I hereby call to order the Roseville City Council meeting for Monday, February 23rd, 2026. Mr. City Manager, would you call the role, please? >> Council member Grath here. Council >> member Bower here. Council member Stron here. Council member Schroeder, Mayor Row here. Uh, and council member Schroeder informed us earlier today that she was under the weather and will not be able to attend this evening. So, we wish her uh speedy recovery. Uh, wanted to go through a couple of housekeeping items for folks uh here tonight. Uh, as always, we have a copy of the extra copies of the agendas of tonight's meetings on the back table under the big clock by the back door. uh should have enough copies hopefully for everybody who needs one to follow along with the meeting. Uh we do also have one copy complete set of all the meeting materials in a binder uh for people to share uh from the public as you need to refer to the materials that we're considering this evening. Um would ask folks if you have a cell phone to make sure and silence it or otherwise assure that it doesn't disrupt our meeting this evening. I did want to also note as far as public comment and I'll go through much more of the specifics of the rules of the road for public comment. Um but um we do have uh several opportunities for public comment this evening. Uh not the least of which is coming up very soon here which is our general public comment at the beginning of the meeting which is on items that are not on this evening's agenda. Uh we will provide public comment opportunities on agenda items as they come up. Uh so just to clarify for folks uh who are here maybe for a particular item that we're taking up this evening uh that uh the period of time for comment on that particular item will be during its consideration uh rather than during the general public comment. Hopefully that's helpful for folks and understanding. And in fact one of our items this evening is a public hearing the 7 uh which is related to a minor plat. And so the public hearing uh the whole purpose of that is to hear public comment from people in the community about that proposal. And so that will be the appropriate time uh for members of the public to speak to that item. With that, uh we would just ask folks to stand if you're able for the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Right. Next on our agenda this evening is to consider approving the agenda. Uh and I'll check as we always do first with uh city manager Trean. Uh is there any changes to the agenda from a staff perspective this evening? >> Mr. Mayor, staff has no changes to the agenda. >> All right. And I'll check with council members. Do council members have any changes or request any items be removed from consent for separate consideration? Council member Strong. >> Um I'd like to request 10F be removed from the consent agenda. >> All right. Uh to consider it separately. Got it. Okay. All right. We'll move that one earlier in the meeting. Boy, it's been so long since we've done that. I have to remember where they go. All right. We got it. All right. And then we will check with uh members of the public as well. So, what council member Strong just referred to was an item in section 10 of our agenda, which is known as the consent agenda. Those items are taken up at the end of the meeting and they're usually fairly administrative in nature and all taken as a single motion uh with limited opportunity for input. But if you happen to be here this evening for an item that's in section 10 of our agenda this evening, uh this would be an opportunity to let us know and we can move that item earlier in the meeting for your comment or question. Uh is there anyone here for an item in section 10 uh which is known as our consent agenda items A through uh M right now that does not appear to be the case. So with that um then a motion to approve the agenda as presented with the uh movement of item 10F to uh separate consideration would be in order. >> So moved. >> Second. >> It's been moved by Council Gra. Uh seconded by council member Stron. Uh discussion on that motion. Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. That passes unanimously. Four to zero. We have our agenda for this evening. Uh and just before we move to the next item on the agenda, I should note I forgot to make introductions. Uh as part of the roll call portion of the agenda, I should note that we have our city attorney, Rachel Tierney, who's on my uh right at the end of the day. It's not quite as far to the end as usual. uh and our city manager Pat Trejudan on my left at the other end also not as far away as usual. Uh with that those introductions out of the way then we have our first opportunity for uh public comment during the meeting this evening and that is once again general public comment. This would be uh related to items that are not on tonight's agenda for council consideration uh but may be of interest to people in the community or related to city business once again that we're not considering this evening. Uh is there anyone here tonight for general public comment? All right. Feel free to have a seat. And while you're taking a seat, I just want to note for members of the public uh the rules of the road for public comment. Uh by council rule, we do have a threeminut time limit per speaker uh which I try to enforce generously and gently. Uh and then also one opportunity per agenda item to speak per speaker, which shouldn't be too hard for this agenda item. Uh we also uh do want uh comments and questions directed to the council uh as opposed to sort of a conversation in the amongst members of the public here. Uh and also if we can't happen to address a comment or a question tonight, uh we often will address that uh be followed up with uh either the the resident or whomever uh as appropriate just so that we uh can uh receive the information or the comment or the question and then uh see if we need to act on it later. I believe that's everything in the rules of the road. So just uh introduce yourself with your name and your street or address for the record. Uh and uh we'll begin with uh the first gentleman who's here to make comment. Hi, my name is Mike Gregory. I live at 1945 Sharendale Avenue. And can you see this piece of paper that >> uh we if uh there's kind of a lighter area on the table sort of to your right in front of you uh that may be available for that overhead camera. >> I'm not sure if we can get the overhead camera in the control room. >> Slide it forward a little. >> Okay. >> Okay. We're not seeing it on our screens. Is it on any of the >> on that guy? >> We've got one screen that's showing us. Okay, there we go. >> It's over there. >> All right, that's what we needed. And then they'll they should be able to zoom it in hopefully. >> Well, okay. Uh going to get it away from There we go. Get away from the microphone. There we go. >> Thank you. I'm Mike Gregory, 1945 Sherendale Avenue, Roseville, Minnesota. I was here a few weeks ago with Do Good Roseville and a number of the not forprofits. We were talking about Roseville Cares and making an impact in our community. Well, with the Operation Metro Surge, it's brought our community g together like never before. So, with over 350 people who are addressing food for people who are afraid to leave their homes and send their kids to school and 252 people who are volunteered to be at every bus stop with at least three people at every bus stop, a group met here on February 2nd. 23 people met here, including nine religious organizations. and we said what can we do relative to rents because that's a very major issue and people are going to be evicted. So when we met we didn't have a particular group available to be the financial agent but St. Michael's Lutheran Church said we will be the financial agent for money coming in and we will disperse money out based on the social workers in the city and the social workers from the school system all seven grade schools middle school and high school. And from that, we've helped over 60 families so far. And with this Metro Surge, Operation Metro Surge, we think it's going to be needed well beyond February. We're already making assistance in March. And we think we'll probably be doing it all the way through April. So, what I'm going to read is what's on this sheet of paper, and this says, this is for the Roseville Housing Stability Fund. Love pays the rent. Due to the ICE activity known as Operation Metro Surge, residents of Roseville and the Roseville School District communities are facing housing insecurity. Donating to this fund allows the school and community social workers to help households maintain stability until the dangers of Operation Metro Surge no longer prevent people from earning an income and paying housing costs. Even though officially it's been reduced, that's going to be around for a while. If you wish to send funds via a donor advised fund or other avenue, please direct them to St. Michael's Lutherm Church, 1660 County Road B uh West, Roseville, Minnesota 55113. Special instructions on the memo line, Roseville Housing Stability Fund. And we have St. Michael's EIN is 41-0835898. Needs are assessed through Roseville Community Social Workers and funds are sent directly to creditors, never to households. So, we don't know who they are. We're just putting the checks together and sending them out to the proper locations with a memo of whatever it needs to be there. And we noted that we have Zephy that's on the bottom of this thing. And Zephy is a way you can donate directly. It doesn't cost anything. And again, all those funds are going to go for housing andor for food. So, I just want to let you know what we're doing in the community. It's making a very positive impact and Roseville Cares is indeed what this shows. Thank you very much. >> Thank you for being here tonight and providing that information. I guess I I do want to make one other comment and that was that uh you can also donate to Roseville Area Schools Foundation and they also are helping with a similar technique with kids in the schools. Okay. Thank you. >> If you hadn't said it, I was just about to. So, thank you. >> All right. Yes. A good indication of how people in Roseville are helping out their neighbors. Uh is there anyone else who wishes to speak under general public comment this evening? >> All right. Uh seeing no one else, then we'll proceed with our agenda as it unfolds here. Uh and the first item under recognitions and donations is a proclamation related to women's history month. Uh and we'll read the proclamation and then a motion to approve would be in order. The proclamation reads as follows. Whereas throughout history, extraordinary women have made significant contributions to the growth and strength of our city, state, and nation in countless ways. And whereas through leadership, innovation, and ingenuity, generations of women have made significant contributions in science, medicine, technology, business, politics, entrepreneurship, and culture in many other ways. And whereas women have been leaders in securing their own rights of suffrage and equal opportunity, and in the abolitionist, emancipation, industrial labor, civil rights, and peace movements, creating a more fair and just society for all. And whereas whether serving in elected positions across America, leading groundbreaking civil rights movements, venturing into unknown frontiers, or programming revolutionary technologies, generations of women that knew their gender was no obstacle to what they could accomplish have long stirred new ideas and opened new doors, having a profound and positive impact on the community. Whereas uh despite their contributions, the role of women in history has been consistently overlooked and undervalued in literature, education, science, and culture. And whereas the theme for Women's History Month 2026 is leading the change, women shaping a sustainable future. This theme honors the women who have and are reimagining and rebuilding systems to ensure long-term sustainability, whether it's environmental, economic, educational, and societal. It recognizes the powerful leadership of women in creating future a future that is rooted in equity, justice, and opportunity for all. Today, we celebrate countless pioneering women and their victories, and we continue to work to build a society where where our daughters have the same possibilities as our sons. Now, therefore, be it resolved the city of Roseville declares March 20 26 to be Women's History Month in the city. >> So, moved. It's been moved by uh council member Stron, seconded by council member Bower. Uh discussion on the motion. I just did want to note that in the first whereas it says extraordinary women and I would add that uh even women who might not otherwise be cons considered extraordinary by the general public have made extraordinary contributions. And so I wanted to add that to uh what we're recognizing here this evening. I don't know if there's other comment from council members. I just want to say indeed we have to remember especially when there are times when our um we are attacked in all kinds of venues. It's uh it's good to remember that we continue to need to fight for the rights that we have and thank to so many of the women in our history who are our voting uh the people who run the voting booths and they're not exclusively women but so many that are led churches women um there's just so many avenues um that our city especially is indebted to the volunteer um hours and time and our schools um to people who feel that need and often they are women. I I think that un sometimes are just unsung as the mayor said they're the ordinary people who um do some extraordinary things. >> Right. Other discussion on the motion. I think the only other thing I'll add is that just echoing what was said earlier that there's been a significant involvement of women in recent efforts in Minnesota in relation to Operation Metro Surge. And certainly that's part of what we recognize this evening and always. Uh with that we've got the motion before us. Uh if there's no further discussion, all those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes unanimously 4 to zero. That proclamation is approved. Uh that brings us then to items removed from consent. Uh and we do have the one item 10F uh which relates to an agreement with JM J&M display for fireworks uh for the Rosefest Party in the park. And I'll have uh Mr. Trean introduce that item for consideration. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You get the words out of my mouth. Uh it's a pretty straightforward case. It's entering into agreement with J&M uh display for a fireworks display on June 27th, 2026 as part of the party in the park and rosefest activities in the amount of $20,000. >> Thank you, Mr. Trean. And council member Strong, you had asked this item to be removed for separate consideration. >> Yes, thank you. Um, for the last few years, we've had um extensive comment near the fireworks, asking if we would consider other um ways to have some type of celebration, either a light show or other things uh that recognize the people who struggle with the sound and kind of the trauma. And we've had a traumatic um spring, so um our winter or whatever season we're still in. So, um I just wanted to make sure that we had addressed either with the parks department or um with others to just see if there's any other options that we might have either this year or just um as Mr. Johnson knows, I continue to bring this up annually. Um and so just knowing um at least for the public's sake what the cont what the comparison and pricing would be if we were to consider a drone show or other um non um firework type productions that would be of equal or similar value to our to our city. So I wanted to make sure before we just approved what this was for the year going forward that we knew um whether or not other items had been addressed. >> Great. Uh and I see our parks and rec director uh Matt Johnson here uh to perhaps shed some light on that question. >> Yeah, thank you council member and uh mayor. Um we did this is something we do look at annually um and we have looked at I guess globally. Um most recently our analysis was it was roughly three times the cost. So um in the neighborhood of about $60,000 to do a drone show. Um, within the last few weeks, we've become aware that one of our neighboring communities is trying a drone show and their budget is more in line with ours. I don't know what that number is, but we don't have really any information. It's quite out of line with what we've heard from other cities that are doing it. So, I think if it goes well, it's certainly worthy of consideration in the future. I'm not sure that it would be something that we would do this year. Um, but we are constantly looking at it. Um we are also aware of other communities um where they've kind of gone on the front end of that and gotten some pretty poor results. So we want to be thoughtful and intentional in that. But yes, we have multiple times looked into it and the cost is multiple times what uh fireworks display is. >> Thank you and thank you for taking that time. >> Right. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Right. Are there any other questions from council members on this uh item this evening? All right. >> Um motion to approve the >> All right. >> Item second. >> It's been moved by Council Member Strong, seconded by Council Member Grath to approve the uh uh agreement on the uh fireworks for 2026 as outlined. Uh all those excuse me, discussion on the motion as the maker of the motion, Council Member Strong. >> No. >> Right. Is the second or Council Member Grath? >> Well, I would like to thank uh Council Member Strong for bringing this forward. It is something you hear about some. Uh I think it would deserve further study before we made a change because most people I talked to like the fireworks. So it would be a big change for Roseville. So I think going forward this year and looking at it down the road in the future would be worth while. >> Right. Other discussion on the motion? I think the only thing I'd add to that is that we are pretty good about having public processes to make these types of changes. And so hopefully that would be something that would be part of it if we if we do look to make a change going forward. >> With that, we've got the motion before us to uh approve the contract for the fireworks for 2026. Uh if there's no further discussion, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. That passes uh unanimously. Four to zero. We have that item approved. >> All right. And that brings us then to our business items for tonight. Our first business item is to consider uh the cities for a safe and stable communities coalition. And I think Mr. Treasure, maybe you're introducing this item and then I know we've got a a special guest with us this evening. >> Yes. Uh thank you uh Mr. Mayor. Um as the city council and the community has been grappling with Operation Metro Surge, uh we have been talking about a lot of actions the city could take. Uh you will recall at our last meeting on February 9th, uh we did talk about um the recently formed cities for a safe and stable community coalition which was a collaborative group of Minnesota cities advocating for public safety approaches that respect the constitutional rights while supporting community stability and local governance during this whole operation metro surge. Originally 12 cities came together Bloomington, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Columbia Heights, Eden Prairie, Edina, Golden Valley, Hopkins, Maplewood, Minnitankka, Richfield and St. Louis Park and my understanding there's uh probably over 30 cities perhaps more uh now that are part of that coalition. City council did have a discussion on that and uh felt that there is maybe need for some additional discussion and perhaps uh bring forward somebody um that um is part of that coalition to answer any questions that the council uh may have. Once again uh it's really formed around three core principles uh safety over partisanship, economic stabilization and local control and constitutional rights. As part of their efforts, they have hired a firm to help them message and uh organize around uh the topic here and that is a contract with momentum advocacy. Uh while it's not totally clear to me if uh we were to be part of the coalition uh there might be some need of a cost share as part of that uh as all the cities would share in the cost given the amount of folks that are or cities that are involved here be pretty minimal probably under $2,000. But um so with that, the information is in your packet. Uh we are fortunate to have Richville Mayor Mayor Supple here uh today uh tonight to answer any questions you have. As mentioned, Richfield was one of the um founding members of this coalition and certainly is able to answer any questions that you may have. So I will turn it back to you, Mr. Mayor, for >> All right. Uh and welcome, Mayor Supple. Thank you for being here this evening on the other side of town. Uh we appreciate that. Um, and um, I don't know if you've got any any information you want to share at the outset or just stand for questions or what you've prepared for this evening. >> Well, first of all, I just wanted to thank you, Mayor Row, and members of the council for giving us this opportunity to talk with you. Um, we joined together um because we thought unified we'd have a bigger voice and we wanted to make sure that the voices of our residents were heard. And so it's a nonpartisan coalition and I think speaking as 20 plus cities, it's you get a much bigger impact than if just one city spoke by themselves. And so that's why we wanted to go ahead and do that. Um we currently have over 20 cities and there are about 15 councils doing exactly what you're doing. And so at the moment we're representing over 500,000 um residents. And so that's why it's a stronger voice when we come together and I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. >> All right. Thank you. Uh questions from the council. Uh Council Member Bower, >> thank you so much for uh coming this evening. Uh in here I I see the list of your core principles. I was wondering if you if you've had a chance to figure out what your the current asks are um that are being made through this and where those asks are being uh made to or who those asks are being made. So that has kind of shifted with the announcement that they're saying that the surge is over, but we know that the impact is carrying on and we don't know for sure what's going to be happening in the future, but we do know that we are going to need some economic stabilization and things like housing stability like was mentioned in your open forum earlier. Um business helping businesses. We have a number of businesses that have had a great deal more impact than during co So, some of them have had 50 to 100% of their um operating um income taken away. And so, we want to make sure that we are reaching out to both the state and the federal government to see if we can find ways to help stabilize our communities. So, um we are talking with Governor Walls on Wednesday. We talked with Senator Smith. We're reaching out to individual legislators and we're trying to have a a nonpartisan broad-based coalition to say, "Hey, we need to do something to stabilize things." And so that's been the main thing focus right now, but we also need to um we want to talk about the fact that because of some of this, we have to restore some trust because I know our public safety officials have worked for years to build trust and now this has really had a big impact on that. So, there's a lot of things like that. >> Thank you, uh, Council Member Strong. >> Thank you. And thank you to you for being here. Your city has been hit particularly hard by Operation Metro Surge, and um, we stand with you and respect all that you've had to do. So, thank you. I see in the um, paperwork that the end date proposed is May 30th, 2026. Do you see that that would be a time time frame that we'd be able to get any substantive things done? Obviously, it's the end of this this particular session, but do you see it maybe being a more of a long term or is it just right now that we're concentrating on? >> Well, when we put the coalition together, we weren't sure how long it was going to last. That's why um when the city manager mentioned we don't know the exact cost. Obviously, if it goes longer, it'll cost more, but if you know it because we have to pay for the um consulting services and those types of things. So we put in there the end to the end of the legislative session hoping that the state would help us out and help some of the cities to stabilize things, but we could agree as a coalition to continue and at that point. So it's kind of fluid at this point. