AGENDA Rogers City Council August 25, 2026 - 7:00 PM Budget Work Session at 5:00 p.m. 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 3.1 Presentation and Discussion with Hennepin County Commissioner Kevin Anderson 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 August 10, 2026 Work Session Minutes and August 13, 2026 City Council Meeting Minutes 5.2 Approval of Bills and Claims 5.3 Approval of an Application for Rogers Otsego Dayton Women of Today to Conduct Excluded Bingo on January 28, 2027; March 11, 2027; September 23, 2027; and November 11, 2027 at the 21st Century Bank Event Center Located at 12716 Main Street, Rogers, Minnesota 5.4 Approval of Policies360 Subscription Agreement for Police Department Policy Management System Page 1 of 129 5.5 Approve Change Order No. 2 for Rogers Activity Center (RAC) Expansion, City Project No. 2406 5.6 Accept Resignation of Officer Hunter Wilhoite and Authorization to Advertise, Recruit, and Fill Police Officer Positions 5.7 Approve Resolution 2026-78 Increasing Paid-on-Call PERA SVF Pension Amount 5.8 Approval of a Corrective Quit Claim Deed Related to the Dahlheimer Billboard at PID 23-120-23-41-0012 5.9 Approve Resolution 2026-79 Accepting Donations for Rogers Fire Department Open House 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7. GENERAL BUSINESS 7.1 Approval of Resolution No. 2026-80, A Resolution Providing for the Competitive Negotiated Sale of $39,235,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2026B 7.2 Approve Hiring of Tonya Larsen to the Position of Community Engagement Specialist 7.3 Approve Recruitment For Hiring of Building Inspector II Position 7.4 Approve Hiring of Paid-on-Call Firefighters 7.5 Items Related to Street Maintenance • Accept Resignation (Retirement) and Recognize Street and Stormwater Supervisor Mike Sable • Approve Promotion of Brian Scharber to Street and Stormwater Supervisor • Approve Promotion of David Tiemam to Street and Stormwater Crew Leader • Authorize the Backfill of Street Maintenance Heavy Equipment Operator (HEO) 8. OTHER BUSINESS 9. CORRESPONDENCE AND REPORTS 10. ADJOURN Page 2 of 129 Page 3 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.1 Subject: Approval of August 10, 2026 Work Session Minutes and August 13, 2026 City Council Meeting Minutes Prepared By: Stacie Brown, City Clerk Recommended Council Action Motion to approve the August 10, 2026 Work Session Minutes and the August 13, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. Overview / Background / Analysis Staff Recommendation Motion to approve the August 10, 2026 Work Session Minutes and the August 13, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. Financial Impact: Source Fund: Budgeted? Supporting Documentation A. 08102026min work session B. 08132026min Page 4 of 129 City of Rogers Budget Work Session Minutes August 10, 2026 1. CALL TO ORDER The Budget Work Session of the City Council of the City of Rogers was called to order by Mayor Klick on Tuesday, July 28, 2026, at 5:30 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; Stacy Scharber, Assistant City Administrator/HR Director; Bridget Bruska, Finance Director; Dan Wills, Chief of Police; Patrick Farrens, Fire Chief; Doran Cote, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Mike Bauer, Parks and Recreation Director; and Brett Angell, Community Development Director. 2. GENERAL BUSINESS Finance Director Bruska opened the Budget Work Session with a review of the 2027 Property Tax Levy and budget overview, including updated fiscal disparities, capital reserves, and the impact on median home values, with department heads providing input on specific fund allocations and anticipated changes. o Fiscal Disparities Update: Bruska noted a decrease in the city's fiscal disparities contribution which positively affects tax rates. She explained that approximately 40% of the commercial base goes into the fiscal disparities pool and the updated tax capacity is slightly lower than previous years. o Capital Reserve Allocations: Bruska reviewed various capital reserves, including information systems, general government buildings, facilities, equipment, subgrade correction, parks and trails, and the Rogers Activity Center, with specific annual increases, pauses, and future planning for projects such as cold storage and central garage funds. o Median Home Impact: Bruska explained that the proposed levy would result in a 2.5% increase in the median home value, translating to a $344 annual increase for a median-valued home, based on updated property values and tax calculations. o Debt Levies and Legal Obligations: Debt levies, including equipment loans and bond repayments, were reviewed, with Bruska emphasizing legal obligations to levy for these items and noting minimal changes in debt service payments for the upcoming year. o General Fund Budget Highlights: The general fund budget highlights spreadsheet was presented, showing a 25% increase in the general fund operating levy, primarily driven by personal services, and breaking out major operational items for council discussion, including software additions, insurance, Page 5 of 129 and revenue adjustments. • Personnel Requests and Staffing Changes: Bruska and department heads presented detailed personnel requests for 2027, including new positions, reclassifications, and mid-year hires across Administration, IS, Payroll, Police, Fire, Building Inspections, and Parks, with explanations of roles, timelines, and anticipated impacts. o Administration Intern and Equipment: Communications Manager Williams requested a Communications Intern for the busy summer months, supported by a need for camera equipment costing $3,000–$5,000, with the intern expected to cover summer activities and events, and no plans for a full-time position in the near future. o IS Services Coordinator Expansion: IS Director Greninger submitted a request to elevate the IS technician role to a services coordinator, with Devon Bainey managing ticket coordination and Adam Bjelland proposed as a backfill, reflecting the expanding network and increased demands from new city sites. o Payroll Coordinator reclassification: Andrea Poythress's payroll role was recommended for reclassification due to increased complexity from new state laws, leave administration, and detailed reporting requirements, with her expertise surpassing the original payroll clerk position and handling complex payroll and benefit issues. o Police staffing additions: Chief Wills outlined requests for a sixth Sergeant, a full- time Property and Evidence Clerk, a full-time Records Management Technician, and additional CSO funding, citing increased call complexity, evidence management needs, and data request workloads, with timelines for hiring and organizational chart updates. o Fire Department staffing and duty crew transition: Chief Farrens proposed adding a Deputy Fire Marshal, launching a rental inspection program, transitioning to a duty crew model for overnight coverage, and postponing Station 3 construction, with detailed analysis of call volumes, recruitment challenges, and apparatus fleet changes. o Building Inspector staffing: the Building Department requested converting a part- time Inspector to full-time, aiming for candidates with plumbing and building inspection skills, and discussed succession planning, permit complexity, and cost comparisons between in-house and Metro West services. o Parks and Recreation staffing: A Park Maintenance employee, Custodian, and Program/Events Coordinator were requested as mid-year hires, with Eric Kolles already hired, and positions split between departments to support the new TruStone Center and event scheduling. o Compensation structure adjustment: Assistant Administrator/HR Director Scharber explained the compensation structure adjustment, including a 4% COLA for non-union and union employees, use of the Hay method for position points, and state pay equity reporting, with the adjustment impacting the general fund levy by under $80,000. • Operational Budget Adjustments and Departmental Initiatives: Bruska and department heads reviewed significant operational budget items, including software upgrades, insurance, revenue changes, and departmental initiatives such as FOIA software, permit systems, property casualty insurance, and parks maintenance, with questions Page 6 of 129 and clarifications addressed throughout. o Software and Technology Upgrades: FOIA data request software and IMS permit/licensing software paired with DigiPlan were approved and implemented, replacing previous systems and streamlining processes, with go-live dates and staff training discussed. o Insurance and Appraisal Updates: Property casualty insurance was reviewed, with a $20,000 increase anticipated based on League of Minnesota Cities recommendations and ongoing property and equipment appraisals, assuming stable values and inflationary adjustments. o Revenue and Expense Adjustments: Assessment search revenue decreased due to reduced requests after implementing fees, while Event Center rentals and engineering computer replacements reduced the levy, and recycling fees and yard waste permit revenues increased based on historical trends and contract changes. o Parks and Recreation initiatives: Senior Recreation program revenues and expenses increased due to shared trips with Otsego, park usage fees rose with more rentable spaces, and emerald ash borer control was budgeted at $76,000, with policies for removal and replacement discussed. o Public Works and Maintenance: Street maintenance revenues and supplies increased based on state projections, and a reclamite trial project was proposed to extend road life, with details on process, coverage, and expected outcomes provided by Public Works Director/City Engineer Cote. • Fire Department Duty Crew transition and apparatus changes: Chief Farrens presented a plan to transition the Fire Department to a duty crew model for overnight coverage, discussed recruitment and retention challenges, analyzed call volumes, and recommended postponing Station 3 construction in favor of staffing and apparatus changes, with input from the team on operational impacts. o Duty Crew implementation: A request was made for $75,000 to staff three Firefighters from 10:00 PM to 4:00 AM Monday through Thursday, targeting periods with the fewest respondents and highest risk, with plans to expand coverage in future years and apply for SAFER grants. o Recruitment and retention challenges: the department faces declining paid-on- call participation, extended leaves, and staff departures, with survey responses highlighting the need for predictable schedules and duty crew models to improve recruitment and retention. o Apparatus fleet adjustments: Chief Farrens recommended reducing one engine from the fleet, replacing the tower truck with a straight ladder stick for cost savings, and leveraging high resale values, with operational benefits and safety improvements discussed. o Station 3 postponement: The construction of Station 3 was recommended for postponement, with provisional land purchase advised, citing studies on optimal station placement, staffing needs, and cost comparisons favoring duty crew staffing over immediate capital investment. • Police Department staffing and evidence management: Chief Wills detailed the need for additional police staffing, including a sixth Sergeant, a full-time property and evidence clerk, and a full-time records management technician, citing increased complexity, Page 7 of 129 evidence management requirements, and data request workloads, with timelines and organizational impacts discussed. o Sergeant Staffing Increase: The department plans to promote a fifth Sergeant in October and hire a sixth in the second quarter of 2027, aiming for three shifts of two sergeants to achieve near 24/7 coverage and improve supervision, training, and liability reduction. o Property and Evidence Clerk addition: an audit revealed the need for a dedicated civilian Property and Evidence Clerk to manage evidence intake, retention, and disposition, addressing issues of multiple personnel handling evidence and ensuring compliance with best practices and audit recommendations. o Records Management Technician expansion: the records unit faces increased workloads from State laws on clean slate and cannabis expungements, body worn camera data requests, and report processing, necessitating a transition from part-time to full-time Records Management Technician to meet demand. o CSO Program Funding: additional funding was requested to maintain a robust part-time CSO program, supporting recruitment and retention of officers, with plans to hire three new CSOs and maintain a pool of five part-time staff. • Civic Campus bonding and Levy timing: Bruska explained the approach to bonding for the Civic Campus, detailing the use of cash on hand from Underserved Municipalities distribution and lease revenues to delay levy impact until 2028, with anticipated debt amounts and options for early payment discussed. o Bonding strategy: using cash on hand to cover the first debt payment for the Civic Campus, delaying the levy impact until 2028, with a projected $3.2 million debt reduced to $1.7 million after applying lease revenues and distribution funds. o Levy impact timing: by balancing cash and debt payments, the Civic Campus will not affect the 2027 levy, with the impact expected in 2028, and options discussed for using funds to pay down debt early versus increasing the levy. Follow-up tasks: • Emerald Ash Borer grant opportunities: identify and pursue available State grant programs to offset costs related to emerald ash borer tree removal and replacement. (Cote) • Civic Campus Bond Levy Timing: Prepare options for the timing of the Civic Campus bond levy, including analysis of using cash on hand versus starting the levy in 2027 or 2028, for discussion at the next meeting. (Bruska) • August 25th Preliminary Levy Meeting Preparation: compile and provide any requested information or materials for the August 25th meeting, including a summary page of the Financial Management Plan (FMP) and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) overview. (Bruska/Cote) • Police Department Recruitment Video: develop and implement a recruitment video to attract new Police Officer candidates, highlighting department features and benefits. (Wills) • Property and Evidence Clerk job description: develop the job description for the new Property and Evidence Clerk position, referencing neighboring cities and best practices. (Wills) • Fire Department SAFER grant application: begin preparations to apply for the FEMA Safer Grant in 2028 to offset costs for duty crew lieutenant staffing. (Farrens) Page 8 of 129 3. ADJOURN Mayor Klick adjourned the meeting at 4:13 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Stacie Brown City Clerk Page 9 of 129 City of Rogers City Council Meeting Minutes August 13, 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 Thursday, August 13, 2026, at 6:00 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; Doran Cote, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Mike Bauer, Parks and Recreation Director; Brett Angell, Community Development Director; Zachary Gatton, Planning Intern; 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 Enga seconded a motion to approve the agenda as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. 