stands nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right, [clears throat] first up is open forum and we do not have any visitors today. So we will move on to presentations. 3.1 audit presentation by Alex Triple CPA from ABDO and acceptance of the 2025 audit. All right, good evening mayor and councel. I want to introduce Alex Triple. Um he is with ABDO. He is new to presenting to you but he is very familiar with our annual audit and has been on the team for our audit for quite some time. Um, so the audit is a big part of what we do and it's something that we have to be mindful of year round. Um, ABDO has been a great asset to our team. They have great people working for them. They provide trainings throughout the year and they are available to answer questions um, throughout the year as we need and that is super helpful. Um, in addition, I just want to note Matt's here tonight, assistant finance director Rathlasberger, and he takes the lead on this and he does an amazing job. So, kudos to him and thank you for that. And without further ado, I'll turn it over to Alex and I'm going to try and run the presentation while Alex presents. 25 and 24. No problem. Um kind of the main two things to focus on here that major tower and billboard leases fund that increase about $450,000 in fund balance. Um that fund really has no expenditures or costs that go along with it. So that's made up of just that revenue for the year increases that fund balance. Then that revolving loan fund. Um you'll see a large increase there from that uh $1.9 million Minnesota investment fund grant. Um that is going to be that big increase in the restricted balance on the right there in that bar chart. Um that loan from the MIF is restricted for um future business expansion projects. And then moving on to the capital project funds. Um same layout and same chart on the right here. Again, the big thing that sticks out here is that local option sales tax fund decrease. Um that's from facility costs for the fieldhouse for the year. Um these capital project funds are designed to fluctuate in fund balance based on project funding and then the expenditures that follow. Here we have the debt service funds and then the corresponding bonds that belong to each of those funds. Um we show the total cash and total asset amounts which are fairly similar. U most of those funds are made up mostly of cash to pay off those outstanding bond balances. Um and then on the far right you can see when those mature and then down below the expected payments for the next 10 years. All of these payments are funded by the tax levy and um some special assessments and those were all at the end of the year those fund balance amounts didn't fluctuate much just because those payments had already been planned out for. Moving on to the enterprise funds here starting with the water fund. Um this top graph here you'll see this for the next three slides for the enterprise funds. In orange we have the total receipts for the year and then in yellow the dispersements and in black those are the debt payment portion of the dispersements. Uh the water fund revenue increase from 24 to 25 is reflecting that increase in rates. Um those water rates increased from anywhere from 15 to 19% from 24 to 25. And then down below you'll see that cash increase um reflected down there from 23.5 million up to 26.8 8 million from 24 to 25. That black bar on the bottom is the minimum target cash balance in the enterprise fund. So you guys are going to be well above that. Um that's just 6 months of operating costs plus any debt payments that are to follow in the following year. Same two graphs for the sewer fund. Um a steady increase in revenue in the sewer fund as well. Rates increase in the sewer fund about 6%. um you'll see that big jump in cash isn't necessarily in line with um how much those revenues exceed the cost. There's a $2 million um contribution to the sewer fund which contributes to that cash increase there from 24 to 25 storefront. The storm fund is again really consistent to prior years. Uh not much change here. Just continuing to build that cash balance there and well above that minimum target balance. Wrapping up the enterprise funds with the liquor fund here. Um you'll see that on that top line of numbers there, the total sales did decrease. Um but so do the cost of sales. Um getting rid of that um on sale MUN bar contributes to a lot of these changes you see. Um the gross profit overall really didn't change much. About $25,000 decrease. Um and then the operating income actually increased to $376,000 getting rid of a lot of those costs associated with the bar. Um and then you'll see that increase reflected down below in the total cash balance there. Then we have this separated by on and off sale. um that off sale liquor still um operating really strong and staying above that operating income level um and consistent with prior years. And then on the right that on sale, not much activity there. You can see a lot of changes that year, but that operate that operating loss was able to decrease and actually be positive in 2025 in the last year. This is the total cash balance across all funds. um across the whole city. Um really consistent, dropped a little bit. Um and then that allocation is broken out by color where that cash is actually being held. Um and that allocation is fairly consistent as well. Moving on to some key performance indicators here. You'll see a lot of the same comparative data here. It's going to be class 3 cities in orange, which is cities with a population between 10,000 and 20,000 people. And then yellow will be Henovan County. And then that black line is going to represent the city of Rogers. So you guys can see you're very consistent with the cities of Henipin County's tax rate. And then a little bit under the class 3 cities. On the right here, this tax rate mix um this just shows what portion of the total tax rate the city makes up. Um in orange there is the city of Rogers and then the county and school and then special portion make up the rest of that. Um, and then the class 3 city is in black actually there for a comparison of where you guys stack up with those cities. Here we have the same comparative charts for um the debt that the city carries. You can see up until 2024 it was pretty consistent. You guys had two bonds issued in 2024 which is the reason for that increase. um still below the comparative data with class 3 cities in Henman County. When you take into account that sales tax bond as well, you guys are a little bit over. Um and then that'll continue to go down as you guys pay off debt and not issue anymore, which if you do, that's no problem, but that's the way that graph is trending right now. On the right here, we have the debt payments as a percentage of total expenditures. Um again, you'll see a little increase in 25. That's when the payments for the 24 bond started. Um, and then you'll have payments starting one of the two 24 bonds in 26. So that'll continue to go up. Wrapping up the total