AGENDA Rogers City Council July 14, 2026 - 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. OPEN FORUM Individuals may address the Council about any item not contained on the regular agenda. A maximum of 10 minutes is allocated for the Forum. If the full 10 minutes are not needed for the Forum, the Mayor will continue with the agenda. If additional time is needed for the Forum, the Council will continue the Forum following Other Business on the agenda. The Council will take no official action on items discussed at the Forum, with the exception of referral to staff or Commission for future report. 3. PRESENTATIONS 4. APPROVE AGENDA Council members may add items to the agenda for discussion purposes or staff direction only. The Council will not normally take official action on items added to the agenda. 5. CONSENT AGENDA These items are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed elsewhere on the agenda. 5.1 Approval of the June 23, 2026 Work Session Minutes and the June 23, 2026 City Council Meeting Minutes 5.2 Approval of Bills and Claims 5.3 Approval of a New Massage Establishment License for Crowhaven Therapeutic Massage (Lynsey Smerud) to Operate Within MySalon Suites, Located at 21051 135th Avenue, Rogers, Minnesota 5.4 Approval of Resolution 2026-66; Appointing Election Judges and Absentee Ballot Board for the August 11, 2026 State Primary Election 5.5 Approve Professional Services Agreement with Dunham Associates for Commissioning for RAC Expansion, City Project No. 2406 Page 1 of 97 5.6 Approval of Scoreboard Purchase for Tria Rink Rogers 5.7 Approval of Resolution 2026-65 Approving a Site Plan Request to Convert a Single-Family Residence to an Assembly Use at 13620 Brockton Lane N and Authorize execution of Site Improvement Performance Agreement 5.8 Setting a Workshop of the City Council for July 28, 2026, at 5:30 p.m. at the Rogers Community Room, 21201 Memorial Drive, Rogers, MN 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7. GENERAL BUSINESS 7.1 Approve Items Related to Amending Section 125-84(i) Swimming Pools, Hot Tubs, and Spas. • Ordinance 2026-13, Amending Section 125-84(i) Swimming Pools, Hot Tubs, and Spas • Resolution 2026-67, Authorizing summary publication of Ord. 2026-13 7.2 Approve Change Order Nos. 2, 3, and 4 for Fletcher Bypass, City Project No. 1409 8. OTHER BUSINESS 9. CORRESPONDENCE AND REPORTS 10. ADJOURN Page 2 of 97 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: July 14, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.1 Subject: Approval of the June 23, 2026 Work Session Minutes and the June 23, 2026 City Council Meeting Minutes Prepared By: Stacie Brown, City Clerk Recommended Council Action Motion to approve the June 23, 2026 Work Session Minutes and the June 23, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. Overview / Background / Analysis Staff Recommendation Motion to approve the June 23, 2026 Work Session Minutes and the June 23, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. Financial Impact: Source Fund: Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. 06232026worksession B. 06232026min Page 3 of 97 City of Rogers City Council Work Session Minutes June 23, 2026 1. CALL TO ORDER The Work Session of the City Council of the City of Rogers was called to order by Mayor Klick on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, at 5:33 PM at Rogers Community Room, 21201 Memorial Drive, Rogers, MN, 55374 and online in the Teams application. Council present: Shannon Klick, Kevin Jullie, Mark Eiden, Amy Enga, Joel Brockman (arrived at 5:40 p.m.) Council excused: None Staff present: Steve Stahmer, Administrator; Dan Wills, Chief of Police; Patrick Farrens, Fire Chief; Brett Angell, Community Development Director; and Stacie Brown, City Clerk. 2. GENERAL BUSINESS 2.1 Discussion on Text Amendment to R1 Zone to Allow Solar Gardens Community Development Director Angell shared the background of an item recently presented at the June 9, 2026 City Council meeting, requesting an amendment to the City Code to allow Community Solar Gardens within the R1 zoning district. This item was tabled by the Council for additional discussion at tonight's work session. Angell reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendations, noting that as part of the Planning Commission's Public Hearing, notices were sent to properties within 1,000 feet. In the proposed plan from SunShare, there is a small area dedicated to a solar panel manufacturer operating in Rogers (Heliene) to test their products. Angell provided an overview of the proposed Ordinance: • Add definition of Community Solar Garden • Add as an interim use in R1 zoning district • Add rules and regulations for Community Solar Gardens Changes to Section 125-93 include: • Duration up to 30 years • Size: no more than 30 acres • Setbacks: 250 feet from existing residential structures • Buffer: 2,640 feet between solar gardens • Landscaping around perimeter • Decommissioning specifications Angell shared maps showing parcels which may be solar candidates, including buffer options. Page 4 of 97He noted that any potential solar garden needs a willing landowner to sell or lease, and there is potential for two or three within the community. He referenced a discussion about grazing sheep, and explained that practice is discretionary, and a standard mowing contract is an option. He invited questions from the Council, and stated that with this as a code amendment, there is a lot of discretion. Councilor Jullie asked how much of the 20 acres could contain solar panels. Angell stated it would have to be within the allowance under the stormwater management code and watershed requirements. Jullie asked if any additional drainage would be needed to accommodate stormwater runoff from the panels. Angell replied no additional drainage is needed, and this is where native plants can be useful. Jullie inquired about environmental review, and Angell explained that at 20 acres, a review is not required, adding that the state likes solar gardens due to the fact that there's no fertilizer utilized, and stormwater will be less phosphorus. Jullie asked who would be responsible for making the connection to electricity, and Angell stated there would be an extensive Xcel permitting process for the applicant. Jullie asked if the panels would move with the sun, which Angell confirmed. In the code, there is language about the tilt to minimize any impact on adjacent properties. Jullie asked if there would be a maintenance agreement to ensure the panels are kept up. Angell noted that an Interim Use Permit allows the City to enforce maintenance requirements. Councilor Enga asked if there would be reflections from headlights. Angell stated they would likely not be tilting to that extent, and a requirement could be included to ensure they are facing away from public rights of way. Angell noted that Community Development reviewed a number of cities, and it was fairly evenly split between allowed and allowed as accessory use. Jullie asked what the argument against this would be, and Angell stated that in Carver County, farmers were concerned about voltage affecting their cows. For some cities, it is aesthetics and the loss of open land. Corcoran has two solar gardens as Interim Use Permits but no longer allows for them and now allows only accessory use solar. St. Michael allows them, and a benefit is diversification of use for property owners. Jullie asked if the buffer areas are used for farming. Angell stated that the proposed location is being used for agricultural purposes today. These properties are flat and open, which is why they rank well for solar panels. Brockman asked if Hanover allows solar gardens, given the proximity of the proposed project. Angell stated they do not have a policy, noting that one person in Hanover was not in favor of the project, and one from Rogers was. Councilor Eiden referenced an article he saw regarding solar gardens having a negative impact on pollinators. Angell stated he had not seen that report. However, usually the native plantings are pollinators. The Three Rivers Parks District is exploring the options, so it would be surprising if there were concerns over pollinators. Mayor Klick noted there isn't a compelling benefit to Rogers. Eiden stated he is sensitive to the landowner, but with the potential for two or three, he isn't likely to change his opinion. Jullie and Enga agreed, noting concerns with aesthetics and no significant benefits to the City. Page 5 of 97Eiden added that homeowners who want to participate are able to take advantage of solar power. Angell noted that the service business district is omitted, which could be amended. Klick asked about seasonal variations, and Angell noted that it does vary widely by season. Another potential option would be to allow community solar on business rooftops. Brockman asked if existing industrial buildings would be able to support community solar, or just new construction. Angell stated it would depend. Brockman stated he is on the fence, noting the benefits and concerns. Jullie asked about future options, and Angell confirmed the topic could be revisited at any point in the future. A draft Ordinance has already been prepared, so it can be amended at any time. The consensus of the Council was to not allow Community Solar Gardens at this time. 2.2 Discussion on Amendments to the City Code Corresponding to Chickens Community Development Director Angell shared that the City has received numerous requests to allow for small-lot residential chicken keeping. He shared the results of an online survey published in late 2025 for residents to provide input: • 170 against, 386 in favor • Minimum lot size: 165 against, 391 in favor Many in favor cited the following benefits: • Ability to get their own eggs • Chickens eat ticks and other insects • Responsibility for children • Desire for less government restrictions Those against had the following concerns: • Odor and noise • City ability to enforce violations • Concerns of people not understanding or being knowledgeable • Farm animals should be left to farms and large properties Councilor Eiden inquired about enforcement challenges. Angell explained that enforcement could be relatively easy as long as coop sizes are required. Councilor Enga stated a no slaughtering requirement should be included. Angell noted that when hens stop laying eggs, options are limited. Enga asked if staff were in favor of permitting. Angell stated that having a clear and defined code, it can be done on a case-by-case basis. Enga noted there is training available, but it may not be the city's business to enforce. Angell said it could be noted on the website that training is not required but recommended. Enga noted that some cities have a minimum coop size, which may aid in flushing out lot sizes. Councilor Jullie expressed concern of complaints coming to City Hall, requiring additional resources. He asked what the process would be when a complaint is received, and Page 6 of 97Angell outlined the code enforcement process. Violations can be a misdemeanor if not addressed. Enga inquired about Homeowner's Associations. Angell stated that the City allows it but their private HOA doesn't, the HOA would make the determination. Enga stated she was open to it, but felt the .2 acres was too tight. Angell noted that a draft Ordinance could be prepared for discussion, along with consultation with other Cities. Enga asked about limits on the number of chickens allowed, and Angell recommended a sliding scale leading up to what the current code allows. Enga inquired about renters, Angell stated it would be a civil matter/lease violation, and the city wouldn't be involved. Brockman stated he is not in favor, but if the City were to allow it, a minimal lot size would be needed. Coops and runs need to be of a certain size and specs, with restraints regarding setbacks and waste control, and fines for violations. Angell stated that staff will prepare a thorough draft Ordinance for Council and Planning Commission consideration. 3. ADJOURN Respectfully submitted, Stacie Brown City Clerk Page 7 of 97 City of Rogers City Council Meeting Minutes June 23, 2026 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rogers was called to order by Mayor Klick on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, at 7:00 PM at Rogers Community Room, 21201 Memorial Drive, Rogers, MN, 55374 and online in the Teams application. Council present: Shannon Klick, Kevin Jullie, Mark Eiden, Amy Enga, Joel Brockman Council excused: None Staff present: Steve Stahmer, Administrator; Dan Wills, Chief of Police; Patrick Farrens, Fire Chief; Mike Bauer, Parks and Recreation Director; Brett Angell, Community Development Director; Jason Greninger, IS Director; Bob Vose, City Attorney; and Stacie Brown, City Clerk. 2. OPEN FORUM No one came forward. 3. PRESENTATIONS None. 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilor Eiden moved, Councilor Brockman seconded a motion to approve the agenda as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. 5. CONSENT AGENDA 5.1 Approval of June 9, 2026 City Council Meeting Minutes 5.2 Approval of Bills and Claims 5.3 Approval to Reschedule the August 11, 2026 City Council Meeting to 6:00 p.m. on August 13, 2026 Due to Primary Election 5.4 Approval of an Application for Rogers Quarterback Club Conduct Raffles on September 4, September 18, October 9, and October 14, 2026 at the Rogers High School Stadium Located at 21000 141st Avenue North, Rogers, Minnesota 5.5 Approval of MOUs for the Patrol and Sergeant Unions Regarding HCSP 5.6 Approval to Withdraw from the Anoka-Hennepin Narcotics and Violent Crimes Task Force Effective December 31, 2026 5.7 Adoption of the 2026 Developers Handbook 5.8 Items related to City Hall and Police Department Civic Campus, City Project No. 2202 • Approve Professional Services Agreement with American Engineering Page 8 of 97 Testing (AET) for Special Inspections for City Hall and Police Department Civic Campus, City Project No. 2202 • Approve Payment to Project Resources Group (PRG) for Comcast Relocation Associated with Xcel Energy's Overhead Power Relocation 5.9 Approval of Resolution 2026-60 Authorizing a Letter of Credit Release for Towns at Fox Creek Grading 5.10 Approval of Resolution 2026-61 Authorizing a Letter of Credit Reduction for Towns at Fox Creek 3rd Addition 5.11 Approval of Resolution 2026-62 Authorizing a Letter of Credit Reduction for Northview Preserve 5.12 Approval of Resolution 2026-63 Authorizing a Letter of Credit Reduction for Aster Mill 3rd Addition 5.13 Approval of Items Related to Trailers Plus at 19520 County Rd 81 • Authorizing a Stormwater Maintenance Agreement • Authorizing Drainage & Utility Easement 5.14 Approve Contract with Emergency Service Perspectives Councilor Jullie moved, Councilor Enga seconded a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion carried 5-0. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 7. GENERAL BUSINESS 7.1 Approval of Resolution No. 2026-57 Hiring Zachary Wells as Full-Time Police Officer, June 24, 2026, Subject to the Conditions Set Forth in the Resolution Chief of Police Wills recalled the City Council's approval of a Deputy Police Chief position in the 2026 Police Department budget, resulting in the internal promotion of a Captain and a Sergeant, and the hiring of a new Police Officer, Zachary Wells. Wills shared Officer Wells' educational and professional background, most recently joining the Rogers Police Department as a Community Service Officer in February 2026. Wills noted that a swearing-in ceremony will be held for Wells at a future Council meeting, upon his completion of the Field Training Program. Officer Wells thanked the Council for the opportunity to serve with the Rogers Police Department. Mayor Klick moved, Councilor Eiden seconded a motion to approve Resolution 2026-57; Hiring Zachary Wells as Full-Time Police Officer, June 24, 2026, Subject to the Conditions Set Forth in the Resolution. Motion carried 5-0. Page 9 of 97 7.2 Approval of Data Request Software Project IS Director Greninger reviewed the manual process currently used for data requests, including manual forms for intake, routing and tracking of each request. With the growing number of requests, staff looked at data request software options from JustFOIA and NextRequest. Greninger noted the similar capabilities of the two platforms: • Public facing portal • Configurable digital request forms a • Automated workflow routing • Due-date reminders • Integrated internal/external communication tools • Support for uploading and managing documents of any file type • built-in redaction tools • Text search • Audit trails • Reporting dashboards. Greninger shared that after receiving demonstrations for both products, staff recommend JustFOIA for ease of use, no file storage limitations, lowest cost, and positive feedback from other municipalities. City Attorney Vose explained that data practices requests are very much on the rise, particularly in the context of lawsuits. Many claimants are foregoing the discovery process through the courts and using the Data Practices Act to obtain documents and data. Vose added that while he doesn't have an opinion on this particular vendor, he acknowledged the importance of a city having this functional ability is very important for a city. Councilor Eiden noted that both vendors quoted a 5% annual uplift, which seems heavy; he asked if they commented on what drives that. Greninger replied that many vendors are building an uplift into their quotes. This may be attributed to inflation and increasing technology costs for computers and servers due to the chip shortage. They are hosting their own servers and are likely trying to cover their costs. Eiden inquired about storage of the City's data. Greninger replied that the City would essentially be releasing copies of responsive data to JustFOIA to provide to requesters via the vendor's website. Eiden noted that the City's data would be in two places, which Greninger confirmed. However, after a period of time, the data is deleted. Their agreements have been reviewed to ensure that best security practices are being followed. Councilor Enga asked if the City's data has retention time limits. City Clerk Brown noted that the retention period is dependent on the type of data, and at the point when the data is made available, any protected portions have been redacted. Administrator Stahmer added this would not change the data retained by the City, or the retention schedule. Brown noted another benefit would be the ability to respond to requests for the same records without starting over, which happens frequently for environmental studies data requests. Eiden Page 10 of 97stated that he understands the necessity, but he had questions about the 5% uplift and proliferation of data. Mayor Klick asked if it would be annual renewal, which Greninger confirmed. He explained that having negotiated with other vendors, unfortunately, it's common to see this percentage amount. Councilor Jullie asked if this is the same software used for information on criminal cases. Police Chief Wills confirmed that it is, and often times, the request is sent to the Police Department, and the same request goes to City Hall. The biggest benefit is saving staff time internally, and this will allow a consistent process for everyone. He added that the number of requests is increasing each month. Councilor Eiden moved, Councilor Enga seconded a motion to approve the data request software project. Motion carried 5-0. 