildings. >> Um and then can you remind me uh and I'm sorry if you said uh how many units were
in the original Amir project that was brought before us for this? 147 as well as two single family homes. >> Okay. >> So, and this one is >> this one is 76 >> plus six. So, 82 between the whole site
and then still those two single family homes. >> Um I guess I mean I agree we need more senior housing uh in the city. Um I like that it's something different, right? It's a
co-op. um gives a little bit different um uh options for people. Um is the twin homes are they part of is that part of the co-op or is that is
it rental? Is it I guess I are those different or is it the same? Mayor and council members. I believe that the town home Josh Calman u my company Leap Development is based out of Pella Iowa and I have partnered with Ebenezer and Eb Ebenezer Development on the creation
of Atoria Cooperatives. Um so um mayor council members thank you for having us here tonight. We're excited about this community and and the potential for this project. So uh a little co-op 101. I've been doing um senior development for my entire career um in the last 15 or so
years of that um specifically in senior housing cooperatives. It is an ownership model where there is one master mortgage and then the members um or shareholders uh actually live in the cooperative and so they buy a share. There's an ongoing
monthly carry fee that covers as many of the uh activities of the building and their lives as as possible. So, similar to an HOA fee. >> Similar. Yeah, exactly. Uh, except for 50% of their uh their monthly fee is um deductible the same way that it would be
if they were in a single family home uh for their property taxes and and uh insurance things and uh principal and interest, sorry. And so then they um own and operate that building under one master mortgage of which they are shareholders in that entity that we form
and they take over and then run um via a an elective board as well as um other other folks who are on different committees to run finance and operations and building and grounds and things like that. So >> uh it started in the late 70s. The first
project was 7500 York in Edina. Um, it's mostly a Midwestern concept. U, there have been a few attempts outside of Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, Missouri, but for the most part, I think if there's 160 senior co-ops or so in the country,
um, well over, you know, 85 90% of those are in Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, Missouri. >> Oh, that's interesting. Why why is that? >> I think a lot of it is because the professionals are here. The folks that sort of um created this concept as a senior product were here. the attorneys
um the uh architects that understood that the size of these units is a little larger. So we have units that are up to,900 square feet in this particular project um and and lots of additional amenity space and different things like that. So I think the folks that understand how they operate are here.
Same way with Ebenezer. I mean, that's that's the unique thing about partnering with Ebenezer on this is that they're the largest senior cooperative uh manager and operator in the in the country, but certainly in Minnesota. And so, they're taking their expertise from all those years of managing other
developers uh projects and putting that insight into the creation of their own brand. So even though the unit count is lower, >> is the footprint of the building actually similar to what the Amira project and I don't know if you know
that Brian maybe I ask that question to you >> mayor and council members I believe it's a little smaller um but relatively same size in terms of overhead footprint and building height. >> Okay, very good. Thank you. And then as
um the people buy into this co-op initially, are there any restrictions or issues with trying to resell your their particular unit or how does that work on the reselling the real estate market? >> Yeah, great question, Mayor. So, um it doesn't actually have to go through the
general real estate market like on the MLS, but it can. Uh basically, the co-op contracts for 90-day increments to be able to sell those units, and they do generally sell within that time period. Co-ops tend to build pretty healthy waiting lists, okay? >> Um because they're entering in in our
particular model at 50% of the actual value of the unit. That's where we model our share prices is around 50% of value. And so um when the market fluctuates, they still stay um relatively affordable for for the day and time of of the
market. And so um there's some pieces of that built into how it appreciates. um the members have a say in that in the future, but we generally build in like a 1 to 2% appreciation per year. Uh so it's certainly not following the es and flows of the housing market when things go really really well, but that also
means that it doesn't follow it when it goes down either. Uh and so it remains a pretty attractive project or product through the different uh real estate cycles. >> So talk to talk a little bit about what the cost to get into a co-op unit would be. >> Yep. So, we're at a point where we're still developing the actual pricing for
this particular model, but we have a project that we uh just opened in December of 2025 in Lakeville. Um, and I think the average share price on that uh community was around 270,000, maybe 265,000. >> Um, and then they also can personalize
their homes. So, while someone might buy a share or a unit in a cooperative for 275,000, they can choose to spend anywhere from zero dollars on upgrades and choose from our packages all the way up to you'll see folks that are spending 50 $60,000 on on upgrades for their home to sort of
personalize it for their own tastes. >> Oh, got it. Okay. >> So, the a you said that was the average was roughly 270 or is that more the entry? >> Nope, that's that's the average. >> Got it. Got it. >> Yep. >> Thank you. And I it our next project which is on the Woodbury um Oakdale
border um is a little higher just pricing. We were sort of in the midst of a lot of fluctuations in the market and so those steadied a bit but the pricing did go up there and I think that one's closer to 285 or 290 on average. >> Okay.