expenditures here, your current expenditures per capita on the left. Um, remaining pretty consistent the last three years and a little bit higher than the comparative data. And then on the right, that's just capital expenditures per capita. Um you can see way above the comparative data historically in 24 and 25. Um 24 you guys had the fire station 2 project that a lot of capital funds went into and then 25 the fieldhouse project makes up a lot of that. And that is all I have for you guys. I'd be happy to answer any questions or go over anything. Cool. >> Yeah. >> Mhm. >> Alex, thank you. >> Yeah. Very well done, >> Bridget. Thank you for keeping things in line. Appreciate it. >> Yeah. So tonight, normally we don't have um motions within presentations, but given um the we do want to see the audit get approved. So there is a motion up for um recommend [clears throat] um approve the 2025 financial statements and audit. >> I'll make a motion to accept the 2025 audited financial statements. >> Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor? I >> I >> All right, that motion passes. >> Thank you, guys. >> Thank you, Alex. Thank you. >> All right, we will move on to general business. We have uh 5.1. Um Oh, sorry. That's consent. I'm sorry. [laughter] I should just look at this piece of paper. [clears throat] All right. These items are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a council member so requests in which item event. All right. Sorry everyone. I'm getting out of order. So first we will approve the agenda. So council members may add items to the agenda for discussion purposes or staff direction only. The council will not normally take official action on items added to the agenda. Anyone have anything to add? Move to approve the agenda as printed. We'll >> second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? I. >> I. >> All right. Thank you. That motion passes. Now we will move on to consent. All right. Um, so anyone have anything to remove from consent? >> I'll remove 5.3. >> All right. We will move 5.3. Anything else? All right. Anyone want to make a motion? >> So, I'll make a motion to approve the um consent agenda minus 5.3. >> I'll second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I >> Okay, 5.3. So 5.3 is approve resolution 2026-48 accepting donations to the Rogers Fire Department. And mainly I just wanted to um thank uh Kitty Fire alarms for the donation. We always appreciate donations. >> Yeah, that's very generous. 76 combination smoke and carbon monoxide alarms. >> Mhm. Very nice. And um then I'll just go ahead and approve that resolution for 5.3 or make a motion to approve it, I guess. >> Did you second it, pat Joel? Okay. >> All right. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I >> I All right, that motion passes. Thank you. Now we will move on to general We have no public hearings and we will move on to general business. All right. First item related to our general obligation tax abatement bonds. Is that you, Director Bruska? >> Yes, it is, Madame Mayor and Council. Uh, the item before you tonight is related to the sale of bonds for our rack expansion project or our second sheet of ice. So, this project has been in the works for quite some time. So today the city's bonds went out for bid and we have Jason Arsald with Ellers here to review those results right before the meeting. I did drop this little packet um which is the sale day report for these bonds um at your spots. And so what was provided last week to you was sample resolutions. So tonight the motion does differ um slightly from what's in your printed packet given that the amount has changed. Um but I will turn it over to Jason to go through the information. >> Hey Jason, >> good evening members of the council. Jason Arzald with Ellers. Uh and as Bridget mentioned uh the item before you tonight is just considering uh the proposed sale of bonds for uh the uh activity center. And uh we talked about this bond issue I don't know roughly 6 weeks ago. Uh we had projected a roughly $10 million bond issue to provide the funding you needed for this project. Uh since that time we started preparing for the sale. Uh as you all know that included a discussion with standard and pores as this issue was rated by them uh before we went out to to bid for the bonds. Uh that report is in the uh in the sale day report uh that is in front of you. And just to note that they did affirm uh the city's double A+ rating, but they included a positive outlook uh you know, which is, you know, fairly rare. They generally in the past have included the double A plus with a stable outlook. So it's a good sign. I think it it's a it's a recognition that your metrics have improved to the point where uh they may be willing to consider an upgrade for Rogers, which would be to the full, you know, AAA rating, but they weren't willing to go quite that far yet. uh uh I think your metrics if you look at the report uh and we reviewed it to compare with other AAA rated communities just on the face uh are as good or better than many AAA rated communities. So we're hopeful, you know, that that uh trend continues and that at some point in the future they assign that AAA rating. But uh one of the one of the reasons that they wanted to wait and withheld that initially was just to understand what's going to happen with the civic campus in the future. They understand there's a big amount of debt coming. They just want to see that the city will manage that as anticipated and you know we're confident in that of course. So uh provided trends continue uh and and things stay on track we're hopeful that we you'll one day come before you and say that they've upgraded it to to AAA rating. So just to know too that they really do highlight the city's uh policies around the finances. Uh your staff did an incredible job preparing for uh the the call with the rating agencies. they were so impressed with the information that they got ahead of time that I think the call lasted I don't know maybe 15 minutes uh something along those lines. So anyway, just a lot of credit to the staff to the council uh maintaining those positive um financial results and it's been reflected in the rating. So and [snorts] we think you know that shows up usually on the day of sale. So you know today at 10:00 as was mentioned we these are competitively bid uh and so what that means is that anybody can you know place a bid to you know buy the city's debt. uh we received nine bids which is a really great number of bids to receive. Uh and they're all those results are in there if you look at them the interest rates that they've all bid they're all very tight to one another just meaning we've got a really good representation of where the market was at today but the low bidder in this case was Bayerd out of Milwaukee Wisconsin and that uh amount was 3.8057%. So when we talked uh at the time of pre-sale we were projecting somewhere around 4.25 25 and build our, you know, kind of the debt service projections off of that, you know, to try to understand whether the revenues that were anticipated were going to be able to cover this particular uh bond issue. And so we've got some cushion now uh having come in a little lower uh than was anticipated. So that's a good thing. You'll note that the amount is less, so 9,285 rather than just under 10 million. And the reason for that, which has been the case for all of your recent bond issues and almost every one of these we work on, is that there was a premium uh that the bidder included when they uh um place their bid for the bonds. And what that means is that they are paying more than the face value amount of the bonds in exchange for higher individual interest [clears throat] rates every year. So they're giving you more money than is owed, you know, than you're going to pay back in a particular year. Uh but but it's at a higher interest rate. So when we work to do the math on that, that's where we get to that 3.8. 