7.3 Approval to Proceed with North Community Park Playground Plan per the 2026 CIP Parks and Recreation Director Bauer shared the background of ongoing issues with the North Community Park Playground; • Equipment needs updates (25 years old) • Ground wasp problems in the sand play area • Limited accessibility • Several incomplete pieces due to parts availability and new safety standards. Bauer noted that a budget of $1,000,000.00 for replacements was included as part of the 2026 Capital Improvement Plan. A Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued in November 2025 to fully replace North Community Park playground, which closed on December 8, 2025. Four firms submitted six complete budget complaint proposals. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC) requested revisions to three top designs. Finalists (GameTime/MWP Recreation and Weber Recreation/Miracle Recreation) were directed to submit updates at the February, 2026 PRAC meeting, advertised for the public to attend. Bauer shared that the City ran an online survey from June 1 - June 9, 2026, which received 178 responses. The option presented by GameTime/MWP received 140 votes, and the Weber option received 38 votes. At the June 11, 2026 PRAC meeting, the Commission unanimously recommended the GameTime/MWP plan, pending branding alignment with the City Communications Coordinator. Dan Lanes of MN/WI Playground came forward and reviewed the features of the playground in detail, including inclusive and intergenerational play areas. Ron Blake of GameTime discussed the importance of accessibility for people of all abilities to play independently and socially. Mr. Lanes shared that this playground would serve as a national demonstration site showing the return on investment for a city's investment in a playground. Bauer noted the priority of the misting area to cool without getting wet, which allows kids playing sports to use it without getting soaked. Councilor Eiden inquired about Page 11 of 97the timeline, and Mr. Lanes estimated August/September for completion. Councilor Eiden moved, Councilor Brockman seconded a motion to approve the North Community Park playground replacement plan as part of the 2026 Capital Improvement Plan and authorize staff to execute necessary agreements with GameTime/MWP Recreation for design, equipment, and installation services, pending confirmation of branding elements with the City Communications Coordinator. Motion carried 5-0. 8. OTHER BUSINESS None. 9. CORRESPONDENCE AND REPORTS None. 10. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION 10.1 Adjourn to Closed Session to Discuss Attorney-Client Privileged Matters Per MN Statutes 13D.05, Subdivision 3(b). Mayor Klick adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 7:41 p.m. to discuss attorney- client privileged matters per MN Statutes 13D.05, Subdivision 3(b). The regular meeting was reconvened at 8:17 p.m. 11. ADJOURN Mayor Klick adjourned the meeting at 8:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Stacie Brown City Clerk Page 12 of 97 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: July 14, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.2 Subject: Approval of Bills and Claims Prepared By: Bridget Bruska, Finance Director Recommended Council Action Motion to approve bills and claims as presented. Overview / Background / Analysis According to the City's purchasing policy, all purchases made by City staff must be reviewed and approved by the City Council during each Council meeting via the consent agenda. Attached is a summary of payments issued by the City since the cutoff date of the previous Council meeting. Detailed supporting documentation is provided to Council as nonpublic background material to reduce fraud risk and is available for public inspection upon request, as permitted by law. Staff Recommendation Motion to approve bills and claims as presented. Financial Impact: N/A Source Fund: N/A Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. AP Cover Sheet B. 06-26-2026 Checks #97867-97884 - UB Overpayments C. 06-26-2026 Checks #97885-97920 & ACH Payments D. 07-02-2026 Checks #97921-97971 & ACH Payments E. June Purchasing Cards Page 13 of 97CITY OF ROGERS 07.14.2026 CITY COUNCIL MEETING OPERATING ACCOUNTS - ADDITIONAL CLAIMS PAID/TO BE PAID City Payroll Checks, Taxes & Misc Fees Paid 6/25/2026ADP Child Support/Garnishment 124.62 6/25/2026ADP Direct Deposits 300,620.42 6/25/2026 ADP Payroll Taxes 121,285.21 6/17/2026Humana (Employee Paid Supplemental Plan) 432.30 6/17/2026Associated Bank FSA/DCAP 300.00 7/6/2026Associated Bank Cobra Fees 62.30 6/25/2026Group Health EAP Charges 202.80 6/29/2026ICMA Deferred Compensation 3,125.00 6/26/2026Associated Bank Health Plan Fund 6,812.60 6/29/2026PERA 84,717.10 6/29/2026State of MN HCSP 4,613.23 6/29/2026State of MN - Deferred Comp 14,286.00 6/30/2026The Hartford - June 2,471.69 Payroll & Misc Fee Expenditures 539,053.27 City Checks & ACH Paid 6/26/2026City Checks UB Overpayments (97867-97884) 1,412.36 6/26/2026City Checks & ACH Paid (97885-97920) 504,815.82 7/2/2026City Checks & ACH Paid (97921-97971) 2,179,494.89 City Misc ACH/Wires Paid 2,685,723.07 7/3/2026Finnly Sports Payments Credit Card Fees RAC 1,930.06 7/3/2026 Payment Services Network Processing Fees 325.00 7/2/2026 Credit Card Fees City 17,480.63 7/1/2026 Civic Pay Fees Utility Billing 5,505.67 6/23/2026WT - Bond Trust Services - 2026A G.O Bond Payment 589.17 6/17/2026US Bank Credit Cards - June 67,436.40 6/18/2026MNDOR - City Sales Tax 3,559.00 City ACH/Wire Expenditures 96,825.93 Liquor Misc ACH/WiresCity Total Paid To Be Approved 3,321,602.27 7/3/2026Credit Card Processing Fees - RWAS 6,738.46 7/3/2026Credit Card Processing Fees - RWAS 534.53 7/3/2026Credit Card Interchange Fees- RWAS 142.86 Liquor ACH/Wire Expenditures 7,415.85 Liquor Total to Be Approved 7,415.85 Page 14 of 97 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: July 14, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.3 Subject: Approval of a New Massage Establishment License for Crowhaven Therapeutic Massage (Lynsey Smerud) to Operate Within MySalon Suites, Located at 21051 135th Avenue, Rogers, Minnesota Prepared By: Stacie Brown, City Clerk Recommended Council Action Motion to approve a new Massage Establishment License for Crowhaven Therapeutic Massage (Lynsey Smerud) to operate within MySalon Suites, Located at 21051 135th Avenue, Rogers, Minnesota. Overview / Background / Analysis Council adopted an Ordinance requiring massage establishments to be licensed by the City and approved by the City Council. Under the Ordinance, massage establishments are responsible for ensuring that all Massage Therapists practicing at their business meet the requirements of City Code. Violations of the Code may result in the suspension or cancellation of the establishment's license. Individuals operating massage therapy businesses within MySalon Suites are required to obtain a Massage Establishment License, as they are leasing space from MySalon (and not under their employment). Crowhaven Therapeutic Massage (Lynsey Smerud) has submitted a Massage Establishment License application to operate as a message establishment within MySalon Suites, located at 21051 135th Avenue in Rogers. The applicant has provided all required documents and fees in support of the application, and a background investigation has been cleared through the Rogers Police Department. If approved by the City Council, the license will be valid through December 31, 2026. Staff Recommendation Motion to approve a new Massage Establishment License for Crowhaven Therapeutic Massage (Lynsey Smerud) to operate within MySalon Suites, Located at 21051 135th Avenue, Rogers, Minnesota. Financial Impact: Source Fund: Budgeted? Page 15 of 97Supporting Documentation None Page 16 of 97 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: July 14, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.4 Subject: Approval of Resolution 2026-66; Appointing Election Judges and Absentee Ballot Board for the August 11, 2026 State Primary Election Prepared By: Stacie Brown, City Clerk Recommended Council Action Motion to approve Resolution 2026-66; Appointing Election Judges and Absentee Ballot Board for the August 11, 2026 State Primary Election. Overview / Background / Analysis Each election cycle, the City Council is required to adopt a Resolution appointing Judges for the upcoming election. The individuals listed on Resolution 2026-66 have applied to serve as Election Judges and/or Absentee Judges for the August 11, 2026 State Primary Election, and have completed training as required by Minnesota Statute 204B.25. Additional Judges may be appointed as applications are received, and training requirements are met. This Resolution allows for the City Clerk to make additions and substitutions as deemed necessary. Staff Recommendation Motion to approve Resolution 2026-66; Appointing Election Judges and Absentee Ballot Board for the August 11, 2026 State Primary Election. Financial Impact: Source Fund: Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. Resolution 2026-66 Appointing Election Judges and Ballot Board for the August 11, 2026 State Primary Election Page 17 of 97 RESOLUTION NO. 2026-66 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES AND ABSENTEE BALLOT BOARD FOR THE AUGUST 11, 2026 STATE PRIMARY ELECTION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rogers that the following individuals are hereby appointed as Election Judges for the State Primary Election to be held on August 11, 2026 at the rate of pay, per hour, as specified: Name Absentee Judge Rate Election Day Judge Rate Joel Brockman $17.00 Dan Creelman $17.00 Pat Curtis $17.00 Jerry Grant $18.00 $17.00 Rose Ivey (Head Judge) $18.00 $18.00 Joan LeVasseur $17.00 Mary Rooney (Head Judge) $18.00 Jeffrey Curtis $17.00 Amy High $17.00 Pamela Hughes $17.00 Janice Lenz $17.00 Maria Quinn $17.00 Diane Baker $18.00 $17.00 Kenneth Bolvin (Head Judge) $18.00 James Grossmann $17.00 Janice Hill $17.00 Michael Jadrich $17.00 Thomas Kissner $17.00 Daniel Liquete $17.00 Becky Trask (Head Judge) $18.00 Mike Volkers $17.00 Shirley Baken $17.00 Alvin Gloege $17.00 Gregg Piehl $17.00 Marilyn Brick $18.00 $17.00 Terri Grant (Head Judge) $18.00 $18.00 Carole Hamilton $17.00 Gregory Kemmetmueller $17.00 Jay Kulp $17.00 Faye Liquete $17.00 Denise Nord $17.00 David Samuelson (Head Judge) $18.00 $18.00 Tracy Shakal $17.00 Rick Taylor $17.00 Page 18 of 97 Name Absentee Judge Rate Election Day Judge Rate Judi Volkers $17.00 Shirley Weidlein $17.00 Louise Wentworth $17.00 Jeffery Fuller $17.00 Lisa Latteman $17.00 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rogers that the following individuals are hereby appointed to serve on the Absentee Ballot Board for the State Primary Election to be held on August 11, 2026 at $18.00 per hour; City staff paid at regular rate of pay, as specified: Diane Baker Terri Grant Rose Ivey Marilyn Brick David Samuelson Jerry Grant Stacie Brown Amy Solum BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Rogers City Council also appoints other individuals and all members appointed to the Hennepin County Absentee Ballot Board as authorized under Minn. Stat. 204B.21, subd. 2 under the direction of the Election Manager to serve as members of the Rogers Absentee Ballot Board; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is authorized to make any substitutions or additions as deemed necessary. Moved by Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember The following voted in favor of said Resolution: The following voted against the same: Whereupon said Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, and was signed by the Mayor and attested by the Clerk dated this 14th day of July, 2026. ___________________________ Shannon Klick, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ Stacie Brown, City Clerk Page 19 of 97 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: July 14, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.5 Subject: Approve Professional Services Agreement with Dunham Associates for Commissioning for RAC Expansion, City Project No. 2406 Prepared By: Doran Cote, Public Works Director/City Engineer Recommended Council Action Motion to Approve Professional Services Agreement with Dunham Associates for Commissioning for RAC Expansion, City Project No. 2406 Overview / Background / Analysis RJM Construction, the Construction Manager for the RAC Expansion, solicited proposals for commissioning services for the facility. Commissioning services include planning, reviewing design documents, observing construction, conducting system testing, and training the building staff. These services confirm operational readiness, ensuring that the facility is safe, efficient, and ready for day-to-day use from day one. Three consultants submitted proposals at the following cost: Dunham Associates - $23,000.00 Emanuelson-Podas - $32,000.00 Questions & Solutions Engineering — $38,600.00 After careful consideration and discussions with RJM, it is RJM’s recommendation that the City of Rogers proceeds with Dunham Associates, Inc. for commissioning services on the RAC Expansion. Dunham provides the most cost-effective option and essentially the same scope coverage. RJM has worked with Dunham before, and they proved to be great to work with. They have demonstrated the best understanding of the scope of the project and presented the best cost to value for the project. Dunham Associates commissioned Fire Station No. 2. Staff Recommendation Motion to Approve Professional Services Agreement with Dunham Associates for Commissioning for RAC Expansion, City Project No. 2406 Financial Impact: $23,000 Source Fund: Park Dedication, RAC Capital Fund, Naming Rights, RAC Operating Income, RYHA, Faceoff Booster Club, ISD 728, Mighty Ducks Grant Budgeted? Yes Page 20 of 97 Supporting Documentation A. Dunham Consultant Professional Services Agreement B. Dunham Cx Proposal C. EP Cx Proposal D. QSE Cx Proposal Page 21 of 97 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT This Agreement is made on the 14th day of July 2026, between the CITY OF ROGERS, 22350 S. Diamond Lake Road, Rogers MN 55374 ("City") and DUNHAM MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERING, 50 South Sixth Street, Suite 1100, Minneapolis, MN 55402 (“Consultant”). Preliminary Statement The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth terms and conditions for the provision of professional engineering services by the Consultant for the City. The City and Consultant agree as follows: 1. Consultant's Services. The Consultant agrees to provide professional services as described in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein. Consultant agrees to use the City's standard specifications in any bidding documents prepared under this Agreement. The requirements of this section may be waived by the City if the City Engineer determines that they are not necessary for the successful completion of the project. Consultants requesting a requirement to be waived must have written authorization from the City Engineer. 2. Time for Performance of Services. The Consultant will perform the services outlined in Exhibit A, Scope of Work within the prescribed days from the date of the contract award. Any changes in this schedule must be approved in writing by the City. 3. Compensation for Services. City agrees to pay the Consultant for services as described in Exhibit A, Scope of Work as may be amended from time to time by mutual written agreement by City and Consultant. 4. Method of Payment. The Consultant must submit itemized bills for services provided to the City on a monthly basis. Bills submitted will be paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City. For work reimbursed on an hourly basis, the Consultant must indicate for each employee, his or her classification, the number of hours worked, rate of pay for each employee, a computation of amounts due for each employee, the total amount due, the original contracted amount, the current requested amount and the total amount. Consultant must verify all statements submitted for payment in compliance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.38 and 471.391. For reimbursable expenses, the Consultant must provide such documentation as reasonably required by the City. 5. Audit Disclosure. The Consultant must allow the City or its duly authorized agents reasonable access to such of the Consultant's books and records as are pertinent to all services provided under this Agreement. Page 22 of 97Professional Services Agreement Page 2 Any reports, information, data, etc. given to, or prepared or assembled by the Consultant, under this Agreement which the City requests to be kept confidential must not be made available to any individual or organization without the City's prior written approval. All finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports prepared by the Consultant will become the property of the City upon termination of this Agreement, but Consultant may retain copies of such documents as records of the services provided and may reuse standard portions of such documents in the normal course of its business. 6. Term. The term of this Agreement will be from July 15th, 2026, through final project closeout by the City Council and receipt of all Consultant deliverables, the date of signature by the parties notwithstanding. This Agreement may be extended upon the written mutual consent of the parties for such additional period as they deem appropriate, and upon the terms and conditions as herein stated. 7. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by City by seven (7) day's written notice to Consultant delivered to the address written above. Upon termination under this provision, the Consultant will be paid for services rendered and reimbursable expenses incurred prior to the effective date of termination. In the event the City uses the Instruments of Service after terminating this Agreement, the City releases the Consultant and subconsultant(s) from all claims and causes of action arising from such uses. The City, to the extent permitted by law, further agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Consultant and its subconsultants from all costs and expenses, including the cost of defense, related to claims and causes of action asserted by any third person or entity to the extent such costs and expenses arise from the City's use of the Instruments of Service after termination of this Agreement. 8. Subcontractor. The Consultant must not enter into subcontracts for any of the services provided for in this Agreement without the express written consent of the City. 9. Independent Contractor. At all times and for all purposes hereunder, the Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. No statement herein shall be construed so as to find the Consultant an employee of the City. 10. Assignment. Neither party will assign this Agreement, nor any interest arising herein, without the written consent of the other party. 