5. CONSENT AGENDA 5.1 Approval of the July 28, 2026 Council Work Session Minutes and July 28, 2026 City Council Meeting Minutes 5.2 Approval of Bills and Claims 5.3 Approval of Application for Gambling Exempt Permit for Mary Queen of Peace Catholic Church 5.4 Approval of Special Event Permit Application for Northridge Fellowship for September 12, 2026 5.5 Approval of a Special Event Permit Application for The Block - Rogers for September 18, 2026 Including a Temporary Extension of Premises for Liquor Service 5.6 Conditional Approval of Special Event Permit Application for the Crown Room at 20500 South Diamond Lake Road for August 22, 2026 5.7 Resolution No 2026-74, A Resolution Canvassing the 2026 Primary Election 5.8 Acceptance of a Donation from Rogers Otsego Youth Baseball for Portable Pitching Mounds via Resolution No. 2026-73 and Approval for Staff to Purchase Page 10 of 129 Mounds 5.9 Call for Budget Workshop: Setting a Workshop of the City Council for August 25, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. at the Rogers Community Room, 21201 Memorial Drive, Rogers, MN 5.10 Approve Change Order No. 1 for Rogers Activity Center (RAC) Expansion, City Project No. 2406 5.11 Approve Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with WSB & Associates for Fletcher Bypass, City Project No. 1409 5.12 Authorization to Proceed with Concession Stand Fire-Damage Repairs and Equipment Replacement 5.13 Approval of Resolution 2026-75 Accepting Street Improvements for Continual Maintenance and Authorizing Letter of Credit Release for Skye Meadows 3rd Addition 5.14 Approval of an Early Grading Agreement with Cloutier Properties for the Rogers Drive Retail Center at 21355 136th Avenue 5.15 Acceptance of a Livable Communities Grant from the Metropolitan Council and a Professional Services Agreement with Stantec Related to a Housing Study 5.16 Approval of Resolution 2026-76 Harvest View 1st Addition Letter of Credit Release 5.17 Approval of Resolution 2026-77 Reducing the Letter of Credit for Towns at Fox Creek 3rd Addition Councilor Enga removed Item 5.8 for separate discussion. Councilor Eiden moved, Councilor Jullie seconded a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0. Item 5.8; Acceptance of a Donation from Rogers Otsego Youth Baseball for Portable Pitching Mounds via Resolution 2026-73, and Approval for Staff to Purchase Mounds Councilor Enga acknowledged Rogers Otsego Youth Baseball for their donation and Council thanked the organization. Councilor Enga moved, Councilor Eiden seconded a motion to Approve Resolution 2026- 73; Accepting a Donation from Rogers Otsego Youth Baseball for Portable Pitching Mounds and authorizing staff to purchase mounds. Motion carried 5-0. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 7. GENERAL BUSINESS 7.1 Consider Amendments to City Code and Zoning Code related to the Keeping of Animals and Backyard Chickens Community Development Director Angell summarized the background of discussions regarding the keeping of chickens on smaller residential lots. He noted that a lot of time has Page 11 of 129been spent on this subject, which began with an active code enforcement case and led to a community survey to gather feedback from residents for consideration. With 550 responses received, the majority were in favor of allowing chickens based on lot sizes. Planning Intern Zachary Gatton shared a summary of changes which would allow residents on smaller lots to keep backyard chickens in all zoning districts as an accessory use. The number of chickens allowed would be based on lot sizes: • Less than 0.20 acres: Chickens not allowed • 0.20 to less than 05.0 acres: Six chickens allowed • 0.50 to less than 2.0 acres: Ten chickens allowed • 2.0 to less than 3 acres: Twenty chickens allowed • Roosters and crossing hens are not allowed on lots less than 3 acres • Only chickens allowed; this Ordinance does not apply to waterfowl, peafowl, or other commonly kept birds Gatton reviewed requirements for coops and run areas: • Must be 10' from property lines and 30' from neighboring residential dwellings • Must be constructed of durable materials • Coops must include ventilation, windows, and insulation to protect birds from the weather • Coops must provide a minimum of 4 square feet of floor area per hen in the coop, and a minimum of 10 square feet per hen in the run area • Run areas must be fully enclosed, even from able with a mesh material • Shelters over 200 square feet will be considered an accessory structure • Most runs and coops will need to be screened with a privacy fence or landscaping • Chickens may range only within a fully fenced rear yard during the day, and must be secured in the coop or run from sunset to sunrise • Slaughter of chickens is not allowed on lots less than one acre Gatton shared that a Public Hearing was held at the August 3rd Planning Commission meeting, with some members of the public and Planning Commissioners wanting to see a permit process in place before allowing chickens. This ordinance will not go into effect until 2027 with the implementation of new permitting software. Mayor Klick asked to clarify the dwelling specification, and Gatton explained that it's written as 30 feet from dwelling and 10 feet from property line. This does not refer to a structure in the yard. Councilor Brockman asked if a deck is considered part of the dwelling, Angell said a deck is not generally considered as part of a principal dwelling. Councilor Eiden asked about enforcement. Angell stated that the license process will add a separate layer, and enforcement would be complaint-based. If not complying, a resident would not be allowed to keep chickens. Licenses can be revoked, and there would be an added ability to have contact info for each owner. With this being a non-inspection license, it reduces staff time. However, City Planner Henderson will be reviewing all applications. Page 12 of 129 Councilor Enga asked how this affects legally non-conforming properties at this point. Angell stated it's looking at single-family dwellings as a specific use. City Attorney Vose noted this would be permitted accessory use in all districts, as long as it's a single-family home. All the rules will still be enforceable; there are no exceptions. Councilor Jullie asked about feedback from those who are opposed, noting that what one person thinks is a nuisance, the others may not. He expressed concerns over this resulting in problems between neighbors and the City being dragged in to resolve it. Angell explained there is a fine line where it becomes a civil issue, and there would be nothing the City could do. Limiting the number allowed limits the smell, and if there is a violation, a letter can be sent. Jullie asked about predators, confirming the yard had to be fenced. Angell stated the coop needs to be completely enclosed, and there is a fence component. In certain circumstances, the backyard has to be fenced in. The Ordinance has two components; the coop and the run, which need to be fully enclosed with mesh wiring or top. The chickens will have to be in a run or a fully enclosed fenced yard during the day. Angell clarified it does not need to be a perimeter fence; it can be a fenced area in the yard. Jullie stated that he respects people's right to use their backyard, but he has concerns that it could create staff time constraints and the need for additional staff. Angell noted that many other cities have allowed chickens, and there are a lot of resources to ease the burden on staff time. As a one-time license, he has fewer concerns. Vose stated his understanding is there are set objective requirements, but if a person has a license and a compliant facility, a neighbor's complaint that the chickens are too noisy will not be handled by staff. Angell noted there is a similarity to dogs, where the City also gets complaints. Jullie inquired about the aesthetics of the coop, and Angell stated that section 5c addresses construction requirements, including materials, ventilation and installation. These details will be part of the licensing requirement. Enga asked if the coops would be elevated, and Gatton confirmed they will unless constructed on a concrete slab. Ventilation and airflow can aid in reducing smells. Enga asked about storage of waste, and Gatton confirmed it needs to be contained in a leak- proof container until it can be disposed of properly. Feed needs to be stored in a rodent- proof container. Councilor Brockman noted several people have expressed the 0.20 lot is too small and may negatively impact their property value. He also expressed concern with the licensing practice, especially with non-inspection. Jullie asked if this came up at the Planning Commission, Angell stated that of five individuals who spoke, three were in favor and two had concerns. He noted will always be spit, and through the survey he sees more that are in favor than opposed. This is up to Council to move forward, make changes, or not move forward. Klick noted recommending talking with neighbors as best practice. Page 13 of 129Councilor Enga asked how many of the 0.20 properties fall within HOA's. Angell stated he doesn't know exactly how many, but it's quite a few. HOA's can have higher restrictions, and the City would not enforce them. Klick stated she is generally in favor, but she could see decks becoming a problem with proximity. Angell stated a slight alteration could be made to include attached accessories, including decks. Angell asked if the Council would also want to include patios, which was confirmed. Enga inquired about staff time for the licensing and permitting process. Angell confirmed that as someone submits, it will go through a completeness check, a fee is paid up front, and review would take 5-10 minutes; not counting any revisions. Eiden reiterated that a plan would be required, including materials, which Angell confirmed. Angell noted there will be a small fee to cover staff time and encourages commitment by the property owner. Eiden stressed the importance of encouraging conversations with neighbors. Angell noted a requirement would be a checkbox acknowledging they've reviewed the Ordinance. Councilor Eiden moved, Councilor Enga seconded a motion to adopt Ordinance 2026-14 with a revision to include attached accessory structures to the setback requirements, and approving Resolution 2026-64 Authorizing Summary Publication of the Ordinance. Motion carried 4-1, with Brockman opposed. 8. OTHER BUSINESS None. 9. CORRESPONDENCE AND REPORTS 9.1 Second Quarter 2026 Financial Reports 9.2 Council-Staff Goalsetting 2026/2027, Report and Work Plan 10. ADJOURN Mayor Klick adjourned the meeting at 7:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Stacie Brown City Clerk Page 14 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 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. 08-07-2026 Checks #98166-98227 & ACH Payments C. 08-07-2026 Checks #98238-98257 UB Overpayments D. 08-14-2026 Checks #98258-98296 & ACH Payments E. July P-Card Allocations Page 15 of 129CITY OF ROGERS 08.25.2026 CITY COUNCIL MEETING OPERATING ACCOUNTS - ADDITIONAL CLAIMS PAID/TO BE PAID City Payroll Checks, Taxes & Misc Fees Paid 8/6/2026ADP Child Support/Garnishment 716.28 8/6/2026ADP Direct Deposits 292,829.31 8/7/2026ADP Fees 2,146.05 8/7/2026ADP Fees 1,039.50 8/7/2026ADP Fees 1,274.40 8/6/2026 ADP Payroll Taxes 116,156.74 8/10/2026Associated Bank FSA/DCAP 202.00 8/11/2026Associated Bank FSA & DCAP Participant Fees 60.00 8/5/2026Associated Bank Cobra Fees 62.30 8/10/2026ICMA Deferred Compensation 3,125.00 8/6/2026Associated Bank Health Plan Fund 7,220.95 8/10/2026PERA 82,709.31 8/10/2026State of MN HCSP 4,688.68 8/10/2026State of MN - Deferred Comp 14,486.00 Payroll & Misc Fee Expenditures 526,716.52 City Checks & ACH Paid 8/7/2026City Checks & ACH Paid (98166-98227) 593,654.87 8/7/2026City Checks UB Overpayments (98238-98257) 1,633.04 8/14/2026City Checks & ACH Paid (98258-98296) 1,053,686.16 City Misc ACH/Wires Paid 1,648,974.07 8/17/2026Civic Pay ACH Fees Utility Billing 42.05 7/17/2026US Bank Credit Cards - July 54,395.83 8/11/2026Wells Fargo Client Analysis Fees 1,962.75 8/14/2026MNDOR - Water Sales Tax 5,297.00 City ACH/Wire Expenditures 61,697.63 Liquor Misc ACH/WiresCity Total Paid To Be Approved 2,237,388.22 8/10/2026MNDOR - Liquor Sales Tax 48,822.00 Liquor ACH/Wire Expenditures 48,822.00 Liquor Total to Be Approved 48,822.00 Page 16 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.3 Subject: Approval of an Application for Rogers Otsego Dayton Women of Today to Conduct Excluded Bingo on January 28, 2027; March 11, 2027; September 23, 2027; and November 11, 2027 at the 21st Century Bank Event Center Located at 12716 Main Street, Rogers, Minnesota Prepared By: Stacie Brown, City Clerk Recommended Council Action Motion to approve an application from Rogers Otsego Dayton Women of Today to conduct excluded bingo at 12716 Main Street on January 28, 2027; March 11, 2027; September 23, 2027; and November 11, 2027. Overview / Background / Analysis The City has received an application from Rogers Otsego Dayton Women of Today to conduct excluded bingo at 12716 Main Street on January 28, 2027; March 11, 2027; September 23, 2027; and November 11, 2027 Staff Recommendation Motion to approve an application from Rogers Otsego Dayton Women of Today to conduct excluded bingo at 12716 Main Street on January 28, 2027; March 11, 2027; September 23, 2027; and November 11, 2027. Financial Impact: Source Fund: Budgeted? Supporting Documentation None Page 17 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.4 Subject: Approval of Policies360 Subscription Agreement for Police Department Policy Management System Prepared By: Dan Wills, Chief of Police Recommended Council Action Motion to Approve Policies360 Subscription Agreement for Police Department Policy Management System Overview / Background / Analysis In January 2012, the Rogers Police Department moved from a paper-based binder policy manual to Lexipol, one of the few online policy management platforms available at the time and a long-standing industry leader. While Lexipol had its limitations and served a nationwide customer base, it remained the strongest option for many years, and the department continued to maintain policies within the system. Recently, a new Minnesota-based provider, Policies360, has emerged with features that better align with our agency’s needs. Policies360 offers policies written directly to Minnesota accreditation standards and crafted specifically for Minnesota law enforcement, avoiding generic nationwide templates that often lack local relevance. Policies are concise, clear, and non-prescriptive, maintaining professional discretion while keeping policy and procedure separate, a feature Lexipol is currently unable to offer. The platform also includes a mobile app that provides officers immediate, real-time access to policies in the field. In addition, Policies360 provides direct access to a dedicated Minnesota attorney and Law Enforcement Training Academy & Consulting (LETAC) support staff, with no call centers or delays, ensuring timely, state-specific legal guidance. This direct support model will save significant internal staff time, especially when legislation changes, as Policies360’s legal team performs all required research and updates to keep policies current, a service not available or reliably time-sensitive through Lexipol. LETAC USA, the organization behind Policies360, has been in operation for over 30 years. The company has since grown into a leading provider of law enforcement training, organizational consulting, and policy development services, and we trust this newer addition to their suite of services is built on decades of experience in law enforcement training and policy development. We will commence our contract with Policies360 in September, and discontinue our contract with Lexipol in December, so there will be a net budget impact of roughly $7,000 this year. Page 18 of 129 The included Policies360 Service Agreement has been vetted by Attorney Vose. Staff Recommendation Approval of Policies360 Subscription Agreement for Police Department Policy Management System Financial Impact: $15,147.50 Source Fund: Budgeted? No Supporting Documentation A. RPD Policies360 Agreement V3 7.13.26 Page 19 of 129 1 SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE AND HOSTING SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT This SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE AND HOSTING SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is effective as of September 1, 2026 (“Effective Date”) and is made and entered into by and between the Rogers Police Department, a municipal corporation located at 21860 Industrial Court, Rogers, MN 55374 (“Subscriber”), and LETAC USA, LLC, located at 1809 Northwestern Avenue, Stillwater, MN 55082 (“Licensor”). Subscriber and Licensor are referred to individually as a “Party” and collectively as “Parties”. RECITALS A. Licensor has developed, owns and provides online, subscription-based law enforcement policies as described in Exhibit A (“Policies360 & Procedures360”); and B. Subscriber desires to license, access and utilize Policies360 as a benefit to its organization; and C. The Parties mutually agree Policies360 be made available to Subscriber and its employees under the terms and conditions of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing express promises and the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, Subscriber and Licensor hereby agree as follows: 1. AGREEMENT; TERM 1.1. Subject to early termination of this Agreement by Subscriber as provided herein, Licensor shall provide the Services for the term of thirty-six (36) months commencing on the Commencement Date. 1.2. Subscriber shall have the option, exercisable at its sole discretion, to extend the term for up to twenty-four (24) months by giving Licensor notice in writing at least ninety (90) days before the date on which this Agreement would otherwise expire. 