>> Quick question. So, will the cooperative own the real estate parcel as part of the overall share or will some other entity own it and ground lease >> back to the cooperative?
>> No, the cooperative owns um the the land. So, they'll be a shareholder in the building. Yep. >> They'll own they'll also own the pin for this parcel. >> Correct. Okay. >> Yep. And then does the cooperative and it may not be of a significant size
but will it have its own brokerage for transferring units or will it move through the the existing you know you're represented by a broker and the both buyer and seller. >> Yeah, great question. So, a buyer could be represented by a broker if they chose
to. Um, or it could run through the cooperative and they would just charge uh I think they I think so the HOA at Ebenezer or any management company of a cooper will generally have a brokerage license on their team, which Ebenezer does. Uh, but they'll just run um those
resales of units through the cooperative and the cooperative charges like a,000 to $2,000 transfer fee. Do you have a certain number of units that you have to sell before you begin construction? And if so, what is that? >> Yep. Great question. So, um, because of the experience that we have with HUD and
Ebenezer's experience, it's a 60% pre-sale requirement. I think new developers are required a greater percentage than that. Um, and so at 60% of the 82 units, we're right around 50 units, >> okay, >> to pre-sale. And I think we have a reservation list already. We haven't launched. That was the other
clarification I wanted to make sure I mentioned this to the to the planning commission as well. You will see us in the community. In fact, I think as early as uh this week, we'll be hosting some umformational sessions where we are gathering reservations. And so I always tell that to councils and commissions
with co-ops is we're not presuming any sort of approval, but it because of that uh that HUD insured requirement of that pre-sale um we do running in parallel with the approval process. you will see us out there. >> Okay, very good. >> Other questions for Mr. Is it common?
>> Yeah, common. Yep, you got it. >> Uh before we have him take a seat. >> Yeah, I mean there's a supplemental description on this from the sketch plot application. >> There's there's conflicting numbers between what's that and what we've seen here tonight. What's what's the accurate
number? because we're I see that there was 65 units that are now being brought down to uh 30 for the outdoor. Help me to understand, Brian, what we're actually dealing with.
>> Um, mayor and council members, we are looking at the 76 unit um cooperative. So their submittal the first time around I think had included an additional six units in the
cooperative building and then they revised their application to reduce it down to 76 units within the co-op building. >> And I think we also lost a villa. We had originally planned for four villas or and eight um of those twin homes. >> Sure. >> And we lost one of those units as well
just with site planning and buffers. >> Yeah. >> All right. Any other questions for Mr. Common? >> Maybe. So, the cooperative is like it's a apartment-like facility, but you're really more kind, it's kind of a
condominium. It's somewhere in between the two. If I have my share and I want to sell my place, do I have to go through the cooperative or can I say, Andy, this share is now 1.25. Would you like to buy it?