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Other questions? >> I think it's clear. >> All right. I did have uh Council Member Sher is not here this evening. She did ask a couple of questions uh and asked me to pass them along. Uh she did uh have a question about um some of the coalition management work that the consultant does uh referencing things like um uh strategy adjustment based on public sentiment which I think you've related a little bit of that just in terms of changing focus and then the use of AI tools to optimize uh content um and some of the logistics of the messaging and how the how that impact is driven by the the work of the consultant. I don't know if you can talk a little bit about those those topics. >> So when we were first coming together, the first thing the consultant did is pulled us together the cities that were working to come up with what would be the consistent messages and then we adjusted after um the borders are at home and announced he was going to end operation metro surge and we made adjustments for those type of things. So, one of the things we said is that these are kind of our core messages and we're hoping others will join this us in them because it gets kind of messy if every time a new city comes on you have to switch up your messaging. And so I think it's one of those things like every um Wednesday morning there's a Zoom call of the mayors to talk about what we're going to do going forward and then the city managers also have a Zoom call that they meet so we can guide what that messaging is and then we try and have a consistent message so we have the most impact if somebody like two of the mayors were on Almanac and another mayor talked to NPR and so we want to make sure that it's a consistent message. And I think there was one other question, but you'll have to remind me what it is. >> Well, I think there was an interest in understanding how the AI tools were used, but I I'm not sure that I could answer that question. >> I'm not sure either. I know they they do come together with talking points and stuff and I'm assuming some of that has to do with putting together the talking points. >> Got it. >> But I don't know for for honest I honestly don't know for sure how that works. >> Um and just and I appreciate you mentioning the the Wednesday morning Zoom calls. Uh so that that's kind of the the governance. It's not not much more formalized than that probably, I'm guessing. >> Right. It's more of a consensus and discussion type thing. >> Got it. Right. Thank you. Other questions? All right. Well, uh, thank you for again for being here and for, uh, being part of initiating this effort and, uh, hopefully, uh, we can be joining you shortly here. >> All right. Thank you so much. >> And if other questions do come up, I hope you'll stand by for a little while. And of course, you're always welcome to stay for the rest of our >> because I'm sure you're way into these topics. We have ours tomorrow night. So, >> thank you. >> Yep. All right. Well, before we uh move to council consideration, uh we do want to provide an opportunity for public comment on this item as it's before us this evening. Uh and just to remind folks once again, we've got the three-minute time limit per speaker. Uh please address uh count questions or comments to the council. Uh we do ask that you introduce yourself by name and uh street or address as you're comfortable. As you begin your comments, um, if you have a name that, uh, that I might not be able to guess the spelling of, uh, we do have a clipboard off to the side and so when you finish your comments, you can kind of just step off to the side and and write out your name just to make sure we we get it right in the official record. Uh, and with and certainly if uh, there's several people that want to speak, we do have the two microphones and so feel free to sit at the unused mic while the previous person is speaking and then we can switch back and forth a little more quickly in that way. I think that covers everything. Oh, and one opportunity per agenda item per speaker. With that, we'll open up for public comment on this item as we're considering it this evening. All right. Going once, going twice. All right. Hello and welcome. >> Hi. Um Carrie Gy. I live near uh Highway 36 and Dale Street. I'm surprised more of my community members didn't just jump right up along with me, but um I'm just here to encourage you to vote in favor of joining the coalition. Um I think there's a lot of benefit that could be gained by joining the residents of Roseville's voices with the city, with all these other cities. Um and I understand a timeline. Uh it just seems like if we could vote on it tonight and get it approved tonight, we are part of the conversation with Governor Walls on Wednesday then. Um and then as far as the length of time if we're asking the state legislature to to support us and some of the actions from the coalition are through the legislative session. Um maybe there's a world where the coalition persists beyond the time that the consultancy is hired. I don't know. But I guess um you know supposedly the operation is drawing down. Um but we don't know what other crisis might face us in the future and maybe this coalition could be something that would would support us through other other needs in down the road. So those are my comments. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. I knew if we got the ball rolling, we'd have >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I mean, you all seemed broadly in favor of it, so I was like, "Yeah." But yeah. Hi, I'm Andy Johnson. I live over by Acorn Park on like rice and sea wooers. Uh it's a weird road. Uh also speaking in favor of it, it seems like a really good idea. I like the notion that maybe somehow the network you could create there could live on for sort of advocacy going forward. sort of 500,000 people stronger voice. Very good. Like that. I think maybe my only critique is like I I just really would love a lot of talking about the individual people that are like suffering and having their lives completely upended, which I know we're getting. I just feel like I get I was reading a news article. It was like sort of safety is this umbrella and then like a lot of focus on the suffering businesses, which they're suffering and that's fine. Um, but I just think, you know, maybe for me the most compelling part is like the people that are locked in their houses for like kind of an indeterminant time. I you could tell me it's done and there's no more ICE agents left and if I were a vulnerable person, I wouldn't believe you and I don't know what would get me out of my house. So, I really think you're looking at like the rest of 2026 or something like am I feeling better in 2020? I guess how do the midterms go? I don't know. It just seems like a real bleak time for a lot of people and I just want to focus on that. But overall, great idea. Absolutely should do it. I hope more people join in. Thank you. >> Right. Thank you. >> Is there anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to this item this evening? >> All right. We'll go ahead and close the opportunity for public comment then on this item uh and proceed to council consideration. Um thoughts from the council. Council member Strong. >> I'd like to move that we join the cities for safe and stable communities. um and with the uh expenditure up to $3,000 as indicated or whatever the request is at this time to get us through this session and then address uh after that um should it move forward past that time. >> Second. >> It's been moved by Council Member Strong, seconded by Council Member Gra to join the coalition. Discussion on the motion as the maker of the motion, Council Member Strong. >> Nothing further. >> Right. As the second or Council Member Gra? Well, I think it's been said, you know, I think many voices are heard more than just individuals and many cities joined together are going to be get more attention than just one city. So, that's why I'm voting for this. I think it's a good idea. It's a very cost-effective use of money uh from the residents and I uh look forward to hearing more from the coalition. >> Right. Other discussion on the motion. Council member Bower. >> Addressing a something stated during public comment. Uh we do also work with other groups such as League of Minnesota cities to push forward agendas that include all city voices, not just these in the metro. I think this works well because of the targeted focus on the metro area for something like this. So I think this is a good idea. >> All right. And uh to uh make sure we do address uh the comment during public comment as well. Certainly a huge part of the impact is impact on individuals. Uh and I think when we talk about impacts on businesses certainly uh it's oftentimes small businesses that may be one or two individuals uh and certainly that's a huge impact to them. Uh and if it's a few more employees that's a huge impact to those people too. A lot of times the impact to business is the result of those employees not being able to uh leave their home and not being able to trust that it's a safe situation. And so uh certainly that is important to acknowledge as part of this. But, uh, I think all of the, uh, efforts that we'd be advocating for would be to help people, uh, in this community as well as across the broader Twin Cities area that have been impacted. Uh, and so I think that's really a good thing to be focusing on. And so that's why I'm supportive of the motion as well. Uh, with that, we've got the motion before us to join the coalition as outlined. Uh, if there's no further discussion, all those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed. >> That passes unanimously 4 to zero. and we are now officially joining the coalition. Thank you again everybody uh for following this and thank you again to the mayor of Richfield. All right, with that then we move to our second item on our business agenda this evening which is item 7B. Uh and that is to consider authorizing proceeding with planning for a possible nature play edition at the Heritage Alexander Nature Center. Uh as well as acceptance of a donation uh to fund a study. Uh, and we have our parks and recctor director Matt Johnson with us this evening to bring this item before the council for our consideration. Welcome, Mr. Johnson. >> Yeah, thank you, mayor and council. And I apologize for a very wordy uh agenda item title. I worked it and worked it and that's what I landed on. So, um, we do have uh what I think is a pretty exciting um opportunity here and it's really um grown over the past uh o over the past I'd say four or five months from a p-siz snowball to something that's really gathering steam and heading down the mountain. So, it was a great time to come and chat in and uh to understand where the council is at with it. So, um as always, I like to give a little bit of uh context before I get into the meat of the issue. Um and that is today I want to talk about the Harriet Alexander Nature Center. Um this is obviously located in Central Park on 52 acres of of uh preserved natural space. Um the visitor center annually has more than 10,000 visitors. Um more than 1,600 volunteer hours take place at the nature center. More than a 100 school field trips were there last year and more than 3,000 recreation programs. Uh more so the spirit of the nature center how it's always been one of volunteerism and community focused donations. Um the center itself was founded by uh was constructed partly um in part based on a generous contribution from Harriet Alexander as well as the Roseville Central Park Foundation. And as I mentioned 1,600 volunteer hours staff that facility 6 days a week. So um we only have one full-time staff member that is there. So it's it's tremendously community-based. Um in addition to that is the interpretive center. The nature center grounds has many times over that many users um on the boardwalks as well as the wild life rehabilitation center which is also on the grounds. We've seen pretty consistent um increases in program participation and annual usage counts the past few years and partly because and as a result of we have chosen to invest in that site. Um you'll recall two years ago we had three mosaic carons done by local artist Lorie Green that were installed on site. Those have been tremendously popular and the idea was to get people to come visit the site, see the facil, see the facility. Um, we also had these two 10- foot tall um, monolith signs that were installed. Um, these were envisioned in 2016, so long before I was in this role and um, fully donationfunded as well. um and finally installed last year uh and have been a tremendous success again at getting people to know the nature centers back there as well as providing some wayf finding for the facility. Additionally, with some capital improvement program dollars um this past year we were able to com uh reside the building um update the facade and the exterior signage. I should have done a before and after facility because it's a picture because it's almost unrecognizable how different and clean it looks with that on there. But really what I want to illustrate is how this has really over time been a joint donor and city effort uh in every aspect of it. Um realistically, as long as I've been here in Roseville, one thing that we've heard about at the nature center, initially sort of on the periphery, but grown louder over the years has been a request for a nature playground. And when I talk about a nature playground, what I mean is a a play space that's a combination of synthetic as well as natural elements that's really geared towards connecting its users to the natural spaces. Um, and this has really over the last I'd say 6 to 8 years become more prevalent in the parks and recreation world and simply because it's viewed as a key antidote to technology, addiction, anxiety, some of the things that we know are impacting our children now. And there's been a lot of studies around just being in nature, not necessarily playing, just being in nature, um, is a great counteraction to those things. And we we talk about that a lot when we talk about why we plant trees and why we do parks and recreation programs. But this really is, for lack of a better term, almost a trick to get kids to come out and fall in love with nature. They come out because they want to play. They come out because that looks really fun. And we hope that over time they also fall in love with the environment around them. They fall in love with sustainability and conservation. And that's something that will keep them healthy throughout adulthood as they transition into maybe less playground activities and more into sustainability