City Council Workshop

WORKSHOP MINUTES OAKDALE CITY COUNCIL MAY 14, 2024 The City Council held a workshop on Tuesday, May 14, 2024 at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota. The meeting began at 5:00 PM. Present: Mayor Kevin Zabel Council Members: Noah Her Andy Morcomb Susan Willenbring Absent: Council Member Jake Ingebrigtson City Staff Members: Christina Volkers, City Administrator Sara Ludwig, City Clerk Brian Bachmeier, Consulting City Engineer Andy Gitzlaff, Community Development Director Luke McClanahan, City Planner Nick Newton, Police Chief Lori Pulkrabek, Communications Manager John Stark, Special Projects Manager Kyle Stasica, Finance Director Julie Williams, Recreation Superintendent Kevin Wold, Fire Chief Others Present: Jim Boo, Team Boo Real Estate Ken Francois, Construction Project Manager, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company Mikaela Huot, Director for Baker Tilly Matt Lysne, Principal, HCM Architects Patrick McGlynn, McGlynn Partners Don Theisen, Owner’s Representative, Don Theisen Consulting Nichole Washburn, JLG Architects REVEW LONG TERM FINANCIAL PLAN MODEL Community Development Director Andy Gitzlaff explained that the long-term financial plan model has been developed by Baker Tilly, the City’s municipal advisor, in collaboration with City management staff through a year-long iterative process. The model is intended to guide future budgeting decisions and is based on a variety of assumptions. Mr. Gitzlaff went over the general assumptions utilized in the long-range financial plan. The residential growth assumptions were reviewed for years 2024-2027. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about why staff chose a two percent annual inflationary increase, Mikaela Huot, Director for Baker Tilly, explained that staff wanted to establish a baseline and remain constant over a period of time, in addition to being very conservative. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE TWO In response to Council Member Her’s question about if the two percent inflation rate is in line with the federal inflation rate, Ms. Huot stated that the inflation rate only looks at the value growth of the existing and future taxable market value. In response to Council Member Morcomb’s question about applying different inflationary percentages to the model, Ms. Huot confirmed that the model is designed to be manipulated across the board or individually. Mr. Gitzlaff continued reviewing the commercial growth assumptions for years 2024-2028. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about the commercial growth assumptions, Mr. Gitzlaff said staff has utilized assumptions to come up with the data, but as the Council makes decisions the model will be updated. The population growth assumptions, and projected growth in the City by residential, population, and commercial/industrial were reviewed. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about whether a projected year’s data reflects a calendar year or aligns with the County assessment year – October 1 through September 30 – Mr. Gitzlaff clarified that it reflects a calendar year. Regarding the projected population growth, Mayor Zabel inquired about how to capture real estate sales data as it applies to number of occupants, which could ultimately have an effect on the population growth data. Mr. Gitzlaff stated that staff has not drilled down to that level. Mayor Zabel added that any shift in the current residential population, especially an increase, could have a dramatic effect on the long-term financial plan model projections. Ms. Volkers noted that the American Community Survey data will be incorporated into the model as it becomes available, but staff resources are limited to do a deep dive into real estate sales data. Council Member Morcomb asked about the implications of a lower population growth projection versus the actual data. Mayor Zabel pointed out that an increase in the number of residents does not necessarily equal a greater tax capacity, and likely means the City will be providing additional services. Mr. Gitzlaff stated that the previously discussed Housing Study could include looking into this type of real estate sales data like trends in household size. Mr. Gitzlaff continued on by reviewing the projected market value growth and tax capacity growth within the City for years 2024-2028. Mayor Zabel requested that the projected growth numbers reflect the two-year lag related to the property tax cycle. Mr. Gitzlaff indicated that the projected growth charts will be improved upon as they are used. Ms. Huot added that later in the presentation, the projected tax capacity does take into account the two-year lag. From the policymaker perspective, Mayor Zabel requested that the data clearly indicate if it is a projection, current information, or includes the two-year lag, among other things to help the Council make fully informed decisions based on this model. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE THREE In response to Council Member Her’s question about knowing if the model is accurate, Mayor Zabel stated there will be data available to compare to the model’s data, such as certificates of occupancy and the market values provided by the County. In response to Council Member Her’s question about the use of actual data within the model, Ms. Huot confirmed that historical data has been inputted where possible. Finance Director Kyle Stasica added that actual tax capacity data was used. Mr. Stasica went over the future full-time employees by department and by year for years 2025-2031. In reference to the capital and debt financing assumptions, Mr. Stasica pointed out that the model is based on future capital needs, the 5-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), one-time versus annual projects, future debt versus cash financing, and annual debt service based on future project financing. Mr. Stasica reviewed operating budget revenue and expenditure assumptions, noting that the property tax levy is the primary revenue source for the General Fund. Ms. Huot noted that the average percentage used for annual growth can be adjusted by category or year. Moving on, General Fund revenues and the General Fund summary models were presented. Ms. Huot explained the reason behind the ‘net change in fund balance’ line item year-over- year. Mr. Stasica said that a large portion of General Fund expenditures is payroll and the compensation plan. Related to the changes in the property tax base model, Mr. Stasica pointed out the projected tax capacity data in years 2023-2025 ties directly to the Washington County property tax reports. Ms. Huot added that the 2025 preliminary tax capacity is not actual as Washington County has not yet finalized that information. Mr. Stasica noted that because the current CIP only goes through 2028, the capital expenditures after that are based on assumptions. In response to Council Member Her’s question about including all CIP items in the model, Mr. Stasica confirmed that if the project is in the CIP then it is included in the model. Additionally, if changes are made to the CIP due to the Park System Plan Update, or through other means, those changes will be factored into the model. Mayor Zabel clarified that the model will only reflect plans that the Council has adopted. Ms. Volkers mentioned that this item will come before the Council again, but it was timely to have the initial discussion now ahead of budget season. The two percent inflationary increase and five percent expenditure increase assumptions will be revisited. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about a wide scale revision of the model next year after the strategic planning process has been completed, Ms. Volkers confirmed. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE FOUR Mr. Stasica reviewed a summary of the model noting that it is intended to be a tool for staff and Council; it incorporates the City’s five-year CIP; it includes 10-years of financial projections; and it uses 2022 actuals, 2023 actuals and budgeted, and 2024 budgeted and projections. Special Projects Manager John Stark stated that the model is a living document that is always changing. He summarized the following discussion points – change “market value” to “construction value” in year one; incorporate changing household sizes into the model; doing an annual review of the model; and adjusting the model for one-time larger projects. Council Member Her was supportive of the model and would like to establish key performance indicators to see if the assumptions are correct. Council Member Morcomb suggested adding a summary tab that lists out the assumptions. In response to Council Member Willenbring’s question about having real-time access, it was determined that the model is not available in real-time at the moment. Mayor Zabel suggested that the known revenue and expenditure streams that fall outside of the given assumptions should not be lumped in with all of the other assumptions. Mr. Stasica pointed out that for the most part, all unknowns were treated fairly for this iteration. Ms. Huot added that the most volatile revenue and expenditure streams will be isolated for further discussion and analysis. Mr. Stark stated that there will be a level of margin of error, but it comes down to balancing those margins of error. A continuation of this discussion with the feedback provided tonight will be brought back to a future workshop. TANNERS LAKE REDEVELOPMENT – CONCEPT PLAN This item started out with introductions around the table. Mr. Gitzlaff stated that the City has an exclusive rights agreement with Tanners Lake LLC. He added that the discussion will focus on the concept plan, but there will be an additional discussion about the financial piece at a future Council meeting as that may require a closed session. City Planner Luke McClanahan said the subject property contains a mixture of land owned by the City’s Economic Development Authority and a private entity. The site is approximately 3.25 acres of vacant land that previously contained commercial uses. Mr. McClanahan reviewed the site plan highlighting the access points and the mixed-use proposals of private residential amenities and public amenities such as a boardwalk and lakeside amenity building. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE FIVE The identified land use application approvals were noted which include a Planned Unit Development (rezoning), preliminary and final plat, and site plan. Nichole Washburn with JLG Architects clarified that the proposed parking will include 120 enclosed stalls for the apartment and 51 surface stalls, which follows a one stall per bedroom model that is typical industry practice. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about feedback from MnDOT regarding the two access points off of Highway 120, Mr. McClanahan stated there are concerns from MnDOT about the proposed access points. Mr. Gitzlaff added that staff is working with MnDOT on a solution and will keep Council updated along the way. Patrick McGlynn with McGlynn Partners complimented staff saying they have been a pleasure to work with on this project. Mr. McGlynn stated that the goal of the project is to be a community-oriented, sustainable project that utilizes the lake front. Ms. Washburn reviewed the concept plans and case study images in greater detail. In response to Council Member Morcomb’s question about incorporating green space into the project, Ms. Washburn stated there will be a strategic effort to include green space. Ms. Washburn continued by reviewing the townhome concept images and potential building materials. In response to Council Member Willenbring’s question about engaging with the current residents of the condominiums near this development site, Mr. McGlynn confirmed that they have spoken and will continue to have conversations as the project moves along. Mayor Zabel asked if there is an opportunity to partner with Lakeview Terrace to utilize their parking lot. Ms. Volkers stated they would likely be a willing to partner if there was an associated revenue stream. Related to parking, Council Member Morcomb asked if any of the proposed parking will be available for public use. Ms. Washburn said they have not finalized details around that, but it will likely be dedicated for resident use. In response to Council Member Willenbring’s question about the location of the LivINN Hotel related to this project and if there are plans to put up a fence or other barrier between the sites, Mr. McClanahan pointed out the motel is very close to the south end of the development site. Mr. McGlynn added that a final decision about a barrier has not yet been made. In response to Council Member Her’s question about the townhomes having an attached garage, Ms. Washburn confirmed. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE SIX Mayor Zabel said he is supportive of the bright exterior colors. He asked what part of the trail segment is missing to complete a full loop around Tanners Lake. Mr. Gitzlaff noted that staff is looking at ways to connect the existing trails to new developments and the future Gold Line BRT route. Council was supportive of the development. Jim Boo with Team Boo Real Estate complimented city staff on their proactive thinking and responsible communication. ADMINISTRATOR UPDATE Ms. Volkers encouraged the Council to participate or get the word out that we need volunteers for the Jane Klein Memorial Spring Planting event this Saturday, May 18th. The City needs more volunteers. Ms. Volkers mentioned that Mayor Zabel will be attending the FlowFit Yoga and Fitness ribbon cutting on May 16th, and Council Member Her attended a ribbon cutting for Beyond Wellness on May 2nd. Both events were coordinated by Woodbury Area Chamber of Commerce. COUNCIL TOPICS Council Member Morcomb asked if there is an update regarding the 3M Water Settlement funds. Ms. Volkers said that Consulting City Engineer Brian Bachmeier has identified projects that can be moved up and he will provide an update at a future workshop meeting. The State grant application is currently being worked on which, if awarded, will cover the cost of the contracted Bolton & Menk engineers that will be working on the related projects. Council Member Willenbring asked why there is a sudden urgency to apply for the settlement funds before they are depleted when it seemed that the City, along with other cities, were under the assumption that there was a dedicated dollar amount for each qualifying city. Ms. Volkers reported that an update was provided by the Co-Trustees at a meeting earlier this year which made it seem like the funds were being given out on a first come, first served basis. It was unclear how much money has already been allocated to the cities that have applied through the grant process. Mr. Bachmeier noted that the City should be allotted $25 million from the settlement. Mayor Zabel recommended having this update on the next workshop meeting. In response to Council Member Her’s question about any progress related to Launch Properties, Ms. Volkers said the property is up for sale and being marketed. Council Member Willenbring suggested putting up a sign at the entrance of the Nature Preserve to warn visitors that wild animals may be present. Ms. Volkers mentioned that there is an unused electronic message board that could be put at the entrance of the Nature Preserve for messaging purposes if staff can get it to work. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE SEVEN In response, Mayor Zabel stated that in the past, Council has taken action to not allow electronic signs at the Nature Preserve due to the proximity to the residential homes. Council Member Her asked for an update on Oak Liquor since their liquor license was denied at the April 23, 2024 Council meeting. Ms. Volkers stated that the owners have asked about reapplying and how the denial affects new ownership. There was a question about the establishment’s remaining liquor inventory. Police Chief Nick Newton said that the Minnesota Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division will likely have to advise on what happens to it. Mayor Zabel inquired about establishing a process for funding requests that may be presented to staff or the Mayor, that require an immediate decision, not allowing for the typical process of Council discussion. He gave a recent example from a Legislator who needed a response to an idea immediately. Council Member Morcomb was comfortable with a quick decision being made if the funds could be used for a broad purpose or for a project already defined in the CIP, allowing for a Council discussion after the fact to determine the specific use(s) for the funds, however, he was uncomfortable with a quick decision if the funds would only be allowed for a defined purpose. Council Member Her would like the opportunity to discuss these requests prior to any one council member or Mayor making a decision. RECESS FOR REGULAR MEETING AT 6:57 PM WORKSHOP RECONVENED AT 7:35 PM after the Regular City Council Meeting GREENWAY AVENUE SIDEWALK/TRAIL Mr. Bachmeier began by explaining that due to additional steps related to a federal grant that will be used to primarily fund the trail project along Greenway Ave N from Hudson Boulevard N to 7th St N, the traditional timeline used for street improvement projects will need to be moved up. Mr. Bachmeier asked for Council support for staff to do a preliminary right-of-way survey to assess the trail feasibility along Greenway Ave N. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about when an easement of right-of-way would be needed, Mr. Bachmeier noted that the grading of the private property can impact whether an easement is needed. In response to Council Member Her’s question about the process of condemnation, Mr. Bachmeier explained that an appraisal of the easement is done and an offer is made to the property owner. Within a reasonable amount of time, the owner has the opportunity to reject the offer. In that instance, the owner and the City would proceed with a condemnation hearing. In response to Ms. Volkers question about residents’ willingness to accept the offer from the City, Mr. Bachmeier said if they support the project then they are more willing to agree to the offer, however, if they do not support the project then they may be less willing to agree to the offer. Mr. Bachmeier noted that he has only had to go through the condemnation process once. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE EIGHT In response to Council Member Morcomb’s question about whether this trail is replacing existing sidewalk or if it would be brand new, Mr. Bachmeier confirmed it would be a brand- new trail. Council Member Her asked which side of Greenway Avenue the trail will be on. Mr. Bachmeier indicated the west side of Greenway has been identified in the past and in the final Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan. He did add that both sides can be evaluated. Council Member Willenbring pointed out that in past conversations with affected residents, they were supportive of sidewalks, but not shared-use paths. She asked that both options be considered during the evaluation. Mr. Bachmeier confirmed both will be evaluated. Mayor Zabel was supportive of a shared-use path, but suggested that the Council make a decision on the type of trail to avoid further costs associated with evaluating both design options. Council Member Her agreed with the latter sentiment. Mayor Zabel suggested a six-foot asphalt trail with two feet of boulevard. Council Members Morcomb and Her agreed. Mr. Bachmeier noted that there is 13 feet of boulevard along the proposed section. Mayor Zabel requested that, if possible, the project avoid cutting down existing trees even if it means foregoing the boulevard in some cases. Mr. Bachmeier stated that affected trees can be called out in the feasibility study. Staff was authorized to conduct the preliminary right-of-way survey and asked to update the CIP and any other affected documents to reflect the agreed-upon trail type and size. 2024 DEBT UPDATE Mr. Stasica reviewed the 2024 debt being used for three upcoming building improvements – Public Works Facility, Police Expansion, and City Hall Renovation. He noted that a portion of the Public Works Building and