8 number 3.8% number that I that I was talking about. So what that means we can effectively borrow less than we had anticipated while maintaining the same amount that we needed to pay for those projects. So we essentially gave that premium back. We give it back but we we aren't keeping it. We're actually reducing the size of the bond so that we can maintain that same debt service number well less actually as I mentioned than we anticipated previously. So that is one little nuance here uh with that goes along with this. Uh and then so the action in front of you tonight is a resolution that would award the sale of bonds uh in the amount of $9,285,000. So whoever might happen to make that motion just different from what uh is in the uh agenda and in that initial resolution uh as Bridget mentioned. So with that I'll stop but happy to answer any questions about the sale the rating process that you might have. Good news. Questions? Anyone? >> No. Oh, it's really good news. Well, if there's no questions, I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2026-59, a resolution awarding the sale of shoot, I didn't write it. [clears throat] 9 million 285. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> General obligation tax abatement bond series 2026A fixing their form and specifications, directing their execution and delivery, and providing further payment. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? I >> I >> opposed. All right, that motion passes. >> All right, thank you. >> Thanks, Jason. >> Thank you. >> Okay, 7.2. >> Thank you, Mayor Council. Tonight we have a uh an application by Sunshare LLC for a zoning code text amendment request uh for allowing community solar gardens and and Rogers. And just an overview, uh solar is currently listed as an accessory use within all zoning districts except for the service business area. What that means typically is that ground mounted is allowed. um a a smaller percentage about 5% of the lot unless you're in the A district um as well as allowing solar on top of roof rooftops just through a building permit. So folks who are meeting those requirements they come in they get a building permit for those improvements. Um the uh this what we don't allow currently is community solar gardens or those larger scale solar gardens that are uh more of a principal use for for the the properties. Um, so the the request is to to uh allow community solar gardens in the city of Rogers. And when we're setting up a zoning code to allow a use, we have to determine where we want that use to be. Um, so when we're when we're looking at the text amendment, this would impact any of the eligible properties per the code uh that we've drafted um to allow community solar gardens. Um, so where where this sits in this discretion is this is a high discretion item to um to add a use or consider a use in the code as a policy decision um where you you're creating that legislation of that that policy um and allowing a certain use and certain criteria. If this were to be approved, the mechanism that we're proposing is through interim use permit. That would be when you for the actual site then you'd be working off what's in code. So your your discretion then gets narrower as you go up that pyramid. So fundamentally what we're what the proposed does is add community solar gardens as a defined use in our definitions section just to set the stage of what this means. what do we consider a community solar for Rogers and then adding that particular use as an interim use in the R1 zoning district. So we're not considering any other district other than R1. And then I have some slides. I'm not going to read off um you know what what it says, but basically you what we're doing is providing that use in the R1 district and then setting up the performance standards uh for community solar. Uh what this includes is the duration. So we're proposing a 30-year interim use permit for solar gardens and it sets up maximum size of no more than 20 acres for a particular solar garden. Uh and then it provides uh setbacks from uh on the parcel would be at a minimum of of whatever the principal building setback is for R1 as well as 250 ft from any existing residences measured from the residence to that facility, not the property line. And then the uh height restriction that um is pretty standard for for ground mounted solar uh proximity that that was proposed and recommended by the commission was half a mile between different solar gardens. And then there's provisions regarding glare uh landscaping, storm water management, any of the utilities, all the power uh related to that uh being underground. Um no outdoor storage of any uh supplies or unused equipment. Um and then it does regulate um the amount of access so access roads needed for safety for the site and then any decommissioning as well. So these were all reviewed by the planning commission at the public hearing earlier uh this month here. Um the changes from what they saw they requested a larger setback and they they requested a shift from capping the megawws to capping acreage instead of megawatts just in case technology advances then you've got you know more efficiency per acre. uh and then increasing the buffer the that separation between solar gardens and adding some language about uh the shity. Those that's the gist of of what was uh at the um commission meeting. Um the just as sort of a brief we're we're in the 2050 complaint update. Um you know this is we're we're starting that off just just to for a little bit of information. There is additional requirements from the MAC council regarding climate and regarding reduction of greenhouse gases. So when we're looking at solar um that is a way to show that you're implementing the regional goals and passing policies related to solar. So it does fill a gap in metrics needed to reduce greenhouse gases. So there's there's a list of of requirements in there. Um you know the these are new checklist items. So we're understanding what it means. Do you need to do this right now? No. So, I don't think you need to feel pressure that this is something you that's imminent that