Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-14-26 City Council Workshop PacketCity Council Workshop 3880 Laverne Avenue North Tuesday, April 14, 2026 6:30 p.m. AGENDA Call To Order Broadband Franchise Discussion Michael Bradley of Bradley Werner, LLC, and Mary Kline of the Ramsey/Washington Suburban Cable Commission presenting COUNCIL MEMO -BROADBAND FRANCHISE DISCUSSION APRIL 2026.PDF BROADBAND FRANCHISING 20251030 (RWSCCC).PDF PRESENTATION BRADLEY BROADBAND FRANCHISING (MN) 20260313.PDF Community Forecasts And 2050 Comprehensive Plan Community Development Director Jason Stopa presenting POPULATION FORECAST OPTIONS MEMO 4.6.26.PDF FORECAST -METHODOLOGY -FOR -WHITE -BEAR -LAKE -AREA.PDF PRESENTATION - POPULATION FORECAST OPTIONS.PDF Legion Avenue Properties Assistant Public Works Director Adam Swanepoel presenting LEGION AVE PROPERTY 2026.PDF LEGION AVENUE PROPERTIES SHORELINE PHOTOS.PDF LEGION POND PARK CONCEPT.PDF Future Agenda Items FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.PDF Adjourn Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible Manner in Partnership with our Community In accordance with the requirements of Minn. Stat. Section 13D.02, members may participate remotely via interactive technology. I. 1. Documents: 2. Documents: 3. Documents: 4. Documents: II. City Council Workshop3880 Laverne Avenue NorthTuesday, April 14, 20266:30 p.m.AGENDACall To OrderBroadband Franchise DiscussionMichael Bradley of Bradley Werner, LLC, and Mary Kline of the Ramsey/Washington Suburban Cable Commission presentingCOUNCIL MEMO -BROADBAND FRANCHISE DISCUSSION APRIL 2026.PDFBROADBAND FRANCHISING 20251030 (RWSCCC).PDFPRESENTATION BRADLEY BROADBAND FRANCHISING (MN) 20260313.PDFCommunity Forecasts And 2050 Comprehensive PlanCommunity Development Director Jason Stopa presentingPOPULATION FORECAST OPTIONS MEMO 4.6.26.PDFFORECAST-METHODOLOGY -FOR -WHITE -BEAR -LAKE -AREA.PDFPRESENTATION - POPULATION FORECAST OPTIONS.PDFLegion Avenue PropertiesAssistant Public Works Director Adam Swanepoel presentingLEGION AVE PROPERTY 2026.PDFLEGION AVENUE PROPERTIES SHORELINE PHOTOS.PDF LEGION POND PARK CONCEPT.PDF Future Agenda Items FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.PDF Adjourn Our Mission is to Provide Quality Public Services in a Fiscally Responsible Manner in Partnership with our Community In accordance with the requirements of Minn. Stat. Section 13D.02, members may participate remotely via interactive technology. I.1.Documents:2.Documents:3.Documents: 4. Documents: II. STAFF REPORT DATE: April 14, 2026 WORKSHOP DISCUSSION TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Nicole Miller, City Administrator AGENDA ITEM: Broadband Franchise Discussion CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☒ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☐Managed Growth ☒ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☒ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: At the January 13, 2026, workshop meeting Michael Bradley of Bradley Werner, LLC, provided a brief overview of broadband franchising. Council was interested in continuing the discussion with more information regarding the benefits of broadband franchising for the community. Michael Bradley of Bradley Werner, LLC, and Mary Kline of the Ramsey/Washington Suburban Cable Commission will be present to facilitate a discussion and answer questions. The Ramsey Washington Counties Suburban Cable Communications Commission has approached its nine member cities, including Lake Elmo, to determine whether there is interest in a potential opportunity to establish franchise agreements with fiber broadband companies operating in the public right-of-way (ROW). This opportunity emerged after recent legal decisions at the federal level which led the South Washington County Telecommunications Commission to adopt the first broadband franchise in Minnesota with Intrepid Fiber Networks for the City of Woodbury on September 25, 2025. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Is the City Council interested in pursuing broadband franchising through the Cable Commission? ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum to Ramsey/Washington Counties Suburban Cable Communications Commission from Michael Bradley dated October 30, 2025. Presentation-Minnesota’s First Broadband Franchise Bradley Werner, LLC 2145 Woodlane Drive Suite 106 Woodbury, MN 55125 (651) 379-0900 BradleyWerner.com MEMORANDUM To: Ramsey/Washington Counties Suburban Cable Communications Commission From: Michael R. Bradley Re: Broadband Franchising Date: October 30, 2025 Franchise Basics In simple terms, a franchise is an authorization from a local government entity to a company to use the public rights-of-way to provide services to area residents. Benefits of Franchising There are many proven benefits of franchising, such as build-out requirements, customer service standards, compliance with the City's right-of-way standards, the payment of franchise fees, and the provision of other public benefits. Franchising Authority in this Area The Ramsey/Washington Counties Suburban Cable Communications Commission has been delegated the authority to negotiate and manage the cable communications systems on behalf of its member cities. The Commission has administered the franchises for the area for 40+ years. Broadband is Not a Telecommunications Service Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals in a Hobbs Act review of an FCC Order held that broadband is not a telecommunications service. Ohio Telecom Ass'n v. FCC (In re MCP No. 185), 124 F.4th 993 (6th Cir. 2025). This decision has caused cities in Minnesota