1.3. If Subscriber exercises the option provided in Article 1.2 to extend the term, Subscriber shall have further options, exercised at its sole discretion, to extend the term for up to an additional twenty-four (24) months by giving Licensor notice in writing at least ninety (90) days before the date on which this Agreement, as extended pursuant to Article 1.2, would otherwise expire. © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 20 of 129 2 1.4. Licensor shall notify Subscriber, at least sixty (60) days prior to the end of the current term, of any proposed increase in the fee for the extension of the term. If such notice is not provided by Licensor at least sixty (60) days prior to the end of the current term, the fees for the extension period cannot be increased. 2. DEFINITIONS The following terms, when used in this Agreement, shall have the meanings provided below: “Authorized Users” shall mean employees, representatives, consultants, contractors, or agents of Subscriber whom Subscriber has authorized to use the Services and to whom Licensor has supplied user identifications and passwords. “Claims” shall mean any of the following, including any combination thereof: causes of action (in rem or in personam), assertions, demands, allegations, proceedings, suits, losses, liabilities, fines, penalties, costs, damages, judgments, awards, and expenses, including court costs and attorneys’ fees, and sums paid by way of settlement and compromise. “Commencement Date” means the date Subscriber first accesses the Systems and begins using the Services. “Indemnify” shall mean defend, indemnify, and hold harmless; and terms such as “Indemnified”, “Indemnifying”, “Indemnification”, “Indemnity”, “Indemnitor”, and “Indemnitee” shall have appropriately correlative meanings and be construed accordingly. “Licensor Technology” means all of Licensor’s proprietary technology (including software, hardware, products, processes, algorithms, user interfaces, know-how, techniques, designs, documentation, and other tangible or intangible technical material or information) made available to Subscriber by Licensor in providing the Services. “Personal Data” means any first or last name, physical address, email address telephone number, other information that allows physical or online contacting of an individual, or other identity employment information, employee identification number, biometric identification data, or other individually identifiable information that may be accessible to Licensor because of Subscriber using the Services. “Services” means the specific edition of Licensor’s Policies360, its online policies, manuals and software application identified in Exhibit A, developed, operated, maintained and hosted by Licensor and made accessible designated website or IP address, and ancillary online or offline products and services provided to Subscriber by Licensor, to which Subscriber is being granted access under this Agreement, including the Licensor Technology and Systems. “Subscriber Data” means any technology, intellectual property, data, information, or material provided or submitted by Subscriber to the Systems in the course of using the Services. Subscriber Data shall include Personal Data. © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 21 of 129 3 “Systems” means the application software, network servers, hardware, software, and data operations utilized by Licensor for the provision of Services. 3. LICENSE GRANT 3.1. In consideration of the fees Subscriber shall pay to Licensor as set forth in Exhibit B of this Agreement and the remaining obligations of Subscriber as set forth herein, Licensor grants to Subscriber and Subscriber accepts a nonexclusive non-transferable worldwide license for Subscriber and Authorized Users to access and use the Services set forth in Exhibit A. Subscriber agrees that only Authorized Users shall access and use the Services. 4. OWNERSHIP 4.1. Licensor transfers no right, title, or interest in and to Licensor Technology or the Systems except as expressly stated in this Agreement, and the same shall remain the sole and exclusive property of the Licensor. 4.2. All right, title, and interest in and to the Subscriber Data and results from processing Subscriber Data are and shall remain the property of Subscriber and no right, title, or interest in and to Subscriber Data or the results from processing Subscriber Data shall vest in Licensor. 5. HOSTING, SECURITY, PRIVACY, BACKUP, AND SUPPORT 5.1. Licensor shall provide a dedicated and secure hosting environment for the Services, which shall include, but not be limited to, all hardware, servers, operating software, network components, database storage, security, technical support, maintenance, backup, and disaster recovery required for Subscriber to use the Services, or otherwise required by this Agreement. 6. AVAILABILITY AND MAINTENANCE 6.1. The Services shall be accessible to Authorized Users twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week, except for (i) scheduled maintenance and required repairs; and (ii) any interruption due to causes beyond the control of Licensor or which are not reasonably foreseeable by Licensor. 6.2. Licensor shall perform maintenance services, updates, or upgrades to ensure continuous availability and operation of the Systems. Licensor shall use commercially reasonable efforts to inform Subscriber of any known or foreseeable disruptions to the availability of the Services. © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 22 of 129 4 7. USE AND ACCESS 7.1. Subscriber shall be responsible for obtaining access to the internet to access and use the Services and complete the implementation and set-up process as set forth in Exhibit A to access the Services. 7.2. Subscriber is entirely responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of any passwords and account information required for access to the Services, and for all acts by Subscriber or anyone authorized by Subscriber to access Subscriber’s account that occur in connection with Subscriber’s account 7.3. Subscriber shall not use the Services or the Licensor Technology for any purpose that is (i) unlawful; or (ii) not specifically agreed to by this Agreement. 7.4. Subscriber shall not without the express written consent of Licensor, copy, sell, sublicense, rent, or lease any portion of the Service, including all, updates, training and or revisions to said Services that may be periodically provided to Subscriber. 7.5. Except for a violation of Sections 7.3, 7.4 and 7.6 hereof, or Subscriber's failure to timely pay invoices as set forth in Section 8 hereof, Subscriber shall continue to have unrestricted use of the Services in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement during any dispute between Subscriber and Licensor, provided Subscriber is proceeding in good faith to resolve such dispute. 7.6. Licensor acknowledges that nothing in this Agreement restricts Subscriber from copying, or reproducing, physical copies of the Services, policies, and manuals identified in Exhibit A, if complying with authorized public data request as required by Minnesota law. 7.7. Subscriber may designate Authorized Users, such persons being able to use the Services for the exclusive benefit of Subscriber. Except as set forth hereinabove, Subscriber shall not assign, convey or transfer any interest in and to the Services without the written consent of the Licensor. 8. INVOICING, PAYMENT, AND TAXES: 8.1. Subscriber pay the fees set forth in Exhibit B. Within thirty-five (35) days of Subscriber’s receipt of an invoice from Licensor, together with all required supporting documentation, Subscriber shall pay, or cause to be paid, the amount of such invoice. Any sum due that is not paid within thirty-five (35) days of the invoice receipt date shall bear interest from the due date thereof to the date of payment at a rate of interest equal to one- and one-half percent (1 ½ %) per month or the maximum rate permitted by law, whichever is less. Subscriber shall pay all costs of collection, including legal expenses, court costs and attorney fees at any time incurred by Licensor in the collection of any amounts owing by Subscriber to Licensor. © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 23 of 129 5 8.2. Licensor may invoice, and Subscriber shall pay to Licensor, such applicable sales, use, excise, or other similar taxes (federal, state, or local) that Licensor is required by law to apply to the fees set forth in Exhibit B. Any such tax amounts shall be clearly and separately stated on Licensor’s invoices. 9. WARRANTIES 9.1. Performance. Licensor warrants and represents that the Services will perform the functions described in the documentation and specifications provided by Licensor, as described in Exhibit A, attached. 9.2. Non-Infringement Warranty. Licensor warrants and represents that when used in accordance with this Agreement, the Services, Systems, and Licensor Technology shall not infringe upon or violate any copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, or any other proprietary right of any third party. 9.3. Limitations on Warranties. IN CONSIDERATION OF THE WARRANTIES EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN THIS ARTICLE 9 AND THE ACCESSIBILITY COMMITMENT IN ARTICLE 6, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMED. 9.4. Internet Delays. THE SERVICES MAY BE SUBJECT TO LIMITATIONS, DELAYS, AND OTHER PROBLEMS INHERENT IN THE USE OF THE INTERNET AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS. LICENSOR IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DELAYS, DELIVERY FAILURES, OR OTHER DAMAGE RESULTING FROM SUCH PROBLEMS. 9.5. Exclusive Remedies. Subscriber's exclusive remedies and Licensor's entire liability for any breach of the warranties specified in this Article 9, except as expressly provided otherwise in this Agreement, shall be the correction of the breach of warranty and the remedies provided in Article 6. However, if Licensor is unable to affect the correction without undue delay for the circumstances, Subscriber shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement, and the remedies defined in Article 14 shall apply. 10. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY 10.1. If a Claim of violation of copyright, trade secret, or other intellectual property rights relating to the Services, Systems, or Licensor Technology provided under this Agreement is made against Subscriber, Subscriber shall: (i) promptly notify Licensor; (ii) allow Licensor to control the litigation or settlement of such Claim; and (iii) cooperate with Licensor in the investigation, defense, and/or settlement thereof. Subscriber retain the right to participate at their own cost in any action in which Subscriber is named as a defendant. © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 24 of 129 6 10.2. Should any portion of the Services or intended use thereof become, or in Licensor’s reasonable opinion be likely to become, the subject of a Claim for infringement of a copyright, or other proprietary right, Licensor shall at its option either (i) promptly and diligently modify or replace such portion to make it non-infringing, without degradation to functionality; or (ii) terminate this Agreement and refund fees pursuant to Article 14.3. 11. DISCLAIMER 11.1 Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create an attorney–client relationship between Licensor and Subscriber. Any consultations, discussions, or support provided by Licensor under this Agreement are strictly limited to assisting with the use and implementation of the licensed materials and shall not constitute legal advice. Subscriber is solely responsible for obtaining independent legal counsel regarding compliance with applicable laws, regulations, or legal obligations. Licensor expressly disclaims any responsibility or liability arising from Subscriber’s legal, regulatory, or compliance decisions. 12. LOSS 12.1 EACH PARTY AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, DEFEND, AND HOLD HARMLESS THE OTHER PARTY AND ITS OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL CLAIMS, DEMANDS, DAMAGES, LOSSES, LIABILITIES, COSTS, AND EXPENSES, INCLUDING REASONABLE ATTORNEY’S FEES, ARISING OUT OF OR RESULTING FROM THE NEGLIGENT OR WRONGFUL ACTS OR OMISSIONS OF THE INDEMNIFYING PARTY, ITS OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, OR AGENTS, IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS AGREEMENT. THE OBLIGATIONS OF EACH PARTY UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE EXTENT CAUSED BY THAT PARTY’S ACTS OR OMISSIONS AND SHALL NOT APPLY TO CLAIMS ARISING FROM THE NEGLIGENT OR WRONGFUL ACTS OF THE OTHER PARTY. ALL SYSTEMS AND POLICIES SUBJECT TO THIS AGREEMENT WERE PROVIDED FOR SUBSCRIBER’S EXCLUSIVE USE AND ADOPTED AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE SUBSCRIBER. EXCEPT IN CASES OF WILLFUL MISCONDUCT, LIABILITY SHALL BE CAPPED AT THE REVENUE RECEIVED BY THE LIABLE PARTY DURING THE PRECEDING TWELVE MONTHS. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION OF THIS AGREEMENT TO THE CONTRARY, NOTHING HEREIN SHALL BE DEEMED A WAIVER OF ANY IMMUNITIES, DEFENSES, OR LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY AVAILABLE TO SUBSCRIBER UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. SUBSCRIBER’S LIABILITY SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND LIMITED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINN. STAT. CH. 466, INCLUDING THE LIMITS SET FORTH IN MINN. STAT. § 466.04. 12.2 SUBSCRIBER AGREES TO AND UNDERSTANDS THAT LICENSOR HAS MADE REASONABLE EFFORTS TO COMPLY WITH AND ADHERE TO ALL © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 25 of 129 7 APPLICABLE STATUTES, OPINIONS, LAWS, AND INDUSTRY STANDARDS IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF CREATION. 