>> So, great question, a great observation. And it does run through the cooperative documents and bylaws and the legal structure that the cooperative uh indicates. So the a person entering into the cooperative. So when you bought your share, you would have been able to look at the at the legal documents and it
would have told you the share price for that unit two years from now, 5 years from now, 10 years from now, 20 or 40 years from now because it's a 40-year fixed rate mortgage that we obtained. >> So it outlines that insurance. So it outlines the future sale price. Yep. Correct. >> So it's not a fundraiser for Can I can I
buy more than one? >> Am I required to? >> Yeah. So, that that question does come up. Um sometimes um generally people can buy more than one unit. Yes. Okay. >> But they need to be occupying those units. Um and just because of the way
that we cap that that growth and appreciation is generally not looked at as a as a real estate a real estate investment for individuals. It's more of that insurance policy that they know what the price is going to be and they can take the additional funds from the purchase of that $300,000 unit and invest it the way they want to.
>> Got it. Thank you. >> Yeah, you bet. Good questions. >> Anything else? >> All right. Thank you. >> Go ahead and have a seat. Don't go far. >> All right. Any other questions for Mr. McCann on this?
>> I I mean I Maybe less of a question but more of a comment. Um I think it would be beneficial for us to take uh another run at the mindot for having
an exit directly from this parcel back to Highway 5. I I'm trying to remember and I don't think at the time we first saw Ammyra there was a roundabout constructed at 11 and five. So there were concerns
about a left turn out of this project out onto Highway 5. Um I I think it it it bears another view at uh trying to make the case that perhaps, you know, like a right in right out from five
going east could be a potential solution to some of the traffic concerns that we've heard. And now that there's the roundabout, you certainly can, you know, through a bit of maneuvering and not not terribly far, be able to construct a de
facto left turn. Um, and then we, you know, then the question of like, can you turn left in, you know, perhaps not. Perhaps that has to go up to the lake bridge and then come back through sky. uh to at least take some of that pressure off. I think it merits our uh
use of trying to, you know, uh have that access restored. It's there now. So, it's it's not I mean, I think that it's it's not like we're asking for a new cut into five. We're just looking to modify what's existing currently.
>> I think that's a fair question. Um Lakes Parkway >> that was actually built as a collector road, not just a neighborhood road. Is that true? Do we know? Yes, that's my understanding as well. Okay. So, that actually is was built to manage more
traffic than it actually currently is. Okay. >> Correct. >> Because if if memory serves that connector road terminates with the intention of at the time a ghost plot of the parcels to the west that correct >> is still privately owned.
>> Correct. >> Good. Right. Thank you. I guess I would just add that I do think it's important that we look at I whether it's the LRT um you know I that neighborhood is kind of out on an
island over there and having a way to get into downtown uh more safely like whether with bikes or whatever. So >> connectivity is important. I think I think the connectivity and making it available to the public, not just the >> residents, you know, what how we do
that, right? I know you mentioned potential for a boardwalk instead of having to buy like I I do think we need to kind of exhaust those options to see what we can do. Um obviously there will be more traffic for the joint the
neighborhood next to them and so you know this is at least they get a benefit uh from having you know, an easy way to walk or bike or whatever down downtown. Um, >> yeah. So, is that part of this sketch plat or is that something that we need
to talk about in a different discussion? >> It's kind of my thoughts on it. >> I think it's part of this, isn't it? >> Well, I mean, certainly >> you've given us the land. >> Yeah. I mean, it's a great opportunity to make that trail connection that we so
desperately want to make. And the the private property parcels that would make it the easiest are a a serious burden for the property owners. I mean, it's cuts right halfway through their backyards. >> Cut their yards in half.