11. Services Not Provided For. No claim for services furnished by the Consultant not specifically provided for herein will be honored by the City. Page 23 of 97 Professional Services Agreement Page 3 12. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion hereof is, for any reason, held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such decision will not affect the remaining provisions of the Agreement. 13. Entire Agreement. The entire Agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof, as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement will be valid only when expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties unless otherwise provided herein. 14. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. In providing services hereunder, the Consultant must abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to the provision of services to be provided. Any violation will constitute a material breach of this Agreement and entitle the City to immediately terminate this Agreement. 15. Waiver. Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement will not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement. 16. Indemnification. The Consultant must indemnify and hold harmless the City, its employees and agents, for all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including but not limited to attorney's fees which they may suffer or for which they may be held liable, as a result of, and to the extent of, the negligent or wrongful acts of the Consultant, his or her employees or anyone else for whom he or she is legally responsible in the performance of this Agreement. 17. Insurance. During the term of this Agreement, Consultant must maintain a general liability insurance policy with limits of $1,500,000 for each occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate, for both personal injury and property damage. This policy shall name the City as an additional insured for the services provided under this Agreement and shall provide, as between the City and the Consultant, that the Consultant's coverage shall be the primary coverage in the event of a loss. If the Consultant is providing either architectural or engineering services, the Consultant must also maintain during the term of this Agreement a professional liability insurance policy with the same limits as for general liability. A certificate of insurance on the City's approved form which verifies the existence of these insurance coverages must be provided to the City before work under this Agreement is begun. 18. Governing Law. This Agreement will be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota. Page 24 of 97Professional Services Agreement Page 4 19. Whole Agreement. This Agreement embodies the entire Agreement between the parties including all prior understanding and agreements, and may not be modified except in writing signed by all parties. Executed as of the day and year first written above. CITY OF ROGERS DUNHAM MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERING By: By: Shannon Klick, Mayor Date: Its: Contracts Officer Date: By: Steven Stahmer, City Administrator Date: Page 25 of 97 DUNHAM ASSOCIATES, INC. Professional Services Agreement This Agreement, including the General Conditions, Appendices, and any Supplemental Agreements shall be effective as of June 2, 2026 between City of Rogers (Client) and Dunham Associates, Inc. (Dunham) . This Agreement authorizes and describes the scope, schedule, and payment conditions for Dunham’s work on the Project known as: Rogers Activity Center Client’s Authorized Mike Bauer Representative: Address: 22350 S. Diamond Lake Road Rodgers, MN 55374 Telephone: 763-428-0974 Email: mbauer@rogersmn.gov Dunham Chad Bolin Representative: Address: 50 South Sixth Street, Suite 1100 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: 612-465-7550 Email: Chad.bolin@dunhameng.com Project Description: RJM is working with the City of Rogers to construct a new activity center that will provide recreational, fitness, and community gathering spaces for residents. Systems: The following systems are included in our Basic Services: HVAC Equipment • Dry Heating Unit • Rooftop Units • Unit Heaters • Infrared Heaters • Makeup Unit • Fans • Furnace Plumbing Equipment • Domestic Water Heaters • Recirculation Pumps Electrical Equipment • Lighting Controls Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 1 Page 26 of 97Scope: The Scope of Services to be provided by Dunham is as set forth below and all services are provided subject to the attached General Conditions of Contract and Appendices attached to this Agreement. Field Verification and Testing Dunham will: • Prepare Commissioning Plan • Review approved HVAC, Plumbing, and Lighting equipment submittals • Conduct Cx Kick-Off Meeting • Prepare functional performance test plans for above listed systems • Conduct construction three (3) site visits prior to functional testing • Participate in up to eight (8) construction meetings • Review Test and Balance reports • Conduct and document manual functional performance tests of above listed systems • Document all deficiencies or recommended actions on an issues log • Conduct seasonal / deferred testing • Provide a report documenting the above tasks Schedule: The Schedule for the Services to be provided by Dunham shall be as mutually agreed upon by Dunham and Client. If in this Agreement specific periods of time for rendering services are set forth or specific dates by which services are to be completed are provided, and if such periods of time or dates are changed through no fault of Dunham, the rates and amounts of compensation provided for herein shall be subject to equitable adjustment. • Dunham is available to begin immediately after a signed contract is in place. • Functional testing will begin after all equipment start-ups have been completed and Test and Balance report has been reviewed. Compensation: Our compensation for Basic Services will be a lump sum of $23,000. Reimbursable expenses are included in lump sum fee. Optional Additional Services: The following services are typically not included in the Limited Scope of Services but may be elected to assure contractor compliance with design intent, budget and schedule. 1. Testing or verification of any equipment not listed above in basic services. 2. Building envelope commissioning. 3. Emergency power commissioning 4. Any commissioning tasks not explicitly named above. 5. Services not listed as Basic Services Additional Services Compensation : For additional services beyond those defined as Project Basic Services, and when these Additional Services have been prior approved in writing by City of Rogers, our compensation will be hourly at the rates outlined in our current rate schedule attached in Appendix A, plus reimbursable expenses as outlined in attached Appendix B. Invoicing: We will invoice you for our services monthly, for services performed during the previous month. Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 2 Page 27 of 97Pre-Lien Notice: CLIENT SHALL FURNISH TO DUNHAM INFORMATION NECESSARY AND RELEVANT FOR DUNHAM TO EVALUATE, GIVE NOTICE OF OR ENFORCE MECHANICS LIEN RIGHTS. SUCH INFORMATION SHALL INCLUDE A CORRECT STATEMENT OF THE RECORD LEGAL TITLE TO THE PROPERTY ON WHICH THE PROJECT IS LOCATED, USUALLY REFERRED TO AS THE SITE AND THE CLIENT’S INTEREST THEREIN. IN THE EVENT THAT THE PROJECT OR PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO LIENS, DUNHAM PROVIDES THE FOLLOWING NOTICE : (A) ANY PERSON OR COMPANY SUPPLYING LABOR OR MATERIALS FOR THIS IMPROVEMENT TO YOUR PROPERTY MAY FILE A LIEN AGAINST YOUR PROPERTY IF THAT PERSON OR COMPANY IS NOT PAID FOR THE CONTRIBUTIONS. (B) UNDER MINNESOTA LAW, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO PAY PERSONS WHO SUPPLIED LABOR OR MATERIALS FOR THIS IMPROVEMENT DIRECTLY AND DEDUCT THIS AMOUNT FROM OUR CONTRACT PRICE, OR WITHHOLD THE AMOUNTS DUE THEM FROM US UNTIL 120 DAYS AFTER COMPLETION OF THE IMPROVEMENT UNLESS WE GIVE YOU A LIEN WAIVER SIGNED BY PERSONS WHO SUPPLIED ANY LABOR OR MATERIAL FOR THE IMPROVEMENT AND WHO GAVE YOU TIMELY NOTICE. This Agreement for Professional Services and the attached General Conditions, Appendices and any Supplemental Agreements as defined below (collectively referred to as the “Agreement”) represent the entire understanding between Client and Dunham with respect to the services to be provided by Dunham. The attached Appendices shall govern over the General Conditions, and written Supplemental Agreement(s), where applicable, shall govern over attached Appendices and General Conditions. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between Dunham and Client. This Agreement supersedes all prior contemporaneous oral or written agreements. This Agreement may not be amended except by written Supplemental Agreement signed by the authorized representatives of each party. The provisions of this Agreement shall be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. Should this proposal not be accepted within a 60-day period from the date of proposal or should the scope, schedule or estimated construction cost vary from the stated assumptions, Dunham reserves the right to review and update this proposal after that time. Dunham Associates, Inc. City of Rogers By: Matt Jensen, PE, LEED AP BD+C By: Title: President and CEO Title: 6/2/2026 Signature Date Signature Date ATTACHED GENERAL CONDITIONS AND APPENDICES ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN AS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT Attachments: GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES APPENDIX A HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE APPENDIX B REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES SCHEDULE Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 3 Page 28 of 97 DUNHAM ASSOCIATES, INC. Professional Services Agreement This Agreement, including the General Conditions, Appendices, and any Supplemental Agreements shall be effective as of June 2, 2026 between City of Rogers (Client) and Dunham Associates, Inc. (Dunham) . This Agreement authorizes and describes the scope, schedule, and payment conditions for Dunham’s work on the Project known as: Rogers Activity Center Client’s Authorized Mike Bauer Representative: Address: 22350 S. Diamond Lake Road Rodgers, MN 55374 Telephone: 763-428-0974 Email: mbauer@rogersmn.gov Dunham Chad Bolin Representative: Address: 50 South Sixth Street, Suite 1100 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: 612-465-7550 Email: Chad.bolin@dunhameng.com Project Description: RJM is working with the City of Rogers to construct a new activity center that will provide recreational, fitness, and community gathering spaces for residents. Systems: The following systems are included in our Basic Services: HVAC Equipment • Dry Heating Unit • Rooftop Units • Unit Heaters • Infrared Heaters • Makeup Unit • Fans • Furnace Plumbing Equipment • Domestic Water Heaters • Recirculation Pumps Electrical Equipment • Lighting Controls Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 1 Page 29 of 97Scope: The Scope of Services to be provided by Dunham is as set forth below and all services are provided subject to the attached General Conditions of Contract and Appendices attached to this Agreement. Field Verification and Testing Dunham will: • Prepare Commissioning Plan • Review approved HVAC, Plumbing, and Lighting equipment submittals • Conduct Cx Kick-Off Meeting • Prepare functional performance test plans for above listed systems • Conduct construction three (3) site visits prior to functional testing • Participate in up to eight (8) construction meetings • Review Test and Balance reports • Conduct and document manual functional performance tests of above listed systems • Document all deficiencies or recommended actions on an issues log • Conduct seasonal / deferred testing • Provide a report documenting the above tasks Schedule: The Schedule for the Services to be provided by Dunham shall be as mutually agreed upon by Dunham and Client. If in this Agreement specific periods of time for rendering services are set forth or specific dates by which services are to be completed are provided, and if such periods of time or dates are changed through no fault of Dunham, the rates and amounts of compensation provided for herein shall be subject to equitable adjustment. • Dunham is available to begin immediately after a signed contract is in place. • Functional testing will begin after all equipment start-ups have been completed and Test and Balance report has been reviewed. Compensation: Our compensation for Basic Services will be a lump sum of $23,000. Reimbursable expenses are included in lump sum fee. Optional Additional Services: The following services are typically not included in the Limited Scope of Services but may be elected to assure contractor compliance with design intent, budget and schedule. 1. Testing or verification of any equipment not listed above in basic services. 2. Building envelope commissioning. 3. Emergency power commissioning 4. Any commissioning tasks not explicitly named above. 5. Services not listed as Basic Services Additional Services Compensation : For additional services beyond those defined as Project Basic Services, and when these Additional Services have been prior approved in writing by City of Rogers, our compensation will be hourly at the rates outlined in our current rate schedule attached in Appendix A, plus reimbursable expenses as outlined in attached Appendix B. Invoicing: We will invoice you for our services monthly, for services performed during the previous month. Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 2 Page 30 of 97Pre-Lien Notice: CLIENT SHALL FURNISH TO DUNHAM INFORMATION NECESSARY AND RELEVANT FOR DUNHAM TO EVALUATE, GIVE NOTICE OF OR ENFORCE MECHANICS LIEN RIGHTS. SUCH INFORMATION SHALL INCLUDE A CORRECT STATEMENT OF THE RECORD LEGAL TITLE TO THE PROPERTY ON WHICH THE PROJECT IS LOCATED, USUALLY REFERRED TO AS THE SITE AND THE CLIENT’S INTEREST THEREIN. IN THE EVENT THAT THE PROJECT OR PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO LIENS, DUNHAM PROVIDES THE FOLLOWING NOTICE : (A) ANY PERSON OR COMPANY SUPPLYING LABOR OR MATERIALS FOR THIS IMPROVEMENT TO YOUR PROPERTY MAY FILE A LIEN AGAINST YOUR PROPERTY IF THAT PERSON OR COMPANY IS NOT PAID FOR THE CONTRIBUTIONS. (B) UNDER MINNESOTA LAW, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO PAY PERSONS WHO SUPPLIED LABOR OR MATERIALS FOR THIS IMPROVEMENT DIRECTLY AND DEDUCT THIS AMOUNT FROM OUR CONTRACT PRICE, OR WITHHOLD THE AMOUNTS DUE THEM FROM US UNTIL 120 DAYS AFTER COMPLETION OF THE IMPROVEMENT UNLESS WE GIVE YOU A LIEN WAIVER SIGNED BY PERSONS WHO SUPPLIED ANY LABOR OR MATERIAL FOR THE IMPROVEMENT AND WHO GAVE YOU TIMELY NOTICE. This Agreement for Professional Services and the attached General Conditions, Appendices and any Supplemental Agreements as defined below (collectively referred to as the “Agreement”) represent the entire understanding between Client and Dunham with respect to the services to be provided by Dunham. The attached Appendices shall govern over the General Conditions, and written Supplemental Agreement(s), where applicable, shall govern over attached Appendices and General Conditions. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between Dunham and Client. This Agreement supersedes all prior contemporaneous oral or written agreements. This Agreement may not be amended except by written Supplemental Agreement signed by the authorized representatives of each party. The provisions of this Agreement shall be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. Should this proposal not be accepted within a 60-day period from the date of proposal or should the scope, schedule or estimated construction cost vary from the stated assumptions, Dunham reserves the right to review and update this proposal after that time. Dunham Associates, Inc. City of Rogers By: Matt Jensen, PE, LEED AP BD+C By: Title: President and CEO Title: 6/2/2026 Signature Date Signature Date ATTACHED GENERAL CONDITIONS AND APPENDICES ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN AS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT Attachments: GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES APPENDIX A HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE APPENDIX B REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES SCHEDULE Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 3 Page 31 of 97GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT through no fault of the party initiating the termination. In the event of termination Dunham shall be compensated FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES for services performed prior to termination date, including charges for expenses and equipment costs then due and 1. SERVICES all termination expenses. 3. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon A. General thirty days’ written notice without cause. In the event of 1. Dunham agrees to perform professional services as set termination, copies of plans, reports, specifications, forth in the Agreement for Professional Services or any electronic drawing/data files (CADD), field data, notes, Supplemental Agreement (“Basic Services”) and other documents whether written, printed or recorded on any medium whatsoever, finished or unfinished, or B. Schedule other Instruments of Service prepared by Dunham pursuant to this Agreement and pertaining to the work or 1. Unless specific periods of time or dates for providing to the Project, shall be made available to the Client per services are specified, Dunham’s obligation to render Section 6. All provisions of this Agreement allocating services hereunder will be for a period which may responsibility or liability between the Client and Engineer reasonably be required for the completion of said shall survive the completion of the services hereunder services. and/or the termination of this Agreement. 