13. INSURANCE 13.1 Required Insurance. Licensor shall procure and maintain, at its sole expense and for the duration of this Agreement, insurance coverage with insurers authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota. Such coverage shall include: (a) Commercial General Liability Insurance with limits of not less than $1,500,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate, covering bodily injury, property damage, personal injury, and contractual liability; (b) Workers’ Compensation Insurance as required by Minnesota law; and (c) Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) Insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per claim and $1,000,000 aggregate for claims arising from the performance of services under this Agreement. Subscriber shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability policy. Licensor shall provide Subscriber with certificates of insurance evidencing the required coverage prior to the commencement of the Services and upon renewal of any such policies. Licensor shall also provide at least thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to Subscriber of any cancellation, non-renewal, or material change in the required insurance coverage. 14. TERMINATION AND REMEDY 14.1. Termination of Agreement for Cause. Licensor and Subscriber each have the right to terminate this Agreement and pursue injunctive relief if the other Party breaches or is in default of any material obligation under this Agreement, when such a breach or default (i) is incapable of cure; or (ii), being capable of cure, has not been cured within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice of breach or default. 14.2. Termination for Convenience. This Agreement may be terminated by either Party at any time upon at least thirty (30) days’ written notice to the other Party. 14.3. Remedy. In the event Subscriber terminates this Agreement pursuant to Article 14.1 or Article 14.2 Licensor shall return to Subscriber any prepaid payments it received for the terminated portion of the Agreement. 14.4. Subscriber Data. Upon termination or expiration of this Agreement, Licensor shall remove from its servers and return to Subscriber all Subscriber Data in a mutually agreed upon format or provide Subscriber access for a reasonable period (but, in any event, no more than 180 days) after termination or expiration in order to gather and facilitate a transfer of all Subscriber Data. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Licensor shall be permitted to retain one archival copy of the Subscriber Data, and Licensor shall represent to Subscriber that the same is retained for archival purposes only and any possible litigation arising thereunder, and for no other purpose. 15. GOVERNING LAW © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 26 of 129 8 15.1. THE INTERPRETATION AND PERFORMANCE OF THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, EXCEPT FOR ANY RULE OF LAW OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, WHICH WOULD MAKE THE LAW OF ANY OTHER JURISDICTION APPLICABLE. 15.2. The Parties specifically agree that, if any provision of this Agreement is determined to be unenforceable or in contravention of any applicable law, such provision shall be deemed modified to the minimum extent required to bring such provision into compliance with said statute or case law. NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS CONTRAVENING THE EXPRESS INTENTION OF THE PARTIES THAT THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SHALL APPLY IN ALL RESPECTS, UNLESS AND EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE PARTIES MAY REFERENCE AND REQUEST APPLICATION OF A LAW, STATUTE, OR RULE OF ANOTHER JURISDICTION OR GOVERNMENTAL BODY IN A SPECIFIC PROVISION OF THIS AGREEMENT. 16. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 16.1. All actions and proceedings arising out of or related, in whole or in part, to this Agreement shall lie exclusively in the state courts of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Both Parties hereby irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of such courts (and, in the case of appeals, appropriate appellate courts therefrom) in any such action or proceeding and irrevocably waive the defenses of lack of personal jurisdiction or any inconvenient forum to the maintenance of any such action or proceeding. 17. DATA AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION 17.1. During the term of this Agreement, the Parties may provide information to each other or come into possession of information which is considered confidential (“Confidential Information”). Confidential Information shall include Subscriber Data, Licensor Technology, and information which is marked as “confidential” or “proprietary” or would reasonably be assumed to be confidential based on its content or the context surrounding its disclosure. 17.2. Licensor specifically agrees that all Subscriber Data (including Personal Data) is and shall always remain the exclusive property of Subscriber, and Licensor shall not access, download, or make use of the Subscriber Data for any reason other than for the purposes of providing the Services or as otherwise required by applicable law. 17.3. Upon expiration or termination of this Agreement, and as directed by the disclosing Party, each Party will promptly (i) return to the other Party all the Confidential Information of the other Party; or (ii) erase and destroy all copies of the Confidential Information of the other Party in its possession and certify destruction of the same. © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 27 of 129 9 18. ACCESS TO SUBSCRIBER’S SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS 18.1. Subscriber shall determine the portions of Subscriber’s System and/or Network to which the Accessing Parties will have access and will designate such portions of the System and Network in writing. No Accessing Party shall access or attempt to access any portion of Subscriber’s System or Network except as expressly permitted hereunder. 18.2. SUBSCRIBER MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS THE WARRANTIES OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND MERCHANTABILITY WITH RESPECT TO SUBSCRIBER’S SYSTEM AND NETWORK. 19. ASSIGNMENT 19.1 Neither Licensor nor Subscriber may assign, transfer, or novate this Agreement, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the other party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Notwithstanding the forgoing, Licensor may assign this Agreement in connection with a merger, acquisition, sale or consolidation to the successor in interest without consent or notice, provided the successor assumes all obligations of Licensor. Any assignment in violation of this Article 19.1 shall be null and void. 20. GENERAL 20.1 Headings. The captions and headings used in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be used for purposes of construction or interpretation. 20.2 Non-Waiver. No waiver by either Party of any one or more defaults by the other Party in performance of this Agreement shall operate or be construed as a waiver of any future default or defaults by the same Party, whether of a like or a different character. 20.3 Amendment. No change to any term or provision hereof shall be effective unless stated in writing and signed by the duly authorized representatives of both Parties. 20.4 Right to Defend. Each Party shall notify the other immediately upon the commencement of any action brought and the outcome of which may affect the rights of the other Party herein granted, and such other Party shall have the right at its own expense to appear in and defend such actions. 20.5 Severability. It is intended that if any provision of this Agreement is determined to be unenforceable or void for any reason, such provision shall be adjusted, if possible, to achieve the intent of the Parties. In any event, all other provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed valid, binding, and enforceable. © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 28 of 129 10 20.6 Legal Representation and Language Construction. Each Party has had the opportunity to be represented by counsel in connection with the drafting and negotiation of this Agreement, and the Parties agree that this Agreement and the terms hereof shall not be construed more severely against one of the Parties than the other. Specifically, but not by limitation, the Parties agree that no term of this Agreement shall be construed more severely against the Party deemed to be the drafter of such term than against the other Party. 20.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement reflects the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to its subject matter. All other oral or written agreements, contracts, understandings, conditions, warranties, or representations with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement are superseded by this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized representatives, effective as of the Effective Date. CITY OF ROGERS LETAC USA, LLC By: By: Print: Print: Imran S. Ali Title: Title: President and CEO, LETAC Date: Date: CITY OF ROGERS By: Print: Title: Date: © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 29 of 129 11 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. GENERAL: 1.1 POLICIES360 Licensor will provide Policies360 Law Enforcement Policies and a hosted platform for Policies360 Law Enforcement Policies Software. The platform provides Subscriber the ability to receive law enforcement policies and provides a platform to deliver, access, manage, audit and report on Policies360 Law Enforcement Policies. 1.2 PROCEDURES360 Licensor will provide Procedures360, a hosted platform which provides Subscriber the ability to organize, deliver, access, manage, audit and report on Subscriber’s law enforcement procedures provided by Subscriber. 2. SUMMARY OF SERVICES: 2.1 POLICIES360 Policies360 is a web-based Law Enforcement Policy management system created to increase understanding, access, retention, proficiency, and efficiency in locating and understanding Law Enforcement Policies by eliminating unnecessary processes and providing enhanced targeted knowledge management systems. All policy storage, retrieval, updating, auditing, reporting and proprietary knowledge management systems are performed online. Policies360 is used by law enforcement agencies to protect the public, officers and municipalities from unnecessary risk and harm by providing comprehensive policies and intuitive knowledge management systems to promote public safety. 2.2 PROCEDURES360 Procedures360 is a web-based Law Enforcement Procedure management system created to separate procedures from policy to increase understanding, access, retention, proficiency, and efficiency in locating and understanding of Subscriber’s Law Enforcement Procedures. Subscriber created Law Enforcement Procedures are hosted in an online platform providing retrieval, updating, auditing, and reporting through a proprietary knowledge management system. © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 30 of 129 12 Policies360 include the following: • Complete and comprehensive Law Enforcement Policy Manual • Online access to Policies 24/7 • Integrated intuitive Knowledge Management System • Policy update notifications • Compliance and reporting • Support for locations and users • Web-based application access • Setup, credentialling and configuration • Telephone support, upgrades and maintenance • Current auditing and reporting • Fully redundant and secure data center • Policy Monitoring Procedures360 include the following: • Online access to Subscriber created procedures 24/7 • Integrated intuitive Knowledge Management System • Procedure update notifications • Compliance and reporting • Support for locations and users • Web-based application access • Setup, credentialling and configuration • Telephone support, upgrades and maintenance • Current auditing and reporting • Fully redundant and secure data center © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 31 of 129 13 EXHIBIT B FEES SUMMARY OF FEES Based on 25 FTE/PTE Officers Policies360 Year 1 Policies360 Onboarding, Included Customization and Annual $12,136.25 Management Year 2 Policies360 Annual Management $9,101.95 Year 3 Policies360 Annual Management $9,557.00 Procedures360 Year 1 Procedures360 $3,011.25 Year 2 Procedures360 $3,161.81 Year 3 Procedures360 $3,319.90 Contract pricing is based on the number of officers at the effective date of the agreement for the term of the agreement and adjusted for the number of officers prior to the effective date of any subsequent extension period. © Policies360 by LETAC USA, LLC | Rogers Police Department Page 32 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.5 Subject: Approve Change Order No. 2 for Rogers Activity Center (RAC) Expansion, City Project No. 2406 Prepared By: Doran Cote, Public Works Director/City Engineer Recommended Council Action Motion to Approve Change Order No. 2 for Rogers Activity Center (RAC) Expansion, City Project No. 2406 Overview / Background / Analysis On February 24, 2026, the City Council accepted bids for Rogers Activity Center (RAC) Expansion, City Project No. 2406 and approved AIA Document A133-2019 Exhibit A Guaranteed Maximum Price Amendment (GMP) with RJM Construction as the City's Construction Manager at Risk. The GMP was $16,204,371. However, the City Council was advised that if unforeseen conditions were encountered, there was a likelihood for Change Orders. On August 13, 2026, the City Council approved Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $62,910.75 which included final costs as directed in Construction Change Directive (CCD) #1 signed June 29th, 2026. Costs included were from Veit & Company Inc. for the correction of soils beyond the documented correction identified within the geotechnical report provided in the base bid construction documents. During correction work included in CCD #1, unsuitable soils were found on along the west and north foundation lines. Due to the proximity to the existing fieldhouse and the required depth of the correction, continuing to excavate soil could have resulted in a foundation failure at the fieldhouse. RJM, Veit & Company, and the design team held a meeting to discuss possible solutions that did not interfere with the fieldhouse foundation. RFI 28 was submitted to the design team to coordinate helical pile locations and bearing capacity for delegated design. The design team released a CCD#2 drawing update which confirmed bearing capacity and dimensioned locations for each of the 34 helical piles. The helical piles have been installed meeting bearing capacity requirements and foundations have been formed and poured. The total cost of Change Order No. 2 is $80,323.85. The original contract cost at the time of bid acceptance was $16,204,371. The revised contract cost including Change Orders No. 1 and No. 2 is $16,347,605.60 or 0.8% over the original contract amount. The current contingency amount is $794,466.00 which is 105% of the original contingency amount. Staff Recommendation Page 33 of 129Motion to Approve Change Order No. 2 for Rogers Activity Center (RAC) Expansion, City Project No. 2406 Financial Impact: $80,323.85 Source Fund: Park Dedication, RAC Capital Fund, Naming Rights, RAC Operating Income, RYHA, Faceoff Booster Club, ISD 728, Mighty Ducks Grant Budgeted? Yes Supporting Documentation A. AIA 002 CCD #2 Page 34 of 129Page 35 of 129Page 36 of 129 MINNEAPOLIS OFFICE 830 Boone Ave Golden Valley, MN 55427 CHANGE ORDER REQUEST To : City of Rogers PCO: Owner-3 22350 South Diamond Lake Road From: Tyler Chaika-Gennow Attn: Steve Stahmer PH: Rogers, MN 55374 Email: DesCription: CCD #2 Date: 07/01/2026 ProjeCt: Rogers ACtivity Center Details: Final costs as direCted in CCD #2 signed July 1st, 2026. SubContraCtor costs to survey loCations, furnish and install heliCals, and install footings maintained originally estimated priCes. During correCtion work inCluded in CCD #1, unsuitable-to-remain soils were found on along grid A.3 and Continued plan North and East until door 119D. Due to the proximity to the existing fieldhouse and the required depth of the correCtion, Continuing to exCavate soil could result in a foundation failure at the fieldhouse. RJM, Veit, and the design team held a meeting to disCuss possible solutions that did not interfere with the fieldhouse foundation. RFI 28 was submitted to the design team to coordinate heliCal pile loCations and bearing capaCity for delegated design. The design team released a CCD#2 drawing update whiCh confirmed bearing capaCity and dimensioned loCations for eaCh of the 34 heliCal piles. Cost does not inCluded additional serviCes provided by the City of Rogers' speCial inspeCtor. Item SubContraCtor: Phase: 1 EVS, InC. 02-21-05- Survey 2,110.00 CCD#2: Stake 34 helical pile locations. 