activities. So again, this is something we've heard about quite a bit over time. Um, this started to, I guess I wouldn't say grow legs, but at least um, become something we wanted to look into more in 2024 when we were approached by both friends of Roseville Parks members as well as the Roseville Central Park Foundation just saying, "What would this look like?" And we didn't really know. We didn't have an idea what it would cost, how it would come together. So, initially what we as staff went out and we toured some uh, nature playgrounds in the metro area that we had heard were good. Um, I think we ended up touring about six of them. Some were really great, some didn't fit what we were trying to do. The pictures to my left um are to on the screen were Spring Brook Nature Center. Um this is in Fidley and as you can see, this is a great illustration of what I'm talking about where um there's natural elements in there. These are all synthetic in the picture, but there are some rocks behind. This is a looks like a beaver, but it's all made out of wood. These are actually concrete sculpted mushrooms and turtles. And this thing is um two giant 9- foot tall platforms with a lever in between where a kid or an adult get on that lever and they swing from platform to platform. U some of our staff did it and said it was scary as heck. I um was in the scary as heck not willing to do it contingent. And I felt very alone about that until today when I was going over my slides and my daughter who is nine looked over my shoulder and she said, "Dad, I've been there and I didn't do that." and I said, "All right, we we we're on the same page." And I had no idea she had been there. Um, this is one that is far larger than what we're talking about here, but very very popular. I'm sure you've all heard about the Tamarak Nature Center in White Bear Township. Again, a combination of natural elements such as the rocks you see in the left picture, as well as um uh synthetic but made to look natural elements such as the hut on the right. And then um the one that we found that really was quite inspiring to us was Grahams Park in Sherburn County. And I've got a few quick slides I'll buzz through about uh Grahams Park, but you can see again on the left, if you look at the uh the little guy in the green or blue shirt here, he's on synthetic lily pads, but also here you've got some huts built with natural sticks. On the right, you've got again woodbased construction with pearl. Um, my favorite element that I've seen at all these places is this is actually a culvert that is put in, um, and buried about a third into the ground, leveled out, and they put rocks and natural grass on top, and it becomes a tunnel that kids can ride their bikes or run through. They run all over it. They're all over the place there. And these are a couple of other elements. These are actually synthetic and painted by an artist to look like birch trees that can be climbed on. birch is typically not something you want to climb on because you will ruin the tree. Um, and again, you can kind of see here you've got stickbased swings, but also very natural elements. So, we went and saw those sites and now we're getting into my timeline of my narrative. Um, we went and saw those sites and thought, boy, this this maybe is interesting. We need to find out how much this costs and what it would look like. So, we invited some vendors, kind of your typical playground vendors that said they had a natural play line to come out to the nature center uh last spring and summer and we had them come out and ultimately it kind of felt like a square peg in a round hole. They pretty much were trying to sell us playgrounds that were painted to look like nature and we thought, boy, we're in this tremendously nature natural space. We're going to ruin it if we put something like this in there. And so, we backed off and thought, you know, maybe this isn't necessarily going to work. And we ended up connecting with the folks in Sherbone County who did Grahams Park. And we said, "How did you get to this very authentic natural space and they connected us with a consultant they worked with, HKGI, and what they showed us is they brought in their consultant at the beginning and they designed they didn't bring in uh your your Cadillac and try to put it in the middle of your driveway. Instead, they began with the driveway and found the car that would fit in their various components of the driveway." Bad analogy, but I went for it. Um but so the idea was again they designed these various elements that you can see here to fit within the existing site to provide very specific play value and they put it out to bid and found different contractors. For example, the person who put in the culvert is not a playground vendor. There's somebody who can do a culvert. Um however, the person who put in the wood swings um is probably a playground vendor. Um and and the more we talked we thought this is an interesting idea and something that we should see if it could make sense. So um as we back out that brings us to this fall and uh I went back to the Central Park Foundation at their November meeting as I promised them I would and I said um this is what we sort of think would work. We'd like to do a study that determines fe feasibility and what a nature playground would look like, where it would fit on the site, what might go there. Um and they immediately said we'll fund that if that's what it takes. And I said, "Well, I want to make sure you understand there's a possibility we'll get to the end of this study and we don't have the money to do the project or we just aren't able to move forward." And they said, "Yeah, but everything's got to start somewhere. So, we'll fund this project uh the the study." And they had also said that they are interested in a substantial contribution to the project if it does go forward at that point. So, in the interest of building a broader coalition, we met with the uh friends of Roseville Parks as well. They were very interested in this idea and gave us a very similar answer of if if you come to us with what we think is an acceptable project, we're in. We want to put some money into it. We want to make it work. So, at this point, I said, "Okay, we're getting we're getting pretty far down the road. Um, I need to make sure we talk to the parks and recreation commission and the council." So as I was preparing the presentation for the February parks and recreation commission, I was approached again by John Robertson Smith who was the donor of the nature center Kairens and he um after some early conversation said that he would like to donate $500,000 to this project. Um he's actually even though we are not there yet and I've been very clear on that has begun to make that donation to the friends of Roseville parks that is happening as we speak. um and is very very committed to the project. Went forward, made the presentation to the parks and recreation commission in February. They were very enthused about the project, stated that a number of them uh visit they knew these nature playgrounds because they take their kids to them in other communities and um again said yes, this stud is worth doing and something we should look into. So, with that, um, I want to share sort of what my vision for the financial implications of this are because I I certainly don't want to lead down a path and say, "Yeah, we're this is going to be a great idea, but we don't know how we're going to pay for it." Um, we've been incredibly blessed by the community support that we appear to have already. Um, as I mentioned, the Central Park Foundation are are willing to pay for that initial study. Um, and the project budget really could be a huge spectrum. could range from a couple hundred thousand dollars, which is not insignificant, but that would be, you know, largely natural elements. You don't need a lot of infrastructure work, all the way up to a million dollars where you might need to add uh adjust trails to have um more ADA access, potentially expand parking. It's really based a lot on that infrastructure and what you decide to put in. As I mentioned, we've received uh uh commitments of contributions from both the Central Park Foundation as well as Friends of Roseville Parks, and Mr. Robertson Smith has contributed $500,000 that he would like to go towards this project. We also since the very um early idea of this project have thought it would be have thought it would be a great candidate for the Minnesota Outdoor Recreation Grant. This is a grant program that is funded by the Department of Natural Resources and is intended to connect children to natural spaces. Um the grant relies very heavily on three elements. one being uh shovel ready, two being funded with through partnerships, so not just city dollars but a broad consortium of partners and three being community engagement which we pride ourselves as something we do fairly well. All of that lends us to believe that we think that if we spend the next year doing this study and putting it together, you never know, but we do think we'd be a strong candidate for that grant which matches funds up to half a million dollars. So if we brought a half a million dollars to the table, they would have a half a million dollars to bring to the table as well. So all of that lends us to believe that I we're we're really quite confident that if we were to move forward and we find a design that we thought would fit and works well with the site that we could do it without any city funds on that initial upfront investment. Now you all know that when we talk about the life of an asset, um I would be misleading you if I said there will never be any city dollars that will go to this. So, I want to be very transparent about that. Um, the little infographic we created on the left talks about sort of a life cycle of of any playground. Um, which is you you have some mid you have the early installation which we think will be fully funded outside of city dollars. Um, the midlife updates which are sort of mid-range fixes and then ultimate replacement in 20 years. There's some changes to this because natural elements will wear out a little quicker. Um, and we should know more about that once we get into the study and understand more. But just on some early conversations, we think at about 10 10 years, you can expect a 15% of the total budget will need to be paid and 20 years there'll need to be full replacement. Of course, it's well within the city's purview to say we have a donation now and in 20 years we'll worry about it at that time either through seeking another donation or maybe not replacing it. But generally speaking, it's been the city's practice and I think it is a good practice to at least be aware of the community doesn't like to have an asset and then say we don't know how we're going to fund the replacement of it. Um, couple other slides here. One, I I do want to talk about some other uh considerations. So, I've presented this so far as as an idea, an idea that we wouldn't be here if we didn't think was a good idea, but there's certainly project considerations that we need to be aware of. Um, and why I say this can't be as big as Grahams Park or Tamarak Nature Center. Um, ecological consider considerations are paramount. This is a nature center, so we're not going to go take down a bunch of trees, take out a bunch of natural spaces to put this in. It needs to fit well, and it needs to be ecologically responsible. Parking on site at the nature center is already difficult um particularly in the summertime when the arburitum across the street is busy. So again, we'll have to do a combination of right sizing the play space, making sure that it's not something that's going to bring in people from the entire state of Minnesota, but also um being thoughtful about is there an opportunity or a need to expand parking? Is there can we get people in from Central Park school? What is the way that we can kind of work through that? And again, that's something that'll take study over time. I don't have the answer tonight, but I do think that with intentionality, we can work through that. Um, additionally, we we would we would be intentional to look at the Hank site as a whole. As we talked about, we've got the boardwalk there. Is there another connection that makes sense with this project? We've talked for a long time about an outdoor teaching space. We don't currently have that there. Um, and building accessibility. And then the other unknown right now is the parcel on the north side of the where the nature center um is currently up for sale. And um we have talked to the realtor as well as the uh one at least one proposed buyer and have expressed our interest through park dedication in acquiring a connection up to County Road C. That's a down the line thing, but we're very aware of that as we look at this as well. Um two more slides. I know I've gone on for a while. One, uh if we were to go forward with the um seeking of feasibility and planning study, engagement would be paramount. um those that have worked with us over time know wouldn't be surprised to hear that that's always a priority for us. So we would envision um working with both current Hank