you need, but just know that this is an item that the state legislature has. There's a 100 megawatt cap a year basically uh over the next 10 years. There's a cap of 800 megawws for, you know, tax um getting tax credits for for these types of projects. That's statewide though. So when you're looking at whether or not this is going to be a huge thing in Rogers, I don't know if it's realistic that we'll see more than a few two or three in the next decade. So I don't know if you'll need if you're I don't think you need to feel like you're going to be pressured by solar companies if you approve this this way. Um just to keep that in mind. So uh Sunshare is is here. they have uh a presentation if you'd want to hear from them or if you have any specific questions for what they're planning for that site in in particular. Um there is a site that they would like to see this on um over on off Park Drive. Um but other than that, we can stand for questions. >> Could you back up like five slides, Alec? You had a one of the slides had a paragraph in it that I wanted to finish reading >> the definition >> right there. All right. Thanks. >> So, one of the things the planning commission asked about is with this is if rooftop solar gardens would also meet that as well as >> Yeah. So you you could this could consider um so a solar garden could be done through a as a principal use like what this particular uh company would like to see on on the ended property off of Park Drive. It could also be if if the roof can handle the amount of solar could be you could lease out a the rooftop to the solar company. The solar company would then have subscribers to solar and then the regional energy company would then rebate the uh subscriber to the it's a complicated kind of subscription service that the residents would would be able to to do. Um but not so just to be clear it's not just Rogers residents it's open to any subscribers of the state. So this is, you know, this would be any anyone who would want to subscribe. >> Is there a way to maybe um give preference to Roachers residence? So if we put this in Rogers that it would benefit Rogers residents versus different cities. >> So I don't know that answer. I'm not super familiar with the state requirements on how that would work other than maybe an early like notice that goes out to residents specifically and that could be something that we could do ourselves. The city could send out a citywide manner that says, "Hey, this is coming. Keep an eye on on on this to get in the door." >> But we couldn't say it's for Rogers residents only. It has to be opened up to [clears throat] full state. Correct. Correct. So what's our buying and involvement in this like other than the land? >> Well, >> I mean just being involved in it. >> Our involvement is is from a process standpoint is just setting up the means by which this would be approved. So interim news permit and sending that through the process. But then it opens up to all our R1 properties being able to go through the process of requesting this. Correct. So if we zone it for R1 properties, future requests come through looking at R1 properties. >> Yes. So theoretically it opens up R1 properties. Realistically it's not I don't think we're going to see 800 of these come out. You know that I think realistically you're looking at relatively large lot properties. So 20 acres or 20 acres is the max, right? But when when a property is going to look at maybe leasing a portion, you're looking at probably larger than 20 acres. So that you probably want they'd probably what they'd want to do is split the 20 acres off to make the lease agreement easier. So realistically, you might be looking at that. I think it'd get complicated to what this doesn't this doesn't disallow multiple property owners coming together and saying, "Hey, we want to lease this site together." I think that'd be a much more complicated lease agreement. Um, but it does it say you can't do that. >> But there's also solar gardens that [laughter] are five acres. It sound like currently they're smaller. >> Yep. Could it be [clears throat] >> won't allow for you to landlock any >> uh know what I'm getting at? >> So your your locked split would still have to meet the requirements of the subdivision code. Yes. >> Yeah. And mayor mayor and councel there there is not a way. It's a great question, but there is not a way to limit the beneficiaries of the solar garden, you know, the buyers of that energy to Rogers residents. So, what solar gardens are producers of energy and the buyers are are, you know, not geographically limited by anything. The PUC allows anyone in the state to be a subscriber to that solar garden. you you there's no way for the city to limit the buyers to only Rogers residents. I guess I find it uncomfortable that it opens up all R1. And I think it needs to be more defined than just all R1. And I don't like seeing a lot of our agricultural land getting consumed by these solar gardens. I uh I see the positive side, but I see a negative side too with the R1 districts. >> I I'm I'm not in favor of it at all actually. >> Um I'm I'm I see both sides of it, but currently I'm not really in favor of it. Um >> the plus the plus side is it it holds that space for 30 years, but then from a planning perspective, it holds that space for 30 years. >> I agree. >> Yeah. I I think allowing folks to do their rooftop units and, you know, be smart about things that way if they choose to >> to do that. I think we've provided for that. >> That's true. >> And I don't I don't see any compelling need to expand it beyond that. I think I mean it's my personal opinion that >> kind of a a blight on the countryside. >> Mhm. >> And I don't know that it [clears throat] really pays. But >> um there was a public hearing. Go ahead and speak, but I can't hear what you said. >> Yeah. Um, when I drive down territorial road, seeing farmland turn into houses is easily as much of a plight as as solar panels. >> Yeah. But those are land owners selling their land. I mean, that's not something we're doing to them, >> right? I mean, yeah, if you'd like to speak, I mean, um, if you have some benefits you'd like to share. >> Thank you. >> Mayor, members of the council. My name is Colin O'Neal. I'm here on behalf of Sunshare. Um, I guess I do want to point out we looked at the R1 zoning district for the city of Rogers. And I think in total there's about 800 or so, a little bit over 800 properties that are zoned R1. Um, when you compare that to the sites that are conducive to these solar gardens, they have to be located near distribution lines. Um, there needs to be buildable acres. You know, some of those properties are wetland or forested. And so ultimately when we looked at kind of all the suitable sites that are zoned R1 um other than the one that we had sort of been working on, there was about four additional sites um in in the R1 district. And so this isn't a large number of properties that you would see this potential development in um should this pass. Um it's very