2 Donald R. Frantz ConCrete ConstruC03-30-05- Cast-In-PlaCe-ConCrete 3,500.00 CCD #2: Addition #4 rebar along helical pile cap. Increased footing depth 3 Veit & Company, InC. 31-22-05- Earthwork 72,500.00 CCD #2: Delegated design and engineering Furnish and install helical piles to bearing capacity provided by structural engineer. Subtotal: 78,110.00 General Liability .9% 703.00 Builders Risk .15% 195.28 Bond .16% 128.51 ContraCtor's Fee 1.5% 1,187.06 2,213.85 Total For Change Order: 80,323.85 Page 1 of 2 24520-0126 Page 37 of 129Approved By: City of Rogers Submitted By: RJM ConstruCtion, LLC Signed: ____________________________ Signed: ____________________________ Date: _____________________________ Date: _____________________________ The work desCribed in this Change Order Request Constitutes a Change in sCope to the ContraCt DoCuments. ExeCution of this Change Order Request by the Owner aCknowledges this Change in sCope. Should the final projeCt Costs exCeed the Guaranteed Maximum PriCe at the Completion of the projeCt, it is hereby agreed that a projeCt Change order will be exeCuted by the Owner, inCreasing the ContraCt value by the amount of this Change Order Request. Page 2 of 2 24520-0126 Page 38 of 129CHANGE REQUEST #1 Rogers Activity Center Staking – Helical Piles REV. 0 June 25, 2026 Tyler Chaika-Gennow Project Manager tyler.chaika-gennow@rjmconstruction.com Rogers Activity Center Staking – Helical Piles Tyler, Thank you for the opportunity to provide pricing for the helical pile staking with RJM. Please review the below Change Request for EVS to complete the staking. Land Surveying Fee Update CAD and Stake 34 helical piles location per RFI #28 $ 2,110 Additional helical piles per location $35 per helical pile Phone: 651-212-0101 | Email: chopp@evs-eng.com ___________________ ___________________ Christina M. Hopp Tyler Chaika-Gennow Survey Project Manager Project Manager EVS, Inc. RJM Revision Prepared by Date Description 00 C. Hopp 2026.06.25 Initial Submittal Page 39 of 129CHANGE REQUEST #1 Rogers Activity Center Staking – Helical Piles REV. 0 CUSTOMER REQUEST  RJM requested pricing for updating CAD files with new helical piles, stake 34 locations as provided on RFI #28, and provide unit pricing for added locations staked in the same mobilization. SCOPE OF SERVICES  Update CAD file with helical pile locations  Additional field staking for helical piles Qualifications and Exclusions  Does not include staking beyond what is outlined in the above scope  Any scope not explicitly detailed above is excluded  All estimates of hours are provided for information only  Original RJM and EVS Contract Exclusions apply Page 40 of 129 CHANGE ORDER REQUEST DONALD R. FRANTZ CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, LLC. PROJECT: Rogers Activity Center COR #: 002 PROJECT NUMBER: 2625 DATE: 6.29.26 SUBMITTED TO: RJM Construction NATURE OF WORK: 03-2000, 03-3000 ATTN: Tyler Chaika-Gennow REQUESTED PRICING PER RFI #28 REPSONSES FOR ADDING HELICAL PILES TO NW FOOTING LINE (ADDITIONAL REBAR, FORMING, CONCRETE, LABOR): • $25.00 / LF • APPROX. 140 LF = $3,500 • APPROX. $200 PER ADDED PC PANEL (8’-0” W/ (2) HELICALS EA.) MIKE JOSLIN DONALD R FRANTZ CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, LLC ▪ 595 Randolph Avenue, St. Paul, MN, 55102 ▪ Office 651-209-6133 ▪ Fax 651-209-6136 Page 42 of 129 RAC – Rogers Athletic Center Helical Pile Alternate Location: Rogers, MN Date: June 30, 2026 Helical Pile Proposal Helical Piles – 34 Helical Piles $72,500.00 • Engineering $ 7,500.00 • Furnish and Install Helical Piles $ 65,000.00 o 2 7/8” Helical Piles ▪ 17 Piles 10/20 kip 25’ Length $1,600 ▪ 10 Piles 25/30 kip 35’ Length $1,995 ▪ 7 Piles 50 kip 50’ Length $2,550 Includes • 1 Mobilizations and Supervision for a Helical Crew • 2 7/8” Helical Piles • Engineered Design • Additional Mobilization $5,500 • Additional Length per 10’ Extension - $275.00 • No Test Pile – Test Pile - $7,500 if required. • New Construction Cap 8”x8”x0.75” Excludes • Access – Assumes Skid Loader and Mini-excavator access to working area. • Removals / Excavation • Cold Weather Conditions • Survey / As built / Layout • All Testing and Inspections • Assumes Flat working Area • Site Fencing/Site Security/Concrete Barriers/Site Control/Traffic Control. • Contaminated/Regulated Soils/ Hazardous Materials – Handling or Disposal • Night/Weekend Work • Dewatering / Utility Relocations or Disconnects • Obstructions / Obstruction Removal Respectfully, Nathan Iverson Nathan Iverson 763-428-6737 Veit & Company, Inc. Nathan Iverson M: (612) 282-2057 Nathan.Iverson@veitusa .com Page 43 of 129 August 6, 2026 1:27 PM Employee Name Total Hours Date: 7/8/2026 4.00 Pay Class Description: Foreman (1) 4.00 Richard Day-Aspinwall 4.00 Date: 7/14/2026 7.50 Pay Class Description: Foreman (1) 2.50 Joseph LaHoud 2.50 Pay Class Description: Laborer 87% Apprentice (1) 4.00 Tyler Kleindl 4.00 Pay Class Description: Superintendent + Work Readines (1) 1.00 Rill Oveson 1.00 Date: 7/15/2026 28.50 Pay Class Description: Drill Rig (2) 9.50 Randy Killebrew 0.50 Randy Killebrew 9.00 Pay Class Description: Foreman (2) 10.50 Joseph LaHoud 0.50 Joseph LaHoud 10.00 Pay Class Description: Lowboy (3) 6.50 Jeffrey Wickline 2.00 Jesse Jendro 1.50 Michael Nielsen 3.00 Pay Class Description: Superintendent (1) 2.00 Dustin Adam 2.00 Page 1 of 4 Page 44 of 129 August 6, 2026 1:27 PM Employee Name Total Hours Date: 7/16/2026 6.50 Pay Class Description: Drill Rig (1) 2.50 Randy Killebrew 2.50 Pay Class Description: Foreman (1) 3.50 Joseph LaHoud 3.50 Pay Class Description: Superintendent (1) 0.50 Dustin Adam 0.50 Date: 7/20/2026 21.00 Pay Class Description: Drill Rig (1) 10.00 Randy Killebrew 10.00 Pay Class Description: Foreman (1) 11.00 Joseph LaHoud 11.00 Date: 7/21/2026 21.00 Pay Class Description: Drill Rig (1) 10.00 Randy Killebrew 10.00 Pay Class Description: Foreman (1) 11.00 Joseph LaHoud 11.00 Date: 7/22/2026 20.00 Pay Class Description: Drill Rig (1) 8.50 Randy Killebrew 8.50 Pay Class Description: Foreman (2) 11.50 Joseph LaHoud 9.00 Albert Fontelroy 2.50 Page 2 of 4 Page 45 of 129 August 6, 2026 1:27 PM Employee Name Total Hours Date: 7/23/2026 19.00 Pay Class Description: Drill Rig (1) 8.00 Randy Killebrew 8.00 Pay Class Description: Foreman (1) 7.50 Joseph LaHoud 7.50 Pay Class Description: Lowboy (2) 2.50 Jesse Jendro 1.00 Michael Nielsen 1.50 Pay Class Description: Superintendent + Work Readines (1) 1.00 Rill Oveson 1.00 Date: 7/24/2026 15.50 Pay Class Description: Drill Rig (1) 15.00 Randy Killebrew 15.00 Pay Class Description: Foreman (1) 0.50 Joseph LaHoud 0.50 Date: 7/27/2026 7.00 Pay Class Description: Foreman (1) 2.00 Kim Bass 2.00 Pay Class Description: Laborer (1) 2.00 Jason Garguilo 2.00 Pay Class Description: Laborer 95% Apprentice (1) 2.00 Dylan Nielsen 2.00 Pay Class Description: Superintendent + Work Readines (1) 1.00 Page 3 of 4 Page 46 of 129 August 6, 2026 1:27 PM Employee Name Total Hours Rill Oveson 1.00 Page 4 of 4 Page 47 of 129 Page 48 of 129 FOUNDATION PLAN NOTES: 1. VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS WITH ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS AND EXISTING CONDITIONS. 2. SEE ARCH DRAWINGS FOR SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL WALL OPENINGS. FOUNDATION KEYNOTES: 3. FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION (FFE) = SEE PLAN. A STEP TOP OF FOOTING AS REQUIRED TO MATCH EXISTING TOP OF FOOTING ELEVATION 4. FLOOR SLAB SHALL BE 4" MINIMUM CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE WITH 6X6-W2.1XW2.1 WWF UNO. (TFE) PER 1/S4.1. MATCH EXISTING BOTTOM OF FOOTING ELEVATION PER 8/S4.1. VERIFY ALL DEPRESSED AND SLOPED SLABS WITH ARCH DRAWINGS AND MECH/ELEC B CONTRACTORS. NEW OPENING IN EXISTING PRECAST WALL, SEE ARCH. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENGAGE ORIGINAL PRECAST WALL PANEL SUPPLIER TO REVIEW OPENING AND DESIGN AND 5. ALL CONTINUOUS WALL FOOTINGS SHALL BE 2'-0"W X 1'-0"D WITH (2) #5 CONTINUOUS BOTTOM DETAIL PANEL REINFORCING/RETROFIT AS REQUIRED. STEEL COLUMN SCHEDULE UNO. SEE GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET S0.1 FOR REINFORCING AND DEPTH FOR OTHER WIDTHS. MARK C CONCRETE CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE PANEL STEP LOCATIONS WITH PRECAST SIZE C1 HSS4X4X1/4 3/4"X10"X10" BASE PLATE REMARKS 6. TOP OF EXTERIOR FOOTING ELEVATION (TFE) = 96'-0" UNO. PANEL MANUFACTURER TO ACCURATELY LOCATE FOUNDATION STEPS. C2 HSS5X5X1/4 3/4"X11"X11" D 7. TOP OF INTERIOR FOOTING ELEVATION (TFE) = SEE PLAN. FLOOR SLAB SHALL BE 6" MINIMUM CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE WITH #4 @ 12" O.C. EACH C3 WAY CENTERED HATCHED THUS: W12X40 1"X18"X12" E 8. S----S ON PLAN DENOTES STEPPED FOOTING. SEE SECTION 1/S4.1. E ICE RINK SYSTEM SUPPLIER SHALL PROVIDE MEASURES (RIGID INSULATION, IN-FLOOR 9. SEE DETAIL 2/S4.1 FOR DROPPED FOOTING AT ALL UNDERGROUND MECHANICAL LINES ENTERING HEAT, ETC.) TO IMPEDE FROST PENETRATION UNDER ADJACENT CONTINUOUS WALL 10 56' - 0" D SITE DATUM:100'-0"=905.5' BUILDING. FOOTINGS. S4.1 FOOTING SCHEDULE 0.8 2' - 1" 10. F PROVIDE (2) #4 X 4'-0" DIAGONAL BARS IN SLAB ON GRADE AT EACH CORNER AT SEE DETAILS 4/S4.1, 5/S4.1 AND 6/S4.1 FOR TYPICAL FOUNDATION WALL JOINTS AND CORNER MARK 8 REINFORCING. OVERHEAD DOOR. SIZE F1 4'-0"X4'-0"X12" BOT REINF EW REMARKS S4.1 11. G PROVIDE (2) #4 X 4'-0" DIAGONAL BARS IN SLAB ON GRADE AT INSIDE CORNERS. F2 5'-0"X5'-0"X14" SEE DETAIL 7/S4.1 FOR FOOTINGS AT NON-BEARING INTERIOR PRECAST WALLS. AT INTERSECTION (5) #5 12 OF PERPENDICULAR FOOTINGS, PLACE UPPER FOOTING OVER TESTED/INSPECTED COMPACTED 8 H (6) #5 5' - 4" S4.1 FILL. 12" MINIMUM CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE WITH #5 @ 12" O.C. EACH WAY CENTERED. J S S 12. "CX" ON PLAN DENOTES STEEL COLUMN SIZE. SEE STEEL COLUMN SCHEDULE ON THIS SHEET. WIDEN FOUNDATION WALL 4" FOR SLAB BEARING. 4' - 0" EXIST FFE= 0.8 C 13. K FOUNDATIONS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED FOR A 50' WIDE FUTURE ADDITION, ASSUMING 50' 2'-6" FTG 96'-0"± "FX" ON PLAN DENOTES FOOTING SIZE. SEE FOOTING SCHEDULE ON THIS SHEET. 8 SPANNING STRUCTURE SUPPORTED BY PRECAST WALL OR NEW WALL DIRECTLY HELICAL PILE DESIGN LOAD SCHEDULE 92' - 0" A 25' - 5" SEE 3/S4.1 FOR TYP 14. SEE PLAN AND SECTIONS FOR SIZE OF CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE FOUNDATION WALLS AND ADJACENT TO PRECAST WALL. F CONTROL/CONST REINFORCING. 14 TFE= EXIST TFE= 94' - 0" ± L MECHANICAL OPENING IN FLOOR SLAB FOR REFRIGERATION SYSTEM VALVE, SEE MECH MARK JT DETAIL SERVICE COMPRESSION S4.1 15. EXTEND ALL FOOTINGS MINIMUM 1'-0" BEYOND END OF WALLS UNO. FOR EXACT SIZE AND LOCATION. 1'-0". TYP FFE=96'-6" M PRECAST SUPPLIER SHALL LEAVE OUT 6'-6" WIDE (UNO ON PLAN) SECTION OF PRECAST HP10 9 16. 25' - 5" PROTECT EXISTING BUILDING FOUNDATION DURING NEW CONSTRUCTION. SHORE AS REQUIRED. 10K RECESS, S4.1 PANEL BELOW SLAB ON GRADE ELEVATION FOR UNDERFLOOR RINK PIPING, HP20 F 92' - 0" SEE ARCH 93' - 0" 17. COORDINATE EXACT LOCATIONS WITH RINK SUPPLIER. 20K FFE=96'-0" ON PLAN DENOTES NON-BEARING PRECAST WALL PANEL. SEE 7/S4.1. HP25 TFE= 20 44' - 7 1/8" 95' - 0" 18. N THICKEN FOOTING TO 16" TO ACCOMMODATE HELICAL PILES. ADD (2) #4 CONTINUOUS 25K TFE= S4.1 "HPX" ON PLAN DENOTES HELICAL PILE DESIGN LOAD. SEE HELICAL PILE DESIGN LOAD SCHEDULE 0.7 C TYP HP30 2'-6" FTG 30 BARS 2" FROM TOP OF FOOTING OR BOTTOM OF KEYWAY. C ON THIS SHEET. 30K 1 HP50 TFE= S4.1 P 6 PLACE NEW FOOTING OVER TESTED/INSPECTED COMPACTED FILL. 50K A C NEW OPNG www.htg-architects.com S S B 8" 6" MECH LINE S S TFE= I.E.=90'-11", VERIFY 92' - 0" Minneapolis 8 . W/ MECH C S S A.2 8 S S A.3 SEE 2/S4.1 8 TYP 152' - 0" M Bismarck 37' - 2" S4.1 1010 Mainstreet, Suite 100 6' - 4" 5' - 4" 94' - 2" S S 15' - 8" 21' - 6" 26' - 5" Hopkins, MN 55343 4' - 9 5/8" 4' - 9 5/8" 4' - 9 5/8" 5' - 6" 10" MECH LINE 10 ± FV TFE= 93' - 0" Tel: 952.278.8880 4" MECH LINE 4" MECH LINE I.E.=91'-1", VERIFY S4.1 16 14 P25 94' - 0" H 10 I.E.=93'-6", VERIFY I.E.=90'-9", VERIFY W/ MECH S4.1 N 4 S4.1 0° 1 ' SEE 2/S4.1 4 S4.1 5 ECH - . HP50 C ECH W/ M 2 W/ M ' 6 0 ' 9 HP10 - TFE= " - S SEE 2/S4.1 0 SEE 2/S4.1 2' - 6" 5' - 4 1/2" 5' - 4 1/2" 7 " HP25 " 1.4 16 28' - 8" 1.4 ° S4.1 S 0 .0 C S S FFE=97'-0" 4 3 0 PROJECT F 9 ' ' F 3 ' - 10" T 11 - 12 3'-0" FTG - ' T - F 8 6 0 12 G SIM E " " S4.1 H TSE=92'-0" F " TFE= T TFE= 91' - 0" 95' - 0" = 19 S4.1 T F T 15 F 9 E S4.1 F 19 0 E 1 HP2 3 = S4.1 E 6 ' = S4.1 = - ' 9 17 EXIST FFE=96'-0"± 9 - 0 C S S HP10 6 LOC 1 9 6 " 0 ' 5 S4.1 ' - " ' 7 - ROGERS 0 G 9 - ' C 0 N " S S - 0 19 " 16 15 3' - 9 5/8" " S4.1 2 FFE=97'-0" C " S4.1 TRENCH S4.1 S4.2 TFE= 96' - 0" 8 " 9 1/4" DRAIN, S ACTIVITY CENTER 3' - 1 3/4" D 5' - 6" 5' - 6" 2' - 9" 3' - 10" 17 SEE ARCH FFE=97'-0" . T S4.1 7 F S 12 TRENCH DRAIN, E 1.3 SEE 3/S4.1 FOR TYP = M N SIM . RAMP DN S4.1 9 F SEE ARCH 3 EXPANSION 8 4" CONTROL/CONST 6 ' T 4" MECH LINE - TFE= ' ' 7 6 93' - 0" G - 14 - FFE=97'-0" FFE= ' 19 19 19 " JT DETAIL TFE= P10 9 H 4 ECH 0 95' - 0" / M - I.E.=VERIFY W 4 19 ' 8' - 4" 8" 1 " " 16 2 0 HP2 B S4.1 " S4.1 S4.1 S4.1 96'-0" - C NEW ' FFE= 70' - 9 3/4" " N SEE 2/S4.1 SIM 8" OPNG - 0 " S4.1 0 S4.2 " 4 4' - 10" 3' - 2" 0 6' - 2" 98'-6" S - ' " ' ROGERS, MINNESOTA S 2 - HP50 HP50 S 1 1' - 8 3/4" F2 6' - 0" ' HP30 F2 0 HP50 - " . 0 " S " 8 5 / M 1.2 ' 3 - RAMP DN . 7 1 S EXIST TFE= 95' - 0" ± S 1 . - ' " M ' - C C M 6 P10 1 H HP30 HP50 HP10 0 F 3 3 F 3 H " ' ' ' T T F F T S C - S T P - T - 6 3 0 F G G F 0 F 0 " " E E E N " 6 = 3 = = " " ' 9 9 - 4 9 TFE= 3 / 96' - 0" H 5 6 " INK DWG'S 0 1 P ' 3" PIPE, SEE R ' 23 TFE= ' FFE=97'-0" 5 " 6 D - 0 96' - 0" 3 - - " 1' - 0" - FFE=97'-0" 0 - 0 0 L ' 0 S4.1 ' " - " 'S 5' - 6" 3 " 8" PIPE, SEE RINK DWG 1' - 0" 5' - 4" 4' - 6" 3 H ' P 6 30 1 8" " 23 FFE=100'-0" 4 23 / N 3 S4.1 3 H S4.1 1 P 23 2 1 20 172' - 0" ' - TFE= S4.1 - ' 96' - 0" 1 7 21 31' - 5 3/4" 1 1 / S4.1 S S C 2 16 TFE= " " 95' - 0" TFE= 96' - 0" 6 S4.2 - ' 2 ' R 3 -6" F A HP TG 21 S S C M 8 " 2 4 0 / S4.1 P 1 2 D 0.6 - 26.0 H N TFE= ' 0° P 98' - 0" 5 50 RAMP DN . " 4 / 1 S S C 2 2 8 8" - ' H 21 - ' P 8 . 5 3 7 0 4" 4" S4.1 " 19 EXIST S4.1 SIM FFE= 98'-0"± HP 30 6 P ' F2 99' - 0" - 0 " FFE=97'-0" ICE RINK & BASE BY OTHERS TFE= HP20 E N TFE= 99' - 0" 6 1' - 7 1/2" ' 8 - 2 RAMP DN 0 201' - 2" S S ISSUED SET " 7' - 2 1/2" P 8" 5' - 3" 8" EXIST TFE= 94' - 0" ± BID/PERMIT SET 01/09/26 5' - 3" HP20 REVISIONS . S S DATE 8" 9 NO 16 48' - 3 3/4" 01/23/26 1 ADDENDUM #1 S4.2 TFE= 99' - 0" EXIST FFE=100'-0"± 7' - 1 1/2" 01/28/26 2 ADDENDUM #2 TYP @ 3'-0" 4 1 2 FTG 07/08/26 8 CCD#2 8 1 4 HELICAL ' 6 2 7 - 1 ' ' ' 6 1 - 19 - - " 2 2 0 7 8 13' - 7 1/4" ' " " S4.1 8 - 1 0 / 2 " R " A F2 P 9" M 6' - 4" P 8" D N FFE= . 10 98'-6" 19 S4.1 EXIST TFE= 92' - 0" ± 22 9 SEE 3/S4.1 FOR S4.1 10" S4.1 TYP CONTROL/ 10 CONST JT S4.1 0.5 16' - 8 1/2" DETAIL 6 S S ' ° - 0 F2 25 .5 " 0 3 7 " 8 - S4.1 8' I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was 0.4 R 2 7' - 0" A J prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a M 2 C2 8 P FFE=100'-0" ' T duly Licensed Professional Engineer FE= - D 7 under the laws of the State of Minnesota N " 2' - 6" S 9 EXIST TFE= 94' - 0" ± 5' TFE= 95' - 0" - 0" FFE=100'-0" S 93' - 0" C S S EXIST . 