users as well as people who don't use the nature center. This the idea is to draw more people in. We want to make sure that we capture them. Um program participants, our current natural resources volunteers. One great opportunity is to connect with the Central Park School which is currently connected via Pathway. they already do a ton of uh a ton of field trips in the facility, but if it can be usable to the school, that's a win-win type situation. So, we we would begin to make that connection as well. And of course, the donors need to make sure that they feel invested and that their uh two cents are are weighed in as well. So, that's sort of our engagement plan. Uh last or second to last slide, I guess. You always feel good when you put a timeline like this together um in six months ago and it still looks the same, but right now we're on track. I don't know that we will be down the line. Um if you look at our timeline, we are sort of at decision point one here. So we began in late 2025 with confirming that partner support, making sure that we have sort of a coalition of people who are interested, but we didn't want to get over our skis. So we went to the parks and recreation commission. That's why I'm here tonight to really understand if the council's interested in pursuing this further. Um, if you are, our next steps would be to hire a consultant to begin the engagement process to confirm our funding. So, once we have a budget, make sure that we actually have people who are going to write those checks. Um, and then check back in again and say, okay, are we ready to really go forward and do this thing? If so, we'll apply for the grant and hopefully be doing construction by late 2027 if all those pieces fall into place. So, the ask for today is twofold. Um, first and foremost is I guess permission to move forward. They're a little bit misordered here. And secondarily, if there is uh the opportunity, if there is a desire to move forward, we would want to officially accept that donation from the Central Park Foundation for the study only. At this point, those other donations, we're not moving to accept those because we don't know if we have a project yet. Um, the future, we would talk about those other whether it's for parks or Mr. Robertson Smith's donation um once we know more what that project budget would look like. So um that's my information on this and I'm certainly happy to stand for any questions that you may have. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Uh questions from the council on the project or the proposal at this time. >> All right. Um with that, is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak to this item this evening and whether we should proceed with the uh study or the consultant work on this proposal? Hi, Carrie Glly again. Um, Highway 36 and Dale Street. Um, I'm in favor of the nature play space and um, I'm very grateful to hear that there are um, people invested in Roseville that are willing to donate such significant funds of money. Um, I do have a concern about the parcel on the north side of Harriet Alexander directly adjacent that's on County Road C. And I think we have an opportunity as a city to prevent maybe some of the mistakes that might have happened in the past. So, we have had multiple um instances where we've had like high-rise uh high residential housing built very near our parks that then have kind of taken away a sight line and sort of disrupted the natural feeling in some of our parks. Um so I have a question. Well, I'll finish my comment and then leave you with my question. But so in general, I would advocate if there's a way to um expand the Harriet Alexander to acquire that parcel and preserve that element of nature. Um just to kind of keep the whole place cohesive, feeling natural. um and not you know spend all this millions of dollars investing in a natural play space but then we have unnatural elements of housing or business or whatever whatever else that property could be used for. Um, so those are my comments. And I guess my question is, um, you know, what is that property currently zoned for? Um, and is there a risk or a timeline that that property could be purchased by someone else that then would prevent um, some of these natural uses of that property. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comment and question. Is there anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to this item this evening? Why not? >> Sure. >> Here I am. Hi, I'm Amy Perkins and I live up by EMTT. Um, I actually came for a agenda item a little bit further down. Um, but this fits in well and so, um, I missed the beginning of the presentation, but I do also love the idea of enhancing here at Alexander. I think they've got a lot of great programming. They've got a great director. Um, so from what I did here, I would also be in favor of looking into putting in a playground. And as for the parcel of land up on sea, one of the things that has kind of broken my heart since I've moved here about, you know, almost 10 years ago now is just watching all the the pockets of green space disappear. Um, I know a lot of that has to do with individuals selling property and then it getting developed. Um, where I live, we've just lost many, many wooded lots and we're going to hear about one that another lot and a half I think that's coming up for development. Um, so I would love to see I mean, one of the things that I and I think many people value about Roseville is just how much it feels like we're not quite so much in the city. And again, a lot of that's been lost in the last few years and we once it's gone, we just can't get it back. So, so I guess this is my my heartfelt plea to do what we can as a city. I've been thinking about it in terms of just individuals selling residential lots that were never built up. like I would love to know from you guys and I can do my own research but what the city can do to protect as many pockets of green um as possible because again we can develop what's already developed in new and interesting ways but we can never get back natural spaces once they're gone. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. Great. Is there anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to this proposal this evening? All right, we'll go ahead and close the opportunity for public comment. Uh, and I believe the zoning of the properties along County Road C on the south side adjacent to the nature center is single family residential. Um, I believe that's and and also the comprehensive plan guidance. >> It or it could be low to medium >> low density residential. >> Okay. All right. So, uh, certainly if somebody came forward with a proposal to put in higher density housing, that would require a change to the zoning and probably the comprehensive plan guidance. Uh, if it's the comprehensive plan guidance, that requires a four-fifths vote of the city council to make that change. Uh, so it's not a simple proposition. Um, and I know that the there's topographical issues with those sites on the south side of sea that uh that contribute to uh how developable those sites are. Um, and so hopefully that helps answer that question. We can't predict what future city councils might vote to do ultimately. Uh, but that's the current state of things and was the vision and has been the vision for some time through multiple updates to our comprehensive plan over the last uh maybe 30 years and more. Uh, that that those sites are generally speaking pretty low density. Uh, and hopefully that remains the case from my perspective. Um, so that that I think answers that. Uh as to the the preserving a lot of the green space, the challenge of course is usually people who plan to use a property for something other than green space and have owned it for a while are very interested in compensation uh because they were planning to receive compensation if they were going to develop that property. And so the challenge that the city always runs into in those cases is resources uh versus opportunities and how can we how can we best uh match up those two things. And so it's it's difficult for the city to acquire every single property that may came up come up for development. Uh but we do have the mechanism which uh may be discussed a little further as part of this which is the uh the notion of park dedication. Uh which is uh that uh for certain qualifying proposals the city can request either a donation or contribution of land as part of the development or a contribution of of dollars towards park development elsewhere. Uh for a lot of the time that I've been on the council, we were accepting the dollars. I think we've had a couple of opportunities in the last few years where we got a little more creative and looked at opportunities to accept land as part of developments. One of those is Sunrise Sunset Park in I have to think of which side of town is Sunset Park in the western part of Roseville off of County Road B. Uh and then also uh property just off of Lexington, north of City Hall here on the east side. uh that was acquired uh through dedication as part of the town homes that were built farther to the north. Uh so I think we continue to look at those opportunities and it was already mentioned that that's being looked at here. Uh and certainly we can talk more about that as appropriate, but hopefully that helps folks in the public understand sort of how those things can happen and and what some of the the challenges can be as well for the city. Uh with that I think that answers the questions that were brought up. Uh but we do have the request before us. Is there further uh need of information from the council, from staff? Anything staff wanted to add either to my answers to correct anything I said or uh enhance the conversation we're having at this point? >> Uh no, I think you got it, Mr. Mayor. >> All right. Thank you. Uh then we do have the request before us once again uh to accept the donation of funds to complete the feasibility study uh as well as to uh approve developing and issuing a request for proposals for that study. Uh and those are the two asks this evening uh of the council. >> Move to um accept the donation and to move forward with the uh proposal study. >> Second. >> All right. It's been moved by council member Stron, seconded by council member Grath. Uh discussion on the motion as the maker. Council member Stron. >> No, it's very exciting. I'm sure many current parents are wondering how much interest their children will have in two years, but uh it's exciting. um in 20 years from now, we have great we have fabulous volunteers. I'm sure they'll continue to amend and grow and change and adjust and hopefully we'll see this be a a really great long-term amenity to the city. >> Right. Council member Grath has the second of the motion. >> I agree with those comments. I do want to um point out though that this will be a cost to the residents down the road. Obviously, we hope that we would get more donations and I think I should have asked this earlier. Is the capital improvement plan able to uh renovate parks? Are we able to use that those funds or do we have to use new funds? >> Yep. That we our intention would be well based on council guidance would be to program it into our capital improvement program. So rather than a one-year hit, we sort of balance it out try to balance it out and even it out over the years. So once we know that total project count becomes a little easier to determine what that annual impact would be. Um but that would be how we would program it is use the capital improvement program to make sure that we are planning for that replacement >> and we have years to do that. So that's I >> 20 ideally >> exactly. So I support the plan. Thank you. All >> right. Other discussion on the motion. I think that was a point I was going to make is that certainly we would immediately program it into the capital improvement plan and then we would have to make sure we can figure out the dollars between now and 20 years from now. Right. Oftentimes that's done by setting aside something like 120th uh each year over that time. Uh but we have to take a look at that in light of all the rest of the the money we're setting aside and our our tax levy and all those things. So we'll figure that out as we go forward. But first we have to figure out if we have a project which is what's before us this evening. So uh if there's no further discussion all those in favor signify by saying I I opposed. >> That passes unanimously 4 to zero and uh that uh donation is accepted and the approval is given to enter to get the uh request for proposals out for that feasibility study. >> Thank you. >> Thank you again uh Mr. Johnson as well as the park rec commission all volunteers and everybody who's been talking about this up to this point including the very generous donors who are pledging their funds as as of now. All right. Uh, with that, then we'll move to item 7 uh C, uh, which is to hold a public hearing and consider a request to approve a minor plat. Uh, and we have our, uh, oh my gosh, why am I blanking? Senior planner. It used to be associate planner or something like that. Years ago, senior planner, uh, Brian Lloyd with us this