2. If Client has requested changes in the scope, extent, or character of the Project or the services to be provided by 2. PAYMENTS Dunham, the time of performance and compensation for Dunham’s services shall be adjusted equitably. The Client A. Invoices agrees that Dunham is not responsible for damages 1. Payments for services rendered as set forth in Dunham’s arising directly or indirectly from delays resulting from Invoices are due and payable within thirty (30) days of causes beyond Dunham’s control. For purposes of this receipt. Agreement, such causes include, but are not limited to, 2. Dunham shall be entitled to interest at the lesser of a rate strikes or other labor disputes; severe weather of 1% per month or the maximum allowed by law on all disruptions, or other natural disasters or acts of God; fires, past due invoices. Dunham may, after giving seven days riots, war or other emergencies; any action or failure to written notice to Client, suspend services under this act in a timely manner by any government agency; actions Agreement until Dunham has been paid in full all amounts or failure to act by the Client or the Client’s contractor or due for services, expenses and other related charges. consultants; or discovery of any hazardous substance or Payments will be credited first to interest and then to differing site conditions. If the delays resulting from such principal. Further, Dunham reserves the right to retain causes increase the cost or the time required by Dunham Instruments of Service until all invoices are paid in full. to perform its services in accordance with professional Dunham will not be liable for any claims of loss, delay, or skill and care, then Dunham shall be entitled to a damage by Client for reason of withholding services or reasonable adjustment in schedule and compensation. products of service until all invoices are paid in full. C. Additional Services Dunham shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs and disbursements, including reasonable attorney fees, 1. If Dunham determines that any services it has been incurred in connection with collecting amounts owed by directed or requested to perform are beyond the scope as Client. set forth in the Agreement or that, due to changed 3. In the event of a disputed or contested invoice, only that conditions or changes in the method or manner of portion so contested may be withheld from payment, and administration of the Project, that Dunham’s effort the undisputed portion will be paid. Client must notify required to perform its services under this Agreement Dunham in writing of any disputed items within 15 days exceeds the stated fee for Basic Services, then Dunham from the date of the invoice. shall promptly notify the Client of that fact. Upon 4. Should taxes, fees or costs be imposed, they shall be in notification, Dunham shall be entitled to additional addition to Dunham’s estimated total compensation. compensation for same, and an extension of time for completion of work absent written objection by Client. 3. PERFORMANCE 2. For additional services beyond those defined as Project A. Standard of Care Basic Services, and when these Additional Services have been prior approved in writing by Client, Dunham shall be 1. The standard of care for all professional engineering and paid hourly at the rates outlined in the current rate related services performed or furnished by Dunham under schedule attached as Appendix A, along with this Agreement will be the care and skill ordinarily reimbursable expenses billed at cost. exercised by members of Dunham’s profession practicing under similar circumstances at the same time and in the D. Suspension and Termination same locality. Dunham makes no warranties, express or 1. If Dunham’s services are delayed or suspended in whole implied, under this Agreement or otherwise, in connection or in part by Client, or if Dunham’s services are delayed with its services. by actions or inactions of others for more than 60 days B. Work of Others through no fault of Dunham, then Dunham shall be entitled to either terminate its agreement upon 7 days 1. Dunham neither guarantees the performance of any written notice or, at its option, accept an equitable Contractor nor assumes responsibility for any adjustment of rates and amounts of compensation Contractor’s failure to furnish and perform the work in provided for elsewhere in this Agreement to reflect accordance with the construction documents. Client reasonable costs incurred by Dunham in connection with, acknowledges Dunham will not direct, supervise or among other things, such delay or suspension and control the work of construction contractors or their reactivation and the fact that the time for performance subcontractors at the site or otherwise. Dunham shall under this Agreement has been revised. have no authority over or responsibility for the contractor’s 2. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon acts, omissions, nor their means, methods, or procedures seven days written notice should the other party fail of construction. Dunham’s services do not include review substantially to perform in accordance with its terms Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 4 Page 32 of 97 or evaluation of the Client’s, contractor’s or enhances the value of the Project beyond the original subcontractor’s safety measures, or job site safety or contract. furnishing or performing any of the Contractor’s work. C. Waiver of Consequential Damages C. Opinions of Probable Cost 1. Neither Party shall be liable to the other for consequential 1. If requested by Supplemental Agreement, or provided as damages, including, without limitation, lost rentals, an additional service, then Dunham may provide an increased rental expenses, loss of use, loss of income, Opinion of Probable Cost. Dunham’s Opinions of lost profit, financing, business and reputation and for loss Probable Cost provided for herein are to be made on the of management or employee productivity, incurred by one basis of Dunham’s experience and qualifications and another or their subsidiaries or successors, regardless of represent Dunham’s best judgment as a professional whether such damages are caused by breach of contract, generally familiar with the industry. However, since willful misconduct, negligent act or omission, or other Dunham has no control over the cost of labor, materials, wrongful act of either of them. equipment or service furnished by others, or over the Contractor’s methods of determining prices, or over D. Waiver of Claims for Personal Liability competitive bidding or market conditions, Dunham cannot 1. It is intended by the parties to this Agreement that and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual Dunham’s services shall not subject Dunham’s construction cost will not vary from Opinions of employees, officers or directors to any personal legal Construction Cost prepared by Dunham. If Client wishes exposure for the risks associated with this Agreement. greater assurance as to probable Cost, Client shall Therefore, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary employ an independent cost estimator. contained herein, the Client agrees that as the Client’s 4. LIMITATIONS sole and exclusive remedy, any claim, demand or suit shall be directed and/or asserted only against Dunham, A. Indemnity for Environmental Issues and not against any of Dunham’s individual employees, officers or directors, and Client knowingly waives all such 1. It is acknowledged by both parties that Dunham claims against Dunham individual employees, officers or Associates scope of services does not include any directors. services related to asbestos or hazardous or toxic materials. In the event Dunham Associates or any other E. Assignment party encounters asbestos or hazardous or toxic materials at the jobsite, or should it become known in any way that 1. Neither party to this Agreement shall transfer, sublet, such materials may be present at the jobsite or any assign any rights under, or interests in, this Agreement or adjacent areas that may affect the performance of claims based on this Agreement without the prior written Dunham Associates’ services, Dunham Associates may, consent of the other party. Any Assignment in violation of at their option and without liability for consequential or any this Provision shall be null and void. other damages, suspend performance of services on the 5. DISPUTE RESOLUTION project until the Client retains appropriate specialist consultant(s) or contractor(s) to identify, abate and/or A. Mediation remove the asbestos or hazardous or toxic materials, and warrant that the jobsite is in full compliance with 1. In an effort to resolve any conflicts that arise during the applicable laws and regulations. Client agrees to hold design or construction of the Project or following the harmless and indemnify Dunham and Dunham’s officers, completion of the Project, the Client and Dunham agree subconsultant(s), employees and agents from and that all disputes between them arising out of or relating to against any and all claims, losses, damages, liability and this Agreement shall be submitted to nonbinding costs, including but not limited to costs of defense, arising mediation as a precondition to litigation unless the parties out of or in any way connected with, the presence, mutually agree otherwise. discharge, release, or escape of hazardous or toxic B. Litigation – Choice of Venue and Jurisdiction substances, pollutants or contaminants of any kind. 1. Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this B. Limitations on Dunham’s Liability Agreement, or the breach thereof, including but not limited 1. The Client hereby agrees that to the fullest extent to claims for negligence or breach of warranty, that is not permitted by law, Dunham’s total liability to the Client for settled by nonbinding mediation shall be settled through any and all injuries, claims, losses, expenses, or damages the state courts and by the law of the state of Minnesota. whatsoever arising out of or in any way related to the The venue shall be the District Court of Hennepin County, Project or this Agreement from any cause or causes Minnesota, regardless of whether a court of another state including, but not limited to, Dunham’s negligence, errors, may otherwise have in rem or in personam jurisdiction omissions, strict liability, breach of contract or breach of over such a controversy or claim. warranty (Client’s Claims) shall not exceed the total C. Subconsultants amount of our fee. 1. The Client and Dunham further agree to include a similar 2. If for any reason, including but not limited to Dunham’s dispute resolution provision in all agreements with negligence or breach of this Agreement, a required item independent contractors and consultants retained for the or component of the Project is omitted from the Contract Project and to require all independent contractors and Documents, Instruments of Service or other deliverables consultants also to include a similar provision in all provided by Dunham, then Dunham shall not be agreements with subcontractors, subconsultants, responsible for payment of the cost required to add such suppliers or fabricators so retained, thereby providing for item or component to the same extent that such item or mediation as the primary method for dispute resolution component and resulting cost would have been required between the parties to those agreements. and included in the original documents. In no event shall Dunham be liable or responsible for any cost or expense that provides betterment or upgrades to the Project or that Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 5 Page 33 of 976. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY changes in the Project or any defect in the services being provided by Dunham or makes or wishes to A. Proprietary Information make changes in the Project. e. Be responsible for the accuracy of all data consisting 1. All documents, including reports, drawings, calculations, of, but not limited to, computations, as-built specifications, CADD materials, computers software or drawings, electronic data bases and maps furnished hardware or other work product prepared by Dunham by the Client. The costs associated with correcting, pursuant to this Agreement are Dunham’s Instruments of creating or recreating any data that is provided by Service (“Instruments of Service”) and Dunham retains the Client that contains inaccurate or unusable all ownership interests in Instruments of Service, information or is found to omit information necessary including copyrights. for Dunham to perform its services are the 2. Dunham shall retain all of its rights in its proprietary responsibility of the Client. information including, without limitation, its methodologies f. Promptly examine all studies, reports, sketches, and methods of analysis, ideas, concepts, expressions, opinions of probable costs, specifications, drawings, inventions, know how, methods, techniques, skills, proposals and other documents presented by knowledge and experience possessed by Dunham prior Dunham and render the necessary decisions and to, or acquired by Dunham during, the performance of this instructions so Dunham may continue in a timely Agreement and the same shall not be deemed to be Work manner to provide the services necessary for Product or Work for Hire and Dunham shall not be completion of the Project. restricted in anyway with respect thereto. g. Furnish or instruct Dunham to provide, at the Client’s B. Client Use of Instruments of Service expense, additional services that become necessary to complete the work called for in this Agreement or 1. Provided that Dunham has been paid for the services, to complete work added to the Project and not Client shall have the right to use Instruments of Service related to the agreed responsibilities of Dunham. resulting from Dunham’s efforts on the project. Dunham h. Furnish to Dunham, prior to any performance of shall retain full rights to electronic data and the drawings, services by Dunham, a copy of any design and specifications, including those in electronic form, construction standards and comprehensive plans prepared by Dunham and its subconsultants and the right which the Client shall require Dunham to follow or to reuse component information contained in them in the incorporate into its work. normal course of Dunham’s professional activities. i. Act promptly to review and approve or reject all Dunham shall be deemed to be the author of such proposed Change Orders and/or Supplemental Instruments of Service, electronic data or documents, and Agreements. shall be given appropriate credit in any public display of j. Include with the Agreement any notice or such Instruments of Service. certification that Dunham will be requested to 2. Records requests or requests for additional copies of provide to Client or third parties in connection with Instruments of Services outside of the scope of services the project. Client and Dunham shall reach are available to Client subject to Dunham’s current rate agreement on the terms of any such requested schedule. notice or certification, and Client shall authorize such Additional Services as are necessary to enable C. Reuse of Documents Dunham to provide the notices or certifications 1. All Instruments of Service prepared by Dunham pursuant requested. Dunham will not be required to sign any to this Agreement are not intended or represented to be certification that would expand Dunham’s liability suitable for reuse by the Client or others on extensions of beyond what has been expressly agreed to the Project or on any other project. Any reuse of the hereunder. Instruments of Service without written consent or k. Client shall be responsible for decisions made on adaptation by Dunham for the specific purpose intended interpretations or clarifications of the data, reports, will be at the Client’s sole risk and without liability or legal drawings, specifications, record drawings, and other exposure to Dunham; and the Client shall defend, deliverables whether in printed or electronic form, indemnify and hold harmless Dunham from all claims, provided or furnished by Dunham to Client pursuant damages, losses and expenses including attorneys’ fees to this Agreement that are given by Client without arising out of or resulting from reuse of Dunham consultation and advice of Dunham. documents without written consent. l. Bear all costs incidental to compliance with the requirements of this Section. 7. CLIENT RESPONSIBILITIES A. General 1. Client shall have the responsibilities set forth herein. a. Provide full information as to its requirements for the services to be provided by Dunham. Dunham shall be entitled to rely on the accuracy and completeness thereof. b. Assist Dunham by furnishing all available information pertinent to the services to be provided by Dunham. All information available in electronic formats shall be provided in such formats suitable for use with current Dunham systems and technology. c. Provide access to and make all provisions for Dunham to enter upon public and private lands as required for Dunham to perform its services under this Agreement. d. Give prompt written notice to Dunham whenever the Client observes or otherwise becomes aware of any Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 6 Page 34 of 97 APPENDIX A HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Through March 31, 2027 DUNHAM ASSOCIATES, INC. Hourly billing rates are: Executive Principal $ 330 Principals $ 300 All other employees on an hourly basis of 2.5 times direct personnel expense (DPE). Direct personnel expense is defined as the direct salaries of the employee and their mandatory and usual benefits such as taxes, vacation, sick leave, and insurance. Hourly billing rates for these employees are: Engineer IV $ 260 – 320 Engineer III $ 170 – 310 Engineer II $ 150 – 250 Engineer I $ 125 – 210 Designer IV $ 225 – 280 Designer III $ 170 – 265 Designer II $ 135 – 220 Designer I $ 105 – 180 Commissioning Specialist III $ 200 – 310 Commissioning Specialist II $ 140 – 275 Commissioning Specialist I $ 120 – 230 Drafter $ 80 – 130 Support Staff $ 85 – 120 Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 7 Page 35 of 97 APPENDIX B REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES SCHEDULE DUNHAM ASSOCIATES, INC. Reimbursable expenses include expenses incurred by Dunham Associate’s employees in the interest of the Project. They include: 1. Transportation and authorized out-of-town travel and subsistence; 2. Mileage charged at the IRS approved reimbursement rate; 3. Long distance services, dedicated data and communication services, teleconferences, Project Web sites, and extranets; 4. Fees paid for securing approval of authorities having jurisdiction over the Project; 5. Printing, reproductions, plots, standard form documents. Dunham contracts with an outside printing service and will invoice for plotting costs at a multiplier of 1.0 of the amount the printing service invoices Dunham; 6. Postage, handling and delivery, local courier, overnight courier; 7. Expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates, if authorized in advance by the Owner; 8. Expense of professional liability insurance dedicated exclusively to this Project, or the expense of additional insurance coverage or limits if the Client requests such insurance in excess of that normally carried by Dunham; 9. Taxes levied on professional services and on reimbursable expenses; 10. Site office expenses; 11. Miscellaneous Expenses: All other expenses such as local courier, overnight courier, specification printing, equipment rental, special consultants, etc. Reimbursable expenses will be billed at a multiplier of 1.0 of the actual expense incurred. Dunham Associates, Inc. Agreement - 8 Page 36 of 97OVERVIEW: Commissioning Avidor Edina // Edina, Minn. Animal Emergency and Referral Center // Oakdale, Minn. Higher Ground // St. Paul, Minn. _________________________________________________________________ SAMPLE EXPERIENCE:  Hocokata Ti Cultural Center, Shakopee Mdewakanton  Proto Labs, Brooklyn Park, Minn. Sioux Community, Shakopee, Minn.  