27' - 5 1/2" FFE= Shawn G. Parks C S S 22 T 100'-0"± TFE= TFE= F S4.1 57854 95' - 0" 22 E = TFE= 96' - 0" S4.1 01/09/2026 TFE= 9 Reg No. 93' - 0" 5 3 ' - 4 0 ' Date 9 7/8" - F1 " 22 9 0.3 S4.1 " 3 2 ' - 3 FFE=100'-0" TFE= 94' - 0" C 2'-6" FTG 1 / 8 A SEE 2/S2.1 EXIST TFE= 92' - 0" ± " 11 FOR LINK C 8 " " MECH LINE 0 T 6 FDN PLAN TFE= 95' - S4.1 F 1 ERIFY E .E.=92'-0", V 2 I F 3 ' = ' FFE=100'-0" T - - F 4 W/ MECH 0 G C S S 9 1 ' T " - S S 6 12 0 6 G E 2/S4.1 S S ' SE 1 " " - ' 39' - 6" 96' - 0" 0 = - TFE 5' - 0" 20 " 6 1' - 6" S4.1 " S S 0.1 LAYOUT POINTS S 0.2 S S (CORNER OF EXIST BRICK A 1 VENEER & FDN WALL) M ' 6' - 4 1/4" 1.1 - 10" MECH LINE A 4" MECH LINE 1.1 2 1 12 T TFE= ' 1 VERIFY W/ I.E.=97'-2", VERIFY 94' - 0" C I.E.= - 10 5' - 0" S4.1 1 0 H / K W/ MECH " ECH . M 2 S4.1 L " 10 I 4.1 19' - 10 3/4" N SEE 2/S4.1 SEE 2/S S4.1 E 210' - 0" 2 1/2" MECH LINE I.E.=92'-0", VERIFY 6.50° W/ MECH SEE 2/S4.1 FOUNDATION PLAN N A.1 D C A.3 1 FOUNDATION PLAN S1.1 1/8" = 1'-0" Drawn By: JMW S1.1Checked By: SGP 71524 C O P Y R I G H T © H T G A R C H I T E C T S IF PIPE IS LOCATED IN FTG REINF, SEE PLAN THE FTG AREA, LOWER NOTES PIPE PERPENDICULAR FTG TO ALLOW PIPE TO TO FTG (SEE MECH FOR PASS THRU WALL 1/3D, SAWCUT W/ WET BLADE 2'-0" SLEEVE) IMMEDIATELY AFTER FINISHING LAP CAST-IN-PLACE CONC TFE CONTROL JT CONST JT SEE GEN'L WALL, SEE PLAN & VARIES TYP NOTES SECTIONS 3" CLR @ 16'-0" O.C. MAX VERT CORNER BAR HORIZ CORNER BARS 2X4 KEYWAY & SEE PLAN SEE GEN'L SEE GEN'L SAWCUT JT SAME SIZE AS VERT SAME SIZE & SPACING CONST JT NOTES NOTES S CONC SLAB ON ADJACENT TO WALL REINF AS HORIZ WALL REINF GRADE, SEE PLAN CONST JT NOTES: 1. FOR PIPES 3'-0" OR LESS BELOW FTG, D BENT BARS TO D PROVIDE SLEEVE & MATCH SIZE & CONC AS SHOWN. QUANTITY OF FTG 2. FOR PIPES MORE HORIZ CORNER BARS - REINF SLEEVE Ø 1/2"ØX2'-0" SMOOTH TERMINATE SAME SIZE & SPACING AS THAN 3'-0" BELOW NOTES DWL @ 12" O.C. CAST-IN-PLACE CONC + 1'-6" NOTES MESH @ JT SEE GEN'L HORIZ WALL REINF HORIZ REINF SHALL BE D 2XS UNO FTG, USE STEPPED CAST-IN-PLACE CONC (GREASE ONE END) SEE GEN'L WALL, SEE PLAN & FTG DETAIL TO GET 3'-0" MAX WALL, SEE PLAN & (ALTERNATE LOCATION) CONT THRU JT SECTIONS NOTES: WITHIN 3'-0" MAX. SECTIONS 1. CAST STEPPED FOOTINGS AS WELDED WIRE MESH FABRIC, CONST JT OPTIONAL www.htg-architects.com 6" SEE PLAN & GEN'L SEE PLAN ONE UNIT. NOTES FOR MAX Minneapolis Bismarck 2. COORDINATE EXACT FOOTING INSIDE DIA OF SLEEVE TO SPACING STEP LOCATION AND WIDTH W/ BE MIN 2" LARGER THAN OTHER TRADES. OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF 1010 Mainstreet, Suite 100 PIPE, CTR PIPE IN SLEEVE Hopkins, MN 55343 1 SECTION 2 DETAIL 3 SECTION 4 PLAN DETAIL 5 PLAN DETAIL 6 PLAN DETAIL Tel: 952.278.8880 S4.1 STEPPED FOOTING 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 WALL FTG @ UNDERGROUND LINES NO SCALE S4.1 TYP CONTROL/CONST JT NO SCALE S4.1 TYP WALL CORNER 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 TYP WALL INTERSECTION 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 WALL CONSTRUCTION JOINT 1/2"=1'-0" #4X3'-0" @ 24" O.C. DWL'S CTRD ON SLAB JT (MIN 2 EXIST CONC CONC SLAB ON GRADE, PER DR) P/C WALL PANEL SLAB ON GRADE SEE PLAN BEYOND PROJECT CAST-IN-PLACE CONC 12"W P/C WALL PANEL 6" MIN STRUC CONC SLAB, FDN WALL, SEE PLAN DESIGNED & PROVIDED BY SEE ARCH FOR SLOPE 4" MIN SLAB BRG, COORD FFE P/C PANEL MFR SEE GEN'L W/ ARCH DWG'S BRACE TOP OF P/C & SECTIONS #4 @ 12" O.C. #5X2'-0" DWL'S @ 12" O.C., P/C WALL PANEL SEE PLAN NOTES WALL PER 1/S4.2 3" CONC SLAB ON WDW SYSTEM, SEE CONC SLAB ON DRILL & EPOXY 4" INTO WHERE OCCURS, SEE #5 @ 12" O.C. BOT GRADE, SEE PLAN ARCH (CFS STUD WALL, GRADE, SEE PLAN PLAN & SECTIONS EXIST FDN WALL 8" ROGERS WHERE OCCURS) EXT GRADE OR FFE INT NON-BRG P/C WALL AT NEW P/C PANEL WALLS, CONC SLAB ON GRADE, #4X2'-0" @ 16" O.C., EXT GRADE OR FFE PAVING, SEE SEE PLAN PANEL, SEE PLAN PANEL MFR TO PROVIDE SEE PLAN DRILL & EPOXY 4" INTO PAVING, SEE ARCH SEE PLAN TWE ARCH & CIVIL ACTIVITY CENTER CONN @ EXIST FDN WALL EXIST CONC SLAB & CIVIL SEE ARCH FFE #4 @ 24" O.C. DWL'S CONC SLAB ON EXIST FDN WALL EXT GRADE OR SEE PLAN ALL AROUND THUS: CONC SLAB ON CONTR OPTION: 12" GRADE, SEE PLAN EXIST FDN WALL & FTG PAVING, SEE ARCH VOID 2'-0" GRADE, SEE PLAN TEMP FORM OR 1 1/2"- EXPANSION & CIVIL 2'-0" GROUT CONT 20 GA TYPE "C" FFE 6 1/2"W CAST-IN-PLACE CONFORM DECK W/ DO NOT FILL GROUT CORES CONT WALL FTG, SEE SEE PLAN EXIST CONT WALL RIGID INSUL, SEE CONC FDN WALL, SEE G60 GALV COATING VOID W/ CONC SOLID @ DWL'S TFE FTG TFE PLAN, CONTR SHALL ARCH PLAN & GEN'L NOTES (MAX SPAN=5'-0") ROGERS, MINNESOTA 1'-0" MATCH SEE PLAN COORD FTG STEPS TO SEE PLAN TFE 8"W CIP CONC SHIM & GROUT EXIST MATCH PANEL STEPS DWL'S TO MATCH SEE PLAN FDN WALL W/ #4 AS PER P/C WALL P/C WALL PANEL TO VERT REINF CONT WALL FTG, SEE DWL'S TO 3" CONT KEYWAY SHIM AS REQ'D BY P/C @ 12" O.C. EW MFR FTG CONN BY P/C TFE PLAN MATCH CTRD P/C WALL PANEL PANEL MFR 3" PANEL MFR VERT REINF CLR SEE PLAN 3" CLR (2) #5X2'-0" DWL'S, DRILL MIN FTG THICKNESS & CONT WALL 1'-8"W X 10"D CONT TYP & EPOXY 6" MIN INTO CONT WALL FTG, SEE GIVEN ON PLAN IS TO FTG, SEE 10/S4.1 FOR ADD'L INFO WALL FTG W/ (2) #5 EXIST FTG PLAN B/O P/C PANEL 3" CLR 1'-8"W X 10"D CONT 3" CLR CONT BOT KEYWAY TYP WALL FTG W/ (2) #5 1'-3" 3" CLR TYP TYP CONT BOT 7 SECTION 8 SECTION 9 SECTION 10 SECTION 11 SECTION 12 SECTION S4.1 INT P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 NEW WALL & FTG TO EXIST 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 NEW TO EXIST SLAB 1"=1'-0" S4.1 EXT P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 FDN WALL @ GLAZING 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 EXT STRUC CONC SLAB 1/2"=1'-0" 8"W CAST-IN-PLACE #4X3'-0" @ 24" O.C. DWL'S CTRD CONC WALL, SEE TWE CONC SLAB ON ON SLAB JT (MIN (2) PER DR) PLAN, SEE ARCH FOR SEE ARCH GRADE, SEE PLAN CONC SLAB ON SLOPED TOP P/C WALL PANEL 6" MIN STRUC CONC EXT WALL BEYOND GRADE, SEE PLAN SEE 10/S4.1 FOR INFO 12"W P/C WALL PANEL FFE #4X3'-0" @ 24" O.C. BEYOND 1'-8" GRATING, SEE ARCH NOT SHOWN DESIGNED & PROVIDED BY SEE PLAN SLAB, SEE ARCH FOR DWL'S CTRD ON SLAB VERIFY W/ SLOPE SEE PLAN 4" MIN SLAB BRG FFE OWNER/ICE P/C PANEL MFR SEE GEN'L JT (MIN 2 PER DR) RESURFACER COORD W/ ARCH SEE PLAN NOTES #4 @ 12" O.C. 6" MIN CONC APRON, CONT GALV TRENCH DRAIN GRATING CONC SLAB ON SEE ARCH FOR SLOPE #5 @ 12" O.C. BOT GRADE, SEE PLAN CONC SLAB ON L2 1/2X2 1/2X1/4 W/ SEE 15/S4.1 FOR & SUPPORTS BY OTHERS, SEE ARCH EXT GRADE OR GRADE, SEE PLAN GRANULAR 3/4"Ø EXP BOLTS @ INFO NOT SHOWN EXT GRADE OR EXT GRADE OR 8" BACKFILL PER PAVING, SEE FFE PAVING, SEE FFE 24" O.C. W/ 4" MIN PAVING, SEE ARCH GEOTECH T/O GRATING ARCH & CIVIL SEE PLAN ARCH & CIVIL SEE PLAN EMBED 2'-0" & CIVIL REPORT SEE ARCH PROVIDE RIGID INSUL TYP BTWN P/C WALL CONC SLAB ON GRADE, #4 @ 24" O.C. DWL'S 8" SLOPE 12" #4 @ 12" O.C. EW PANEL & CIP CONC SEE PLAN CONTR OPTION: VOID #5 @ 12" O.C. EW CTRD ALL AROUND THUS: GROUT CORES CONC SLAB ON WALL, SEE ARCH SEE ARCH GROUT CONT TEMP FORM OR 1 1/2"- 1 2'-0" SOLID @ DWL'S GRADE, SEE PLAN 20 GA TYPE "C" 1'-4" BID/PERMIT SET 01/09/26 DO NOT FILL 2'-0" #4 @ 24" O.C. DWL'S CONT WATER STOP, CONT WALL FTG, SEE ISSUED SET TSE CONFORM DECK W/ VOID W/ CONC THUS: P/C WALL PANEL & SEE ARCH TSE 1 TFE PLAN, CONTR SHALL G60 GALV COATING SEE PLAN 6" DWL'S TO MATCH 2'-0" CONT WALL FTG, SEE PLAN MIN 1 SEE PLAN COORD FTG STEPS TO REVISIONS (MAX SPAN=5'-0") CAST-IN-PLACE SEE ARCH SEE 10/S4.1 FOR MATCH PANEL STEPS VERT REINF CONC FDN WALL, 1'-0" ADD'L INFO TFE (4) #4 CONT RIGID INSUL, SEE PLAN & 6" #4 @ 18" O.C. 3" CONT KEYWAY 8"W CAST-IN-PLACE SEE PLAN SHIM AS REQ'D BY P/C DATE NO CONC FDN WALL, SEE ARCH SECTIONS TFE 3" (2) #4X4'-0" CTRD OVER MIN PANEL MFR CLR 01/23/26 1 ADDENDUM #1 SEE PLAN & GEN'L SEE PLAN HELICAL CAP MIN FTG THICKNESS NOTES TFE GIVEN ON PLAN IS TO 07/08/26 8 CCD#2 SEE PLAN B/O P/C PANEL 3" CLR HELICAL PILE BY KEYWAY TYP 1'-8"W X 10"D CONT SUPPLIER 1'-3" 3" CLR CONT WALL FTG, 8 WALL FTG W/ (2) #5 TYP SEE PLAN 8 CONT BOT 13 SECTION 14 SECTION 15 SECTION 16 SECTION 17 SECTION 18 SECTION S4.1 TYP EXT STRUC CONC SLAB 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 APRON 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 ICE PIT 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 ICE PIT @ EXT P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 TRENCH DRAIN 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 EXT P/C WALL PANEL @ LOW EXT GRADE 1/2"=1'-0" CL SEE COL STL COL, SEE PLAN & PLAN SEE CONC SLAB ON CONC SLAB ON PIER SCHED P/C WALL PANEL PLAN @ SIM: CONC SLAB GRADE, SEE PLAN GRADE, SEE PLAN & FTG DESIGNED & PROVIDED PAINT COL BASE & TOPS ON GRADE IS HIGHER SEE BY P/C PANEL MFR SEE WDW SYSTEM OF ANCHOR BOLTS W/ THIS SIDE PLAN GEN'L NOTES FFE FFE ASPHALTIC PAINT PRIOR P/C WALL PANEL #4 @ 16" O.C., THUS: BEYOND, SEE ARCH SEE PLAN SEE PLAN TO ENCASING IN CONC DESIGNED & PROVIDED CONC SLAB ON 1'-6" 8" 8" GROUT COL POCKET CONC SLAB ON GRADE, SEE PLAN COL ISOLATION JT, BY P/C PANEL MFR, SEE 1'-6" SOLID AFTER COL GRADE, SEE PLAN #4 @ 16" O.C., THUS: SEE 26/S4.1 GEN'L NOTES ERECTION FFE 1'-6" 6"W CAST-IN-PLACE 6"W CAST-IN-PLACE CONC SLAB ON I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was SEE PLAN 1'-6" CONC WALL W/ #4 @ CONC WALL W/ #4 @ prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a GROUT CONT 28 GRADE, SEE PLAN DASHER BD BY ICE 12" O.C. EW CTRD 12" O.C. EW CTRD duly Licensed Professional Engineer CONC SLAB ON CONC SLAB ON S4.1 CONTRACTOR EXT GRADE OR FFE under the laws of the State of Minnesota CONC SLAB ON GRADE, SEE PLAN DASHER BD BY ICE GRADE, SEE PLAN CONC SLAB ON PAVING, SEE ARCH SEE PLAN GRADE, SEE PLAN 2" CONTRACTOR GRADE, SEE PLAN SLAB & ICE FFE DWL'S W/ STD HK TO 8" GROUT CONT & CIVIL FFE CLR SYSTEM BY ICE SEE PLAN MATCH VERT REINF SEE PLAN FFE CONTRACTOR DWL'S W/ STD HK TO Shawn G. Parks TFE CONT WALL FTG, SEE ADD (3) TIES LOCATED PLAN, CONTR SHALL SEE PLAN MATCH VERT REINF WITHIN 5" OF THE TOP SEE PLAN TFE SLAB & ICE 57854 01/09/2026 SHIM AS REQ'D BY P/C SEE PLAN COORD FTG STEPS TO 1 CONTINUE FDN WALL OF THE PIER 1'-0" SYSTEM BY ICE PANEL MFR MATCH PANEL STEPS 1 PAST FACE OF CONC Reg No. Date 3" CONT KEYWAY CONTRACTOR TFE PIER, SEE 11/S4.1 FOR CONT WALL FTG, SEE 3" CONT KEYWAY SHIM AS REQ'D BY P/C TFE 20"X20" CONC PIER W/ 3" SEE PLAN FDN WALL INFO MIN FTG THICKNESS PLAN PANEL MFR CLR SEE PLAN (4) #7 VERT & #3 TIES GIVEN ON PLAN IS TO MIN FTG THICKNESS 1'-0" @ 12" O.C. B/O P/C PANEL GIVEN ON PLAN IS TO 3" CLR (2) #4 CONT CONT WALL FTG, SEE CONC FTG, SEE PLAN KEYWAY B/O P/C PANEL 3" CLR CONT WALL FTG, SEE TFE 11" TYP PLAN & SCHED KEYWAY PLAN 3" CLR SEE PLAN 1'-3" TYP 3" CLR TYP TYP 3" CLR TYP 19 SECTION 20 SECTION 21 SECTION 22 SECTION 23 SECTION 24 SECTION S4.1 INT P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 INT P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 ICE RINK EDGE 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 RINK EDGE @ HIGH SLAB 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 CIP CONC WALL @ HIGH/LOW SLAB 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 EXT STL COL, PIER & FTG 1/2"=1'-0" CL COL EXIST BRICK VENEER CL & PIER PAINT COL BASES & TOPS CL WHERE OCCURS COL SEE OF ANCHOR BOLTS W/ COL 1 1 1 1 PLAN ASPHALTIC PAINT PRIOR 1 2" 1 2" 1 2" 1 2" EXIST BLDG " 2 TO ENCASING IN CONC 1 1 " STL COL, SEE PLAN SLAB BLOCK-OUT STL COL, SEE 2 1 & SCHED (SHAPE COL ISOLATION JT, SEE POUR AFTER PLAN & SCHED 1 VARIES) 26/S4.1 COLUMNS ARE CL ERECTED STL COL, SEE STL COL, SEE EXIST CONC COL CONC SLAB ON GRADE, PLAN & SCHED PLAN & SCHED CL SLAB ON GRADE 1/4" BITUMINOUS & FTG SECTIONS AND DETAILS SEE PLAN CONC SLAB CL COL FFE FELT JT COL STL COL, SEE PLAN & " " SEE PLAN 2 2 1 1 SCHED 1 1/3 SLAB PLAN VIEW 1 8" BASE PL, SEE PLAN VIEW 20"X20" CONC PIER W/ DEPTH BASE PL, SEE ADD (3) TIES LOCATED PAINT COL BASE & STL COL SCHED (8) #6 VERT & #3 TIES COL ISOLATION JT, SEE STL COL SCHED WITHIN 5" OF THE TOP TOPS OF ANCHOR 6" CONC SLAB ON GRADE, @ 12" O.C., DRILL & 26/S4.1 OF THE PIER BOLTS W/ ASPHALTIC CONC SLAB ON SEE PLAN EPOXY (2) VERT'S 6" 2'-0" MIN PAINT PRIOR TO 1/4 1/4 GRADE, SEE PLAN 28 29 INTO EXIST FTG CONC SLAB ON GRADE, FFE ENCASING IN CONC 28 STL COL, SEE STL COL, SEE S4.1 S4.1 @ SIM: 24"X24" CONC SEE PLAN SEE PLAN EXIST FDN WALL 2'-0" MIN S4.1 PLAN & SCHED PLAN & SCHED FFE @ SIM PIER W/ (8) #6 VERT & 5" 5" SEE PLAN FFE PROJ 1 1/2" NON-SHRINK 8" EXIST WALL FTG #3 TIES @ 12" O.C. PROJ 1 1/2" NON-SHRINK 1 SEE PLAN (4) 3/4"Ø ANCHOR GROUT (4) 3/4"Ø ANCHOR GROUT 1 8" EXIST TFE #5@12" O.C. EW CONTROL JT CONST JT RODS W/ (3) NUTS RODS W/ (3) NUTS 1'-0" TFE CONC FTG, SEE & (2) WASHERS & (2) WASHERS THICKENED SLAB EDGE CONC FTG, SEE PLAN PLAN & SCHED SEE PLAN DRILL & EPOXY CONTRACTOR OPTION: OMIT SLAB BLOCK-OUT & USE 8" TRANS REINF SEE GENERAL STRUCTURAL NOTES NUT Drawn By: JMW Checked By: SGP 8" TO T/O EMBED INTO EXIST FTG PIN-WHEEL CONTROL JT FOR ASPHALTIC COATING OF SECTION NUT SECTION TO T/O 3" CLR PATTERN, PROVIDE 1/4" MIN EMBED W/ 6" MIN EMBED STRUCTURAL STEEL BELOW GRADE 3" CLR TYP JT FILLER BTWN COL & SLAB TACK WELD TACK WELD FTG WIDTH TYP MATCH EXIST B/O SEE PLAN FTG EL 25 SECTION 26 DETAIL 27 SECTION 28 DETAIL 29 DETAIL 30 SECTION S4.1 NEW STL COL, PIER & FTG @ EXIST 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 TYP COL ISOLATION JT NO SCALE S4.1 INT STL COL & FTG 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 ANCHOR ROD SETTING 1"=1'-0" S4.1 ANCHOR ROD SETTING 1"=1'-0" S4.1 SLAB STEP 1/2"=1'-0" S4.1 71524 C O P Y R I G H T © H T G A R C H I T E C T S Page 49 of 129 P/C PLANK & TOPPING, CL SEE PLAN BM COMPRESSIBLE P/C PLANK & TOPPING CLOSURE MATERIAL, GROUT JT SOLID BTWN (DIRECTION VARIES), SEE ARCH BRACE TOP OF WALL 12"W P/C WALL PANEL P/C PLANKS SEE PLAN WELD PL'S CAST IN P/C P/C PLANK & TOPPING, SEE PLAN FOR PER 4/S4.3 DESIGNED & PROVIDED 12"W P/C WALL PANEL P/C PLANK & TOPPING, FFE PLANK @ 24" O.C. MAX SEE PLAN LOADS TO P/C BY P/C PANEL MFR, SEE DESIGNED & PROVIDED SEE PLAN SEE PLAN (ALT ENDS), BY P/C BY P/C MFR, SEE GEN'L GEN'L NOTES (INT P/C PLANK MFR FFE NOTES (INT P/C WALL WALL PANEL, WHERE FFE OCCURS) SEE PLAN L2 1/2X2 1/2X3/16X0'-8" @ PANEL, WHERE OCCURS) INT NON-BRG P/C WALL SEE PLAN 48" O.C. EA SIDE OF P/C FFE " MAX " MIN CLR PANEL, SEE PLAN 4 2 P/C PLANK & TOPPING P/C PLANK & TOPPING 1 WALL PANEL, ANCHOR TO 1 SEE PLAN P/C PLANK W/ (2) 3/8"ØX1 3/4" 1 (DIRECTION VARIES), (DIRECTION VARIES), FFE SCREW ANCHORS @ 6" O.C. SEE PLAN SEE PLAN P/C WALL PANEL TO L SEE PLAN EMBED PL DESIGNED & ANGLES MAY BE OMITTED CONN BY P/C WALL PROVIDED BY P/C PANEL SLOTTED INSERT & STRAP CONN DESIGNED & WITHIN 4'-0" OF RETURN TYP MFR MFR CONN DESIGNED & DESIGNED BY P/C PANEL P/C PLANK & TOPPING, PROVIDED BY P/C 8"W P/C PANEL 3/16 WALLS, PROVIDED PROVIDED BY P/C MFR MFR (MIN 2 PER WALL SEE PLAN WALL MFR DESIGNED & PROVIDED RETURN WALLS ARE AT INT NON-BRG P/C WALL PANEL, SEE PANEL) BY P/C MFR, SEE GEN'L www.htg-architects.com LEAST 2'-0" LONG OPEN CORES & GROUT P/C WALL PANEL TO CONN DESIGNED & PLAN NOTES STL BM, SEE PLAN SOLID BY P/C ERECTOR P/C PLANK CONN BY PROVIDED BY P/C MFR Minneapolis Bismarck 12" MIN CTRD ON WALL P/C PANEL MFR ABOVE 1010 Mainstreet, Suite 100 Hopkins, MN 55343 1 SECTION 2 SECTION 3 SECTION 4 SECTION 5 SECTION 6 SECTION Tel: 952.278.8880 S4.2 INT NON-BRG P/C WALL @ P/C PLANK 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 NON-LOAD BRG P/C WALL @ P/C PLANK 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 P/C PLANK BRG @ EXT P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 P/C PLANK LAP @ EXT P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 P/C PLANK BRG @ INT P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 P/C PLANK BRG @ INT STL BM 1/2"=1'-0" GUARDRAIL (WHERE OCCURS) & CONN TO BENT PROJECT GUARDRAIL (WHERE PL BY STAIR SUPPLIER OCCURS) & CONN TO BENT CL PL BY STAIR SUPPLIER BM SEE 3/16 CL P/C PLANK & TOPPING PLAN CONN DESIGNED & FFE COL GROUT 18" END OF