evening to bring this item before the council. And I'll turn it over to Mr. Lloyd for the presentation. >> Thank you. Uh if I could please have the document camera for this. Uh I don't plan to show much, but as you mentioned, this is uh a proposal for um a minor plat. The subject site is in the corner of Brener Avenue and Chadzsworth Street. I have more detailed drawings with me. They were provided as well in the council packet. Uh I don't imagine the detail will show up particularly well uh given the scale of the plans. Uh but I'll just do this uh as representing the proposal. Generally, it's to pretty much split it right in half, east to west, and create two residential parcels uh out of the existing one that's there today. Uh the simple analysis is that uh both of these proposed parcels are plenty large enough to meet the minimum standards both in terms of lot width and area. Um, the applicant has been working with Roseville's uh public works staff to uh to develop a storm water BMP that's larger than strictly needed by development of this site, but that will uh capture and improve storm water treatment uh in the public right ofway there. And so the city would um sort of take ownership and maintenance of that BMP after it was built uh and installed by the applicant. Um and the uh the parks and recreation commission did review it earlier this month and recommended a dedication of cash uh in lie of land uh at this site. Um and uh the only other sort of typical part of the analysis involves a tree preservation plan. I see that in the the plan that I uh had attached to the council uh packet didn't have the um the inventory on it as you know typically would be included with the graphical plan for a tree pres uh preservation. I would just note that um the the proposed removals for building new homes and for the the storm water management uh area in the eastern most part of the site uh are so far outweighed by the trees that would remain on the property particularly because the two largest one uh largest trees are on the western most edge of the property uh and sort of well out of range of any of the construction activity there. Um, but of course that's something we would monitor as the project would continue. Um, aside from that, um, I did have one phone call from a nearby resident late last week who was asking in particular whether these lots could be, uh, built with duplexes or twin homes. Uh, because both of them are slightly less than the minimum 11,000 square ft that's required for duplexes or twin homes, they could not. Um, you know, the applicant could uh could have proposed a property line that is slightly off to one side, leaving one of the parcels big enough for that. Um, but this is the same person that's doing other development in the community presently on lots that are plenty large enough for duplexes or twin homes. Uh, and his interest is in building single family detached homes. So, it's not a surprise to me that uh he didn't propose, you know, that sort of uh varied lot size program to allow for the development of a duplex. And that's really all I have. And I'll conclude by indicating that we do recommend approval of the minor plat with a couple of routine conditions of approval related to the storm water and park dedication. And if there are other questions that members of the council have, I'm happy to try to answer those. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Lloyd. Are there questions from the council on the plat being proposed this evening? >> And just to clarify once again, you indicated that both of the proposed lots are are well uh beyond our standards uh for lot size, right? >> Dimensions. >> The minimum width requirement is 85 ft and these are both in excess of 100 ft and the minimum area requirement is 9,350 square ft and these are just shy of 11,000. >> All right. Thank you again. Um I did have one question. Uh, oh, and just to clarify, uh, stormwater BMP means best management practice, uh, for those who aren't up hip to all the lingo. Um, and the one question I did have on that is we talked about city ownership. Would that be done through some sort of easement or um other document filed against the property or what's the ant anticipated way that that would be handled or do we know at this time? Well, it looks uh like and again the the scale is small, but uh it looks um like on the preliminary plat there is a storm water easement uh described. Uh I don't have the remote out here, but could we please zoom in on this plan? Or I do have the remote here coming. >> Maybe the microphone. >> Okay, thanks. Oh, great. Thank you. >> Great. >> Yeah. >> Oh, thanks. Um, and so there's a a dashed line here that continues around here. >> Uh, that seems to encompass the bulk of that that excavation area, which would be, you know, part of that storm water treatment. Um, so it does look like it's uh there's an easement proposed here for that purpose. Uh, I have not scrutinized the plans for that, but I know our public works staff uh, you know, will have uh, been tracking that. >> All right. Thank you for that. Uh, and the only reason I I bring that up for well two two reasons. One is obviously we want to understand how the ownership is defined. Uh and second, I know that um for instance at the Met Council when they consider each city's residential density calculations um they exclude storm water features or best management practices when they're city-owned through such things as easements. But when it's simply a contractual arrangement to maintain something, we don't get credit for those in terms of our density calculations at the Met Council, which for a city like Roseville may not be as big of an issue as as some other cities, but uh but certainly that's it was something that I became aware of through the planning for the next kind of plan planning process that made me think about that. >> So, I just wanted to once again ask that question. Uh were there other questions from the council? Council member Strong, >> thank you. When I look at this um what's up on the display and then the aerial photo um I see this existing structure to the north there. I would assume that's maybe the garage to the home that's there already. It seems like it's closer to that on the aerial than it is um to the line than it is in there. So would that meet the proper setbacks for distance from the lot line? >> Um just to clarify, you're talking about this structure here, correct? Yes. Okay. Uh I can see because I'm sitting close to it. It does say it's the existing house, not a accessory structure. Um so a couple of different or responses to that. Uh that's going to be a house with a Chadzsworth Street address, which means that would be the front. Minimum requirement for the home from this side property line is only 5 ft. >> Okay. >> Um and there wouldn't be any requirements pertaining to this property about where that home is located. Um, so there, you know, the the existing setback distance between the home and the existing northern boundary of these lots isn't something that would be germanine to the consideration of this subdivision approval. I would add the bit of esoteric context that uh aerial photos are made to look like they're being taken from directly above. In practice, they are not. And so it's entirely possible, entirely routine that um things like houses in particular or other buildings uh can look like they are further toward one side of the property depending on where the plane actually was when that aerial photo was taken. Uh so it's yeah, it's not surprising that it looks different on Ramsey County's aerial photo. And then just double checking on the two homes as they look like maybe they mirror one another um as far as the setback from one another on the the lot line that they share. >> Is that I mean they'll have adequate setback from that lot line then too. >> Absolutely. What's proposed here? Uh I I didn't honestly measure it. Um I'm assuming that it's at least 5 ft. When we review subdivision proposals, we're not strictly speaking reviewing proposed setbacks. uh we would definitely ensure at the time of construction that they are meeting requirements for the setbacks but you know given that these lots are more than large enough to meet the minimum requirements there won't be any problem meeting those minimum requirement or those minimum setback standards at the time of construction >> and who is the current property owner for this particular lot >> um I don't uh well okay so uh I just going to say I don't have the application in front of me which would have the name. Uh, but on the the RCA for this evening, uh, I I did indicate that the owner is also the current applicant, Cara Builders. Um, I presume that's accurate, but like I said, I don't have it in front of me to verify. >> Okay. It's not one of the adjacent land owners. It's actually already the builder. >> As far as I know, that must be right. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Right. Other questions from the council for staff. All right. Uh, thank you, Mr. Lloyd. Uh we do want to provide an opportunity for public comment since this is a public hearing this evening. Um we did provide notice I believe to all of the uh property owners and residents within uh 500 ft of the uh property lines of this proposal. Uh and so that is the uh uh reason that probably folks are here this evening is because of that notice. Um that is a standard practice of the city. Um, and I probably we have affidavit of mailing available in the the planning office and things like that to verify that. Uh, which is something we always mention for our public works hearings, but some for some reason don't mention them for our planning hearings. But anyway, uh, that's inside baseball that you don't care about. Um, with that, once again, the rules for public comment is the same three-minute time limit per speaker. Uh, we ask that you identify yourself by your name and your street or address at the beginning of your comments. Uh, address comments or questions to the city council. um you'll have one opportunity to speak uh for this agenda item. And then once again, if you have a name that uh I may not be able to spell with a reasonable guess, uh feel free to just write it down on the clipboard off to the side once you finish your uh comment or questions this evening. And with that, we will open the opportunity for public comment during this public hearing. I'll go ahead and get things started. Um my name is Tim Maris. I live at 988 Brener uh directly to the south on um shown right here on the map. Um and I've got uh just some comments about orientation um of said lots in regard to possible pedestrian safety considerations um and just a request maybe for additional consideration uh by the council um uh in regards to this proposal. Uh so um as was stated uh the builder is Kara uh Builders LLC. This is currently uh some excerpts from their website. Um and one of the things uh that is noted is oversized garages um that is present here and we'll get into that as we go. Um but this site is relatively unique. Um so here again is that proposal uh being shown um with kind of the unique feature that the garages or the the garages and driveway portions are meant to be uh very very close to one another. Um closer than any uh driveways currently in the neighborhood given the size of the lot um and kind of um as close as reasonably possible given the lot uh division proposed. um why uh that is a a consideration point is um the context of where this is located. So uh one of the unique features is that it's directly south by a block of EMT Williams Elementary. This is just a broader view showing the property currently in blue. Um Em Williams um is a the main thoroughfare is Chadzsworth which is this busier street also feeds from Brener from both east and west to Chadzsworth getting up there. Uh the reason it's unique uh is given the neighborhood orientation uh everything within that half mile radius per the school board uh does not receive bus transportation directly. So as a result, EMD William D. Williams has a lot of neighborhood walkers who are walking down Chadzsworth coming from the side streets. Uh Chadzsworth is known as the busy street where everyone has to be aware and take caution. Uh the side streets are kind of the the reprieve uh from the busy streets and so uh together they complement one another well. Um so again asking that you know we would consider uh the safety of community members and elementary students going there. Um, the other interesting feature is down at the end of the block is the entrance to the trail to Little Lake Josephin. And so, uh, also directly past that house are a number, you know, a lot of walkers throughout the day, uh, from the adjoining neighborhood streets, uh, to get there. And the reason I bring that up is with new construction brings large garages, which are convenient. Um, and I'm not against large, uh, vehicles, but large vehicles are known to bring additional uh, considerations with them. Uh so there are increases of roughly 40% that have been indicated for pedestrians uh due to the increased prevalence of these large vehicles. Um they're not well accommodated in garages of the 