Junior Achievement, St. Paul, Minn.  Dorothy Day Place & Higher Ground, St. Paul, Minn.  Newport Recovery Assessment, Newport, Minn.  Life Time Fitness, Multiple Locations  Lakewood Cemetery, Minneapolis, Minn.  Junior Achievement, St. Paul, Minn.  Animal Emergency & Referral Center, Oakdale, Minn.  Avidor Edina Apartments, Edina, Minn.  Caraway West End, St. Louis Park, Minn  Avidor Glenview, Glenview, Ill.  Corsa Apartments, St. Louis Park, Minn  RBC Gateway, Minneapolis, Minn.  People Serving People, Minneapolis, Minn.  MnDOT Lab, Maplewood, Minn.  MNDot Training Center, Arden Hills, Minn.  Osborn 370, St. Paul, Minn.  Avidor Minnetonka, Minnetonka, Minn. Page 39 of 97 Proposed Fee (Lump Sum): MEP Commissioning: $32,000, not including reimbursable expenses. Reimbursable expenses are anticipated to be $1,000 and will be billed on a 1.0 x direct cost basis and could include travel expenses, plotting, deliveries, and mileage from our office in Edina. ADD ALTERNATE FEE: If seasonal retesting is required, we are including an add alternate to perform the required testing and the associated trip expenses. This includes one (1) seasonal functional testing trip to perform functional testing of commissioned systems in the opposite season from which the building was originally commissioned. Seasonal Retesting Fee $2,500, not including reimbursable expenses. BILLING AND PAYMENTS: We will invoice monthly for our services. Payments are due and payable 30 days from the date of our invoice or 15 days after architect has received payment. Billing transaction surcharges will be billed as a reimbursable expense. Billing transactions with surcharges are defined as processing fees charged to Emanuelson-Podas to submit invoices and receive payment for services rendered. ACCEPTANCE: This proposal is valid for 60 days. If acceptable to you, please sign and return one copy of this document to our office. We will proceed with our work upon receipt of your signed proposal and architectural backgrounds. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this proposal. Accepted for Emanuelson-Podas: Accepted for City of Rogers: _______________________________ _06/02/2026_ __________________________________ ___________ Eric Rose, Partner date Director of Strategic Development Page 44 of 97 ® May 28, 2026 Questions & Solutions® Engineering Mr. Mike Bauer Parks and Recreation Director City of Rogers 22350 South Diamond Lake Road Rogers, Minnesota 55374 RE: Rogers Activity Center Expansion Rogers, Minnesota Proposal for MEP Commissioning Services Dear Mr. Bauer: Questions & Solutions Engineering, Inc. (QSE) is pleased to present this proposal to serve as the third party Commissioning Professional for the mechanical, electrical and plumbing (MEP) systems to be installed in the Rogers Activity Center Expansion in Rogers, Minnesota. QSE is eminently qualified to perform these services, as we are a commissioning- only engineering firm focused on working with facility owners to achieve high performance from their new and existing building systems. QSE’s technical personnel have a combined 360 years of commissioning experience, averaging more than 18 years each. Most relevant for your project, though, is the fact that in the past 2 years we have commissioned or are currently commissioning 6 indoor ice rinks in the Upper Midwest. Dating back further, some of our premier ice facilities included the Amsoil Arena in Duluth, the Denny Sanford PREMIER Center in Sioux Falls, and the Rough Rider Center in Watford City, North Dakota. For more information regarding QSE, please see the attached three qualification sheets. Project Background and Objectives The City of Rogers is adding a single ice sheet addition to the existing Rogers Activity Center, along with support spaces such as locker rooms, offices, restrooms, and mechanical rooms. This proposal is for QSE to join the project team to lead and facilitate MEP commissioning in compliance with the 2024 Minnesota Energy Code. In this role, we will serve as the City of Rogers’ technical advocate to verify that the commissioned systems are installed as designed and perform as required and that Questions & Solutions® the City’s staff are prepared to operate and maintain the systems when the project is Engineering 1079 Falls Curve complete. Chaska, MN 55318 612.308.4716 LetsTalk@QSEng.com www.QSEng.com Page 46 of 97Proposal for MEP Commissioning Services May 28, 2026 ™ ® Better Performing Buildings Scope Description QSE’s proposed MEP commissioning scope of work is detailed in the Commissioning Activities Table attached to this letter. The three left-hand columns of the table describe the commissioning activity and the reason for inclusion in the scope. The reasons include the following: • 2024 Minnesota Energy Code Requirement • QSE-recommended Best Practice for successfully executing the above requirements The next column identifies when the activity will occur. D: Design Phase C: Construction Phase W: Warranty Phase We understand the official Design Phase is complete, but the Code requires the Commissioning Professional to review and comment on the commissioned systems design documents. At this late stage, our comments will be limited to those related to critical issues, if any, that might impact the systems’ ability to meet the City’s performance requirements and/or result in change orders during construction. We have also detailed the number of meetings QSE will attend, the trips to the project site QSE will make, and the budgeted labor hours for each activity. TheSystems to be Commissioned Table following the Commissioning Activities Table details the systems included in this scope of work and QSE’s proposed sampling strategy for functional performance testing. This list is based on the latest construction drawings incorporating Addendum 1, Addendum 2, Addendum 3, ASI 1, and PR 1. Project Team Rebecca Ellis, PE will be Principal-in-Charge and Shannon Ellis, PE will serve as Project Manager and Lead Mechanical Engineer. John Hebert, PE will serve as QSE’s Lead Electrical Engineer. Shannon and John are veterans of multiple similar projects, including: • Maple Grove Community Center Ice Rink Expansion • Bloomington Ice Garden Modernization • Northfield Ice Arena • Watertown South Dakota Ice Complex • Augustana University Hockey Arena This team will be supported by other QSE technical staff as appropriate to accommodate the project team and schedule. Schedule QSE understands construction on the Rogers Activity Center Expansion will begin in June 2026 and extend through September 2027. We are prepared to begin work immediately upon notice-to-proceed, starting with developing the Commissioning Plan and performing our Design Review. Page 47 of 97Proposal for MEP Commissioning Services May 28, 2026 ™ ® Better Performing Buildings Including the Warranty Phase activities (seasonal testing in winter 2027-2028), this proposal assumes our scope of services will be complete no later than March 31, 2028. Project delays beyond QSE’s control may result in the need to amend the scope and/or fee. Scope Description 1. This proposal is for QSE to provide commissioning of the MEP systems only. It does not include building envelope commissioning, also required by the 2024 Minnesota Energy Code. 2. We have included one retesting visit following initial functional performance testing, assuming there will be some deficiencies found that need to be corrected and retested. If additional retesting is required for reasons outside of QSE’s control, we can provide those services on a time and material basis. Fee Proposal QSE proposes to provide the above scope of services for a lump sum fee of $38,600, including time and reimbursable expenses. QSE will invoice monthly, based on the percentage of total scope completed the previous month. Payment is due 30 days after e-mail receipt of an invoice by the City of Rogers. Past-due invoices shall accrue interest at a rate of 1% per month. QSE’s Billing Policy is incorporated into this proposal. If you accept this proposal by signing below, this Proposal letter and QSE’s Billing Policy (which together are called the “Proposal” or “Agreement”) contain the complete, final and exclusive agreement between QSE and the City of Rogers relating to the Project described above. This Proposal supersedes any and all other prior or contemporaneous agreements or understandings. No amendment to this Proposal will be effective unless it is in writing and signed by both QSE and you as our client. Page 48 of 97Proposal for MEP Commissioning Services May 28, 2026 ™ ® Better Performing Buildings Assignment and Execution The City of Rogers cannot assign any of its obligations to QSE under this Proposal to any third party without the prior written consent of QSE. QSE may withhold or deny consent in its sole discretion. This Proposal may be signed in one or more counterparts. Each counterpart is an original and together are one and the same document. Facsimile or electronic transmissions, images or signatures shall be effective as an original. If you find this proposal acceptable, please print and sign it in the space provided below and return (via fax, mail or scanned email attachment) one signed original to QSE. Thank you very much for the opportunity to contribute to the successful completion of the Rogers Activity Center Expansion Project. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call or email me (612-309-0503, Rebecca.Ellis@QSEng.com) anytime. Respectfully submitted, QUESTIONS & SOLUTIONS ENGINEERING, INC. Rebecca T. Ellis, PE LEED AP, CCP, BCxP, CxA President CITY OF ROGERS (“Client”) Name (Signature) Title Name (Printed) Date Attachments: Commissioning Activities Table Systems to be Commissioned Table QSE Commissioning Qualifications QSE Sports Facility Qualifications QSE Government Qualifications Questions & Solutions Engineering, Inc.’s Billing Policy File: QSERogersActCtrExpCxProp260528 Page 49 of 97Proposal for MEP Commissioning Services May 28, 2026 ™ ® Better Performing Buildings Commissioning Activities Site Labor Activity Notes Source Reference Phase Mtgs Visits Hours Develop commissioning plan Including detailed test plans. 2024 Minnesota D 5 Energy Code CD design review Includes backcheck of responses from 2024 Minnesota D 7 design engineers. Energy Code Develop commissioning specification Preparation of commissioning specification 2024 Minnesota D 5 for inclusion in architect's specifications. Energy Code Also includes coordination of reference language from division-specific specifications to the Div 01 Cx spec. Construction phase Cx kickoff meeting Including planning, facilitation (via virtual 2024 Minnesota C 1 4 platform) and documentation. Energy Code Construction phase commissioning QSE will plan, facilitate, and document Best Practice C 2 6 coordination meetings meetings to coordinate outstanding and upcoming commissioning-related work (via virtual platform unless on-site for other activities). Construction phase meeting participation Attend select construction team meetings Best Practice C 12 12 (via virtual platform) to address commissioning-related topics and stay up- to-date on project developments and schedule. Construction schedule integration QSE will develop a list of Cx milestones for Best Practice C 3 contractor inclusion in master schedule. Includes 1 round of schedule review for compliance. Submittal review 1 review cycle, to be completed in parallel Best Practice C 22 with design engineers' review. Includes backcheck of responses. Controls integration meeting QSE will plan, facilitate, and document one Best Practice C 1 5 controls integration meeting (via virtual platform) with the relevant parties to reconcile any outstanding controls-related Cx comments and resolve any gaps/duplications particularly between custom and packaged controls systems. Site observation QSE will visit the site prior to functional 2024 Minnesota C 2 11 performance testing to review installation Energy Code for accessibility/maintainability and compliance with installation details. Document and track concerns on the commissioning action list. Construction phase documentation review RFIs, ASIs, change orders, meeting minutes, Best Practice C 4 etc. 4 hr allowance. --- continued --- Page 50 of 97Proposal for MEP Commissioning Services May 28, 2026 ™ ® Better Performing Buildings Commissioning Activities Site Labor Activity Notes Source Reference Phase Mtgs Visits Hours Construction checklist development QSE will create construction checklists to 2024 Minnesota C 3 be completed by the contractor to Energy Code document the readiness for testing of each system to be commissioned. Functional performance test procedure Customized test procedures developed by 2024 Minnesota C 8 development QSE for documentation of test results by Energy Code QSE. Construction checklist tracking QSE will collect checklists completed by the 2024 Minnesota C 2 contractor and confirm checklist Energy Code completion. Test & balance report review 1 review cycle, to be completed in parallel Best Practice C 4 with design engineers' review. Includes backcheck of responses. Functional performance testing See Systems to be Commissioned Table for 2024 Minnesota C 4 43 detailed sampling strategy. Function and Energy Code performance to be demonstrated by contractor, facilitated and documented by QSE (including planning and documentation). Assume no phased completion. Deficiency documentation & tracking QSE will document and track deficiencies 2024 Minnesota C 5 on an action list, to be hosted via online Energy Code spreadsheet. Functional performance retesting Retesting allowance of 1 site visit with up to Best Practice C 1 11 6 hours field retesting plus planning and documentation. Develop systems manual 2024 Minnesota C 6 Energy Code Preliminary commissioning report Compile a PDF commissioning report, 2025 Minnesota C 5 culminating commissioning results and Energy Code documentation from the project. Construction phase commissioning process Best Practice C 31 management, communication, and coordination Deferred & seasonal testing QSE will return to the site once during the 2024 Minnesota W 1 11 warranty phase to functionally test any Energy Code commissioned systems that are not ready to be tested at the time of substantial completion and to verify opposite season performance (design cooling or heating). Up to 6 hours total site time plus planning and documentation. Final commissioning report Update the commissioning report to reflect 2024 Minnesota W 2 warranty period activities. Energy Code Warranty phase commissioning process Best Practice W 3 management, communication, and coordination Totals 16 8 218 Page 51 of 97Proposal for MEP Commissioning Services May 28, 2026 ™ ® Better Performing Buildings Test Assumed Sample Systems to be Commissioned Notes Total Qty Rate Test Sample DIV 22 - PLUMBING #REF! 0 #REF! Instantaneous Water Heaters WH-1,2 Gas-Fired 2 100% 2 Water Heaters WH-3 Gas-Fired 1 100% 1 Domestic Hot Water Recirculation Pumps CDP-1, 2 2 100% 2 Domestic hot water system fixture response Random sample of 2 fixtures TBD TBD 2 DIV 23 - HVAC Dehumidification Unit DHU-1 Gas-Fired Desiccant 1 100% 1 Makeup Air Units MAU-1,2 Gas-Fired DX with ERV 2 100% 2 Rooftop Units RTU-1,2,3,4 Gas-Fired/DX 4 100% 4 Exhaust Fans EF-1,2,3,4 4 100% 4 Electric Unit Heaters EUH-1,2,3,4,5,6,7 7 100% 2 Gas-Fired Unit Heaters GUH-1 Gas-Fired 1 100% 1 Radiant Heaters IR-1, 2, 3 Gas-Fired 3 100% 3 Duct Furnace DF-1 Gas-Fired 1 100% 1 Building automation system Extend existing Honeywell Niagara AX system 1 100% 1 DIV 26 - ELECTRICAL Lighting Controls TBD TBD 3 hr field testing allowance Page 52 of 97 Questions & Solutions Engineering Commissioning Company Profile Example Clients Questions & Solutions Engineering (QSE) Commercial works with facility owners and operators worldwide • Blackstone to achieve high performance from their new • Boston Scientific and existing building mechanical, electrical, and • Capital One life safety systems. We are not traditional design • Hormel engineers; rather we are experts in how buildings Healthcare actually operate. • Allina Health System • Inova Health System Commissioning Services • Mayo Clinic Systematically verifying that building systems • Owensboro Health have been designed, installed, properly set-up and • Sanford Health programmed, and tested to meet the Owner’s • University of Chicago Medical Center performance requirements. Government • Oak Ridge National Laboratory In order to set the stage for continued proper • U.S. Department of State operation after occupancy, commissioning also • U.S. Naval Facilities Engineering Command includes the development of systems-level • U.S. Postal Service documentation and operations & maintenance • South Dakota Office of the State Engineer stafftraining planning and oversight. Education • American University QSE is a Certified Commissioning Firm through • University of Kansas the Building Commissioning Association. • University of Minnesota • University of Iowa • Stephen A. Schwartzman College (Beijing, China) Other Services Museums, Sports and Entertainment • Retro-Commissioning • On-Going Commissioning • Getty Villa Museum • LEED Commissioning & Facilitation • The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts • Cx Planning & Program Development • MGM Resorts International • Facility Energy Analysis & Assessment • Minnesota Twins Baseball Club • Owner’s Project Technical Representation 18 YEARS • Design Development 19 360+ YEARS WHO WE ARE DEDICATED OF COMBINED AVERAGE COMMISSIONING COMMISSIONING COMMISSIONING PROFESSIONALS EXPERIENCE EXPERIENCE PER PROFESSIONAL “QSE professionals are personable, proactive and 1300+ $18B+ 92,000+ COMMISSIONING CONSTRUCTION / CX ISSUES IDENTIFIED involved. That’s exactly what we IN TOTAL MAJOR RENOVATION CONSTRUCTION AND TRACKED TO needed.” PROJECTS COSTS COMPLETION QSE Client RETRO- COMMISSIONING 260+ 90M+ $12M+ & ENERGY BUILDINGS STUDIED TOTAL SQUARE FEET ANNUAL ENERGY ANALYSIS SAVINGS 1079 Falls Curve, Chaska, MN 55318 Questions & Solutions® 612.308.4716 ® Engineering LetsTalk@QSEng.biz www.QSEng.com ® Page 53 of 97 Questions & Solutions Engineering Sports Company Profile Services Questions & Solutions Engineering (QSE) Commissioning works with facility owners and operators worldwide Systematically verifying that building to achieve high performance from their new systems have been designed, installed, and existing building mechanical, electrical, and properly set-up and programmed, life safety systems. We are not traditional design and tested to meet the Owner’s engineers; rather we are experts in how buildings performance requirements. actually operate. In order to set the stage for continued proper operation after occupancy, Example Clients commissioning also includes the • Allianz Field (Saint Paul, MN) development of system-level • Amsoil Arena (Duluth, MN) documentation and operations & • CHS Field (Saint Paul, MN) maintenance stafftraining planning • DakotaDome (Vermillion, SD) and oversight. • Denny Sanford PREMIER Center (Sioux Falls, SD) Retro-Commissioning & Energy Analysis • Dykhouse Stadium (Brookings, SD) Evaluating building systems • Petersen Events Center (Pittsburgh, PA) performance and adjusting & • Rough Rider Center (Watford City, ND) optimizing those systems to meet the • Stanley J. Marshall Center (Brookings, SD) Owner’s performance criteria. Retro- • Target Center (Minneapolis, MN) commissioned systems perform more • Target Field (Minneapolis, MN) effectively and efficiently. • U.S. Bank Stadium (Minneapolis, MN) Other Services Other Markets • On-Going Commissioning • Commercial • LEED Commissioning & Facilitation • Healthcare • Cx Planning & Program Development • Government • Facility Energy Analysis & Assessment • Entertainment • Owner’s Project Technical Representation • Education • Design Development • Multifamily Residential • Museums 360+ YEARS 18 YEARS • Industrial 19 AVERAGE WHO WE ARE DEDICATED OF COMBINED COMMISSIONING COMMISSIONING COMMISSIONING QSE is a certifiedWomen Business Enterprise EXPERIENCE PER PROFESSIONALS EXPERIENCE (WBE) under several different certification programs PROFESSIONAL including the Women’s Business Enterprise National Council. 