Police Expansion are being funded through a local option sales tax (LOST) while the remainder, and the total of the City Hall Renovation, are being funded through Capital Improvement Bonds. Mr. Stasica explained as part of issuing CIP bonds, the City is required to hold a public hearing detailing the projects to be funded and authorizing a “Not to Exceed” amount which is the maximum amount of CIP bond funding the City can issue for these projects. On a related note, Mr. Stasica then discussed previously approved Resolutions 2023-72 and 2023-77 which gives the Council the authority to increase the amount and duration of the approved LOST by putting the related questions on the November 2024 ballot. Ms. Volkers and Mr. Stasica recommended that the Council consider setting the “Not to Exceed” amount higher than might be needed as the bonding amount can always be decreased. The “Not to Exceed” amount will be combined for all three projects. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE NINE Mayor Zabel was not in favor of lumping all three projects together under one public hearing as it could pose a risk to one or two of the project(s) if residents are not in favor of all three. Additionally, this may be the first-time residents are hearing about the City Hall Renovation project. Council Member Her asked for the rationale behind lumping all three projects together. Ms. Volkers explained that bond counsel recommended a single public hearing for several reasons. One, it is costly to do multiple public hearings related to CIP bond funding. Two, it is unlikely that the required five percent reverse referendum threshold would be met to force the bond issuance approval be put on the November 2024 ballot. Third, combining all three projects under one “Not to Exceed” amount offers flexibility if one project is under budget and another is over budget. In reference to the need for the City Hall Renovation, Council Member Willenbring noted that it makes sense to do the Police Expansion and City Hall Renovation in tandem. In response to Council Member Morcomb’s question about other types of funding, Mr. Stasica said lease revenue bonds are an option. Oakdale’s Economic Development Authority would take out the bonds and lease them to the City. The General Obligation (GO) designation would be unavailable which would increase interest costs. Mayor Zabel asked for a recommendation from staff on the CIP bond portion amounts for all three projects. Ms. Volkers stated that the current amounts reflected in the Council Memorandum are outdated, but it is hard to know updated amounts without current architectural plans and bids. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about cons to a higher “Not to Exceed” amount, Mr. Stasica said public perception is the only downside. Mayor Zabel suggested a “Not to Exceed” amount of $25 million - $9 million for Public Works Building, $6 million for Police Expansion, and $10 million for City Hall Renovation. The Council was supportive. Mr. Stasica reiterated that the City could not bond for any more than $25 million if this is the authorized “Not to Exceed” amount. In response to Council Member Her’s question about Mr. Stasica’s recommendation, he stated that he does not have architectural knowledge, but would recommend $30 million. Ms. Volkers agreed with $30 million. The Council was supportive of staff’s recommendation of a “Not to Exceed” amount of $30 million. The allocation of the $30 million was determined to be $9 million for Public Works Building, $9 million for Police Expansion, and $12 million for City Hall Renovation. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE TEN Mayor Zabel expressed his support for going back to the voters to increase the LOST, on the condition that the City has a clear message as to the reason why. Council Member Morcomb pointed out that new legislation came out after the LOST which has increased costs for the Police Expansion. Council Member Willenbring asked if an increase in the number of years means an increase in the LOST percentage. Mayor Zabel clarified that the percentage would not change. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about the ballot questions being written to reflect the LOST increase (gap amount) versus the overall project total, Ms. Volkers said she will ask the City Attorney if that is possible. Council Member Willenbring was supportive of going back to the voters in November 2024 for a LOST increase on the Public Works Building and Police Expansion. The Council was in agreement. Ms. Volkers added that the LOST increase would be $6 million for the Public Works Building (for a total of $28 million over 30 years) and $3 million for the Police Expansion (for a total of $18 million over 30 years). In response to Council Member Her’s question about what the levy increase would be if the City did not go back to the voters for the LOST increase, Mayor Zabel said it is hard to say as it depends on interest rates and market values. Mr. Stasica went over next steps noting that the public hearing to set the “Not to Exceed” amount would