60s and before uh which serves as somewhat of a deterrent. Um for children which is relevant because of elementary school it can be as high as 82% uh increase in the odds risk uh for fatalities. Um, additionally, driveways uh were responsible for 26% of injuries uh for uh children in pedestrian accidents um in a study from Utah. Um and so the consideration would be uh for pedestrian safety uh going from a side street where there are currently no um uh driveways on that side of the street to two that are relatively concentrated that could have uh you know obstructions from people parking on one or the other making it hard for folks backing out to see other pedestrians. Um, I would just request that the city uh take a look at uh this slight uh revision uh to the proposal where you'd orient one of the lots which are roughly square after division. Orient one of the lots on Chadzsworth and then leave one of them oriented to Brener uh which serves to decouple the driveways from one another uh providing better sight lines um along Brener and more room uh towards the intersection uh for cars coming to the stop sign. So, it's a stop sign on Brener from both directions and Chadzsworth is just a through street. Um the uh uh vehicles and driveways along Chadzsworth have better sight lines um already. Um and so that likely wouldn't present any additional risk and again people preferentially avoid Chadzsworth from a pedestrian u perspective because it is the busy street and Brener is that preferred walking street. I thank you for the time. All right. Thank you. Is there additional public comment on this proposal this evening? >> Hi, I'm Ryan Castello. I I'm the house just to the north 3073. >> Mhm. >> Um so I purchased my house from my uncle about 6 years ago and I was unable to purchase that lot um just financial reasons. But I was explained that there's not enough setback available for a house on this corner lot to meet the requirements of all these houses here as well as here. It would be too close to the corner. In order to fit two homes, you'd have to take the back part of my lot and have a very narrow lot on this side. And that's how it was explained to me six years ago. So, unless things have changed. Also, it didn't show the trees very well. There's a big maple tree right in the middle of the property line. There's hedges all the way around if you look on Google Maps. And there are giant pine trees everywhere. So, they would be cutting down the majority of the trees to get two homes in there. So, I'm proposing that just one home get built on the site. That's all. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. Are there other comments on this proposal this evening? >> Anyone else from the public wish to speak to this item? >> Hi, Amy Perkins again and um I lived on the block at 9:04. So, I just want to speak in um favor of my two neighbors who just spoke. Um, and I was also going to mention um, in the I mean perhaps I wasn't reading it correctly, but when I looked at the plans and there's another version I saw online that showed the trees and I assume that trees with an X through would indicate trees that were going to be cut down. >> Correct. >> So, I counted quickly and I don't think my number is exactly right, but uh, agreeing with what Ryan just said, I counted at least 15 or close to 15 trees that would come down. And if you drive by the corner um of that lot, the trees are magnificent and um that would be a huge lot. So I also would love to see only one home go in that spot. Thank you. >> Right. Thank you. >> Is there anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to this proposal this evening? >> Hello and welcome. Hi, Joan Dulfur. I live at 3030 Chadzsworth Street and I've lived there for 36 years and I'm just going to um reiterate the safety issues because the safety on Chadzsworth has been a problem since I moved in and um there hasn't been any remediation for that. Um so I'm just want to I just want to say it is really an issue and there are a lot of people and a lot of kids who walk up Chadzsworth to get to Edie Williams. So, um, if there's any consideration of how we can make that safer for kids because you're just adding again two more cars and potentially children to the neighborhood and um I would really like the council to consider that people coming down Chadzsworth because it's a hill are almost always speeding and um we have never had a resolution into that problem. So anyway, uh just to add that uh in support of the safety issue. >> Right. Thank you for your comments. >> Is there anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to this proposed subdivision this evening? >> All right, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing then. U move to council consideration. Um, just as to um, questions that were brought up, I guess, uh, one of the things is as far as standards for driveway locations, I guess it wasn't necessarily a question about the standards, but we might as well since the topic was brought up, but we do have standards as a city as to where those can be located on on properties, especially in relation to property lines. So, I'll turn it over to Mr. Lloyd maybe to enlighten us a little bit on that. >> U, that's right. And then and mostly uh we'd be talking about minimum distance, minimum spacing between a driveway and a street corner. Um you know I I don't uh offhand know what that minimum distance is. It's something that I could be concerned about if the driveway were proposed all the way on the eastern side of the site uh adjacent to Chadzsworth Street, but being all the way over on the western side of the proposed lot there, um it certainly will be uh farther away from that intersection than the minimum requirement would be. I think it's the the minimum requirement is something like 20 ft maybe. Um but I I can't remember for sure. >> All right. And then as to the location of driveways relative to property lines themselves, I thought we had a standard something like five feet. >> Yes, the the the setback especially from that interior property line uh which is the sort of proposed common one is at least 5t away and the same would be true for this property line which is also not adjacent to a street corner. Uh minimum spacing of of five feet um for those driveway surfaces just like the buildings themselves. >> All right. And there's there's nothing uh official about the location of driveways as they're shown on a plat because we're simply approving the lot lines and the easements and things like that at this point. >> Yep. >> So what they've provided is an example. >> Right. Okay. >> Yes. And it's it's an example that's provided as an assumption of what the likely or what the possible improvements might be for the sake of understanding what trees might be removed and understanding how much storm water needs to be accounted for in the storm water management plan. >> Right. And it's entirely possible that uh actually there's trees on the west side that might be better preserved by not having a driveway that close there. >> Yes. >> Although there is a tree on the east side as well. >> Um and just to the tree question, I think just in my preliminary count, it seemed like there were about approximately 10 trees proposed to be removed and maybe nine trees remaining, but I was counting while other people were talking. So that could be >> and more than the absolute numbers of trees. the the main driver of whether tree replacement is required is the size of the trees. Uh and the two largest what we call heritage sized trees uh that are on the property are on the the far western side um you know out of out of range of any of the construction activity. So those two largest trees will remain and so it seems likely that you know the the total removals wouldn't trigger a replacement requirement because again it's not by numbers of trees exactly. All right. Thank you, Mr. Lloyd. All right. Uh council, we have the request before us uh to consider this preliminary plat um and the uh conditions as outlined which are relatively straightforward. One is to uh create the approved storm water best management practice and on completion that'll be owned and maintained by the city as well as the park dedication fee. Uh before I recognize council member Strong, I did want to just clarify one other thing in relation to this. So, uh, this is, uh, a a plat a minor subdivision or a plat approval. Do we have a final plat that comes back before the council in this case, or is this sort of the one stop for everything? At this point, >> this is a sort of one touch that the council will have with a minor plat like this. Uh, if the minor plat proposed is approved, it is the preliminary plat strictly speaking. The applicant will come back then with a final plat drawing and that will be reviewed administratively to ensure that it conforms with the approval that was granted. >> All right. And uh Council Member Strong, >> I just wanted to make sure we um address Mr. Costello's concern about the setbacks and his understanding based on being next door. Do you have any more information on that, Mr. Lloyd? >> Yeah. Um I I don't I can't account for what conversation um he had uh you know to understand what he he did about the building setback. This is what we would call a reverse corner lot which means that uh this required setback for the house uh along the Chadzsworth side will have to be 30 ft um like the minimum requirement for the houses adjacent to it. their front yards up here coincide with the sideyard. But for uniformity sake, I suppose a 30-foot setback is required here. Uh as well as here on the the front of the proposed lot, at least as it's arranged here. And um the scale again is rather small, but um you know 30 ft is well the the proposed setback does it say it might say, but I can't quite see it. uh is uh more than 30 ft, you know, from that that uh Chadzsworth Street property line. So, it uh it would meet the minimum requirements as proposed. I think it could probably even be a little bit closer, but >> All right, council. Uh is there a uh motion in relation to the proposed uh plaque that's before the council this evening? >> Approval. >> Second. All right. It's been moved by council member Gra, seconded by council member Bowerer to uh move approval of the plat as proposed with the conditions uh presumably as outlined and I believe that's through the resolution that's attachment four in the packet. discussion on the motion as the maker. Council member Grath, >> I understand that these things are frustrating for the neighborhood to have changes, but the the applicant is meeting the requirements that we have in our zoning laws. And with that information, uh it's necessary to approve these types of buildings. So, I do think there are other times down the road where things will be uh looked at again by the planning department and it will be when we get closer to the final designs of the property, but it does meet the the minimum requirements. >> Right. And as the second council member Bower, >> yeah, this is always a challenge when I was on the plane commission. Uh I don't like to see these uh lots split, but as council member Grath uh said, this is what it's in our zoning. it is what we're um held to. When the comprehensive plan comes up again this year, we can re-evaluate it and I'd be in favor of making changes. So, splits like this can't happen. But as of right now, this is what our zoning is and this is what we need to follow. Council member Estrad and I'd recommend that if there's concerns to make sure that if a safety study has not been done before that maybe the safety study be done as far as u stop signs or other things we've been told recently about the efficacy of those can be can be not as good as people hope but um I as far as I recall I don't think it's is it a controlled intersection >> it is controlled on the Brener part Brener has to stop for Chadzsworth Okay. Yeah. And it is downhill. So I would assume that maybe changing the direction or reorienting that. But that's not my area of expertise. But maybe someone who has that expertise could offer some additional >> certainly. And I think it may be a challenge to understand how a stop on Chadzsworth affects the safety on Brener necessarily. Um but certainly I think that the having been in that neighborhood a number of times over the last several years um the concerns about pedestrians on Chadzsworth is definitely uh valid and and I was going to attempt to find the city's pathway master plan to see where that might have stood on the uh the plans for the future. I don't believe it's very high on the list at this point just based on the traffic counts and things like that. So uh but u I will do more research on that. Uh the other thing just as a comment sort of on the general planning process and the notion that maybe in the next comprehensive plan update we might not allow this type of lot split. I'm not 100% sure that that might be the case uh because we've got conflicting desires. Um one of the desires is keeping things nice the way they are and keeping open space and not a lot of um new houses in the neighborhood. Um, the other is the desire to make sure we're providing opportunities