1300+ $18B+ 92,000+ COMMISSIONING CONSTRUCTION / IN TOTAL CX ISSUES IDENTIFIED MAJOR RENOVATION CONSTRUCTION AND TRACKED TO “QSE provides exemplary PROJECTS COSTS COMPLETION service in challenging environments where buildings & business culture demand rare SPORTS 6.4M+ 233,000+ $2.7B+ EXPERIENCE SEATS IN TOTAL professional skills.” TOTAL SQUARE FEET CONSTRUCTION COSTS QSE Client 1079 Falls Curve, Chaska, MN 55318 Questions & Solutions® 612.308.4716 ® Engineering LetsTalk@QSEng.biz www.QSEng.com ® Page 54 of 97 Questions & Solutions Engineering Government Company Profile Services Questions & Solutions Engineering (QSE) Commissioning works with facility owners and operators worldwide Systematically verifying that building systems have been designed, installed, to achieve high performance from their new properly set-up and programmed, and tested to meet the Owner’s and existing building mechanical, electrical, and performance requirements. life safety systems. We are not traditional design In order to set the stage for continued proper operation after occupancy, engineers; rather we are experts in how buildings commissioning also includes the development of system-level actually operate. documentation and operations & maintenance stafftraining planning and oversight. Retro-Commissioning & Energy Analysis Example Clients Evaluating building systems performance Federal Government Departments, Installations & Programs and adjusting & optimizing those systems • Ellsworth Air Force Base to meet the Owner’s performance criteria. • Fermi Research Alliance Retro-commissioned systems perform • Fort Greely Army Base more effectively and efficiently. • Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base Other Services • Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research • On-Going Commissioning • Grand Forks Air Force Base • LEED Commissioning & Facilitation • Minneapolis-Saint Paul Air Reserve Station • Cx Planning & Program Development • Oak Ridge National Laboratory • Facility Energy Analysis & Assessment • U.S. Department of State • Owner’s Project Representation • U.S. Naval Facilities Engineering Command • Design Development • U.S. Postal Service Other Markets • Healthcare State & Local Government • Commercial • South Dakota Office of the State Engineer • Education • State of Minnesota • Museums • Douglas County, WI • Sports • Hennepin County, MN • Entertainment • Sherburne County, MN • Industrial • City of Minneapolis • City of Rochester 360+ YEARS 18 YEARS • City of Saint Paul 19 AVERAGE WHO WE ARE DEDICATED OF COMBINED COMMISSIONING COMMISSIONING COMMISSIONING • City of Sioux Falls EXPERIENCE PER PROFESSIONALS EXPERIENCE PROFESSIONAL “We are grateful for QSE’s 1300+ 92,000+ COMMISSIONING $18B+ CX ISSUES IDENTIFIED QSE CONSTRUCTION / IN TOTAL support and always feel is MAJOR RENOVATION CONSTRUCTION AND TRACKED TO always looking out for our best PROJECTS COSTS COMPLETION interests.” QSE Client MAJORITY CERTIFIED LEED 120+ 65% OR EXPERIENCE LEED COMMISSIONING GOLD LEED ACCREDITED PROJECTS SILVER PROFESSIONALS 1079 Falls Curve, Chaska, MN 55318 Questions & Solutions® 612.308.4716 ® Engineering LetsTalk@QSEng.biz www.QSEng.com ® Page 55 of 97Proposal for MEP Commissioning Services May 28, 2026 ™ ® Better Performing Buildings Questions & Solutions Engineering, Inc.’s Billing Policy This Billing Policy describes the standard terms and billing policies of Questions & Solutions Engineering, Inc. (QSE) that apply to QSE’s services to you, the Client. The Proposal letter and this Billing Policy together are referred to as the “Agreement”. If terms in the Proposal letter conflict with the terms contained in this policy, the Proposal letter terms control. 1. Billing. QSE generally bills fees and expenses monthly for actual time spent and expenses incurred during the previous month. Invoices are due and payable thirty (30) days after receipt, including receipt through electronic means, such as e-mail. 2. Interest/Collection Costs. Interest at a rate of 1% per month (or the maximum allowable rate, if lower) shall be charged on any unpaid past due invoice. Client shall reimburse or pay QSE for all collection costs, including, but not limited to attorneys’ fees, that QSE incurs in attempting to collect unpaid past due invoices. 3. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Client agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless QSE and its consultants, employees and agents from and against any and all claims arising out of or caused by the negligence or intentional acts of Client, general contractor, subcontractors, material suppliers or any third party. Client has no obligation, however, to defend, indemnify or hold QSE harmless in the event that the claim was caused by the sole negligence or intentional acts of QSE. 4. Limitation of Liability. In recognition of the relative risks and benefits of the project to Client and QSE, the risks have been allocated such that Client agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to limit the liability of QSE, and QSE’s consultants, to Client and to the general contractor and its subcontractors, and suppliers, or any other third party, on the Project for any and all liability, claims, demands, damages, expenses (including attorneys’ fees, expert and administrative costs) from any cause or causes, so that the total aggregate liability of QSE and its consultants to all of those named shall not exceed QSE’s total fee for services rendered on this project. This limitation of liability includes without limitation allegations or proof of negligence, indemnity, breach of contract, strict liability, warranty or any other claim or cause of action. 5. Termination. Client is free to terminate QSE’s services and QSE may terminate its services without cause at any time upon written notice. Without limiting QSE’s termination rights, QSE may terminate its services if Client does not cooperate or pay QSE’s fees and/or expenses in a timely manner, or if QSE determines in its sole discretion that continuing to provide services would be unethical or impractical. If Client terminates QSE’s services or if QSE terminates its services, all fees and expenses incurred by QSE up to that time are immediately due and payable. QSE may also charge Client a reasonable fee for the cost of copying, retrieving and/or transferring Client’s files, papers, and property. 6. Governing Law/Jurisdiction/Waiver of Jury Trial. The Agreement is governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota without giving effect to principles that would make the laws of any other jurisdiction apply. A state or federal court of competent jurisdiction located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any and all disputes arising out of or relating to the Agreement. Client expressly agrees and consents to the personal jurisdiction of the state and federal courts located in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Client permanently waives any claim that it is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of any such courts, or that venue in any such courts is improper or inconvenient. CLIENT EXPRESSLY, KNOWINGLY AND VOLUNTARILY WAIVES ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO (AND AGREES NOT TO REQUEST) A JURY TRIAL FOR THE ADJUDICATION OF ANY DISPUTE HEREUNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH OR ARISING OUT OF THE AGREEMENT. Page 56 of 97 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: July 14, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.6 Subject: Approval of Scoreboard Purchase for Tria Rink Rogers Prepared By: Mike Bauer, Parks & Recreation Director Recommended Council Action Move to approve the purchase of Daktronics scoreboard equipment for Rink Two at a cost of $31,844, with shipment scheduled for Aug/Sept 2027, funded by the approved Rink Two FFE budget Overview / Background / Analysis Construction of Rink Two is just beginning, and staff have secured a complete quote for the necessary Daktronics scoreboard and timing equipment. Purchasing this equipment now allows the City to secure current pricing before an anticipated price increase at the end of July. The vendor has confirmed that the City may place the order now with a shipment date in August/September 2027, aligning with the installation timeline for the facility while ensuring price protection. All equipment specified matches the Daktronics systems already used in the Rogers Activity Center. • Two Daktronics H-2104-W LED Hockey Scoreboards, including AS-5010 console controllers Price: $11,140.00 each / $22,280.00 total • Three Daktronics TI2031 locker room clocks (Referee's Room, Coaches' Room, and Hallway) Price: $2,130.00 • One Daktronics Varsity Goal Lights set (Requirement for youth State and Regional Tournaments) Price: $4,020.00 • One Daktronics TI-2101 Four-Digit Timer with receiver (Hour Clock next to ice resurface room like Rink 1) Price: $3,220.00 Page 57 of 97 • One backlit ID panel (3'H x 10'W) Price: $3,110.00 • Installation and training, includes mounting scoreboards and clocks, installing 500’ signal wire, wireless control setup, testing Price: $2,650.00 • Estimated freight Price: $850.00 • Custom ID panel backlit, similar to Rink 1 Price $4,724.00 Total $31,844 Warranty: 5 years All costs will be covered by the previously approved Rink Two FFE budget. Staff Recommendation Approval of a motion authorizing staff to purchase the scoreboard and timing equipment package for Tria Rink Rogers (Rink Two), securing current pricing and scheduling shipment for August/September 2027, with funding from the approved Rink Two FFE budget. Financial Impact: $31,844 Source Fund: 411-RAC Expansion Page 58 of 97Budgeted? Yes Supporting Documentation A. Rogers activity center H2104 TI2101 LR clocks panel quote 6-26 scan Page 59 of 97Page 60 of 97Page 61 of 97 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: July 14, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.7 Subject: Approval of Resolution 2026-65 Approving a Site Plan Request to Convert a Single-Family Residence to an Assembly Use at 13620 Brockton Lane N and Authorize execution of Site Improvement Performance Agreement Prepared By: Alec Henderson, City Planner Overview / Background / Analysis MN Sikh, represented by Gurdeep Singh, has submitted a site plan application to convert the existing single-family residence at 13620 Brockton Lane to an assembly use. The 4.28-acre parcel is located in the R3 (Medium Density Residential) zoning district and is adjacent to Grass Lake, placing it within the Grass Lake Natural Environment shoreland overlay district under Sec. 125-100. The property is unplatted and is currently served by private well and septic. The applicant proposes to remodel the interior of the existing home to accommodate a small weekly assembly (one service per week, approximately three hours on Sundays). Exterior improvements include construction of a 25-stall parking area and updated driveway connection to Brockton Lane, ADA parking and accessible ramp, and a biofiltration basin (P1) for stormwater management. The existing gravel surface area shown on the plan is proposed to remain as gravel in the interim, with paving deferred pending a Site Improvement Agreement. Municipal sanitary sewer and water services are not currently available on the east side of Brockton Lane; the applicant proposes to coordinate connection with the Hennepin County CSAH 13 reconstruction project anticipated for 2027. The proposed site improvements total approximately 18,034 square feet, representing approximately 9.3% of the gross site area above the OHWL (195,645 SF). This figure exceeds the 10% minor site plan amendment threshold when measured on a net basis against the 2,962 SF of existing hardscape proposed for removal. Accordingly, the application is processed as a full site plan under Sec. 125-27, requiring Planning Commission review and City Council approval. It is anticipated by the owner that should the assembly use grow, a new construction building will be brought forward with more permanent improvements to the site including parking and access. The owner is remodeling the existing home as an interim solution to space needed for their use. ZONING AND LAND USE Page 62 of 97The subject property is zoned R3 (Medium Density Residential). Religious assembly uses are permitted in the R3 district subject to site plan approval. The site is located within the Grass Lake shoreland overlay district; Grass Lake is classified as a Natural Environment lake under Minn. Rules 6120. Applicable shoreland standards include a 150-foot structure setback from the OHWL, a 50-foot shore impact zone, and a 25% impervious surface limit calculated above the OHWL. Adjacent land uses and zoning are as follows: • North: Medium Density Residential / Grass Lake Preserve (open space) • South: R3 (Medium Density Residential) / single-family residential • East: Grass Lake (protected water) • West: Brockton Lane (CSAH 13) / single-family residential SITE PLAN ANALYSIS Access and Parking. The existing gravel driveway access off Brockton Lane is proposed to be paved and expanded to meet the 24-foot minimum width required under Sec. 125-86(e)(1). The site plan shows 25 total parking stalls, including 3 ADA- accessible stalls. ADA parking and the accessible route to the building entrance shall be paved prior to occupancy. The remaining parking area is proposed as gravel on an interim basis, with full paving required within one year of occupancy or upon City Council approval of an extension under the Site Improvement Agreement. Interim dust control (application of dust suppressant) shall be applied to the gravel surface a minimum of twice per year until paving is complete. Stormwater Management. The applicant proposes a biofiltration basin (P1) to manage stormwater from the new impervious surfaces. The basin has a bottom elevation of 914.50, a runout elevation of 915.50, and a 100-year water elevation of 916.41. A sodded overflow and Class II riprap outlet are shown on Sheet C4. Engineering review of the drainage calculations and basin sizing is pending based on review comments from City engineer. No substantial changes are expected. Shoreland. The subject property is located within the Grass Lake shoreland overlay district. The site plan must be revised to include the OHWL elevation, shore impact zone boundary, and required shoreland setbacks. Impervious surface above the OHWL is limited to 25% under Sec. 125-100. The plan currently shows proposed impervious at 8.2% of site area above the OHWL (16,494 SF proposed impervious / 195,645 SF site area). No substantial changes are expected for information being placed on plans (e.g. improvements are setback sufficiently form the OHWL). Utilities. The property is served by a private well and an existing septic system for which Hennepin County Environmental Services has no record on file. A compliance inspection of the existing septic system is required as a condition of any change of use. The inspection must be completed prior to conversion of the property to assembly use Page 63 of 97and must confirm the system is adequately sized for the proposed use and anticipated occupancy. If the system is found to be non-compliant or undersized, the applicant must expand, replace, or connect to municipal sewer prior to commencing assembly use. Connection to municipal sanitary sewer and water is planned in conjunction with the Hennepin County CSAH 13 reconstruction project in 2027; this timeline is to be formalized in the Site Improvement Agreement. Wetland Delineation. The parcel is unplatted and contains potential wetland areas. A wetland delineation has been submitted. A completed delineation is required prior to grading. If the delineation identifies wetland impacts, the applicant must obtain all required wetland replacement permits and any associated mitigation plan shall be reviewed and approved prior to issuance of a grading or building permit. Fire Review. The Fire Marshal has reviewed the proposed and the applicant will be providing fire suppression for the assembly use consistent with code requirements. SITE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT Given the phased nature of the proposed improvements, the applicant is required to enter into a Site Improvement Agreement with the City as a condition of site plan approval. The agreement will address, at minimum, the following: 1. ADA parking stalls and accessible route to the building entrance shall be paved prior to occupancy. 2. Remaining parking area shall be paved within one year of the date of the certificate of occupancy. The City Council may grant an extension of this deadline upon written request. Interim dust control (application of dust suppressant) shall be applied to the gravel parking surface a minimum of twice per calendar year until paving is complete. 3. Connection to municipal sanitary sewer and water services shall be completed in conjunction with the Hennepin County CSAH 13 (Brockton Lane) reconstruction project, anticipated for 2027. The applicant shall provide the City with written confirmation of coordination with Hennepin County prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. Wetland delineation and, if applicable, all required wetland replacement permits and mitigation plans shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a grading permit. 5. Financial security shall be provided in an amount and form acceptable to the City Engineer to guarantee completion of required improvements or waiver of assessment. Staff Recommendation Page 64 of 97 The Planning Commission recommended approval of the site plan at the July 6th meeting, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval is subject to the plans dated May 28, 2026, as prepared by Plowe Engineering, Inc. (Project No. 26-2239), as may be revised to address all outstanding staff comments. Revisions shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to issuance of any building or grading permit. 