to reevaluate where broadband-only providers fall under state law. Since broadband is not a telecommunications service under federal law, it is similarly not likely to be under state law. Instead, it is more likely that a broadband system is a “cable communications system.” A "cable communications system" is a system that provides "data, or communications content service." See Minn. Stat. § 238.02, Subd. 3 and 31. This definition is much broader than a cable television system or “cable system” as that term is defined in federal law. See, e.g. WH Link, LLC v. City of Otsego, 664 N.W.2d 390 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003) (OVS provider using internet protocol is a cable communications system). If the City determines that a permit applicant is constructing a cable communications system, it could instruct the applicant to obtain a franchise from the Commission as a prerequisite to issuing permits. Minnesota’s First Broadband Franchise A similar commission just negotiated and executed the first broadband franchise in the state for the City of Woodbury area. Additional information and links can be found here. More information on the benefits of local franchising can be found here. We would be happy to review this further with any of the Commission’s Member Cities and their respective city attorneys. Additional information and links can be found here. Minnesota’s First Broadband Franchise Benefits to City and Residents Nonexclusive Franchise. Broadband Franchise. Compliance with City Code. Equal Access to Broadband. Open Access Service Provider Franchise Requirement. 15-Year Term. Reasonable Buildout of the City. Annual Meetings. More Benefits to City and Residents Transfer of Ownership. System Quality and Performance. Reporting Requirements. Customer Service. Disabled and Senior Discount. Consideration. Security, Indemnification, and Insurance. Liquidated Damages. Franchising 101 Franchise Basics •In simple terms, a franchise is an authorization from a local government entity to a company to use the public rights-of-way to provide services to area residents. Franchising > Permitting •The benefits in the first broadband franchise are far superior to permitting. •See Summary here. Reassessing Broadband Fresh Look at Broadband Franchising Ohio Telecom Ass'n v. FCC (In re MCP No. 185), 124 F.4th 993 (6th Cir. 2025). •Broadband is not a Telecommunications Service –Under Federal Law •Post Loper Bright decision Charter v. Lange, 903 F.3d 715 (8th Cir. 2018); Vonage v. MN-PUC, 290 F.Supp.2d 993 (D. Minn. 2003), aff’d on other grounds, 394 F.3d 568 (8th Cir. 2004) •“Minnesota may not regulate an information service provider such as Vonage as if it were a telecommunications provider” Reevaluate State Law Applicable to Broadband •Cable Communications System •Telecommunications ROW User Decision Making on Franchising Review City Charter Authority (if applicable) •May provide additional broad authority to franchise in addition to statutory authority Review State Statutory Authority •Cable Communications System v. Telecommunications ROW User Review Benefits and Risks with Management Refer Franchising to Cable Communications Commission (if applicable) Common Broadband Franchise Questions What if our city already started issuing permits? •Explain the new law •Next Construction Season Every BB company will need a franchise What about Comcast/Charter/Mediacom/Midco? What about Lumen? •Quantum Fiber What about Forged Fiber 37, LLC? •Purchasing Lumen’s mass markets fiber assets This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA-NC STAFF REPORT DATE: 4/14/2026 WORKSHOP TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Jason Stopa, Community Development Director Nathan Fuerst, Consulting City Planner REVIEWED BY: Nicole Miller, City Administrator Clark Schroeder, Special Projects Manager AGENDA ITEM: Community Forecasts and 2050 Comprehensive Plan CORE STRATEGIES: ☐ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☒ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance ☒ Managed Growth ☐ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☐ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: The Met Council releases system statements containing community forecasts based on regional population models. After release, communities have 60 days to appeal. Historically, Met Council staff have been willing to work with communities to amend population forecasts periodically, including outside of the comprehensive planning process, where there may be inconsistencies between the regional population model and local realities. The White Bear Lake lawsuit has caused the Met Council to take a new position on water that was not understood during the review period for system statements. In a White Bear Lake Methodology Memo (“WBL Memo”) the Met Council states that it will effectively cap population forecasts based on availability of water. This has complicated the City’s review and would have likely resulted in a different determination on how to proceed regarding its system statement. Staff have continued to coordinate with the Met Council and are actively identifying the City’s options and next steps with respect to population forecasts. A timeline and analysis of staff’s review is provided in this memo along with analysis of the City’s options and a recommendation on how to proceed. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: How should staff proceed with respect to the City’s system statement and 2050 Comprehensive Plan? DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Timeline In September 22, 2025, system statements were released and communities began to review. Lake Elmo staff reviewed the system statements and identified that the population estimate seemed low. On October 24, 2025, Lake Elmo staff sought a meeting with Met Council staff to discuss the implications. Several questions were sent to the Met Council in anticipation of meeting: What data sources/trends informed the population and household estimates? What happens if development exceeds forecasted growth? On October 28, 2025, City planning staff and the Met Council sector representative, Emma Dvorak met to discus these questions. Regional trends were cited as the primary driver for the downward change in population forecasts. Generally, the feedback was that the Met Council is open to periodic forecast adjustments provided there was rationale supporting a change. Small adjustments can be made administratively, while larger adjustments need to be approved by the Met Council. Given ability of the Met Council to amend the forecasts, it was communicated that the City is not “punished’ if population growth exceeds forecasts. On October 29, 2025, additional follow-up information was provided based on the questions asked to the Met Council. While considerable information was provided on methodology for regional and local forecasts, water systems, water appropriation, or the WBL Memo methodology were not communicated. It was also noted that forecast adjustments could be adjusted unless projected growth outstripped the transportation and wastewater systems serving a community. Water systems were not mentioned. November 21, 2025, the appeals period for the 2025 system statements expired. Prior to this, and based on the communications above, staff determined that an appeal to the forecast found in the system statement would not be necessary. Given the ability to periodically and collaboratively make adjustments, it was concluded that the population could be increased as the City moved through the Comprehensive Planning process when it would have a better idea about needs for forecast adjustments. January 15, 2026, the City of Lake Elmo received the WBL Memo dated October 22, 2025 from City of Hugo staff. This memo, nor any indication of the methodology and position on system statements within, had not been provided in any correspondence prior from the Met Council in the period between the system statements being released and the expiration of the appeal period. At this time, and due to the implications of the Met Council’s policy position, staff began to take considerable efforts to understand what options the City has moving forward. February 19, 2025, the City of Lake Elmo staff met with Met Council Principal Forecaster Todd Graham and sector representative Emma Dvorak to discuss population forecasts and options the City has. Prior to this meeting, staff compiled data on development projections and permitting history which support a higher population forecast. Met Council staff agreed to an interim adjustment of Lake Elmo’s population forecast. March 6, 2026, City of Lake Elmo staff received an email from Angela Torres, the options for the City of Lake Elmo would be to adjust its 2030 and 2040 decade forecasts as follows: Raise the 2030 forecast to 7,200 households @ 2.66 average household size = 19,200 pop. Of this number, 2,472 households unsewered and the remainder sewer-serviced. Adjust the 2040 forecast to 8,250 households @ 2.59 average household size = 21,400 pop. Of this number, 2,200 households unsewered and the remainder sewer-serviced. The Met Council has not changed its position on increasing population estimates until June 2027, after which, the White Bear Lake working group is expected to have identified a solution and timeline to resolve issues of water availability in the White Bear Lake Area. White Bear Lake Memo (WBL Memo) Attached to this report is the Forecast Methodology for the White Bear Lake Area Communities (WBL Memo) which documents the methodology and policy position of the Met Council. Generally, the WBL Memo can be summarized as follows: Summary of overall methodology used in regional/local population forecasts. Reference to legislatively directed White Bear Lake Comprehensive Plan Group – deadline of June 30, 2027 for completion of a long term plan with supporting analysis, to convert some or all wells to surface water. Policy positions: o “Until the White Bear Lake Area Work Group concludes and there is an identified response to legislative direction and judicial decisions, the Met Council determined it prudent to withhold its consent of additional growth in local jurisdictions affected by the White Bear Lake Area Court decision until the Council is assured additional growth does not conflict with Court orders that cities must abide.” o “as it relates to requesting an upward adjustment to forecasts for growth in this area prior to completion of the White Bear Lake Area Comprehensive Plan being prepared with assistance from the legislatively identified Work Group Members and modification of the court order, communities should be aware that the Council will only consider forecast adjustments in the future, not during System Statements review. If a request is made, it may only be considered after modification of the court order, a change in local conditions, or a solution to water supply constraints are determined and implemented.” The Bottom Line for Lake Elmo The Met Council refuses to allow for a higher population projection than the City’s 2040 plan provides, but has agreed that the September 2025 forecasts are low. The City has the option from the Met Council to use the numbers from its Thrive 2040 plan, ending at a total