limited and when you do factor that half mile buffer, it's actually just two properties total in R1. So, um I guess we have an interested, you know, land owner that um would would like to use his land. Um this isn't encompassing his entire property. It's a part of his property that would go towards a community solar garden. Um and we have a lease agreement with him and he would continue to farm the rest of it. And I think on top of kind of the environmental benefits [clears throat] that you see from this, um the state of Minnesota has this program. So all of the energy that's generated goes to homeowners and over half of it actually goes to mod low and moderate income nonprofits and I think that's a huge benefit as well and we would certainly you know love to work with the city to try to offer um like a first first option to subscribe maybe at an additional discount. Um so would would certainly be willing to explore something like that to try to get the the benefit here locally. How is it going to nonprofits? Are you reaching out to them? >> Yeah, we um are partnered with several housing authorities all around the metro area and so we do all of the subscriptions inhouse at Sunshare and we own and operate these projects for the lifespan. Um and so yeah, it's our job to go out and find subscribers. there is um a mandate of who the subscribers can be from the state under this program and there is mandated discounts that have to be provided uh to the subscribers and so we obviously have to adhere to kind of all the the state guidelines but yeah we're responsible for finding the subscribers for the garden >> Mayor can I can I just ask the the representative um so I've just said that the city can't limit who can subscribe through Sunshare's solar garden were it to be allowed. Is that right? Number one. And number two, you just said that the city somehow could get preferential treat. How would that work? >> So, I I believe it's true that we wouldn't be able to limit it to just Rogers. I think that's governed by the state and this program which was passed in 2023. >> Um because Sunshare handles the subscription inhouse. you know, we could maybe post something in the newspaper or or or do some type of program locally for uh folks that are within the city that if they want to subscribe um maybe we can set a window and give them the option to subscribe, you know, early or kind of be the first option to subscribe to this garden and, you know, with a certain discount. I, you know, this is something that I'm just kind of thinking about and had talked about briefly after the planning and zoning meeting. Uh so I don't have an exact plan or anything, you know, worked out, but um we're certainly open open to discussions on that >> will be providing the solar panels. >> Oh yes. Um great question. So yes, we have talked with Halen um their man panel manufacturer. So they are um their first facilities in Mount Iron, Minnesota, which is in northern Minnesota, but they recently opened the new facility in Rogers. So we have used um their panels on all of our systems for the last couple of years and have a great relationship with them. And so when we came across this site, we chatted with them and they expressed an interest in using a portion of this garden for in essence like a test facility on um kind of upcoming technology panels that they have. And so part of our plan would be to set aside a portion of the garden that they can access um that they would be able to use to get real-time data on the equipment um as they're kind of creating new panels that would come to market. And so yeah, they they I believe I sent the um a letter of support from Hailing, but they were really excited about the project when we chatted with them about it. Do >> you know what percent of the garden he'd be using? Like what size, how much of it? >> Um we're still chatting with them about exactly what they'd want to see. Um, we set aside uh four strings of panels, kind of arrays of panels for them on the first iteration of the site plan. Um, but I guess should this be approved, we would continue to work with their engineers to kind of find a solution that would best work with them, but it would roughly speaking maybe 10% of the garden would be for their kind of test facility. Can you clarify one thing in this write up? What's the definition of community versus I mean what does that mean? Just that different property owners are coming together to ask >> form one big parcel that it can be on. Is that what you mean by community? >> So the community comes from the fact that the energy is sort of being used offsite by subscribers. And so a garden of this side would supply power for about a thousand homes, but it's not, you know, connected into the power right there on the site. And what happens is the power goes onto the, you know, grid with XL Energy. And, you know, subscriber anywhere in XL territory in Minnesota would get a bill credit for subscribing to kind of the amount of panels that their home would need. And so that's kind of where the community component comes in is that you're you have a thousand households or so for a garden like this. Yep. >> Do these go through an environmental review when they're built? >> Uh they do. Yes. Um we're currently working with um like an environmental consultant that does several surveys and studies on the property. Um we look at wildlife uh storm water and go through civil um generally you know we would provide kind of all those results in you know the form of a like a building permit that's kind of a requirement um but yes we do go through >> what are the typical impacts of a big solar farm if you will I mean >> like to the >> wildlife to the water runoff things like that how can you summarize what the >> impacts are so We work to make sure that there's very minimal if any impact. Um, you know, we use wildlife friendly game fence. Um, as far as, you know, water runoff goes. We don't see a significant impact there or sometimes we'll install like a holding pond or something like that for storm water runoff. Uh, I don't we haven't gone through all of those plans quite yet on this project. It's still, you know, preliminary. Um yeah there is you know the benefit of upgrading kind of local infrastructure. So we would pay XL Energy to do upgrades to the three-phase lines all the electrical infrastructure between kind of the project and the substation. And then part of this is there's going to be upgrades at the substation as well. So you get some benefits to reliability and and things like that. So, there was a mention of um sheep being brought in to graze. >> Yeah, that's something that we have done on all of our other projects. We um work with a a sheep grazer here in in Minnesota. Um and periodically, about two to four times a year, they'll bring sheep to the site uh to graze the vegetation. And then they'll also do kind of some spot treating to make sure everything is is presentable, of course. But um we see a really big benefit you know there for for his operations but