2. The Applicant shall enter into a Site Improvement Agreement with the City, in a form approved by the City Attorney, prior to issuance of any building permit, and shall post financial security in an amount acceptable to the City Engineer to guarantee completion of required improvements. 3. ADA-accessible parking stalls and the accessible route from those stalls to the building entrance shall be paved prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. The remaining parking area shall be paved with a durable and dustless surface within one (1) year of the date of the certificate of occupancy. The City Council may grant a written extension of this deadline upon written request. During any interim period, dust suppressant shall be applied to the gravel surface a minimum of twice per calendar year and as requested by the City of Rogers. 5. Connection to municipal sanitary sewer and water services shall be completed in conjunction with the Hennepin County CSAH 13 (Brockton Lane) reconstruction project and within the compliance timeframe established by Hennepin County Environmental Services, but no later than December 31, 2030. Written confirmation of coordination with Hennepin County shall be provided to the City prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall provide results of a septic compliance inspection completed by a licensed inspector and accepted by Hennepin County Environmental Services confirming the existing septic system is adequately sized for the proposed religious assembly use. If the system is found non-compliant or undersized, the Applicant shall remediate or replace the system to the satisfaction of Hennepin County Environmental Services or complete the municipal sanitary sewer connection required by para 5 above prior to commencement of the religious assembly use. 7. A completed wetland delineation shall be submitted prior to issuance of any grading permit. If wetland impacts are identified, all required wetland replacement permits and any mitigation measures shall be obtained and approved prior to initiation of grading or site work. 8. The site shall comply with all applicable shoreland standards under Sec. 125-100, including the 150-foot structure setback from the OHWL, shore impact zone standards, and the 25% impervious surface limit. 9. Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission permitting shall be obtained prior to construction if disturbance is one acre or greater. 10. All exterior light shall be downcast and/or cutoff lighting. 11. All plan revisions shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, City Planner, and Fire Marshal prior to issuance of any permit. Page 65 of 97Financial Impact: Not Applicable Source Fund: Not Applciable Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. MN_Sikh_Resolution_2026-65 B. MN_Sikh_Site_Improvement_Agreement_COUNCIL_DRAFT_7-9-26 C. MN_Sikh_Preliminary Comments_6-16-26 D. 13620 Brockton Lane - Civil Plans (6-26-26) Page 66 of 97 CITY OF ROGERS RESOLUTION NO. 2026-65 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SITE PLAN FOR CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE TO AN ASSEMBLY USE AT 13620 BROCKTON LANE WHEREAS, GG Holdings LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, represented by Gurdeep Singh (“Applicant”), has submitted a request for Site Plan approval to convert the existing single-family residence at 13620 Brockton Lane, Rogers, Minnesota (“Subject Property”) to a religious assembly use, together with associated exterior site improvements, as legally described in Exhibit A; and, WHEREAS, the Subject Property is approximately 4.28 acres in area, is guided Medium Density Residential per the Rogers 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and is zoned R3 (Mid-Density Residential); and, WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located within the Grass Lake shoreland overlay district, as Grass Lake is classified as a Natural Environment lake; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to remodel the interior of the existing residential structure for use as a location for small religious assemblies (one weekly service of approximately three hours), and to construct exterior improvements including a 25-stall parking area, paved driveway connection to Brockton Lane, ADA-accessible parking and ramp, and a biofiltration basin for stormwater management, as shown in Exhibit B; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to connect to municipal sanitary sewer and water services in conjunction with the Hennepin County CSAH 13 (Brockton Lane) reconstruction project anticipated for 2027, and to operate on existing private well and septic in the interim, subject to a septic compliance inspection and Hennepin County Environmental Services approval; and, WHEREAS, the proposed site improvements total approximately 18,034 square feet, which exceeds the 10% minor site plan amendment threshold, requiring full site plan review and approval under Sec. 125-27 of the Rogers Zoning Ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission (“Commission”) considered the Site Plan request based on the current zoning regulations and the Comprehensive Plan designation at their regular meeting on June 6th, 2026; and, WHEREAS, following the meeting the Commission recommended approval of the Site Plan based on the following findings: A. The Site Plan is consistent with the requirements of Sec. 125-27. Page 1 of 6 Page 67 of 97 B. Religious Assembly is a permitted use in the R3 zoning district, subject to site plan approval. C. The proposed improvements are consistent with the Medium Density Residential land use designation in the Rogers 2040 Comprehensive Plan. D. The proposed site improvements, as conditioned, are consistent with the applicable shoreland standards under Sec. 125-100. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROGERS, MINNESOTA, the Site Plan request from MN Sikh for property at 13620 Brockton Lane is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval is subject to the plans dated May 28, 2026, as prepared by Plowe Engineering, Inc. (Project No. 26-2239), as may be revised to address all outstanding staff comments. Revisions shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to issuance of any building or grading permit. 2. The Applicant shall enter into a Site Improvement Agreement with the City, in a form approved by the City Attorney, prior to issuance of any building permit, and shall post financial security in an amount acceptable to the City Engineer to guarantee completion of required improvements. 3. ADA-accessible parking stalls and the accessible route from those stalls to the building entrance shall be paved prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. The remaining parking area shall be paved with a durable and dustless surface within one (1) year of the date of the certificate of occupancy. The City Council may grant a written extension of this deadline upon written request. During any interim period, dust suppressant shall be applied to the gravel surface a minimum of twice per calendar year and as requested by the City of Rogers. 5. Connection to municipal sanitary sewer and water services shall be completed in conjunction with the Hennepin County CSAH 13 (Brockton Lane) reconstruction project and within the compliance timeframe established by Hennepin County Environmental Services, but no later than December 31, 2030. Written confirmation of coordination with Hennepin County shall be provided to the City prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall provide results of a septic compliance inspection completed by a licensed inspector and accepted by Hennepin County Environmental Services confirming the existing septic system is adequately sized for the proposed religious assembly use. If the system is found non-compliant or undersized, the Applicant shall remediate or replace the system to the satisfaction of Hennepin County Environmental Services or complete the municipal sanitary sewer connection required by para 5 above prior to commencement of the religious assembly use. 7. A completed wetland delineation shall be submitted prior to issuance of any grading permit. If wetland impacts are identified, all required wetland replacement permits and any mitigation measures shall be obtained and approved prior to initiation of grading or site work. 8. The site shall comply with all applicable shoreland standards under Sec. 125-100, including the 150-foot structure setback from the OHWL, shore impact zone standards, and the 25% impervious surface limit. Page 2 of 6 Page 68 of 979. Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission permitting shall be obtained prior to construction if disturbance is one acre or greater. 10. All exterior light shall be downcast and/or cutoff lighting. 11. All plan revisions shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, City Planner, and Fire Marshal prior to issuance of any permit. [Balance of this page was left intentionally blank] Page 3 of 6 Page 69 of 97 Moved by Councilmember _________________________, seconded by Councilmember _________________________ The following voted in favor of said resolution: The following voted against the same: The following abstained: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, and was signed by the Mayor, and attested by the Clerk dated 14th day of July, 2026. ______________________________ Shannon Klick, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________________ Stacie Brown, City Clerk Page 4 of 6 Page 70 of 97 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION That part of Government Lots 1 and 2, Section 13, Township 120, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of the East 1 /2 of the Southeast 1 /4 of said Section 13; thence North along the West line of said East 1/2 a distance of 1060.0 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence continuing North along said West line 348.5 feet; thence East parallel with the South line of said Government Lot 2 a distance of 625.0 feet; thence South parallel with said West Line 348.5 feet; thence West parallel with said South line 625.0 feet to the point of beginning, according to the United States Government Survey thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota. PID: 1312023440002 Page 5 of 6 Page 71 of 97 EXHIBIT B SITE PLAN Civil plans prepared by Plowe Engineering, Inc., dated May 28, 2026 (Project No. 26-2239), on file in the office of the Community Development Department at Rogers City Hall. Page 6 of 6 Page 72 of 97 REVIEW MEMO 0MN Sikh (attn: Gurdeep Singh and Pinda Singh) 19315 Sorrel Ct, Corcoran, MN 55340 gurdeep18@gmail.com; spmgholding@yahoo.com RE: Site Plan Application - 13620 Brockton Lane (MN Sikh) – Preliminary Review June 16, 2026 Dear Gurdeep Singh, On June 3, 2026, the City of Rogers received a preliminary civil engineering submittal from Plowe Engineering, Inc. on behalf of MN Sikh for proposed site improvements at 13620 Brockton Lane. Your request has been reviewed by Fire, Public Works, and Planning staff. This memo should be considered a preliminary review memo. Revised plans are required prior to additional review by engineering. Additional plans will need approval prior to construction. Staff has reviewed the proposed scope of work and has determined that this project requires full Site Plan approval under Sec. 125-27 of the Rogers Zoning Ordinance. The proposed site improvements exceed 10% of the total existing site area, which requires Planning Commission review and City Council approval rather than administrative review. The City can schedule Planning Commission review for July 6, 2026 and City Council consideration for July 14, 2026. However, the plans will require revisions and approval prior to construction and any approvals from the City Council will be conditioned on plans meeting the requirements of code and engineering. Given the phased nature of the proposed improvements, the City will require a Site Improvement Agreement as a condition of site plan approval. At minimum, the agreement will address: (1) a timeline and trigger event for connection to municipal sanitary sewer and water services, including coordination with the Hennepin County Brockton Lane reconstruction project anticipated for 2027; (2) a timeline and performance standard for paving of the gravel parking area, including interim dust control measures required prior to paving; and (3) financial security or waiver of assessment in an amount acceptable to the City Engineer to guarantee completion of required improvements. 1. Missing Items a. Wetland Delineation needed. i. A wetland delineation must be provided to confirm no wetland impacts result from the proposed improvements or demo work. This has been a consistent outstanding item. Please coordinate with Engineering. b. Septic System Compliance i. Hennepin County Environmental Services has no record of the existing septic system on file for this property. A compliance inspection is required as a condition of any change of use and must be completed prior to conversion of the property to assembly use. The inspection will determine whether the existing system is code- compliant and adequately sized for the proposed use and expected occupancy. If the system is found to be non-compliant, the applicant will have up to three years to replace the system or connect to municipal sewer while operating under the existing 22350 S. Diamond Lake Rd. | Phone: 763-428-2253 Fax: 763-428-4470 | www.rogersmn.gov Page 73 of 97 system, provided the system is not surfacing. If the system is undersized for the proposed use, the applicant must expand, replace, or connect to municipal sewer before the change of use may occur. The City notes that the applicant’s plans already contemplate connection to municipal sanitary sewer in coordination with the 2027 Hennepin County CSAH 13 reconstruction project, which may satisfy this requirement if the compliance inspection is completed and connection occurs within the required timeframe. Contact Matt Bolterman, Hennepin County Senior Health Inspector (Matthew.Bolterman@hennepin.us, 612-919-9221) to coordinate the compliance inspection. 2. High Level Comments a. Civil Plan Set i. Removal Plan: Show tree removals associated with the project. ii. Site Plan: Show building and parking setbacks. Provide information on pavement typical sections. iii. Grading and Drainage Plan: Show construction limits. Label the OHWL elevation. Show spot elevations along the county ditch. iv. Update all details to current City of Rogers standard plates. Contact Mike Albers (malbers@rogersmn.gov) with questions regarding civil standards. v. Ensure plan contains information related to shoreland impacts and shoreland requirements. Please see Sec. 125-100. Shoreline OHWL needs to be shown, shore impact zone needs to be shown, shoreland setbacks need to be shown. Impervious surface is limited to 25% and calculations need to be shown. b. Fire Department– Fire suppression via well-fed storage tanks in the basement has been approved by the Fire Marshal. No municipal water connection is required for fire suppression at this time. Continue coordination with Jason Albers, jalbers@rogersmn.gov. c. The resubmittal must address all comments contained in the City’s prior incomplete notice dated December 23, 2025, as well as all comments discussed at the February 2026 meeting with City staff. These comments remain in effect and are not restated in full here. The resubmittal must demonstrate compliance with code, engineering standards and review. 3. County Coordination a. Continue coordination regarding change in use with Hennepin County and identify County comments or permits that may be required for driveway changes. Contact Christina Neel (christina.neel@hennepin.us), Development Review Coordinator. b. Continue coordination with Hennepin County Septic Inspector for change in use compliance for existing septic system. Contact Matt Bolterman (Matthew.Bolterman@hennepin.us), Hennepin County Senior Health Inspector. Please submit the above information for a complete application. Sincerely, Alec Henderson, AICP City Planner CC: Brett Angell, Mike Albers, Patrick Farrens, Jason Albers, Caleb Hansen Page 74 of 97Page 75 of 97Page 76 of 97Page 77 of 97Page 78 of 97Page 79 of 97Page 80 of 97Page 81 of 97Page 82 of 97 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: July 14, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 7.1 Subject: Approve Items Related to Amending Section 125-84(i) Swimming Pools, Hot Tubs, and Spas. • Ordinance 2026-13, Amending Section 125-84(i) Swimming Pools, Hot Tubs, and Spas • Resolution 2026-67, Authorizing summary publication of Ord. 2026-13 Prepared By: Alec Henderson, City Planner Overview / Background / Analysis City Staff is proposing amendments to Section 125-84(i) (Swimming Pools) of the Rogers Zoning Code to bring the City’s standards for swimming pools, hot tubs, and spas into conformance with the Minnesota State Building Code. The proposed changes are set forth in Ordinance No. 2026-13. The State Building Code sets safety requirements for residential pools, hot tubs, and spas. A barrier must enclose the water and may not have any opening large enough to pass a four-inch sphere, the gap between the bottom of the barrier and the ground may not exceed two inches, and the pool side of the barrier must sit at least twenty inches from the water’s edge. Access gates must be self-closing and self-latching. As an alternative to a fence, an automatic cover meeting ASTM F1346 may be used. These requirements apply to hot tubs and spas as well as to pools. The current language in Sec. 125-84(i) contains inconsistencies with present building code and speaks only to swimming pools. It does not carry several of the safety standards the State now requires, it does not extend any standard to hot tubs or spas, and it treats the pool setback as an extra five feet added on top of the other required yard setbacks, which has caused confusion in the field. The exceptions for above- ground and temporary pools are also unclear. The amendment corrects each of these and renames the section to reflect its broader scope. Summary of Proposed Changes to Sec. 125-84(i) Swimming pools, hot tubs, and spas. The section is retitled and its standards are extended to hot tubs and spas, which the State Building Code already regulates but the current section does not address. A hot tub or spa fitted with a lockable hard cover meeting ASTM F1346 is exempt from the fencing requirement. State building code safety standards. The barrier and gate standards are aligned to Page 83 of 97the building code. A barrier may not pass a four-inch sphere, may not leave more than a two-inch gap at the ground, and must stand at least twenty inches back from the water on the pool side. Gates must be self-closing and self-latching, and the maximum gap beneath a gate is reduced from 2.5 inches to two inches. An automatic cover meeting ASTM F1346 is allowed in place of a safety fence. Setbacks. The setback is amended as a single, clear standard rather than five feet layered on top of other yard setbacks. A pool, hot tub, or spa may not sit within five feet of any side or rear lot line, within the required front yard, within