P/C NOT SHOWN FOR PROVIDED BY P/C SEE PLAN PLANK SOLID, BY P/C CLARITY ROGERS 3/16 WALL MFR P/C PLANK & TOPPING NOT CONT 5/16" BENT PL, ERECTOR P/C PLANK & TOPPING, GROUT EDGE CORE SEE PLAN SHOWN FOR CLARITY THUS: 4" P/C PLANK & TOPPING, STL BM, SEE PLAN ACTIVITY CENTER SOLID P/C PLANK & TOPPING, P/C PLANK & TOPPING 12" SEE PLAN P/C PLANK & TOPPING, WALL PANEL SEE PLAN INT NON-BRG P/C (DIRECTION VARIES), 12"W P/C WALL PANEL TBE CONT 5/16" BENT PL, FFE FFE SEE PLAN TBE SEE PLAN DESIGNED & SEE PLAN THUS: 4" FFE STAIR STRINGER (WHERE SEE PLAN SEE PLAN SEE PLAN PROVIDED BY P/C EXPANSION 12" SEE PLAN OCCURS) & CONN TO PANEL MFR, SEE 3/8" FITTED STIFF PL EA BENT PL BY STAIR EMBED PL DESIGNED & SIDE OF STL BM SUPPLIER 4" FFE GEN'L NOTES PROVIDED BY P/C PANEL 8"W P/C PANEL 4" SEE PLAN @ SIM: EXIST P/C WALL MFR DESIGNED & PROVIDED ROGERS, MINNESOTA WELD PL'S CAST IN P/C PANEL, ORIGINAL EMBED PL @ 24" O.C. BY P/C MFR, SEE GEN'L TYP 5/8"Ø SCREW ANCHORS PLANK @ 48" O.C. MAX BY 8"W P/C PANEL WALL PANEL SUPPLIER 3/16 BY P/C PLANK MFR CONN DESIGNED & NOTES @ 24" O.C. W/ 4 1/2" P/C PLANK MFR DESIGNED & PROVIDED TO DESIGN & PROVIDE STL BM, SEE PLAN 5/8"Ø SCREW ANCHORS PROVIDED BY P/C MIN EMBED CONN DESIGNED & BY P/C MFR, SEE GEN'L CONN FROM BM TO STL COL W/ 3/4" CAP PL, (4) 3/4"Ø BOLTS @ 24" O.C. W/ 4 1/2" WALL MFR EMBED PL DESIGNED & STL BM TO P/C PANEL CONN PROVIDED BY P/C WALL NOTES 2 EXIST WALL PANEL SEE PLAN & SCHED MIN EMBED PROVIDED BY P/C PANEL DESIGNED & PROVIDED BY @ SIM: P/C PLANK MFR CONN DESIGNED & 1/4 MFR P/C PANEL MFR, SEE PLAN OVERHANGS P/C WALL, PROVIDED BY P/C P/C PANEL DESIGNED 3/16 FOR REACTION SEE PLAN FOR DISTANCE STL BM, SEE PLAN WALL MFR & PROVIDED BY P/C SEE MFR, SEE GEN'L NOTES PLAN 7 SECTION 8 SECTION 9 SECTION 10 SECTION 11 SECTION 12 SECTION S4.2 P/C PLANK LAP @ FLR OPNG 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 P/C PLANK BRG @ STL BM 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 P/C PLANK BRG @ P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 HI/LO P/C PLANK BRG @ INT P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 STL BM BRG @ P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 STL BM TO COL CONN 1/2"=1'-0" 12"W P/C WALL PANEL DESIGNED & PROVIDED BY PL1/4"X4" @ EA EMBED, P/C PANEL MFR SEE GEN'L CL LAP 2" MIN W/ EMBED NOTES CONC SLAB ON BM GRADE, SEE PLAN 1 WELD PL'S CAST IN P/C 2" GAP SEE PLANK @ 48" O.C. MAX, EXT GRADE OR SEE ARCH PLAN 3/16 FFE EXIST P/C WALL BY P/C PLANK MFR, SEE PAVING, SEE ARCH SEE PLAN GROUT 18" END OF P/C PANEL PLAN FOR FORCES & CIVIL PLANK SOLID @ HEADED P/C PLANK & TOPPING GROUT CONT 3/16 STUD LOC'S MIN, BY P/C P/C PLANK & TOPPING SEE PLAN SHIM AS REQ'D BY P/C ERECTOR NOT SHOWN FOR STL PILE CAP BY PANEL MFR CLARITY FFE HELICAL SUPPLIER P/C PLANK & TOPPING, 12"W P/C WALL PANEL SEE PLAN (8"X8" MIN, USE CONT WALL FTG, SEE CONN TO FLR STRUC SEE PLAN DESIGNED & PROVIDED STL BM, SEE PLAN 12"X12" MIN @ HP50'S) PLAN, CONTR SHALL BY CURTAINWALL FFE BY P/C PANEL MFR, SEE COORD FTG STEPS TO SUPPLIER SEE PLAN GEN'L NOTES TFE TBE SEE PLAN MATCH PANEL STEPS SEE PLAN (2) #4X4'-0" CTRD OVER PROVIDE 1 1/2" VERT 3" CONT KEYWAY BID/PERMIT SET 01/09/26 CONT 1/4" END PL W/ 1/4 HELICAL CAP ISSUED SET 1/2"ØX6" HEADED STUDS SLOTTED HOLES IN L, INSTALL ANCHOR @ B/O 1'-4" SEE FDN PLAN/NOTES @ 24" O.C. COORD WELD PL'S CAST IN P/C STL BM TO P/C PANEL REVISIONS HOLE, HAND TIGHTEN L5X3X5/16X0'-9" LLV @ FOR FTG REINF EXACT LOC'S W/ P/C PLANK @ 48" O.C. MAX (4 CONN DESIGNED & NUT TO ALLOW VERT EA EMBED W/ 1/2"Ø 3" CLR SUPPLIER PER BM SPAN MIN) BY P/C PROVIDED BY P/C MOVEMENT & DAMAGE THREADED RODS @ 6" TYP PLANK MFR PANEL MFR, SEE DATE NO THREADS SPACING W/ 2 1/4" STL BM, SEE PLAN PLAN FOR REACTION 01/28/26 2 ADDENDUM #2 EMBED USING HILTI SEE FDN PLAN FOR HIT-HY 270 ADHESIVE 07/08/26 8 CCD#2 CURTAINWALL, SEE FTG WIDTH HELICAL PILE BY SYSTEM & HIT-SC 18X50 ARCH 3/16 SUPPLIER SCREENS 13 SECTION 14 SECTION 15 SECTION 16 SECTION S4.2 P/C PLANK BRG @ STL BM 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 STL BM BRG @ P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 P/C PLANK LAP @ EXIST 1/2"=1'-0" S4.2 EXT P/C WALL PANEL 1/2"=1'-0" 8 I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota Shawn G. Parks 57854 01/09/2026 Reg No. Date SECTIONS AND DETAILS Drawn By: JMW Checked By: SGP S4.2 71524 C O P Y R I G H T © H T G A R C H I T E C T S Page 50 of 129      RJM Construction LLC Project: 24520-0126 Rogers Activity Center 830 Boone Avenue North 21080 141st Avenue North Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427 Rogers, Minnesota 55374 P: +19528378600     RFI #28: Soil Corrections At Grid A.2-A.3 & 1-1.4   Revision 0 Status Closed on 07/06/26 To Jack Gossen (Veit & Company, Inc.) (Response From Tyler Chaika-Gennow (RJM Construction LLC) Required) 830 Boone Avenue North Bradden Parks (Innovative Structural Solutions, PA) Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427  (Response Required) Kevin Beidelman (American Engineering Testing, Inc)  Mike Quicksell (Veit & Company, Inc.)  Nii Otoo (HTG Architects)  Nate Iverson (Veit & Company, Inc.)  Date Initiated Jun 17, 2026 Due Date Jun 26, 2026 Location Project Stage Cost Impact Yes (Unknown) Schedule Impact Yes (Unknown) Spec Section Cost Code Drawing Number Reference Linked Drawings   Received From   Copies To Mike Bauer (City of Rogers), Matt Benson (GR Mechanical Plumbing & Heating, Inc), Dan Cacka (Donald R. Frantz Concrete Construction, LLC), Doran Cote (City of Rogers), Jeremy Jimenez (Fabcon Precast, LLC), Mike Joslin (Donald R. Frantz Concrete Construction, LLC), Bryce Kamenick (RJM Construction LLC), Steve Karvala (Veit & Company, Inc.), Max Kolles (Veit & Company, Inc.), David Larson (RJM Construction LLC), Phil Marquette (Veit & Company, Inc.), Ryan McDonald (Superior Steel Erectors LLC), Ryan Simpson (RJM Construction LLC), Jesse Spetz (United Water & Sewer Co.), Sam Straate (Veit & Company, Inc.), Nick Zarembinski (RJM Construction LLC)        RJM Construction LLC Page 1 of 3 Printed On: Aug 3, 2026 02:15 PM CDT Page 51 of 129    RFI #28 - Soil Corrections At Grid A.2-A.3 & 1-1.4 Project: 24520-0126 Rogers Activity Center   Activity   Question Question from Tyler Chaika-Gennow RJM Construction LLC on Wednesday, Jun 17, 2026 at 03:01 PM CDT   Soil corrections are needed beyond the original scope outlined in the geotechnical report, specification 07 7002. The plan NW corner of the building footprint contains organic soils >20' deep. Continuing excavation would put the existing fieldhouse facility at risk of undermined footings. OSHA requires a 1.5:1 slope of excavation. Veit has determined that to continue digging, at least ~28' of clearance is needed from bottom of fieldhouse footings to bottom of excavation. This clearance is not possible.   During a 6-17-26 meeting with HTG, ISS, AET, Anderson Engineering, RJM, Veit, and City of Rogers it was determined that lead times for additional borings to verify the soil composition at the impacted locations by AET can be beyond 4 weeks. Without verification of the soil, the soil bearing pressure cannot be determined thus upsizing the footings may not prevent future building movement.    The general consensus from the meeting is that our best option moving forward is to develop a helical pile plan for the impacted footings.    1. Veit - Provide marked up plan of area where soil corrections are NOT able to complete.  2. ISS - Outline what information is needed from Veit or AET to start assembling a helical pile design.    Impacts to the project schedule will be estimated at this time and will be shared with all impacted trades once available.   Attachments Impacted Footing Locations.pdf   Official Response Response from Tyler Chaika-Gennow RJM Construction LLC on Monday, Jul 6, 2026 at 11:15 AM CDT   Submittal 31-22-05-2 Earthworking - Helical Piles Engineered Drawings created and posted to Procore. RFI CLOSED.   Official Response Response from Kevin Beidelman American Engineering Testing, Inc on Wednesday, Jul 1, 2026 at 07:37 AM CDT   Reports were distributed via email noting the extent of the corrections made along the west side of the arena.   Official Response Response from Bradden Parks Innovative Structural Solutions, PA on Friday, Jun 19, 2026 at 01:06 PM CDT   See attached   Attachments Footing at Helical Pile Cap.pdf   Official Response Response from Bradden Parks Innovative Structural Solutions, PA on Thursday, Jun 18, 2026 at 11:44 AM CDT   See attached proposed helical layout. With this helical layout, footings can remain as sized except thickness should be increased to 16". AET/Veit: Are helical extents limited to magenta shaded footings only (and none under interior slab)?  Helical Supplier: Do helical spacing and required capacities seem reasonable? Any feedback/concerns?     Attachments RFI 28 - Soil Corrections At Grid A.2-A.3 1-1.4 - ISS Comments.pdf   All Replies Response from Tyler Chaika-Gennow RJM Construction LLC on Monday, Jul 6, 2026 at 11:15 AM CDT   Submittal 31-22-05-2 Earthworking - Helical Piles Engineered Drawings created and posted to Procore. RFI CLOSED.   Response from Kevin Beidelman American Engineering Testing, Inc on Wednesday, Jul 1, 2026 at 07:37 AM CDT   Reports were distributed via email noting the extent of the corrections made along the west side of the arena.   Response from Bradden Parks Innovative Structural Solutions, PA on Friday, Jun 19, 2026 at 01:06 PM CDT   See attached   Attachments Footing at Helical Pile Cap.pdf     RJM Construction LLC Page 2 of 3 Printed On: Aug 3, 2026 02:15 PM CDT Page 52 of 129    RFI #28 - Soil Corrections At Grid A.2-A.3 & 1-1.4 Project: 24520-0126 Rogers Activity Center   Response from Tyler Chaika-Gennow RJM Construction LLC on Friday, Jun 19, 2026 at 12:09 PM CDT   ISS,   Can a typical detail for grade beams on helical piles be developed for preliminary pricing purposes?    Response from Bradden Parks Innovative Structural Solutions, PA on Thursday, Jun 18, 2026 at 11:44 AM CDT   See attached proposed helical layout. With this helical layout, footings can remain as sized except thickness should be increased to 16". AET/Veit: Are helical extents limited to magenta shaded footings only (and none under interior slab)?  Helical Supplier: Do helical spacing and required capacities seem reasonable? Any feedback/concerns?     Attachments RFI 28 - Soil Corrections At Grid A.2-A.3 1-1.4 - ISS Comments.pdf   RJM Construction LLC Page 3 of 3 Printed On: Aug 3, 2026 02:15 PM CDT Page 53 of 129 STEEL PILE CAP BY HELICAL SUPPLIER (8"X8" MIN, USE 12"X12" (2) #4X4'-0" CTRD MIN @ 50K HELICALS) OVER HELICAL CAP 1'-4" SEE FDN PLAN/NOTES FOR FTG REINF 0'-3" SEE FDN PLAN FOR FTG WIDTH HELICAL PILE BY SUPPLIER Page 54 of 129      RJM Construction LLC Project: 24520-0126 Rogers Activity Center 830 Boone Avenue North 21080 141st Avenue North Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427 Rogers, Minnesota 55374 P: +19528378600     RFI #28: Soil Corrections At Grid A.2-A.3 & 1-1.4   Revision 0 Status Open To Bradden Parks (Innovative Structural Solutions, PA) From Tyler Chaika-Gennow (RJM Construction LLC)  (Response Required) 830 Boone Avenue North Jack Gossen (Veit & Company, Inc.) (Response Golden Valley, Minnesota 55427 Required) Kevin Beidelman (American Engineering Testing, Inc)  Mike Quicksell (Veit & Company, Inc.)  Nii Otoo (HTG Architects)  Date Initiated Jun 17, 2026 Due Date Jun 26, 2026 Location Project Stage Cost Impact Yes (Unknown) Schedule Impact Yes (Unknown) Spec Section Cost Code Drawing Number Reference Linked Drawings   Received From   Copies To Mike Bauer (City of Rogers), Matt Benson (GR Mechanical Plumbing & Heating, Inc), Dan Cacka (Donald R. Frantz Concrete Construction, LLC), Doran Cote (City of Rogers), Jeremy Jimenez (Fabcon Precast, LLC), Mike Joslin (Donald R. Frantz Concrete Construction, LLC), Bryce Kamenick (RJM Construction LLC), Steve Karvala (Veit & Company, Inc.), Max Kolles (Veit & Company, Inc.), David Larson (RJM Construction LLC), Phil Marquette (Veit & Company, Inc.), Ryan McDonald (Superior Steel Erectors LLC), Ryan Simpson (RJM Construction LLC), Jesse Spetz (United Water & Sewer Co.), Sam Straate (Veit & Company, Inc.), Nick Zarembinski (RJM Construction LLC)        RJM Construction LLC Page 1 of 2 Printed On: Jun 17, 2026 03:02 PM CDT Page 55 of 129    RFI #28 - Soil Corrections At Grid A.2-A.3 & 1-1.4 Project: 24520-0126 Rogers Activity Center   Activity   Question Question from Tyler Chaika-Gennow RJM Construction LLC on Wednesday, Jun 17, 2026 at 03:01 PM CDT   Soil corrections are needed beyond the original scope outlined in the geotechnical report, specification 07 7002. The plan NW corner of the building footprint contains organic soils >20' deep. Continuing excavation would put the existing fieldhouse facility at risk of undermined footings. OSHA requires a 1.5:1 slope of excavation. Veit has determined that to continue digging, at least ~28' of clearance is needed from bottom of fieldhouse footings to bottom of excavation. This clearance is not possible.   During a 6-17-26 meeting with HTG, ISS, AET, Anderson Engineering, RJM, Veit, and City of Rogers it was determined that lead times for additional borings to verify the soil composition at the impacted locations by AET can be beyond 4 weeks. Without verification of the soil, the soil bearing pressure cannot be determined thus upsizing the footings may not prevent future building movement.    The general consensus from the meeting is that our best option moving forward is to develop a helical pile plan for the impacted footings.    1. Veit - Provide marked up plan of area where soil corrections are NOT able to complete.  2. ISS - Outline what information is needed from Veit or AET to start assembling a helical pile design.    Impacts to the project schedule will be estimated at this time and will be shared with all impacted trades once available.   Attachments Impacted Footing Locations.pdf     Awaiting an Official Response   RJM Construction LLC Page 2 of 2 Printed On: Jun 17, 2026 03:02 PM CDT Page 56 of 129 DL=3150PLF 10K HELICAL SL=800PLF TL=3950PLF 25K HELICAL 25K HELICAL 25K HELICAL 25K HELICAL 115'-10" Helical supplier to review/advise as needed on 20'-6 3/4" helical spacing (are any too Footing loads for reference close to each other)? for helical supplier 24'-0" 20K HELICAL DL=1850PLF 10K HELICAL X6 SL=250PLF 25'-0" TL=2100PLF 20K HELICAL DL=1050PLF @ 8" WALL 4 SIDES 10K HELICAL 20K HELICAL 50K HELICAL 50K HELICAL 2'-0" 30K HELICAL 21'-6 3/4" 30K HELICAL 10K HELICAL 50K HELICAL 30K HELICAL DL=12K 50K HELICAL With helical spaced as shown, currently spec'd footing width SL=21K 10K HELICAL @ JST 30K HELICAL and reinforcing to remain, increase footing thickness to 16" (thicken bottom of footing) DL=3150PLF + JST RXNS DL=5875PLF 50K HELICAL SL=3750PLF TL=9625PLF 30K HELICAL DL=4775PLF 20K HELICAL SL=2575PLF TL=7350PLF Helicals and caps designed by helical supplier. We anticipate cap to be embedded 3" to 4" DL=7.5K 20K HELICAL into bottom of footing SL=13K 34'-11 3/4" @ JST 50K HELICAL Verify if helicals are required under interior slabs. If so, provide extents. 