also for the soil health and quality over the 25 years. Uh you see um a lot of you know rich uh phosphorus and nitrogen build up over the 25 years because of that sheep grazing. And so when we do commission the project um and remove all the equipment and kind of restore it back to its uh original state then you have this really rich soil that's very conducive to agriculture. So my question would be to the water runoff. So is there I think there was wet land in that area. Is there storm sewer drainage in that area? So if you have you know the expense sitting there and there's water runoff type of thing would that have an effect? >> Um the the water runoff with with the sheep on site. >> Mhm. >> Uh I I don't believe so. Um, I guess maybe I'm not understanding the question fully. >> So, unless someone's cleaning up after the sheep, but sounds like you're leaving their excrement there, the dung >> and um if there's any water runoff in the area because you just said nitrogen and all that, right? >> Yep. if that would have an effect. >> You know, we see the excrement kind of being trampled by the sheep as they graze um and kind of incorporating into the soil. Um so I guess that's something we would look at during our our storm water plan and >> um you know looking at runoff and if it you know if we should add a a retention pond or something like that. Um, I guess I I don't have an answer quite yet, but yeah, on the sites that we do have up and running, we we don't see that being an issue. >> Okay. >> And the sheep are trucked in and out, correct? >> That's correct. >> Um, would all the sheep you need for this site be on one trailer? Would they all fit on one trailer or would it be multiple? I >> I believe it's just one one trailer for this site. Yeah. you stated other projects. Which other communities have you had projects in? >> Um with the sheep grazing >> in general >> or just in general? So I mean in Minnesota, we started development in 2013. Um we're actually the nation's oldest community solar developer and helped write the legislation in Colorado that kind of started these types of projects. Um in Minnesota, I think we have about 30 sites total spread all around. Um the nearest to here I'm trying to think we have one in St. Michael's actually um that's a 1 megawatt project that I could certainly provide the address too if you wanted to take a look. >> Yes please. >> Yep. >> Um but yeah we it's anywhere in XL Energy territory in Minnesota that these are built. So we have project as far southwest as Pipstone Minnesota and um you know around the metro area as well. But yeah I could provide a map and certainly the the St. Michael's address if you're in >> I would I would like that. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> And the size of the one megawatt projects, >> those how many acres? Again, >> the one megawatt projects are usually somewhere between 5 and 10 acres. Um, and so historically in the in the state of Minnesota, the first community solar program was approved in 2013 and allowed that allowed for 5 megawatt projects, which based on the technology at that time was about 30 to 40 acres of land that that you saw. And so we saw quite a bit of development at that point. And in 2017, the state of Minnesota um changed that program a little bit and reduced the system size of these to one megawatt, which is around that 5 to 10 acres depending on kind of the the layout on the panels themselves. And then in 2023, there was a third iteration of this program, which we're currently in, um that allowed for these projects to get back up to that five megawatt size. And so we're seeing that be kind of the ideal size for um developers, but there's kind of some flexibility there in terms of of uh what folks will look at. >> Question. Uh you don't really own the property, right? So what do you do? Do you sign a lease for 25 years or something? >> That's exactly right. Yep. So, we sign a 25-year lease agreement with the land owner. Um, >> so who pays the taxes on the property? >> We do. Yeah. If there's an increase in property taxes due to solar, um, yes, we reimburse the land owner fault. >> So, at the end of the lease, then what happens? You give it back to the land owner. >> Yep. Yeah. We never have any ownership over anything other than the equipment that we install. And um there is a decommissioning that's part of this. So at the end of it, we're responsible to pull everything out, you know, recycle what's recyclable and then restore the land to the way it was before we were on the property. Yep. >> Are people seeing like subscription versus what they get back on their like the credit they get back? like what's the difference if they were to do XL versus a subscription with Sunshare. So, it is there's mandated minimums um for income qualified residents. I believe it's 25 or 30% discount on their electric bill that they see. And then if you're, you know, business or just a homeowner, it's maybe five or 10%. It's it's not as much of a discount, but certainly a savings over what, you know, Excel would offer. And like what kind of range does a subscription cost? >> So they're usually sized to be um like what you are using at your home. So if you use $100 worth of electricity each month in your home, that would be kind of the size that we would the subscription size that you would do. So in essence, um we would be generating the power. We tell Excel Energy, hey, we're generating this amount of power on behalf of this homeowner. And Excel says, great. we're not going to send them a bill because you're now generating the power and then we would send them kind of our they would pay a monthly subscription to us instead of the XL Energy bill. >> Okay. >> So, you're kind of trading XL payment for subscription receiving a discount. Um, and really this type of program was created for, you know, folks who either couldn't afford to do solar on their rooftop. You know, back in 2011, solar is quite expensive and most people couldn't afford to install a system. uh but also people in apartments, condos who don't own their roof that want to participate in kind of this renewable energy technology. So that's where these programs stem and kind of why you see the community aspect of it. And um one last thing I'll mention is that we do plan and I think it's in the ordinance to screen the outside of the garden. Um so there will be vegetative screening around the entire fence of the property. I did speak with the two neighbors next to the property that we've looked at um and kind of talked about the project and told them that they would be screening and and they were you know on board with it. Um and so as far as like a visual impact the ideas with the screening there should be a very minimal you shouldn't be able to see it driving by um kind of as that vegetation grows. So, >> and so screening is there any requirements about size of trees? Because as we know with screening it takes a while for the trees to grow. So, specific to ordinance, there'd be whatever the minimum size requirement