for housing for people in the community. And those those kind of clash certainly. Um, and we're trying to do the best we can as decision makers for the public to make sure that we're providing for uh the opportunity to preserve where we can as well as the opportunity to provide housing where we can. Um, this proposal, just back to this proposal, is proposing lots that are well larger than what our minimum standards are that we have in our zoning code. Um, and so that that helps me be supportive of it. I don't think on that basis that I could deny it because I think it that the developer would have a pretty strong case that the city is being arbitrary and not applying our own standards. Um, and so that's to to elaborate on the challenge that council member Grath expressed in his comments. I think that's that's the reality that we face as as a public body and and as a governing uh body of the city here. um because we would be essentially not applying our own standards in that case if we didn't approve the plat. Um however, I think we we can be mindful of things like adjacency impacts. We can be mindful of those types of things. We we already try to do that and and the the existing zoning code is an evolution of what started in 1959 when the first code was adapt adopted by the city. I think that's been, you know, there's been a lot of changes we made over the years, uh, all towards making sure that we address potential impacts, uh, to neighbors. Um, all of that being said though, once again, I think that this proposal, um, meets all of our requirements. I will even go a little bit further to say that it I feel that it is reasonable. We're we're um, adding two houses to a neighborhood that's got a fair number of houses. Now granted, the density is perhaps a little greater on the the eastern side of Chadzsworth on Brener Street as opposed to the western side. I'm I'm fully aware of that, but it's certainly not out of character with with sort of the general neighborhood more broadly. And so I think that that it it for the reasons of the technical reasons as well as just seeming to to fit in appropriately, I think that that it has to be supported. Uh so on that basis, I would be voting in favor of the motion. uh but acknowledging the comments that we've received from neighbors this evening as as as we often do receive in these these cases. With that, we've got the motion before us to adopt the resolution approving the uh minor plat as proposed with the conditions as outlined related to um park dedication as well as the dedication of the or the ownership of the storm water best management practice. Uh all those in favor signify by saying I opposed. >> That motion passes unanimously 4 to zero and that plat is approved. Uh thank you again for the staff's work on this as well as for members of the public who've come and uh been a part of the process this evening. Um and we appreciate all of the voices of the community that participate and that's why we set up a process with public hearing. That then brings us to the end of our business items on the council agenda this evening. Uh we do have uh one set of council minutes for consideration and those are the minutes from the February 9th city council meeting. Uh those have been provided to council. Council has provided comments back. Uh and the revised draft is before the council this evening for our consideration. Are there any other changes that need to be made or a motion to approve as presented? >> Move to approve as presented. >> Second. >> It's been moved by council member Grath, seconded by council member Bower to approve the meeting minutes of our uh February 9th meeting as presented. Uh discussion on the motion. >> Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I opposed. That passes unanimously 4 to zero. Those minutes are approved. Uh we have the remaining items on the consent agenda. Mr. Trean, that is the items except for item 10F which was taken up earlier. Uh Mr. Trean, would you give us a brief description of those remaining items? >> Yes, it will. Uh Lloyd in the control room, could we have the computer screen back up you? >> All right. a lengthy consent agenda tonight. Item 10 A approves payments in the amount of uh sorry um approves payments in the amount of $1,898,14.88. Item 10B approves a massage therapy establishment license for Adteraxis massage and wellness on Rice Street and a temporary gambling permit for a bingo event held at the BDL club on March 26 for the Adina Realy Foundation. Item 10 C approves a professional services agreement with American Engineering Testing for construction material testing as part of the Lexington Avenue sidewalk project. Item 10D approves a resolution awarding a contract to Sunramm Construction for the affforementioned Lexington Avenue sidewalk project in the amount of $365,536. Item 10E approves entering into a professional service agreement with St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce in cooperative funding agreement with the city of Maplewood for the Rice Carpenter Alliance. Item 10F was already uh taken up. Item 10G adopts a resolution approving a cooperation construction agreement with Mandot for the Snelling Avenue resurfacing project later this summer. Item 10H approves a resolution to grant Mandot a permanent easement for the storm water pipes that will be placed by the Snelling Avenue resurfacing project just mentioned. Uh this summer, the city will receive $4,300 for granting this easement. Item 10 I approves a resolution entering into a grant agreement with Metropolitan Council for the city's inflow and infiltration program to reduce the amount of flow going into the sanitary sewer system. It is anticipated the city will receive approximately $215,000 of grant funds. Item 10J approves entering into a clean water funds grant agreement amendment with Metropolitan Council to receive an additional $5,000 of grant funds for water efficiency rebate program. Item 10K approves applying for a grant from the crisis response fund through the Minnesota Office of Justice to offset the cost for the embedded social workers in the Roseville Police Department. In 2025, the city received this grant for $200,000, which expires at the end of 2026. The Roseville Police Department will be applying for $300,000 in grant funds to be used in 2027 and 2028. Item 10 L approves applying for the Minnesota Automobile Theft Prevention Program Grant administr administered by the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. This three-year grant reimbures the city a thousand $100,000 annually for autotheft and investigations. Since 2021, we have received this uh grant funding through this program and this current cycle is ending in June 2026. If we do not receive grant funding, this position uh will be uh uh eliminated from uh the police department. Item 10 M accepts the award of the community crime intervention and prevention grant funding. Sorry, there's a lot of words to these grants apparently from the Minnesota Office of Justice in the amount of $325,000. This grant will offset the cost of the Roseville's PD's homeless outreach program from February 2026 to December 31st, 2027. The city has also received this grant in the past previously and the most recent grant expiring at the end of 2025. I would mention as the funding for the position was uncertain, we did include levy funds in the 2026 budget to ensure this continuation of this um position accepting this uh grant will offset those budgeted costs. And a big shout out to uh all the folks in the organization that are writing these grants uh it is a great opportunity for us to leverage additional public dollars to help provide services to our community. And that is the consent agenda. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Trean. Is there a motion on the consent agenda? >> All right. Moved by Council Member Strong. >> Second. Second by council member Bower. Discussion on the motion. >> Again, we are so thankful. I was speaking with a leader of another city and I said, "Oh, we're so fortunate to get all these grants." And um and they said, "Oh, we don't really get grants." And I I can't even imagine what that's like. We hear it almost every time we meet that there's some grant. And so, we're really fortunate for the skill and the um dedication of those who put this together. They're not easy. They take a lot of time, but they really are making our city and our departments safer and better places. So, um, and I see some of our CAT folks and, uh, thank you for being here, too. I see you've gotten other awards this week, too. Um, but, uh, just thank you for all they do. It's really, really important to what we do as a city and this how we serve our residents. >> Right. Other discussion on the motion? And I would just note as well that um the uh funding is through the end of 2027 as I heard for the the social worker or the homeless outreach. Uh and that helps in terms of uh looking at our levy impacts for 2027 as we're looking at the budget. We can uh hopefully be able to um uh look at how we apply that funding which is already in the levy, but then we don't have to increase levy for other things potentially. All right. With that, we have the motion before us to approve the consent items uh as presented with the exception of F, which was already taken up. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes unanimously. Those items are approved. That brings us to future agenda review. Mr. Trejan. >> Yes, Mr. Mayor. I know we need to jump into another meeting here. And I I just point out uh there's a couple changes from what's in the packet here. We do have a meeting next Monday, March 2nd. Fairly light agenda. We look to appoint the commissioners. We have a conversation around the snowplow policy we have updated hasn't been touched for many years. Also consider uh approving an updated noise ordinance for the process. On the 16th we do have an EDA meeting. Uh we anticipate there will be continued discussion about housing uh funds uh that we'll be talking about shortly. We also have a pre-development agreement with high development for the pick property redevelopment and also author authorizing agreement with Ramsey County for another grant uh that we've received uh for the high development help uh with the environmental cleanup on the 16th of March uh after the uh EDA main looking to receive presentation from Liz Noak visit Roseville president CEO. I just confirmed uh late this afternoon that Michael Bradley attorney for 9 north will be able to be present uh to discuss broadband uh franchising. We also want to establish the 2027 budget calendar as I mentioned and also receive the preliminary cash reserve level uh report for the council. Another meeting on the 23rd. Uh we do have um some land use items there uh regarding um the state patrol headquarters behind target uh both a resoning and a comprehensive plan. I think that is going through the planning commission um here shortly. And then also uh hotel licenses uh it's back again. We are completing our um our inspections. I think relatively going pretty well. I think uh it's been a market difference from year-over-year. A lot of the hotels have been repaired. Uh a lot less violations, but I don't have full report of everything. So, we'll report that back on the 23rd. And that's all I have. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Trojan. Are there any questions on the future agenda? Any council member initiated items for future agendas? Uh or any announcements or communications from council members? Council member St. >> I noted this at um the Nine North U meeting as well. There's a annual community gathering for the uh Rice and Larpender Alliance on March 5th at the community school of excellence. So technically in St. Paul but part of that alliance um and I think it includes dinner and such uh free event. So take a look if you're interested in that. Uh, and I would note that I think the last three years or more it's been held in Roseville at the Handinhand Monastery. So, they're just trying to rotate it around a little bit amongst the three communities. Uh, and we encourage people to um participate or attend. Council member Graph >> and we did have the um meeting of the visit Roseville board and uh had an update on what's being what's happened with the restaurant and the hospitality services in Roseville and a lot of concern because of the uh activity that's been going on in the city. But the January numbers were better than expected. So that was a a good surprise. We'll see how February comes out, but the uh board and the uh the CEO will talk more about that when she comes to speak to us, and we'll have more data at that time. >> All right. If there's no more business before the council, the next item on our agenda is to adjourn. >> So moved. >> Second. >> It's been moved by Council Member Grath, second by Council Member Bower to adjourn the council meeting. Uh no discussion on a motion to adjurnn. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. That passes unanimously 4 to Z. We are adjourned from the council meeting at 7:44 p.m. Uh we will transition then to the economic development authority meeting immediately to follow.