of 21,400 by 2040. For the time being, the City may need to work with the following projections by decade: 2030: 19,200 (7,200 households @ 2.66 average household size) 2040: 21,400 (8,250 households @ 2.59 average household size) 2050: 21,400 (no increase) From the Met Council’s Senior Manager of Local Planning Assistance, Angela Torres: “We routinely have staff-to- staff agreements on forecast adjustments during development of the decennial Plan updates and we are willing to discuss an expanded 2050 forecast in mid-2027 after the White Bear Lake Area Comprehensive Plan Work Group concludes. At that point, we’d know more about everyone’s comfort (neighboring cities, DNR, etc.) and local systems preparedness. Until then, Met Council will limit forecast increases as described in "Forecast Methodology for the White Bear Lake Area Communities.” Amending the 2040 Plan: The above communication from Angela Torres, Senior Manager of Local Planning Assistance with the Met Council, states that for the City to utilize the population forecast numbers from its 2040 Plan a comprehensive plan amendment is necessary. However, the Met Council has not agreed to use the numbers found in the adopted plan with modifications identified based primarily on fluctuations in average household size in the region. The Following comparison articulates the differences between what is in the current 2040 Plan and how it would be amended: Adopted vs Amended 2040 Plan Forecasts 2030 (as amended with average household size of 2.66 instead of 2.77) 2040 (as amended with average household size of 2.59 instead of 2.72) Households Unsewered 2642 (2472)2742 (2200) Households MUSA 3858 (4728)5458 (6050) Total Households 6500 (7200)8200 (8250) Total Population 18,005 (19,200)22,304 (21,400) Employment Unsewered 562 562 Employment MUSA 2788 3238 Total Employment 3350 3800 Staff find that the adjusted numbers are reasonable given that there is an expected net increase in households but a reduction in population given the regionwide trend of reduced household size. The above amended forecast is both consistent with the adopted 2040 plan and would be accepted by the Met Council as it does not represent additional growth which would not be supported by the Met Council’s WBL Memo policy. Staff are therefore supportive of an amendment to the 2040 plan. This would provide a reasonable starting point for Comprehensive Planning and allow further discussions with the Met Council in 2027 or beyond following conclusion of the WBL Area Work Group study. The Process to amend the City’s 2040 plan would include the following general steps and timeline. 1.(~1-2 weeks) City Notices a self-initiated comprehensive plan amendment (this includes adjacent and affected jurisdiction notices to surrounding communities and other levels of government) 2.(~30 days) Planning Commission review and Public Hearing 3.(~60 days) City Council Review and Determination 4.(~70 days) Approved Amendment Submitted to Met Council for Review and Approval 5.(~70-180 days) Met Council review and approval memo received by City. FISCAL IMPACT: This issue has primarily been managed by City Staff but has required ongoing coordination between the Administration, Planning, and Engineering teams to identify how the City should move forward. It is anticipated that legal resources would have been required if the City appealed its system statement, as the legal process would have necessitated added coordination with the City Attorney. OPTIONS: The City can work through the 2050 Comprehensive Planning Process using the higher forecast for 2030 and 2040 provided by the Met Council staff in March. This will require a text amendment to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan to increase the Community’s forecasts accordingly. At the conclusion of the White Bear Lake working group comprehensive plan study in June 2027, The City can revisit the population forecasts through 2050. It is unclear what the group’s conclusions will look like, and which direction the Met Council will seek to go regarding increases to community forecast at that time. Presently, staff recommend pushing as hard as possible for the highest numbers possible in the community’s forecasts to the extent that the Met Council will allow it. Staff also recommend creating an alternate growth scenario in the 2050 Plan that accurately depicts the reality of population growth in the community. The Alternative Growth scenario would be used to plan for necessary transportation, water, and sewer utility infrastructure regardless of the Met Council’s prevailing limit on growth. A realistic alternative growth scenario may be found acceptable by the Met Council once it discontinues limiting growth based on water supply. RECOMMENDATION: Staff Recommend discussion on this topic and are seeking guidance from the City Council on the following: Should staff push for the higher forecast numbers that the Met Council has provided by 2040? Should staff plan to create an alternative growth scenario in the 2050 Comprehensive Plan Update that is based on a realistic expectation of growth in the planning period? ATTACHMENTS: Forecast Methodology for the White Bear Lake Area Communities (WBL Memo) FORECAST METHODOLOGY FOR THE WHITE BEAR LAKE AREA COMMUNITIES LOCAL PLANNING HANDBOOK BACKGROUND As directed by state law, the Met Council develops forecasts of when, where, and how much population, household, and job growth the seven-county region and local jurisdictions can expect over a 30-year horizon. These long-range forecasts provide a shared foundation for coordinated comprehensive planning. The forecasts describe