any wetland buffer, or within any drainage and utility easement, measured from the nearest wall or edge of the structure. Any associated deck, coping, or patio carries the same five-foot side and rear setback. Above-ground and temporary pools; removable ladders. The exceptions are clarified. The wall of an above-ground pool at least four feet above grade may serve as the required barrier, provided the ladder or steps are surrounded by a compliant barrier or removed when the pool is not in use. A temporary pool with sides over four feet and a removable ladder needs no fence. Any pool with a removable ladder must have the ladder removed when the pool is not in use. Conforming and clarifying changes. The maximum barrier height is reduced from eight feet to six feet to match the City’s general fence-height standard. Equipment- location language is simplified to require placement in the rear yard at least ten feet from any lot line, pool lighting must be downward-facing and full cut-off with no spillage onto adjacent property, and several provisions are renumbered as duplicative items are consolidated. Planning Commission Review A public hearing was held, and this item was reviewed at the July 6th Planning Commission meeting. The item was unanimously recommended for approval. Staff Recommendation Staff recommend the approval of Ordinance 2026-13 amending City Code Section 125084(i) related to Swimming Pools, Hot Tubs, and Spas and Resolution 2026-67 authorizing the summary publication of the ordinance. Financial Impact: Not Applicable Source Fund: Not Applicable Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. Ord_2026-13-Amending_Sec_125-84i-Pools B. Resolution_2026-67_Authorizing_Summary_Publication_of_Ordinance_2026-13 Page 84 of 97 CITY OF ROGERS ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ROGERS CITY CODE SECTION 125-84(i) SWIMMING POOLS, HOT TUBS, AND SPAS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROGERS, MINNESOTA, HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 125-84(i) Swimming Pools is hereby amended and retitled. The strikethrough text indicates removal of text and the underlined text indicates added text: Sec. 125-84(i). Swimming pools. Swimming Pools, Hot Tubs, and Spas. (1) Required permits; application. a. A building permit shall be required for any swimming pool swimming pool, hot tub, or spa with a capacity of over 5,000 gallons or with a depth of over two feet of water, whichever is less. b. An application for a building permit shall include a site plan showing the type and size of pool swimming pool, hot tub, or spa; location of pool the structure; location of house, garage, fencing and other improvements on the lot; location of structures on all adjacent lots; location of filter unit, pump and writing indicating the type of such units; location of back-flush and drainage outlets; grading plan; finished elevations and final treatment (decking, landscaping, etc.) around the pool swimming pool, hot tub, or spa; location of existing overhead and underground wiring, utility easements, trees and similar features; and location of any water heating units. (2) Performance standards. a. Pools Swimming pools, hot tubs, and spas shall not be located within 20 feet of any septic treatment or absorption area, 10 feet from any septic holding tank tank/drainfield, nor within six feet of any principal structure or frost footing. b. Pools shall be located 5 feet at minimum from any required front- side- or rear-yard setbacks, wetland buffer or drainage and utility easement. Swimming pools, hot tubs, and spas shall not be located within five (5) feet of any side or rear lot line, within the required front yard, within any wetland buffer, or within any drainage and utility easement. The required setback shall be measured from the nearest exterior wall or edge of the pool, hot tub, or spa structure. Any deck, coping, patio, or similar surface constructed in conjunction with a pool, hot tub, or spa shall be set back no less than five (5) feet from any side or rear lot line. c. Pools Swimming pools, hot tubs, and spas shall not be located beneath overhead utility lines nor over underground utility lines of any types type. d. Pools shall not be located within any private or public utility, walkway or other easement. e. d. In the case of in-ground pools, necessary precautions shall be taken during the construction to avoid damage, hazards, or inconvenience to adjacent or nearby property and assure ensure that proper care shall be is taken in stockpiling excavated material to avoid erosion, dust, or other infringements upon adjacent property. f. e. All access for construction shall be over the owner’s land and due care shall be taken to avoid damage to public streets and adjacent private or public property. g. f. To the extent feasible, back-flush water or water from pool drainage shall be directed onto the owner’s property or into approved public drainageways. Water shall not drain onto adjacent or nearby private land. h. g. The filter unit, pump, heating unit, and any other noise-making mechanical equipment shall be located at least 35 feet from any adjacent or nearby and not closer than 10 feet to any lot line, and located no closer than ten (10) feet to any lot line and shall be located in the rear yard. i. h. Lighting for the pool swimming pool, hot tub, or spa shall be directed toward the pool and not toward adjacent property. Any lighting on poles shall be downward facing and full cut-off. There shall be no light spillage onto adjacent properties. Page 85 of 97 j. i. A structure or safety fence at least four feet in height, but not greater than eight six feet in height, shall completely enclose the swimming pool, hot tub, or spa. The barrier shall have no opening that allows passage of a four-inch (4") diameter sphere, and shall maintain a maximum gap of two (2) inches between the bottom of the barrier and the ground along the entire perimeter. The pool side of the barrier shall be no less than twenty (20) inches from the water’s edge. As an alternative to a safety fence, an automatic pool cover may be utilized if it meets the standards of ASTM F1346-91 (Reapproved 1996) of the American Society of Testing and Materials, as such standards may be modified, superseded, or replaced by ASTM. Hot tubs and spas equipped with a lockable hard cover that meets ASTM F1346-91 shall be exempt from the fencing requirement of this subsection. 1. If the pool is temporary in nature, no fence is needed if the pool sides are greater than four (4) feet in height and the pool has a removable ladder. 2. For above-ground pools, the pool structure wall may serve as the required barrier if it is at least four (4) feet above grade. The ladder or steps providing access to the pool shall be surrounded by a barrier meeting the requirements of this subsection or shall be removed when the pool is not in use. k. j. Water in the pool swimming pool, hot tub, or spa shall be maintained in a suitable manner to avoid health hazards of any type and shall be subject to periodic inspection by the local health officer. l. k. All wiring, installation of heating units, grading, installation of pipes, and all other installations and construction shall be subject to inspection. m. l. All access gates for pool enclosures shall contain self-closing and self-latching hardware in accordance with the adopted building code. Spacing between the bottom of the access gate and the ground shall not exceed 2.5 two (2) inches. n. m. Pools Swimming pools, hot tubs, and spas shall have required safety fencing or approved covers installed prior to filling with water. o. n. Any proposed deviation from these standards and requirements shall require a variance. p. o. Should a property have a fence in the backyard that meets the height provisions stated above, an additional fence shall not be required around the swimming pool, hot tub, or spa. Such fence shall be required to have a self-latching mechanism on the interior side of the fence. q. p. All requirements of the state building code shall be met. A building permit shall be issued by the building inspector that verifies state code requirements have been met. r. q. All swimming pools with removable ladders shall have the ladder removed when the pool is not in use. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force immediately after its passage and publication in accordance with applicable law. Dated the ___ day of __________, 2026. _______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ City Clerk Page 86 of 97 RESOLUTION 2026-67 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 2026-13 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rogers adopted Ordinance No. 2026-09 titled “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ROGERS CITY CODE SECTION 125-84(i) SWIMMING POOLS, HOT TUBS, AND SPAS”, and WHEREAS, in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps, Minnesota state law allows the City Council to approve, by a four-fifths vote, the publication of an Ordinance by title and summary only; and WHEREAS, the expense to publish the complete text of Ordinance No. 2026-13 is not justified; and WHEREAS, the following summary clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rogers, Hennepin County, Minnesota, that the following summary is hereby approved for official publication: Summary of Ordinance 2026-13 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ROGERS CITY CODE SECTION 125-84(i) RELATED TO SWIMMING POOLS, HOT TUBS, AND SPAS On the 14th day of July, 2026, the Rogers City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2026-13, an ordinance amending Section 125-84(i) of the Rogers City Code related to swimming pools, hot tubs, and spas. The amendment aligns the City's regulations with the Minnesota State Building Code. It retitles the section to include hot tubs and spas, adopts the building code's barrier and gate safety standards, restates the required setback as a single measurement from the pool, hot tub, or spa to the nearest lot line rather than an added five feet, clarifies the exceptions for above-ground and temporary pools, and reduces the maximum barrier height from eight feet to six feet to match the City's general fence standard. The full text of the Ordinance may be reviewed at City Hall, located at 22350 South Diamond Lake Road, Rogers, MN 55374. The ordinance can also be viewed online at our website http://rogersmn.gov. Page 1 of 2 Page 87 of 97Moved by Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember ; The following voted in favor of said resolution: The following voted against the same: The following abstained: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, and was signed by the Mayor, and attested by the City Clerk dated this 14th day of July, 2026. ATTEST: Shannon Klick, Mayor Stacie Brown, City Clerk Page 2 of 2 Page 88 of 97 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: July 14, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 7.2 Subject: Approve Change Order Nos. 2, 3, and 4 for Fletcher Bypass, City Project No. 1409 Prepared By: Mike Albers, Assistant City Engineer Recommended Council Action Motion to Approve Change Order Nos. 2, 3, and 4 for Fletcher Bypass, City Project No. 1409 Overview / Background / Analysis The City of Rogers, in collaboration with Hennepin County, is leading the design and construction of Fletcher Bypass, which realigns a 3/4 mile segment of Fletcher Lane, generally between 1,600’ south of Territorial Road (County Road 159) and County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 81. The project is designed to enhance traffic operations, improve roadway safety, and provide enhanced pedestrian and bicycle facilities. On August 26, 2025, the City Council awarded a contract to C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. of Maple Grove, Minnesota for the above referenced improvement. The original contract amount was $6,124,677.78. The total estimated project cost at the time of bid award including contingencies, right of way, railroad crossing, wetland mitigation, administration, engineering and legal, was $10,100,000 representing a 24.3 percent decrease from the $13.35 million estimated in the City's 2024 Capital Improvement Program. On June 9, 2026, the City Council approved Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $58,000, increasing the contract amount to $6,182,677.78. The attached Change Order Nos. 2, 3, and 4 were necessary during construction of the street and utility improvements for the Fletcher Bypass project. • Change Order No. 2 in the amount of $396,924.20 is for additional subgrade correction, discing the subgrade to a depth of approximately 12 inches rather than the contract requirement of 6 inches, installation of MnDOT Type 9 geotextile fabric, and installation of supplemental subsurface drainage to intercept and convey groundwater within the project limits due to the discovery of poor/wet soils. • Change Order 3 in the amount of $47,330.66 is for potholing, removal of the existing field drain tile that is unsuitable to remain beneath the proposed roadway section, and installation of new drain tile parallel to the roadway to restore the existing field drainage system. This change order also includes the installation of 4-inch drain tile along the south side of the distribution slab, which Page 89 of 97 was approved as part of Change Order No. 1, to prevent water from becoming trapped adjacent to the slab. • Change Order 4 in the amount of $169,350 is for muck excavation that has been encountered near the CSAH 81 ditch and the railroad tracks. Due to the poor quality of the underlying soil and the proposed grading requirements, this material must be removed. The combined amount of Change Order Nos. 2-4 is $613,604.86 increasing the contract amount from $6,182,677.78 to $6,796,282.64. The cumulative value of Change Order Nos. 1-4 is $671,604.86 which represents an increase of 10.97 percent over the original contract amount. The cost of Change Order Nos. 1-4 will be split 50/50 between the City and County funding in accordance with the project funding agreement. Staff Recommendation Motion to Approve Change Order Nos. 2, 3, and 4 for Fletcher Bypass, City Project No. 1409 Financial Impact: $613,604.86 Source Fund: MSA, 401, 402, Hennepin County Funds Budgeted? Yes Supporting Documentation A. Fletcher Bypass - Change Order 2 B. Fletcher Bypass - Change Order 3 C. Fletcher Bypass - Change Order 4 Page 90 of 97 STATE AID FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION Rev. December 2024 CHANGE ORDER Page 1 of 3 SP 238-020-007, 238-137-001, SP 027-716-012 Minn. Project No. CDS 2724 (170) Change Order No. 2 Project Location: Fletcher Bypass Project Local Agency: City of Rogers Local Project No. 1409 Contractor: C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. Contract No. Contractor Address: 7865 Jefferson Highway Maple Grove, MN 55369 Total Change Order Amount: $396,924.20 Issue: In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions. The Engineer, in coordination with the City of Rogers, Hennepin County, and the Contractor, determined that the addition of MnDOT Type 9 geotextile fabric is necessary to support the proposed roadway section over areas of wet, saturated clayey soils. Initial contract requirements included performing 6 inches of discing and drying; however, these efforts did not result in measurable improvement in subgrade moisture conditions. The project is located within an agricultural field containing extensive existing drain tile systems, which has made effective drying of the in-place soils difficult due to continuous moisture migration. A geotechnical engineering memorandum dated May 6, 2026, outlines a revised subgrade preparation approach consisting of discing the subgrade to a depth of approximately 12 inches, followed by recompaction over a period of one to two days. A test roll is then to be performed using a TR-10 truck to evaluate subgrade stability. If the test roll does not meet performance criteria, an additional day of discing and recompaction is to be completed, followed by repeat testing. Acceptance criteria established in the memorandum indicate that rutting or deflection less than 4 inches does not require additional subgrade correction. Observed deflections exceeding 4 inches indicate unsuitable subgrade conditions and require corrective measures, including removal of approximately 1 foot of subgrade material, placement of Type 9 geotextile fabric, and installation of an additional 1 foot of select granular embankment to provide adequate structural support. In addition, the memorandum recommends installation of supplemental subsurface drainage to intercept and convey groundwater within the project limits. This additional work requires connecting the subsurface drainage pipe into many of the storm sewer structures. New drain tile systems have been incorporated into the design and are shown on plan sheets 163R, 164R, and 165R. As a second addition, and in accordance with a memorandum dated May 15, 2026, the presence of saturated, wet in-place soils prompted a geotechnical engineer to recommend a reduction in required utility trench compaction. Specifically, the compaction requirement was modified from 100 percent Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density to 95 percent Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density. This revision impacts MnDOT Table 2106.3-4 – Required Compaction, Line 4, which governs compaction requirements for all depths within excavation trenches and structure backfill under Specification 2451, “Structure Excavations and Backfills.” This work will be considered "Contract Revisions" as provided for by Specification 1402. Payment for this work will be at negotiated unit prices and contract unit prices, as shown in the estimate of cost. This cost includes all labor, equipment, materials, and allowable Prime Contractor mark-up to complete the work as specified herein. Contract Time: Will be negotiated on a future Change Order Estimate Of Cost: (Include any increases or decreases in contract items, any negotiated or force account items.) Group/Funding + or – + or – Item No. Description Unit Unit Price Category** Quantity Amount $ Federal Eligible / SP 238-020-007 & 027-716-012 - Group 1 2106.507 EXCAVATION - SUBGRADE C Y $3.30* 1500 $4,950.00 Federal Eligible / SP 238-020-007 & 027-716-012 - SELECT GRANULAR EMBANKMENT Group 1 2106.507 (CV) C Y $25.00* 1500 $37,500.00 Page 91 of 97 STATE AID FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION Rev. December 2024 CHANGE ORDER Page 3 of 3 Hennepin 7/8/2026 County: Date: Nariman Vanaki Print Name: Phone: 612-596-0291 DSAE Portion: The State of Minnesota is not a participant in this contract. Signature by the District State Aid Engineer is for FUNDING PURPOSES ONLY and for compliance with State and Federal Aid Rules/Policy. Eligibility does not guarantee funds will be available. This work is eligible for: ___ Federal Funding ___ State Aid Funding ___ Local funds District State Aid Engineer: Date: Page 93 of 97 7/8/2026 Nariman Vanaki 612-596-0291 Page 95 of 97 7/8/2026 Nariman Vanaki 612-596-0291 Page 97 of 97