>> Yeah. Which is is a real problem. So, we're looking at a complicated trail build. And um I have some questions um maybe around some proposed grant funding that we might be able to get. Do we have
a partner that might be willing to share the cost of extending the trail with that for us? um whoever that might be. I would encourage staff to see exhaust those possibilities as well because we are never going to get a better opportunity to build out
that trail than >> agree >> as this property develops. >> I absolutely agree. I just don't know if it's part of the sketch plat. But I think we have to look at jogging north of the three properties that don't want to sell. I think we need to get after the um Boardwalk Kings, the Minhaha
Creek wershed district, work with them. The LRT is technically county property. So even if we get it, we have to give that to the county to build. So the city's not even really doing it. I mean, it's super complicated. It's not like we can just say, "All right, Ebenezer, can
you guys build this trail back here for us?" And, you know, it'll cost you a couple million bucks, but you know, it'll be a great benefit to everybody. It's not even going to just benefit Lake Town, but the neighborhood to the north that's always looking to get connected somehow off of five. If we can have a,
you know, an easier access point for them to cross five. I mean, it's a key component for sure for the city. I just don't know if it's part of their sketch plat's like here's our driveway and here's our
parking lot and I just don't think it's their job to build it. Yeah, I think it's just like it's a discussion for staff to look at and then if there's a opportunity for, you know, hey, can you help us with this little portion of this, right? Like then then
maybe we >> while you're building your path back to it, can you continue on to this edge? >> Yeah. Like whatever we figure out is the most >> draw a couple more 2x4s in the back of the truck and do this. I'm aligned with council member Patterson that it's it's
a it's a good thing to get the easement. I think it's a bit of a stretch to say ebenezer fund this. >> Yeah, I don't think anyone's saying that. I think it's just saying, >> oh, we we have heard comments that somebody should buy it and I think we need to
>> dispel those notions that this particular project is not um it doesn't serve their benefit and the other benefits that we're going to from, you know, going forward with with a
structure that's like this to take what, you know, there there just doesn't seem to be the financial feasibility in this to be able to absorb that >> and that's why looking at partnerships potential partnerships or exhausting other options I mean this is the time to
look at it even though it's not Ebene in Ebenezer's court completely by any means but I think we need to look at exhaust those options and look at them >> all right any other anything else staff um developer looking for from council on
this project there's no action to be taken. It's just for feedback. So, >> I do I do like the concept of a co-op. I think it's uh >> I agree. I think that's going to get um it serves it checks a couple of boxes for us. The senior housing component,
the affordability component. >> I you know, the fact that people can, you know, maybe finally move out of their big houses into something that's right sizes them. I I love this idea and the ownership piece of it I think is really important. Well, I yes to all of
that, but I also think there's been some concerns and again I'm starting to answer some of the questions from the public comment that we got via email, but you know, the Lakes Drive is a collector road. Sky Drive is not. Um,
does that matter? I'm not sure. But we have, you know, 142 units down to 82. We have a scaled view versus just an apartment. So, you have some single family homes, town homes, and then you have the apartment complex or the co-op
complex. Um, so we're lessening that. We're lessening the blow from what was already approved all the way through preliminary plat last time. Um, and that fell through just basically due to their own personal financing, not anything
that the city was necessarily doing. Um, but I think what the last traffic study with the double numbers was something like 24 increased traffic routes per day or something like that. So, if they're to do a traffic
study, it's probably going to be less during peak times. Is that correct, >> Mayor and Council members? That's correct. I actually printed a copy of the last traffic report which funny enough was actually done 3 years ago or submitted to the city 3 years ago today.
Uh but that says that the site in total during peak hours would only generate up to an additional 37 trips in the evening hour of 4:15 to 5:15 p.m. and generates
um like 450 trips in the average day. Uh that was for the 147 unit proposal. We're talking about just over half of that now. So you can expect those numbers to go down significantly from what was proposed before. >> And I'm curious to Sorry, go ahead.
>> And if and if we're successful with, you know, getting some access to five, I mean, I think that this becomes a completely two dog on that question. >> Do they take into account what type of living it is, right? Because you think senior living, right? If they're retire,
right? Like they're probably they could be retired, so they're not going to work during the day. They obviously they probably don't have kids, so they're not going to all those events that you have to go to, right? So, I mean, it should be even less. So, they do take that into account. Okay. >> Yep. There's a whole different
classification for senior housing versus apartment or condos or whatever it may be. >> I'm going to take umbrage with that. I I think that seniors uh will will definitely have a clamoring to leave in the, you know, during the peak hours to go to the Mocha Monkey once that's open. So,
>> we'll be taking the new trail to the Mocha Monkey. Um, >> but I mean I think it it satisfies a lot of things. There's not going to be more traffic deep in the neighborhood unless they're taking the different access point from the deep west which may increase a couple extra trips. You might
have a couple of extra Amazon deliveries. But, you know, UPS, FedEx, mail is all going to be the same servicing both areas. Um, I don't see it creating a safety issue for kids on bikes or people walking the trails. My
only concern would be stacking the distance between Sky Drive and Highway 5 um in the mornings taking a right or taking a left out of there. Um, I know that's an engineering thing for Cara,
but if I have a concern about the plat, it would be stacking of cars at certain points in time based on how close Sky Drive is to Highway 5. And that's it for me. Thank you.