likely and reasoned expectations of regional growth based on an understanding and modeling of regional dynamics. Regional total results were published in April 2023. Met Council’s local forecasting involves the geographic allocation of regional employment and households totals to specifc places. Met Council uses the local forecasts as a basis and benchmark for regional systems planning and deployment (MN Statutes 473.146); the local forecasts are our commitment to serve the forecasted population levels with transportation plans and wastewater capacity. While the Met Council does not provide or guarantee water supply, water supply limitations are a consideration in forecasts. Imagine 2050’s local forecasts were formally adopted by the Metropolitan Council on February 12, 2025. The Met Council uses UrbanSim, a real estate market simulation model, to project the geographic pattern of expected future growth and allocate the regional totals to locations. UrbanSim’s methodology is online, here. The model is provided a large collection of neighborhood-level data for every location in the 7-county metro region; all of these locations are in competition with one another to attract shares of the metro region total. The main determinants of local forecasts are real estate dynamics, location characteristics and amenities, activity patterns and accessibility (travel within the region). However, as part of forecast development, the Met Council may make manual adjustments to the model outputs based on known issues as well as policy direction. This is the case with the White Bear Lake Area communities impacted by court decisions. Additionally, demographic trends through the region also indicate deceleration, as migration to the region has declined, birth rates have fallen, and death rates have stabilized. These factors contributed to a downward adjustment of approximately 100,000 persons in the regional population forecast. Because each community’s forecast is a share of the regional total, a reduction at the regional level results in corresponding decreases in local level projections. WHITE BEAR LAKE The Minnesota legislature directed the Met Council to “develop a comprehensive plan to ensure communities in the White Bear Lake area have access to suffcient safe drinking water to allow for municipal growth while simultaneously ensuring the sustainability of surface water and groundwater resources to supply the needs of future generations.” This included establishing a White Bear Lake Comprehensive Plan Group, inclusive of 14 local governments and other named stakeholders. This comprehensive plan was directed to be completed by June 30, 2027. This work is underway. The Council is statutorily directed to plan for the orderly and economical development of the region. In this role, the Council must act responsibly to ensure that adequate public services are available to accommodate forecasted growth. Until the White Bear Lake Area Work Group concludes and there is an identifed response to legislative direction and judicial decisions, the Met Council determined it prudent to withhold its consent of additional growth in local jurisdictions affected by the White Bear Lake Area Court decision until the Council is assured additional growth does not confict with Court orders that cities must abide. 1 2050 PLAN UPDATES The 2050 local comprehensive planning process was formally initiated when system statements, including local forecasts, were distributed to communities on September 22, 2025. Per statute, communities have the opportunity to dispute their forecasts and work with Council staff to make adjustments. Any jurisdiction impacted by this methodology and the court decision may still do that in accordance with state statutes. However, as it relates to requesting an upward adjustment to forecasts for growth in this area prior to completion of the White Bear Lake Area Comprehensive Plan being prepared with assistance from the legislatively identifed Work Group Members and modifcation of the court order, communities should be aware that the Council will only consider forecast adjustments in the future, not during System Statements review. If a request is made, it may only be considered after modifcation of the court order, a change in local conditions, or a solution to water supply constraints are determined and implemented. Council staff and Sector Representatives are available to assist local governments as they prepare for their 2050 planning process. If a deeper discussion about forecast methodology is desired, contact Todd Graham, Principal Forecaster at Todd.Graham@metc.state.mn.us. October 22, 2025 Todd Graham, Principal Forecaster Angela R Torres, Senior Manager, Local Planning Assistance LOCAL PLANNING HANDBOOK Metropolitan Council Main: 651.602.1000 390 Robert Street North TTY: 651.291.0904 Saint Paul, MN 55101 Public Information: 651.602.1500 public.info@metc.state.mn.us metrocouncil.org 2 Community Forecasts and the 2050 Comprehensive Plan City Council Workshop | April 14 th 2026 Background •System Statements begin the Comprehensive Plan update period •Lim ite d tim e to Ap p e a l (60 d a ys) •Majority of communities do not appeal •White Bear Lake Case has caused Met Council to deflate population forecasts in the WBL area Issues Before Council •Should the City amend its 2040 Plan to adopt new projections •Strategies for 2050 Planning Effort What are System Statements? Individualized documents indicating how communities are impacted by regional plans for: •Transportation/Aviation •Water Resources •Re g iona l Pa rks a nd Tra ils Once released, communities have three years to