occur in early July and the ballot questions would need to be approved at or prior to the August 14, 2024 Council meeting. Mayor Zabel asked staff to discuss details for a public information campaign. He noted that the Special Projects Fund would be the revenue source for any associated costs. Additionally, Mayor Zabel offered to bring it up at the next Oakdale Area Chamber of Commerce meeting. NEW PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY UPDATE Ms. Volkers explained that the discussion tonight is related to budget balancing options for the Public Works Facility prior to the project going out for bid. Don Theisen, the City’s Owner’s Representative for the project, introduced himself, along with Matt Lysne, Principal with HCM Architects, and Ken Francois, Construction Project Manager with Kraus-Anderson Construction Company. Mr. Lysne went over the project design. Mr. Theisen outlined the project status noting that 3M has completed the remedial work in the Response Action Plan (RAP), 3M is preparing the Environmental Covenant for recording prior to the land closing, and the Minnesota Pollution and Control Agency (MPCA) is preparing WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE ELEVEN the “No Association Determination” letter for the City which documents that 3M is still responsible for any remediation costs in the future. Mr. Lysne previewed various building monument sign styles and asked for Council’s input. Mayor Zabel suggested that staff develop a sign standard to be used for all City signs moving forward. Council Member Willenbring was in favor of a sign style that featured multiple materials. Council Member Her asked if the architectural style sign was selected for this project would that be prohibitive on other projects if a different contractor were asked to make this style sign. Mr. Francois clarified that any contractor can make this style sign. Staff was asked to bring back three sign options for Council feedback and decision. Mr. Theisen moved on to discuss the project budget and scope history. The value engineering items used to control the budget such as deferring the fuel island construction, changing the yard pavement from concrete to asphalt, eliminating shop mezzanine and fleet storage, among other things, were reviewed. Mr. Theisen went over the history of the project budget including revenue sources and cost details for construction and soft costs. Mr. Theisen explained that the budget deficit grew from December 2023 to May 2024 due to a decrease in revenue related to an unobtained generator grant, and increase in construction costs such as adding winter conditions and inflation for building materials. To balance the project budget without significantly affecting building operations or features, Council could decide to reduce metal panels on Areas B and C, and use black vinyl fencing in place of decorative fencing along Granada Ave N. Next, the additional revenue options were discussed. The City could increase the bonding amount from $6 million to $7 million, but this would likely not include any alternates. Alternatively, bonding could increase from $6 million to $8 million which would include the current alternates of building the fuel island now, adding ten or 22 feet of fleet storage, and adding the shop mezzanine. In response to Council Member Morcomb’s question about the shop mezzanine, Mr. Theisen noted that it is used for storage. In regards to the project schedule, Mr. Theisen verbally corrected the facility construction dates which are now scheduled for October 2024 – October 2025. The next future City Council actions include approval for bid advertisement, approval of the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP), and approval for project bonding. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE TWELVE In response to Council Member Willenbring’s question about the cost difference between using concrete versus asphalt for the yard pavement, Mr. Francois stated that there is a $450,000 cost savings to use asphalt instead of concrete. Mr. Lysne added this is a common project adjustment due to the cost, however, concrete is the better option if funding is possible. Mayor Zabel suggested leaving the exterior metal panels on Areas B and C and using the decorative fencing along Granada Ave N, as originally planned. The Council was in agreement. Mayor Zabel also suggested including the current alternates of building the fuel island now, adding 22 feet of fleet storage, and adding the shop mezzanine. The Council was in agreement. Mr. Francois recommended leaving those items as alternates as it is easier to choose a vendor for those items once the bids are received. VOLLEYBALL IN THE PARKS Fire Chief / Acting Public Works Director Kevin Wold shared concerns from staff about how the erection of volleyball nets in City parks has caused damage to Walton Park and Tanners Lake Park underground utilities and park ball fields (outfields). In response to Council Member Willenbring’s question about the cost to repair the utility damage, Chief Wold was unsure. Ms. Volkers