>> Thanks. >> Uh, I just had one other question and I apologize if you answered it or if I just missed it. I was trying to look to see the town homes or the twin homes. They do they have their own separate parking spots or they
because you I know you talked about they the outdoor lots, right? And then there's underground parking. I guess I just was trying to figure out if they have like a driveway for them for those. >> Mr. Common, please. >> Yeah, thank you. So, they actually do and they uh each unit would have a twocar enclosed garage as well as a
driveway um to that to those. >> I was going to say our code requires a twocar garage on those. And that is that is yep achieved. >> Cool. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> As we get to the impervious too, I just want to say one last thing I forgot to put in my notes. If we left it as CBD,
they could actually create more units and would be required to create more units and they would have, you know, up to 80% imperous surface coverage that we're going because we're going to R4, they can effectively reduce the number
of units there, but now they're beholden to a 25% impervious. So, I'm just kind of level setting as we get to the point we should also keep that into consideration that we may want to allow a little bit more imperous surface aotment through the PUD based on the
fact that when this was a CBD, they could have gone way bigger and way and done things way tighter. So, um anyway, that's it. I swear I'm done now. Thank you. All right, last call for any other comments from council.
All right, Brian, you have everything you need. >> Yes. Thank you, mayor. >> Very good. Then we are moving on. The next item on the agenda, item 6.2 is the final plaque, conditional use permit and encroachment agreement for the Hotel Victoria commercial development. Uh Brian McCann, this is back to you again,
sir. Thank you, Mayor and Council members. Tonight, we're at the final step of the major subdivision or planning process for the Hotel Victoria project. This is where we finalize the development details. You'll be seeing a development agreement at one of your
upcoming meetings on the consent agenda as part of this process if you choose to approve it tonight. Um, as you're well aware, this is a commercial development project located right in the heart of the central business district downtown here. Tonight, they are requesting final
plat approval as well as a conditional use permit approval for shared parking arrangement. uh as required by the preliminary plat approvals that the city council granted as well as an encroachment agreement for some building overhangs.
So for the location and existing conditions, the site is located at 7929 Victoria Drive. It's currently a single parcel which has the Winchester and Rye building with some available green space to the north where the proposed hotel
would go. The site as it stands today is surrounded by streets on all sides. It is also within close proximity to the Lake Mitanka Regional Trail. You can see just a little portion of it in the image on the left in the top left corner. Uh
the site is also about 50% impervious today with the Winchester and Ry building and sidewalks and parking. So, for Hotel Victoria, just as a reminder of what their project entails, they are proposing a 46 unit boutique hotel with
various amenities, including a covered parking garage with 41 parking stalls. Uh, that's where that request for the shared parking agreement comes in for those five stalls. They weren't able to fit in the parking garage for their project. They're also proposing a
fitness center, a lobby with a breakfast bar, multiple meeting rooms, and spaces for the project. Um, since the city council last reviewed it at the preliminary plat, you may recall that it was tabled for the applicant to find some additional parking for the project.