amend/update comprehensive plans to comply with re g iona l syste m p la ns. 2025 System Statement Fore ca st Im p lica tions/ Use s •Guide updates to Comprehensive Plans (need to accommodate a proportionate share of regional growth) •Aids in long range wastewater system planning •Forecasts may be used by other agencies (MnDNR) for understanding growth trends Tim e line of Eve nts •Septem ber 22, 2025 – System statements released by Met Council (online) •October 24, 2025 – City sta ff m e e t with Me t Council, sp e cific q ue stions a ske d : •What data sources/trends informed the population and household estimates? •What happens if development exceeds forecasted growth? •October 28, 2025 – Meeting with Met Council Sector Rep., staff learned that: •Primary changes to forecast were due to regional trends. (WBL issue not cited) •Openness from Met Council on adjustments to forecasts. •Clarification that city is not “punished” for growing faster than projected. •October 29, 2025 –Follow up from Met Council after meeting indicated: •Specific methodologies for regional forecasts (WBL issue not cited) •Clarification that forecasts could be adjusted unless regional systems could not support growth Timeline of Events, cont. •Novem ber 21, 2025 – Period of appeals for system statements is closed. Staff recommendation not to appeal based on: •Ab ility to p e riod ica lly a d just fore ca sts in colla b ora tion with Me t Council sta ff •Growth projections best understood as City moves through Comp Plan Update •January 15, 2026 – City staff receive WBL Methodology Memo from City of Hugo. •City staff identify options to move forward and compile permitting/development pipeline data to Met Council, countering low forecasts. •February 19, 2026 – City staff meet with Met Council Forecaster and Sector Rep: •Met Council staff acknowledge permitting data and low forecasts •Met Council staff agree that a solution is needed for more reasonable forecasts Data Provided: Permitting History 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Detached 41 120 200 265 244 244 265 236 105 91 84 157 Attached 0 20 51 34 28 6 44 61 95 75 0 47 41 140 251 299 272 250 309 297 200 166 84 204 Data Provided: Development Projection Building Construction Start Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 Units per Year 239 445 278 491 316 413 177 50 55 20 71 20 364 60 60 Unit Totals 239 684 962 1453 1769 2182 2359 2409 2464 2484 2555 2575 2939 2999 3059 Pop 2.5 598 1710 2405 3633 4423 5455 5898 6023 6160 6210 6388 6438 7348 7498 7648 Pop 2.7 645 1847 2597 3923 4776 5891 6369 6504 6653 6707 6899 6953 7935 8097 8259 Population Year 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2024 Total Pop (2.5)14529 15127 16239 16934 18162 18952 19984 20427 20552 20689 20739 20917 20967 21877 22027 2024 Total Pop (2.7)14529 15174 16376 17126 18452 19305 20420 20898 21033 21182 21236 21428 21482 22464 22626 Imagine 2050 (2030 pop)15200 16900 Timeline of Events, cont. •March 6, 2026 – City receives email from Angela Torres, Sr. Manager of Planning at Met Council: •City can amend its 2040 Plan to adjust forecasts for 2030 and 2040: •Raise the 2030 forecast to 7,200 households @ 2.66 average household size = 19,200 pop. Of this number, 2,472 households unsewered and the remainder sewer-serviced. •Adjust the 2040 forecast to 8,250 households @ 2.59 average household size = 21,400 pop. Of this number, 2,200 households unsewered and the remainder sewer-serviced. •Met Council has not changed its policy position regarding population estimates higher than 2040 plans found in WBL Memo W BL Me m o •Summary of overall methodology used in regional/local population forecasts. •Reference to legislatively directed White Bear Lake Comprehensive Plan Group – deadline of June 30, 2027 for completion of a long term plan with supporting analysis, to convert some or all wells to surface water. •Policy p ositions: •“Until the White Bear Lake Area Work Group concludes and there is an identified response to legislative d ire ction a nd jud icia l d e cisions, the Me t Council d e te rm ine d it p rud e nt to withhold its consent of additional growth in local jurisdictions affected by the White Bear Lake Area Court decision until the Council is assured additional growth does not conflict with Court orders that cities must abide.” •“as it relates to requesting an upward adjustment to forecasts for growth in this area prior to completion of the White Be a r La ke Are a Com p re he nsive Pla n b e ing p re p a re d with a ssista nce from the le g isla tive ly id e ntifie d Work Group Members and modification of the court order, communities should be aware that the Council will only consider forecast adjustments in the future, not during System Statements review. If a request is made, it may only be considered after modification of the court order, a change in local conditions, or a solution to water supply constraints are determined and implemented.” Bottom Line The Met Council refuses to allow for a higher population projection than the City’s 2040 plan provides, but has agreed that the September 2025 forecasts are low. The City has the option from the Met Council to use the numbers from its Thrive 2040 plan, ending at a total of 21,400 by 2040. For the time being, the City may need to work with the following projections by decade: •2030: 19,200 (7,200 households @ 2.66 average household size) •2040: 21,400 (8,250 households @ 2.59 average household size) •2050: 21,400 (no increase) From the Met Council’s Senior Manager of Local Planning Assistance, Angela Torres: “We routinely have staff-to -staff agreements on forecast adjustments