is for for your trees. So if you're you're a deciduous or understory at 2 and a half caliber per inch is minimum by landscaping code evergreen would be about 6 feet I think six feet is the minimum planning size through the interim use permit process if there are you know these are condition basically these are proved with conditions right if you if there are you know believed to be higher impacts for the development um you can apply reasonable conditions to that approval Um, does that mean you can require, you know, 30 foot tall trees? Is that reasonable to request that along 20 acres of property is kind of the question. Um, and I I don't think that's probably the right amount of height. But you can certainly if if if six feet if you feel in particular isn't enough, then what else could be done? Is is there burming that could be done in some sections? Um, if there's if there's a great difference and a little bit more visibility somewhere. Um but as far as as that goes you'd be basically limited to what you have you know in code that's reasonable to apply a condition >> and remind me deciduous >> leaves in the >> Yep. So evergreen being six feet evergreen is six feet in height and then the understory would be you know the the you know your maple you know whatever it is uh would be I'm not a I'm not a tree guy so [clears throat] two and a half caliber inches they this is how they sell them and the size is different by >> yeah just for screening though like in the winter too so it's screened in the winter as well as the summer >> Yep. Yep. And we do have you know the specifics there's the landscaping code and there is there is sections regarding you know screening what that mean what what screening is generally there's there are requirements about screening the width um and height >> did Three Rivers Park get notified of this? It's like across the street from them. So the uh we did send a mail notice even though this was just the the the um just the code amendment part of it. Um should this be brought forward then the uh or should this be approved and IUP is the method that this gets approved by there would be noticing property owners but to 350 ft I think. So, it depends on if they are within that notice radius. So, I can't tell you. I I don't know specifically if they were told yes or no. >> They're across the street. I would >> right across the street. >> If they if they're right across the street, then yes, they were >> Madame Mayor. >> Yes. >> I have too many questions to resolve this issue tonight. I'd like to table it until the next meeting so I'd have some time to research a little more information. Uh right now I'm a negative but I want to be sold and give them a fair chance. That would be okay. I'd like to table this till next meeting. >> Council would it help so I know some of the concern that I' I've been all the R1 property could be considered. Would it be helpful to see a map about uh that shows sort of where sunlight hits the property, right, for a project and where that kind of lines up with the R1 properties? Would that be helpful, beneficial to see that? It'd be helpful, but I still want to go out and physically look at one of their facilities. I still want to see what the impact is going to be to the neighboring area for this spec specific project, which I did not take it the time to do this time. and I want to do my due diligence. Please >> keep in mind that current facilities are five acres instead of 20. >> Again, I will take a look. >> But if you think about it, it's if you take a halfacre lot, that'd be 40 homes. That's the size of it, right? Yeah. >> Got a question on on equipment. When you when you decommission, how much of that equipment's recyclable typically? Um, I I don't know off the top of my head. I mean, a lot of the equipment in the panel itself is recyclable, not all of it. Um, all of the racking is steel that can be recycled. Um, and then there's copper wire, things like that. So, I don't have an exact number, you know, percentage wise, but I would say a majority of it is recycled. >> Sure. And then, so what's not recyclable? What goes to the landfill? >> Um, I'm trying to think. There's silicon cells inside the panels which right now you don't see commonly recycled. I think some manufacturers are starting to take, you know, the panels back. Um Yeah. And there's, you know, plastics and things like that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I'm just trying to get at what what, you know, what how much goes to the landfill and then what's in it. >> Yeah. >> You know, what we're what we're sending to the landfill. >> Yep. But you don't really know what that is. >> You know, I don't have it in front of me, but um like when we prepare a decommissioning plan, it will show all of the equipment, what we plan to do with it, and that's something that we would, you know, prepare and present as part of the use permit. Um I could certainly pull one from another one of our projects as an example if you'd like to see it. Um but yeah, I don't have those answers right right now. >> [clears throat] >> I'm trying to remember if those panels Hen makes, do they have lead and cadmium in them? >> I don't believe so, but I would have to double check. >> I don't remember if they did or a little bit more, but I feel like this. We've been talking about actually just allowing it and not talking about why there's some stuff like there's more to it I think than what we madame mayor and council um we could bring this information if you're to table it next time as well um but just an idea of kind of what how big this program is in the state of Minnesota. So at the end of 2023, um the Melissa Hortman Community Solar Garden Program came into effect. So that was the last day of 2023. [snorts] And in the first year of that where it's capped at 100 megawws per year, um there were 81 megawatt projects across the state. Um and then year two it went down to 51 projects and then so far as of last week only seven um megawws have been approved in the whole state of Minnesota. And so it's something I think that maybe people thought was going to be a race to get solar in your town but is ended up being something that's kind of decreased for three straight years. Um as of last week only four megawws were being reviewed as well. So, the numbers are down pretty drastically over the 3-year period. So, I think that [clears throat] maybe if we in development could come up with a map of what these R1 sites even would be, um I think maybe just seeing some of those trends across the state um might alleviate some of your fears that all of the R1 will be solar panels, you know, by 2040. Yeah, it's not just that, but like 20 acres is a really big visual impact compared to five as well. So, that's the other part. >> Madame Mayor and council, so a couple other cities that we were looking at were Hugo um and AIGO. Um two of them that their council and planning commissions went through a lengthy process. Um they actually had moratoriums on um building solar um in Hugo. They