With this, they've proposed some modifications to Stiger Lake Lane within Carver County property to create angled parking to get them to a net zero uh product. So, they're not losing any spaces. They're not gaining any on street spaces with the project. they're
bringing it right back to uh the same number of stalls that are on the streets currently. And then uh there are some building overhang encroachments that require the encroachment agreement uh notably the balconies and the entrance here for the building. So that is why
you are seeing an encroachment agreement on your case this evening. So here is the final plat that was submitted. Lot one would contain the hotel. Lot two would contain Winchester and Rye. And then they have an outlot here which contains a small portion of
sidewalk and parking that they are proposing to privately uh own and maintain with the project. And then with landscaping and tree preservation, they are exempt from the open space and minimum planting requirements as being part of the central business district.
uh they placed foundation plantings where practical as you can see in the image on the left adjacent to the building in some spots. They also are required to have a boulevard tree every 35 ft. Uh during preliminary plat the
city council granted them a deviation for that uh due to the developing urban nature downtown here. And then our tree preservation requirements, anything over 20% typically requires uh mitigation for
removal. Uh they are proposing to remove some additional trees on Stiger Lake Lane here to accommodate those angled parking stalls that were required. uh with that staff did not anticipate that tree preservation would be required to make up those lost trees on the north
side since this was a request to add additional parking capacity. Then regarding streets parking and drive aisles, they are still planning to expand Ry's way up to 20 ft wide. So with the other project uh in the
southeast here, the entire section of Ry's Way will actually be upgraded to 20 ft in width. They are also proposing those angled uh parking modifications to Siger Lake Lane. As I mentioned, that's within Carver County property. So they
need to approve that uh as part of their request. So city staff are actively engaging Carver County. They've noted verbally that they would be open to that, but we are requesting uh formal written approval from the county for those expansions within their property.
And then regarding the minimum parking requirements, they are required to have one space per room, meaning they need 46 parking stalls off street. They are providing 41 in the underground parking garage. So that is where the request for
the five shared parking comes from. With that, we reviewed this against our general requirements for a conditional use permit set in our code, and we did not find any discrepancies uh with any of the following items listed on the screen.
And with that, we had a public hearing that was held by the planning commission at their meeting last Tuesday. We did not receive any written comments and no one spoke from the public during the public hearing. So, the plan commission closed the public hearing and discussed
the improvements to Stiger Lake Lane since that was the first time they had seen them. Uh, since they had previously reviewed the preliminary plat um and then also had some general questions regarding on street shared parking use with a hotel concept since there is a
overnight component with that. So, the plan commission ultimately recommended approval with a unanimous 70 vote. These were the conditions that staff had presented to the planning commission and the planning commission recommended that the city council approve the request
with these conditions. I've highlighted the ones that are abnormal from the ones you would typically see. So, uh the first one being that the conditional use permit is for the shared parking agreement for five public spark parking spaces. Um the stalls that made the most
sense were the five parallel stalls on the south side of Stiger Lake Lane directly adjacent to the building. Uh with that uh we would also require in number two a staging plan to be reviewed and approved since they would be constructing in a sensitive area
downtown. as well as uh number three here. The property at 1600 Arbreedom Boulevard is used for project staging and contractor parking as the applicant noted during their preliminary plat approvals. And
then the last two uh items here, 11 and 12, that they receive approval from Carver County for those modifications within their property boundaries. And then lastly, that they provide a sidewalk connection from that contractor and staging parking at 1600 Arbreedom
towllet so that contractors or visitors could safely get between the two sites. So with that, I have two sample motions on the screen for you for consideration this evening. I can stand for any questions you have and there are representatives of the application in the audience this evening as well.
>> Very good. Thank you, Mr. McCann. Uh, council questions, comments. >> I'm excited for it. I don't know much about the encroachment agreement. That just basically means the balcony's hanging over the edge. >> Correct. >> All right. >> Over the property line into the rightway. >> Okay.
>> That's totally legal. >> Correct. With the agreement. >> Okay. >> Is it the balconies and the overhang of the front as well or is it just the >> Correct. Yeah. Um, so if Well, maybe I don't have a good image in this slide
deck. Yes, I do. So, uh, as you can see here, this is the front of the building. This is the property line here. This dashed line going around it. Their balconies would slightly extend over the sidewalk here. And then the front of the
building would slightly extend over this corner here, requiring the encroachment agreement. Anything else, Council Member Patterson? >> I have no other questions on the engagement agreement. >> Thank you. >> I I don't have any questions. I just I
think, >> you know, I think we've said it before. I think it's a going to be a great addition to the downtown. We I we know we have a need for it. We've got lots of businesses um and events in the city that we
currently people are either you know staying with family or going out of the city to stay at different hotels and this will keep them in the city and visit our restaurants and do other things. So um yeah I mean I think and
once we got to that net zero I think everything kind of fell into place. So >> agreed. I think it's it's a lot of work has gone into this. So I think it's uh a need and keep the wallet share in Victoria right for another night or two.