during development of the decennial Plan updates and we are willing to discuss an expanded 2050 forecast in mid- 2027 after the White Bear Lake Area Comprehensive Plan Work Group concludes. At that point, we’d know more about everyone’s comfort (neighboring cities, DNR, etc.) and local systems p re p a re d ne ss. Until the n, Me t Council will lim it fore ca st incre a se s a s d e scrib e d in "Fore ca st Methodology for the White Bear Lake Area Communities.” Amending the 2040 Plan Adopted vs Amended 2040 Plan Forecasts 2030 (as amended with average household size of 2.66 instead of 2.77) 2040 (as amended with average household size of 2.59 instead of 2.72) Households Unsewered 2642 (2472)2742 (2200) Households MUSA 3858 (4728)5458 (6050) Total Households 6500 (7200)8200 (8250) Total Population 18,005 (19,200)22,304 (21,400) Employment Unsewered 562 562 Employment MUSA 2788 3238 Total Employment 3350 3800 Timeline for Amendment 1.(~1-2 weeks) City Notices a self-initiated comprehensive plan amendment 2.(~30 days) Planning Commission review and Public Hearing 3.(~60 d a ys) City Council Re vie w a nd De te rm ina tion 4.(~70 days) Approved Amendment Submitted to Met Council for Review and Approval 5.(~70 -180 days) Met Council review and approval memo received by City. Options and Recommendation Short – Medium Term •Amend the 2040 Comprehensive Plan to update the City’s forecast for the years 2030 and 2040. This forecast is expected to carry forward into the Comprehensive Plan. •Include an alternative growth scenario for 2050 in the upcoming Comprehensive Plan Update, this would generally include the following: •Added language/analysis in the Demographics chapter •Additional callouts or tables for Land Use analysis in the Land Use Chapter •Additional callouts or tables included in the Water Resources Chapter Me d ium -Long Term •Work proa ctively with the Met Council to identify opportunities to become aligned on re a listic forecasts. •Revisit policy position on forecast adjustments in Summer 2027 as WBL working group concludes •Revisit forecast through 2050 in subsequent Comprehensive Plan amendments (only if needed) STAFF REPORT DATE: APRIL 14, 2026 WORKSHOP DISCUSSION TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Adam Swanepoel – Assistant Public Works Director AGENDA ITEM: Legion Ave. Properties CORE STRATEGIES: ☒ Vibrant, inclusive, connected community ☒ Responsive, transparent, adaptive governance☐ ☐ Managed Growth ☐ Efficient, reliable, innovative services ☐ Balanced Finances now and future ☐ Resilient Infrastructure BACKGROUND: The Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) is a local unit of government that manages water resources within the Valley Branch watershed. The VBWD covers approximately 70 square miles including numerous waterbody basins and streams within Lake Elmo. In 2025, the Valley Branch Watershed District acquired several homes on Legion Avene for stormwater and watershed mitigation efforts. Legion Pond is a 17.5-acre landlocked waterbody with no natural surface outlet, water levels are controlled primarily by precipitation, evaporation, seepage, and groundwater conditions. Homes in this area were constructed in the early 1970’s along the east side of the pond. During the extended wet period from roughly 2014–2020, high precipitation combined with elevated regional groundwater levels caused Legion Pond to reach historically high and sustained water levels. These prolonged highwater conditions resulted in flooding and ground water related impacts to nearby homes. In response, the VBWD conducted emergency pumping in 2020 to reduce immediate risks to affected properties. Subsequent technical evaluation by the VBWD, in partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, assessed a range of long-term management approaches for Legion Pond, including property acquisition, installation of pumped outlets, and combinations of these strategies. The analysis concluded that property acquisition was by far the least costly option. Following this evaluation, the VBWD approached owners of the homes identified as below the 100-year flood level of Legion Pond, and the owners voluntarily sold their homes to the District. The District has hired a contractor who is currently in the process of removing the homes, with all removals expected to be completed by this summer. ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL: Would the City be interested in acquiring any of the properties along Legion Avenue? PROPOSAL DETAILS/ANALYSIS: Four homes along Legion Avenue North are scheduled for removal in April and May of 2026, with a fifth and final home anticipated to be removed later this summer. The VBWD intends to restore the site by preserving as many existing trees as possible and planting native grass throughout the area, followed by one year of monitoring and maintenance. The district is offering the property to the City for potential use as a public amenity, such as a park. If the City declines, the district plans to sell the parcels on public auction with conservation easements in place which would restrict any building on the sites. If the city chooses to acquire the property, they may set conditions in the agreement that would benefit the area and the future outlook of the area. Concept plans provided by VBWD include a pier, additional trees, parking, and a gravel pathway throughout the area. The city would be responsible for any future upkeep of the area and be restricted to any future buildings being placed on the property. The Right of Way (ROW) in this area is extremely limited, leaving little opportunity for the City to use it for future access or infrastructure improvements. Public Works and Engineering met to discuss the potential acquisition and determined that obtaining the 2764 Legion Ave. property would be advantageous for the city, as it would allow for improving the current hammerhead style turn around into a cul-de-sac. The existing “hammerhead” turnaround was implemented during the 2024 reconstruction due to the constrained space and limited ROW available at that time. The City currently owns a small parcel of land located south of the existing properties, which was likely acquired to accommodate a future roadway extension in this area. At present, there are no proposed development plans to the south; however, this parcel may serve a future purpose as a trail connection linking to the Eden Park and Packard Park developments. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of acquiring the property would be minimal. VBWD has provided examples of past sales to municipalities being $0-100 per parcel. Future maintenance of the property would be required by the city, this may include yearly mowing, upkeep of any trail or feature added to the area. OPTIONS: Do not acquire or purchase the property Direct staff to proceed in discussions with the VBWD in acquiring the property: Suggested options: -Acquire only 2764 Legion Ave for future ROW and buildout of roadway. -Acquire all five properties along Legion Ave -Are there any conditions the city would like to request if acquiring any of the properties ATTACHMENTS: -Shoreline pictures of property - Legion Ave Concept VBWD HOME DEMOLITION AND PARK CONCEPT PROJECT LEGION POND PARK CONCEPT | APRIL 2026 0 20 40 [North MINIMUM 25’ BUFFER PROPOSED WETLAND AVERAGE 50’ BUFFER RAINGARDEN RAINGARDEN PROPERTY BOUNDARY 6’ MOWN TURF TRAIL BENCH/BIRD WATCHING AREA 6’ BOARDWALK RESTORED WETLAND LEGION POND RESTORED WETLAND BUFFER GEOGRID CANOE LAUCNH PROPOSED CUL-DE-SAC EXISTING LOT 2832 LEGION AVE N PROPERTY OF CITY OF LAKE ELMO EXISTING LOT 2814 LEGION AVE N EXISTING LOT 2790 LEGION AVE N EXISTING LOT 2778 LEGION AVE N EXISTING LOT 2764 LEGION AVE N NOTES: 1. ALL PROPOSED MOWN OR EARTHEN TRAILS SHALL BE ALIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUSTAINABLE TRAIL DESIGN PRINCIPLES TO MINIMIZE EROSION AND MAINTENANCE. 2. A MINIMUM 25-FOOT-WIDE AND AVERAGE 50-FOOT-WIDE VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIP IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT AND CONTIGUOUS TO THE DELINEATED WETLAND BOUNDARY SHALL BE MAINTAINED. 3. WHEN GRADING WITHIN WETLAND BUFFERS, THE SLOPES SHALL BE NO STEEPER THAN 5 FEET HORIZONTAL TO 1 FOOT VERTICAL, WITH 8-FEET- HORIZONTAL TO 1-FOOT-VERTICAL BUFFERS PREFEREED. IF THIS CANNOT BE ACHIEVED, THE FLATTEST SLOPE FEASIBLE SHALL BE PROVIDED. 894 894 5H:1V M A X 8H:1V MAX 5-8% MAX 893 892 892 891 890 890 889 888 888 887 886 886 5 BUMP OUT PARKING SPOTS 6’ WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALK Date Type Due date for packet Order Agenda Section Agenda item 4/21/2026 CC Meeting 4/14/26 Consent Agenda 1st Quarter Dashboards and Financials Consent Agenda Approve Special Event Permit for Lake Elmo Night Out Regular Agenda 1st Quarter Goals Update Regualr Agenda Approve Updated Open Burning Ordinance Regular Agenda 76 Acre Park Consultant Scope Regular Agenda Stormwater fee scope Closed Session Discuss sale of Fire Station & Parks properties (tentative) 5/5/2026 CC Meeting 4/28/26 Presentation Baywest & Freshwater presentation on Biofilm mediated destruction of PFAS in groundwater in Lake Elmo Consent Agenda Approve Special Event Permit for 4th of July Parade Closed Session  Discuss sale of 11052 34TH ST N (tentative) Regular Agenda Approve Cooperative Cost Share and Cooperative Maintenance agreements for Hwy 36/LE Ave Dunn Storm Water Appeal Watters Storm Water Appeal (4180 Irvin Cir N ) Stephen Johnson Stormwater Appeal Regular Agenda Highpointe Crossing Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, and Variance 5/12/2026 CC Workshop 5/5/26 Discussion Obstructions in ROW Discussion Old City Hall Discussion Purchasing Policy Discussion Sidewalk/Trail snow removal ordinance-continued from 5/6 5/19/2026 CC Meeting 5/12/26 6/2/2026 CC Meeting 5/26/26 Consent Agenda State Performance Measures 6/9/2026 CC Workshop 6/2/26 City Council salary Discussion Strategic Financial Plan - Initial Review of Models, Assumptions, and Strategic Financial Goals Lobbyist services-Margaret Vesel Parks Coordinator position discussion 6/16/2026 CC Meeting 6/9/26 Regular Agenda 2025 Audit Presentation 7/7/2026 CC Meeting 6/30/26 Consent Agenda Approve Special Event Permit for Lake Elmo Night Out Consent Agenda 2nd Quarter Dashboards and Financials Regular Agenda 2nd Quarter Goals Update 7/14/2026 CC Workshop 7/7/26 Future Council Agenda Items *Please note: This list is subject to change* Discussion Draft 2027 - 2036 Capital Improvement Program 7/21/2026 CC Meeting 7/14/26 8/5/2026 CC Meeting 7/30/26 8/11/2026 CC Workshop 8/4/26 Discussion Draft 2027 Budget & Levy 8/18/2026 CC Meeting 8/11/26 9/1/2026 CC Meeting 8/25/26 9/8/2026 CC Workshop 9/1/26 9/15/2026 CC Meeting 9/8/26 Regular Agenda 2027 Preliminary Levy 10/6/2026 CC Meeting 9/29/26 Consent Agenda 3rd Quarter Dashboards and Financials Regular Agenda 3rd Quarter Goals Update 10/13/2026 CC Workshop 10/6/26 CIP F-012 Ladder 1 Replacement Approval 10/20/2026 CC Meeting 10/13/26 Regualr Agenda CIP F-012 Ladder 1 Replacement Approval 11/4/2026 CC Meeting Regular Agenda Bonding 11/10/2026 CC Workshop Employee Policies Updates 11/17/2026 CC Meeting Regular Agenda 12/1/2026 CC Meeting Regular Agenda 12/8/2026 CC Workshop 12/15/2026 CC Meeting