had one project in 2018 and then another project in 2024. And what they ended up doing was um actually increasing the acreage of the pro the minimum size um acreage of the projects and then uh requiring that the panels are installed in the most central part of the property. Um so therefore they would have minimal, you know, it would it wouldn't be something that as many people could see because there would be so much land between um where the actual uh solar panels were being installed. Um and so I think that that was something that they kind of uh made a compromise. I know it sounds kind of counterintuitive to think that maybe a bigger site would be beneficial to that, but if your idea is that solar panels could be an eyesore and you want them to be away from houses, then I think they moved from a minimum of 10 acres to 20 acres. And I I feel like they've been pretty happy um based on everything that I've read so far. land. Well, a project of this side would would power a thousand homes. >> How much land does that take up? >> 20 acres. >> 20 acres. >> So, take 20 divide by a th00and >> 20 acres. roughly a thousand homes. >> Assume it's kind of an average. >> There's a develop a solar development I think it's in Corkran if you go down Highway 19 on the west side there. Are you familiar with that? >> I'm not. >> I don't know if anybody else is, but that I'd be curious to know what acreage that is. And I I get it. Blight is a personal opinion, but I that's what I think of when I see that site. And I don't know if that's Are you familiar with that one? >> 10 or I don't know how many acres it is, but to me that's part of this is just the visual aesthetics of it. Um, I don't know that I think I have some environmental concerns, but I know there's a study and a review and and that, but the runoff, the shade on the ground, I think it changes anything that can live there as far as wildlife. So, I agree. I think we ought to table it and consider our own questions, but um I don't know there's some things there that I'm not convinced about. Mayor Council, would you like to see this on a workshop for the standing meeting? Would you like to see this as a as a workshop item on the 23rd is a workshop? Standing. Okay. Yep. General's office. Nothing too alarming, but maybe >> Mayor, if I can just add to make this productive that the next look at this. Um, I know Alex, you had suggested a map or something showing the number of properties that you're talking about. I think another criteria, and you can tell me if I'm wrong, another criteria is proximity to existing Excel facilities, right? You you can't be too remote from Excel facilities to connect your power into. So maybe that can be added to the map you're going to show Alex the number of prop, you know, that that info and so yeah. So, but I don't think we're gonna look at it now, but if you can get that to him, yeah, that'd be good. >> Okay, >> perfect. >> Yeah, we have a standing meeting for the even month at 5:30. I >> already gave one. Madam Mayor, >> I'll second it. >> All in favor? I >> Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you. >> All right, one more item. 7.3 items related to city hall and police department civic campus chiefs or who's in charge of this one? Oh, Doran. >> Madame Mayor, council members, this is again once again items related to the city hall and police department civic campus. Um maybe just as a little background, um the site plan includes uh construction of the civic campus. It's about 60,000 square ft. It would house city hall, a new council chambers and the police department. The city hall side would be a single story and the police department will be at two stories. City hall and and the council chambers will sit at the east end of the site. um police department and their secure storage and or secure garage and secured parking would be on the west. The main entrance would face John Deere Lane. Um there would be a plaza adjacent to the council chambers for the public use and it would be tied to the downtown area by sidewalk. On January 13th of this year, the city council approved an agreement with Terara Construction to be our construction manager at risk. In February, the city council approved the preliminary plat and site plan. And on April 28th, the city council approved bid package number one and bidder qualification selection criteria. Bid package one, if you'll recall, was a site work, utilities, demolition, and the uh rammed aggregate peers. On May 28th, 2026, the city council approved the bids for the demolition, the pre-cast panels and the earthwork and utilities. Um, bid package two now includes all the remaining scopes of work. So, the rest of the building. So, we're looking at July 28th, 2026 to bring bid package 2 bids back to the city council for award as well as a guaranteed maximum price with Terara Construction for the final construction on the the site. And the value of bid package 2 is roughly $34.5 million. much like we did for bid package one. Um the we're setting forth the bidding criteria. Um the bidder qualification selection criteria. Then Terara will publicly bid bid package two. Um bid package two will be sent to all the bid package one biders as well just for their information. And I know it doesn't show up on the overhead very well, but it's in your packet. the bidder selection criteria. Now, one of the things we found um at a previous meeting, the city city council approved payment to Excel Energy to relocate their overhead facilities. Um we also now have some lumen communications facilities that are uh on in conflict with the facility. Um they have two fiber optic lines and a copper line out in the rightway where some of the building activity is going to take place. They require payment in advance in order to relocate their facilities. And that payment is $36,000 $36,10027. And just to go through some um slides of what the C campus will look like just as a reminder to the council, there's the council chambers. Um the floor plan again on the west you have the police department. Common spaces are shown in pink and then the blue is a city hall. Then on the second floor is again PD administration and the yellow is it. So the recommended council action is to approve payment to Lumen for relocating their facilities and to approve bid package number two and authorize a solicitation of bids questions. [clears throat] So, I'll make a motion to approve payment to Lumen Centry Link for relocation of communications facilities for city hall and police department civic campus city project number 22. >> Second. >> Right, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? I >> I >> All right, that motion passes. If then I'll make a motion to approve bid package number two and bidder qualification selection criteria and authorize solicitation of bids. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> I motion passes. Thank you all. All right, that's the end of general business. We have uh first quarter financial reports online and that we are adjourned. Thank you.