Um so I think that's great. Okay. Any other questions, comments? All right. With that, uh we're going to take this in two motions. Council, can I get a motion? Motion to adopt the resolution
approving the final plat and conditional use permit for Hotel Victoria. >> 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. I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. Can I have a second motion, please? >> I'd like Oh, you go ahead. And
>> I was asking about it, so I thought maybe I should jump in, but you do it. I'll do the second. >> Motion to adopt the encroachment agreement for Hotel Victoria. >> Motion. Can I get a second from Council Member Patterson? >> All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I.
>> Any opposed? Motion carries. >> All right. Next item on the agenda, item 6.3, a zoning text amendment request regarding fence setbacks. Mr. Brierly is with us this evening to present on this item. Whenever you're ready, please.
>> Thank you, Mayor and Council. pointed out this is a zoning text amendment that was brought forward. This is not the zoning text amendment that's up here. Give me one second. >> Sure. Mayor and council, uh, forgive me. The there's a technical issue. We can
indulge me for 30 seconds. I can get it up. >> Sure. No problem. I do apologize. Um, going real quick. >> Okay, I just don't have I apologize, Mayor Council. The technical issue that we have is normally it can get put on remotely and it just
didn't make it to the desktop. So, just getting an alternate way to get it there real quick. >> It's all right. Go ahead. And >> just do what you need to do. A lot of dead time. And like I said, this is I apologize for that. Um, so we're working to resolve that
>> fence post. >> It is. >> I would like to blame Brady Lee for this because he also put together the Eene He put together one. >> He he he's credited with putting together. >> There we go. Now we got it working.
>> All right. Very good. >> All right. So, mayor, council, again, I apologize. Tonight, uh, is a zoning tax amendment that was brought forward by a resident uh, to make some changes to our fence ordinances. The main thing looking at it is changing how we define a fence
setback from storm water posts, primarily on residential properties. Instead of looking at it from the stance of the fence itself, we'd look at the post specifically as that measurement. Um, this is a a zoning request. Therefore, we are on a 60-day rule,
which would expire on July 7th. Uh, this was properly noticed. We sent it out. We had a public hearing at the last planning commission meeting where no comments were presented from the public, and there was unanimous recommendation from the planning commission for approval. The proposed language as you see in
front of you is pretty straightforward. Um just state that the fence post shall be no closer than six feet to any storm water pipes just to help with clarity for for residents. The intent of this is to provide or the intent of the setback is to provide access for public works and contractors to get in and maintain
the storm water infrastructure which includes the pipe itself as well as any inlet structures that um might need to be cleaned out. Um, the overall effect that would come with this is it it would change it so that you could put in a gate to cross storm water pipes or be able to connect
to existing fences which were installed underneath the previous ordinance. Um, so a real world example that comes up is we look at property or the the property here with the four on it is actually the applicant on property three to the north. This
fence already exists and was put in under the old ordinance. There's a storm water pipe that runs on the property line in between. Under our current current ordinance, um the applicant could put in a fence, but would have to be 6 ft off the existing fence to the north with his neighbor, creating a gap.