added that staff time is a cost contributor as well. Chief Wold stated that staff would like to identify areas where residents can play volleyball to avoid damage to City infrastructure and still encourage use of City parks. Chief Wold pointed out that in the 2023 Parks CIP, $35,000 was allocated for a sand volleyball court at Eastside Park, however, a location for that court was never established; therefore, the project was not completed; in the 2024 Parks CIP, $35,000 has been allocated for a sand volleyball court at Guthrie Park; and in the 2027 Parks CIP, $50,000 has been allocated for a sand volleyball court at Golfview Park. Staff has determined that residents do not want to play on sand so other options have been explored. In the fall of 2023, staff received a quote for a permanent turf volleyball field in the amount of $65,000. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about an established location for the Guthrie Park volleyball court, Chief Wold confirmed. Ms. Volkers recommended exploring the turf volleyball field option. In response to Council Member Morcomb’s question about the Walton Park utility map, Chief Wold noted it points out the irrigation system. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE THIRTEEN Ms. Volkers stated that the flat grassy area along Hadley Ave N just south of the well house has been identified as a safe area to stake a volleyball net. Chief Wold suggested repurposing the current Tanners Lake sand volleyball court into a turf court as some of the infrastructure is already in place. In response to Council Member Willenbring’s question about a current City ordinance that does not allow for volleyball nets to be put up in City parks, Chief Newton stated that there is an ordinance that prohibits damaging City parks, but there is no enforcement mechanism. Council Member Morcomb mentioned putting up signs at the Tanners Park ballfields to let residents know they should not erect nets in that part of the park. Council Member Willenbring agreed. Ms. Volkers noted that the volleyball playing in the ballfields is causing bald spots in the grass. Mayor Zabel suggested no volleyball playing at the Tanners Lake and Walton Park ballfields to avoid potential infrastructure damage. He added that any park improvements or additions of amenities be tabled until the Park System Plan Update results come back as this will provide advice to the City on these decisions. In response to Council Member Willenbring’s question about surrounding communities allowing volleyball in their parks, Chief Wold mentioned that no surrounding community allows volleyball playing in their ballfields. He added that these cities direct residents to other parts of their parks instead. In reference to the Parks System Plan Update, Council Member Her stated that the challenge will be community participation. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about the possibility of using the Pleasure Rink for volleyball during the summer months, Chief Wold said that the parking lot area is sloped for the ice rink drainage so the lot would have to be temporarily leveled. Additionally, that parking lot is utilized for ballfield activities. Chief Wold pointed out that other communities convert their ice rinks into pickleball courts during the summer months so it is possible to utilize the ice rinks for other purposes. In response to Council Member Willenbring’s question about the cost associated with damaging the ballfields, specifically causing bald spots, Chief Wold did not have the financial cost on hand, but noted that because the fields are constantly used there is no downtime for turf restoration. Council Member Willenbring followed up asking if there is a safety issue related to this. Chief Wold noted that is not necessarily the case. Council Member Her asked if it is possible to create infrastructure in the parks for residents to bring their own volleyball nets and hook into pre-existing hooks. Chief Wold said that is possible. WORKSHOP MINUTES MAY 14, 2024 PAGE FOURTEEN Mayor Zabel suggested painting lines on the grass for designated volleyball playing areas within the parks, and advertise it to the residents. Chief Wold recapped that the City will promote the designated volleyball playing areas within specific City parks via social media which do not include Tanners Lake and Walton Park ballfields. Mayor Zabel clarified that prohibiting playing on ballfields should not be included in the communications. Mayor Zabel asked for an update on the Oakdale Athletic Association (OAA) agreement. Ms. Volkers stated that two of the three projects have been identified in which OAA funds will be used to cover the costs. The third project has not yet been identified by City staff. Council Member Willenbring suggested maintenance for the OAA building. Mayor Zabel recommended setting a deadline of June 30, 2024 for an agreed-upon contract with the OAA or the City will not hold field space for 2025 usage until a contract is signed. ADJOURNMENT The workshop was adjourned at 9:20 PM. Respectfully submitted, Sara Ludwig, City Clerk