Um though that gap would be created, the ordinance is not based on an aesthetic. It's based on an availability to maximize the use of a person's property while mitigating any adverse effects that would public works would have with maintaining our infrastructure. So that would just be one example. And then to the south here is another example where
there's an inlet. Currently the fence would have to jog around the inlet underneath the proposed language. We could actually put a gate across the inlet allowing for maximization there. And the main reason a gate works for there is the easement comes up from the south. Public works would still have
access to that area to do the maintenance and the other things they need to do by opening a gate. So there's no additional machinery or anything else required. So, the over but like I said, the overall effect is it doesn't really have any downsides to it, but it will allow for greater maximum use for our
residents to put a fence around their property. >> Um, and with that, I can stand for any questions. >> Very good. Thank you. Questions, comments from council. >> We're basically putting gates over the storm water pipe instead of a pulled fence, right,
>> council member? That's correct. It would need to have at least a six foot. So where the post would be for the gate, the gate would have to extend six feet from there. And that way you can create a 12-oot opening with two gates uh to get in there with existing fences. The
fence is already in the way that exists now, but the additional fence that would come in, we use a gate that could open. So it doesn't actually create any more nonconformities. >> Makes sense. >> I couldn't come up with anything. I tried to do a little search on it. I couldn't come up with anything. What What is the negative here? like if we
have to get a machine in there that's too big and it breaks up some fence because it's wider than six feet, but I can't come up with a machine that would need to go in there to do that. So, yeah, I don't see a downside. >> I don't either. >> All right. Any other questions,
comments? Seeing none, I will entertain a motion. >> Motion to adopt ordinance 489 ZC amending the minimum fence setbacks from storm water pipes. >> 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. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. With that, uh, there are no more items on our regular agenda this evening. So, we're moving on to reports and emerging issues. Attorney V, anything from you this evening? >> Mayor, I don't. Thank you. >> You've been very quiet this evening.
>> I've been trying to be a good boy. >> Yeah. Miss Hardy, anything from staff? >> None from staff, Madame Mayor. >> All right. Anything from the council members this evening? >> I have two things. >> Yes, council member. >> Maybe three. Um, this week is the PGA
Championship for Women at Hazeline KPMG. I'm volunteering. Um, I think it's a great way to get out and spend some time with your family and watch some great golf. 24th is our next car show, I believe. And then unfortunately, as of
the 22nd, which is today, Bavaria Road South in Chaska is getting a mill and overlay until the middle of August. I did drive it today and it was still operational without any sort of incumbrance, but um it looks like Chaza
is doing some construction there for all of you watching. Unfortunately, >> fortunately that >> it's well needed on >> it's a little beat up, but I'm like wait one week because that's my path to Hazel team. >> Anyway, so those are just the three
little updates I had. Thank you. >> Very good. Thank you. Any other >> I have two not updates but uh I'm gonna put uh city manager Hardy on the spot. Um >> one I just am curious after our ordinance uh last what two weeks ago or
last meeting uh if there's been any uh complaints updates on noise uh at night if there's any update on. >> Excellent question. Thank you Council Member Roberts, Mayor, members of the council. Um we have not like the last
two weekends we have not received any noise complaints um specifically for um loud outdoor music and there were other calls to service in the
downtown area but none of them related to noise. >> Yeah. And then my only other question is um and I think I asked this maybe a month or so ago, but I keep getting asked about it because people are excited about it. Any update on Quick Trip on when they're going to start?
>> Do you have an update, Brian? >> Because people are jonesing for some Quick Trip clothes. I guess >> Mr. McCann has the answer for us. >> Thank you, mayor and council members. Yes. Uh quick update to that last question as well. I do want to note that we did get uh one complaint through our
revised system that we just got uh this morning. So, we didn't get the chance to update Miss Hardy on that yet. Uh but yes, that's the only one that I'm aware of that's come in. And then secondly, for Quick Trip, they should be getting their building permit soon. All the
requirements that I needed on my end have been done and I think we're finalizing the building permit plan set pretty shortly. So, uh, construction is anticipated soon. I think it's going to be a threemonth construction, they said. So, they moved pretty quick. So, we
might have trip. >> Can you repeat that? Three months. That's impressive. >> I think >> that is impressive. >> I remember them saying what their construction time was and it was remarkable. Yeah, >> for sure. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Anything else?
>> No, I'm good. Thank you. >> All right. Seeing nothing else, there are no more items to come before the body this evening. So I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> I'll make a motion to adjurnn. >> 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.
I.................... Any opposed. Motion carries. We stand adjourned.