13'-8 3/4" 30K HELICAL 20K HELICAL DL=3200PLF 20K HELICAL SL=100PLF ESIMATED LOCATION OF TL=3300PLF IMPACTED FOOTINGS BASED OFF 6-17-26 Verify helical extents limited to magenta shaded area Page 57 of 129 FOUNDATION PLAN NOTES: 1. VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS WITH ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS AND EXISTI 2. SEE ARCH DRAWINGS FOR SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL WALL OPENING NG CONDITIONS. FOUNDATION KEYNOTES: 3. FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION (FFE) = SEE PLAN. A S. STEP TOP OF FOOTING AS REQUIRED TO MATCH EXISTING T 4. FLOOR SLAB SHALL BE 4" MINIMUM CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE WITH 6X (TFE) PER 1/S4.1. MATCH EXISTING BOTTOM OF FOOTING VERIFY ALL DEPRESSED AND SLOPED SLABS WITH ARCH DRAWINGS AND MECH/EL B NEW OPENING IN EXISTING PRECAST WALL, SEE ARCH. CON OP OF FOOTING ELEVATION CONTRACTORS. ELEVATION PER 8/S4.1. ORIGINAL PRECAST WALL PANEL SUPPLIER TO REVIEW OPEN 6-W2.1XW2.1 WWF UNO. 5. ALL CONTINUOUS WALL FOOTINGS SHALL BE 2'-0"W X 1'-0"D WI DETAIL PANEL REINFORCING/RETROFIT AS REQUIRED. STEEL COLUMN SCHEDULE EC TRACTOR SHALL ENGAGE UNO. SEE GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET S0.1 FOR REINFORCING AND DEPTH MARK SIZE BASE PLATE REMARKS C CONCRETE CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE PANEL STEP LOCATIING AND DESIGN AND C1 HSS4X4X1/4 3/4"X10"X10" 6. TOP OF EXTERIOR FOOTING ELEVATION (TFE) = 96'-0" UNO. TH (2) #5 CONTINUOUS BOTTOM PANEL MANUFACTURER TO ACCURATELY LOCATE FOUNDATION C2 HSS5X5X1/4 3/4"X11"X11" FOR OTHER WIDTHS. D ONS WITH PRECAST 7. TOP OF INTERIOR FOOTING ELEVATION (TFE) = SEE PLAN. FLOOR SLAB SHALL BE 6" MINIMUM CONCRETE SLAB ON GRA C3 W12X40 1"X18"X12" WAY CENTERED HATCHED THUS: STEPS. E 8. S----S ON PLAN DENOTES STEPPED FOOTING. SEE SECTION 1/S4.1. E ICE RINK SYSTEM SUPPLIER SHALL PROVIDE MEASURES (RI DE WITH #4 @ 12" O.C. EACH 9. SEE DETAIL 2/S4.1 FOR DROPPED FOOTING AT ALL UNDERGROUND MECH HEAT, ETC.) TO IMPEDE FROST PENETRATION UNDER ADJAC 10 56' - 0" SITE DATUM:100'-0"=905.5' FOOTINGS. D BUILDING. GID INSULATION, IN-FLOOR S4.1 ENT CONTINUOUS WALL FOOTING SCHEDULE 0.8 - 4" 2' - 1"5' 10. F PROVIDE (2) #4 X 4'-0" DIAGONAL BARS IN SLAB ON GRA SEE DETAILS 4/S4.1, 5/S4.1 AND 6/S4.1 FOR TYPICAL FOUNDATION ANICAL LINES ENTERING MARK SIZE BOT REINF EW REMARKS 8 REINFORCING. OVERHEAD DOOR. F1 4'-0"X4'-0"X12" (5) #5 S4.1 DE AT EACH CORNER AT 11. WALL JOINTS AND CORNER G PROVIDE (2) #4 X 4'-0" DIAGONAL BARS IN SLAB ON GRA F2 5'-0"X5'-0"X14" (6) #5 SEE DETAIL 7/S4.1 FOR FOOTINGS AT NON-BEARING INTERIOR PRECAST 12 OF PERPENDICULAR FOOTINGS, PLACE UPPER FOOTING OVER TESTED/INSPECTED H S4.1 FILL. 8" MINIMUM CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE WITH #5 @ 12" DEO.C AT INSIDE CORNERS. WALLS. AT INTERSECTION J S S 12. "CX" ON PLAN DENOTES STEEL COLUMN SIZE. SEE STEEL COLUMN SCHEDULE ON WIDEN FOUNDATION WALL 4" FOR SLAB BEARING. 4' - 0" COMPACTED . EACH WAY CENTERED. EXIST FFE= 0.8 C K 2'-6" FTG 96'-0"± 13. "FX" ON PLAN DENOTES FOOTING SIZE. SEE FOOTING SCHEDULE ON THI FOUNDATIONS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED FOR A 50' WIDE FUTUR SPANNING STRUCTURE SUPPORTED BY PRECAST WALL OR NEW 92' - 0" A THIS SHEET. SEE 3/S4.1 FOR TYP 14. SEE PLAN AND SECTIONS FOR SIZE OF CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE FOUNDA ADJACENT TO PRECAST WALL. E ADDITION, ASSUMING 50' F CONTROL/CONST REINFORCING. S SHEET. 14 TFE= EXIST TFE= 94' - 0" ± L MECHANICAL OPENING IN FLOOR SLAB FOR REFRIGERATION WALL DIRECTLY JT DETAIL S4.1 15. FOR EXACT SIZE AND LOCATION. EXTEND ALL FOOTINGS MINIMUM 1'-0" BEYOND END OF WALLS UNO. TION WALLS AND 1'-0". TYP FFE=96'-6" M PRECAST SUPPLIER SHALL LEAVE OUT 6'-6" WIDE (UNO ON SYSTEM VALVE, SEE MECH 9 16. PROTECT EXISTING BUILDING FOUNDATION DURING NEW CONSTRUCT 25' - 5" RECESS, S4.1 PANEL BELOW SLAB ON GRADE ELEVATION FOR UNDERFLOOR F 92' - 0" SEE ARCH COORDINATE EXACT LOCATIONS WITH RINK SUPPLIER. 93' - 0" 17. PLAN) SECTION OF PRECAST FFE=96'-0" ON PLAN DENOTES NON-BEARING PRECAST WALL PANEL. SEE 7/S4.1. ION. SHORE AS REQUIRED. TFE= 20 44' - 7 1/8" 95' - 0" RINK PIPING, TFE= S4.1 0.7 C TYP 2'-6" FTG 30 C 1 TFE= S4.1 6 A C NEW OPNG www.htg-architects.com S S B 8" S S 6" MECH LINE TFE= 92' - 0" Minneapolis I.E.=90'-11", VERIFY . C S S A.3 A.2 W/ MECH S S M 8 TYP Bismarck SEE 2/S4.1 S4.1 152' - 0" 1010 Mainstreet, Suite 100 37' - 2" S S 94' - 2" 6' - 4" Hopkins, MN 55343 26' - 5" 5' - 4" 21' - 6" ± FV 15' - 8" 10" MECH LINE 10 TFE= Tel: 952.278.8880 I.E.=91'-1", VERIFY S4.1 93' - 0" 14 4" MECH LINE 4" MECH LINE 10 I.E.=93'-6", VERIFY I.E.=90'-9", VERIFY W/ MECH 94' - 0" S4.1 4 0° 16 1 ' SEE 2/S4.1 4 S4.1 5 W/ MECH - . C W/ MECH ' 6 0 9 S4.1 - TFE= " S SEE 2/S4.1 0 SEE 2/S4.1 " 1.4 1.4 16 ° S 0 S4.1 .0 C S S FFE=97'-0" 11' - 10" 4 F 0 PROJECT ' 9 F 3 - T 12 ' H T 8 - 3'-0" FTG F 0 12 G " SIM 15 E S4.1 F " TFE= TSE=92'-0" T 95' - 0" = 19 S4.1 T F T S4.1 F TFE= 91' - 0" 9 E S4.1 F 19 E 1 3 = E 6 ' = S4.1 = 17 - ' 9 EXIST FFE=96'-0"± 9 - 0 C S S 1 9 6 " 0 ' S4.1 5 ' - " ' - ROGERS 0 G 9 - C 0 " S S 0 15 19 " 3' - 9 5/8" FFE=97'-0" " S4.1 S4.1 TRENCH S4.1 C 10 TFE= 96' - 0" 8 " DRAIN, S ACTIVITY CENTER S4.1 D 17 SEE ARCH FFE=97'-0" . T S4.1 7 TRENCH F 12 S E 1.3 S4.1 DRAIN, SEE 3/S4.1 FOR TYP = M SIM . RAMP DN 9 F 3 EXPANSION SEE ARCH 8 CONTROL/CONST 6 ' T 4" MECH LINE - ' ' 6 G - - 19 FFE=97'-0" 19 19 FFE= " 6' - 0" JT DETAIL TFE= 9 4 / ECH 0 95' - 0" 14 19 I.E.=VERIFY W M ' 8' - 4" 8" 28' - 8" 1 " " 10 S4.1 S4.1 S4.1 96'-0" B - TFE= 9 3' - 0" C NEW ' FFE= S4.1 SEE 2/S4.1 SIM 8" OPNG - 0 S4.1 S4.1 " 0 4 98'-6" S " ' ROGERS, MINNESOTA S S - F2 F2 0 " . S 5 M 1.2 ' - RAMP DN . 7 S EXIST TFE= 95' - 0" ± S 1 . ' " M - C C M F 1 0 F 3 3 F 3 " ' ' ' T F T T S C - S T - T - 6 0 F G G F F 0 " " E E E " 6 = 3 = = " ' 9 9 - 9 TFE= 3 " 96' - 0" 5 6 INK DWG'S 0 0 FFE=97'-0" ' 3" PIPE, SEE R ' 23 TFE= ' FFE=97'-0" " D - - 96' - 0" - - 1' - 0" ' 0 0 L 6 0 S4.1 " " 'S 5' - 6" 1 " 8" PIPE, SEE RINK DWG 1' - 0" 5' - 4" 4' - 6" 8" 23 23 FFE=100'-0" S4.1 3 S4.1 23 2 ' TFE= S4.1 - 96' - 0" 1 21 31' - 5 3/4" 1 1 / 2 S4.1 S S C 2 '-6 TFE= " 10 F " 95' - 0" TFE= 96' - 0" S4.1 TG R 21 A S S C M 8 S4.1 P 0.6 D 2 N 6.00° TFE= 98' - 0" RAMP DNRAMP DN RAMP DNRAMP . S S C 2 8 ' 8" 21 - 7 . S4.1 " 19 4" 4" EXIST S4.1 SIM FFE= 8 98'-0"± S4.1 TYP F2 99' - 0" FFE=97'-0" ICE RINK & BASE BY OTHERS TFE= E 2 1' - 7 1/2" S S ISSUED SET 201' - 2" 8" 5' - 3" 8" EXIST TFE= 94' - 0" ± BID/PERMIT SET 01/09/26 7' - 2 1/2" 5' - 3" REVISIONS . S S DATE 8" 9 01/23/26 1 ADDENDUMNO #1 3'-0" EXIST FFE=100'-0"± 7' - 1 1/2" FTG 01/28/26 2 ADDENDUM #2 4 1 2 8 1 4 ' 6 2 7 - 1 ' ' ' 6 1 - 19 - - " 2 2 0 7 13' - 7 1/4" ' " " S4.1 - 1 0 / 2 " R " A F2 9" M 6' - 4" P 8" D N FFE= . 10 98'-6" 19 S4.1 EXIST TFE= 92' - 0" ± 22 9 SEE 3/S4.1 FOR S4.1 10" S4.1 TYP CONTROL/ 10 CONST JT S4.1 0.5 16' - 8 1/2" DETAIL 6 S S ' ° - 0 F2 25 .5 " 0 3 7 " 8 - S4.1 8' I hereby certify that this plan, specification or r 0.4 R 2 7' - 0" A J prepared by me or under my direct supervision and t M 2 C2 eport was 8 P FFE=100'-0" ' T duly Licensed Professional Engineer FE= - D hat I am a 7 under the laws of the State of Minnesota N " 2' - 6" EXIST TFE= 94' - 0" ± S 9 5' TFE= 95' - 0" - 0" FFE=100'-0" S 93' - 0" C S S EXIST . 27' - 5 1/2" 48' - 3 3/4"FFE= 70' - 9 3/4"Shawn G. Parks 25' - 5" C S S 22 T 100'-0"± TFE= TFE= F S4.1 57854 95' - 0" 22 E = TFE= 96' - 0" S4.1 01/09/2026 TFE= 9 Reg No. 93' - 0" 5 3 ' - 4 0 ' Date 9 7/8" - F1 " 22 9 0.3 S4.1 " 3 2 ' - 3 FFE=100'-0" TFE= 94' - 0" C 2'-6" FTG 1 / 8 A SEE 2/S2.1 EXIST TFE= 92' - 0" ± " 11 FOR LINK C 8 " " MECH LINE 0 T 6 FDN PLAN TFE= 95' - S4.1 F 1 ERIFY E .E.=92'-0", V 2 I F 3 ' = ' FFE=100'-0" T - - F 4 W/ MECH 0 G C S S 9 1 ' T " - S S 6 12 0 6 G E 2/S4.1 S S ' SE 1 " " - ' 39' - 6" 96' - 0" 0 = - TFE 5' - 0" 20 " 6 1' - 6" S4.1 " S S 0.1 LAYOUT POINTS S 0.2 S S (CORNER OF EXIST BRICK A 1 VENEER & FDN WALL) M ' 6' - 4 1/4" 172' - 0" 1.1 - 10" MECH LINE A 4" MECH LINE 1.1 2 1 12 T TFE= ' 1 VERIFY W/ I.E.=97'-2", VERIFY 94' - 0" C I.E.= - 10 5' - 0" S4.1 1 0 H / K W/ MECH " ECH . M 2 S4.1 L " 10 I 4.1 19' - 10 3/4" N SEE 2/S4.1 SEE 2/S S4.1 E 210' - 0" 2 1/2" MECH LINE I.E.=92'-0", VERIFY 6.50° W/ MECH SEE 2/S4.1 FOUNDATION PLAN N A.1 D C A.3 1 FOUNDATION PLAN S1.1 1/8" = 1'-0" Drawn By: JMW S1.1Checked By: SGP 71524 C O P Y R I G H T © H T G A R C H I T E C T S N 0 20' 40' LEGEND PROPERTY LIMITS CONSTRUCTION LIMITS 899 EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR 900 EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR 899 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR 900 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION DRAINAGE ARROW INLET PROTECTION SILT FENCE GRADE BREAKLINE SPOT ELEVATION KEY ROGERS ACTIVITY CENTER EXISTING ICE RINK BUILDING FFE = 905.5 HP HIGH POINT ELEVATION EXPANSION 905.46 ME 905.18 ME MATCH EXISTING 905.50 ROGERS, MINNESOTA TOW TOP OF WALL BOW BOTTOM OF WALL ME 905.21 FFE 905.5 EOF EMERGENCY OVERFLOW 905.50 GRADING NOTES 905.45 1. THE CONTRACTOR MUST CONSTRUCT/GRADE SIDEWALKS AND ACCESSIBLE ROUTES, INCLUDING CROSSING DRIVEWAYS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT ADA STATE AND NATIONAL STANDARDS. IMMEDIATE WRITTEN NOTIFICATION TO THE ENGINEER IS REQUIRED IF ADA CRITERIA CANNOT BE MET AT ANY LOCATION. 2. IMPORTED SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL NEEDED MUST BE APPROVED BY THE 902.50 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER BEFORE BRINGING IT ON THE SITE. 902.50 3. THE CONTRACTOR MUST COORDINATE REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH FFE 902.5 THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. 4. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EXCAVATING AND DISPOSING OF UNSUITABLE OR CONTAMINATED SOILS DISCOVERED ONSITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND AS DIRECTED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. 902.24 5. EXISTING TOPSOIL ON-SITE VARIES IN DEPTH. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING SURFACE VEGETATION, TOPSOIL, AND OTHER UNSUITABLE MATERIAL 902.50 FROM IMPERVIOUS AREAS AND OTHER DESIGNATED AREAS BEFORE PLACING 902.50 SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL, AS DIRECTED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. ME 902.11 5 6. EXCAVATE, COMPACT EMBANKMENT/SUITABLE FILL, AND BACKFILL IN ACCORDANCE 902.50 WITH THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND WITH MN/DOT SPEC 2106 SPECIFIED DENSITY 1/23/2026 1 ADDENDUM #1 902.47 903 METHOD. THE CONTRACTOR MUST MEET MOISTURE CONTENT/CONTROL 1/27/2026 2 ADDENDUM #2 902.50 902.50 REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT 2106, THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, 2/18/2026 4 ASI #1 4/17/2026 5 PR#1 904 AND SITE TESTING REQUIREMENTS. FFE 902.5 904 ME 901.92 7. ONSITE EMBANKMENT MATERIAL FREE OF ORGANIC SOIL AND DEBRIS MAY BE 902.50 905 CONSIDERED FOR REUSE AS SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL IN PERVIOUS AREAS BUT MUST 901.88 905 BE APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. ME 901.72 902.00 901.85 PROPOSED BUILDING 8. THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD PROMPTLY BACKFILL SUBGRADE AND TRENCH ADDITION = 905.5 FFE EXCAVATIONS AFTER EXCAVATION. 901 901.60 901.58 EX SANITARY 9. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR QUANTIFYING SOIL IMPORT OR EXPORT AND ME 901.26 MANHOLE CONDUCTING THEIR OWN QUANTITY TAKEOFFS FROM THE DRAWINGS. ADDITIONAL 901.43 RIM: 902.03 ON-SITE EXCAVATION OR OFF-SITE IMPORT MAY BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE FINAL LP 901.45 905 902 904 GRADES, AND THE CONTRACTOR MUST COORDINATE THESE ACTIONS WITH THE 903 OWNER AND ENGINEER. THE SUITABILITY OF OFFSITE IMPORT MATERIAL MUST BE LP 901.25 EX CATCH BASIN RIM: 902.5 VERIFIED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. ANY EXCESS MATERIAL, UNLESS NOTED EX CATCH BASIN 902 OTHERWISE, BELONGS TO THE CONTRACTOR AND SHOULD BE MOVED AND DISPOSED EX. RETAINING WALL 902.00 RIM: 899.93 OF OFFSITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS. 901 10. GRADING DISCREPANCIES IN EXISTING OR PROPOSED GRADES MUST BE REPORTED IN 901.73 JOE LUCHT HP 902.15 WRITING TO THE ENGINEER BEFORE PLACING PAVEMENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD 900 901 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 899 CATCH BASIN OBSERVE PAVEMENT AREAS FOR EVIDENCE OF PONDING BEFORE PLACEMENT TO 898 RIM: 900.4 902.11 ENSURE ADEQUATE DRAINAGE. 3/26/2026 897 52858 902 896 11. EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS AT MATCH POINTS ARE BASED ON SITE SURVEY DATA. 895 THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING CONNECTION POINTS BEFORE 902.00 894 INSTALLATION OF IMPROVEMENTS AND MUST NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IN WRITING OF 893 902.47 ANY FIELD DISCREPANCIES. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REWORK OF ANY 902.50 892 902.33 DISCREPANCIES THAT ARE NOT COMMUNICATED TO THE ENGINEER IN WRITING AT NO FFE 902.5 ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. ME 902.14 LP 901.41 12. THE PROPOSED CONTOURS PERTAIN TO THE FINISHED SURFACE GRADE, UNLESS ME 902.37 903.45 902.50 OTHERWISE INDICATED. 902.50 13. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MEETING GRADING/COMPACTION 903.40 905.40 REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR FFE 902.5 903.36 903.40 THE PROJECT. 903.39 902.30 905.50 1 3 6 0 5 1 s t A v e n u e N . # 1 0 0 902.23 905.40 14. IMPORTED SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL MUST BE APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL Plymouth, MN 55441 | ae-mn.com HP 903.40 P 763.412.4000 | F 763.412.4090 902.50 902.73 903 903 ENGINEER BEFORE BRINGING IT ON THE SITE. Anderson Engineering of Mi nneso ta, L LC 903.35 901.92 15. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING DEWATERING MEASURES AS 904 ME 904.57 ME 903.82 27'-3" 902 REQUIRED OR AS DIRECTED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER AT NO ADDITIONAL ME 904.00 905 COST TO THE OWNER. BOW 903.67 16. COMPACTION TESTING SHALL FOLLOW THE FREQUENCY OUTLINED IN THE BOW 902.41 ME 904.57 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT OR MNDOT SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS CONTROL. WHERE NO CATCH BASIN TOW 905.01 GRADING TOW 903.16 FREQUENCY IS PROVIDED, CONSULT THE ENGINEER FOR MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. RIM: 902.5 CATCH BASIN RIM: 901.7 905.50 17. GRADING ELEVATIONS SHALL CONFORM TO MNDOT SPEC 2106.3.I. PLAN ACCESSIBILITY NOTES 1. PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO TOP OF FINISHED SURFACE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED IN LEGEND . EXISTING FIELD HOUSE 2. ALL CONSTRUCTION OF HANDICAP STALLS, ROUTES, & CURB RAMPS TO COMPLY AW JL BUILDING FFE = 905.5 WITH THE 2020 MN ACCESSIBILITY CODE. 3. CONTRACTION JOINTS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG ALL GRADE BREAKS. ALL GRADE BREAKS SHALL BE PERPENDICULAR TO THE PATH OF TRAVEL . 4. TO ENSURE RAMPS & LANDINGS ARE PROPERLY CONSTRUCTED, LANDINGS MAY BE C3 CAST SEPARATELY. 5. TOP OF CURB SHALL MATCH PROPOSED ADJACENT WALK GRADE. © Page 58 of 129 115'-10" 20'-6 3/4" 24'-0" 25'-0" 21'-6 3/4" 34'-11 3/4" 13'-8 3/4" ESIMATED LOCATION OF IMPACTED FOOTINGS BASED OFF 6-17-26 Page 59 of 129 FOUNDATION PLAN NOTES: 1. VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS WITH ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS AND EXISTI 2. SEE ARCH DRAWINGS FOR SIZE AND LOCATION OF ALL WALL OPENING NG CONDITIONS. FOUNDATION KEYNOTES: 3. FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION (FFE) = SEE PLAN. A S. STEP TOP OF FOOTING AS REQUIRED TO MATCH EXISTING T 4. FLOOR SLAB SHALL BE 4" MINIMUM CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE WITH 6X (TFE) PER 1/S4.1. MATCH EXISTING BOTTOM OF FOOTING VERIFY ALL DEPRESSED AND SLOPED SLABS WITH ARCH DRAWINGS AND MECH/EL B NEW OPENING IN EXISTING PRECAST WALL, SEE ARCH. CON OP OF FOOTING ELEVATION CONTRACTORS. ELEVATION PER 8/S4.1. ORIGINAL PRECAST WALL PANEL SUPPLIER TO REVIEW OPEN 6-W2.1XW2.1 WWF UNO. 5. ALL CONTINUOUS WALL FOOTINGS SHALL BE 2'-0"W X 1'-0"D WI DETAIL PANEL REINFORCING/RETROFIT AS REQUIRED. STEEL COLUMN SCHEDULE EC TRACTOR SHALL ENGAGE UNO. SEE GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET S0.1 FOR REINFORCING AND DEPTH MARK SIZE BASE PLATE REMARKS C CONCRETE CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE PANEL STEP LOCATIING AND DESIGN AND C1 HSS4X4X1/4 3/4"X10"X10" 6. TOP OF EXTERIOR FOOTING ELEVATION (TFE) = 96'-0" UNO. TH (2) #5 CONTINUOUS BOTTOM PANEL MANUFACTURER TO ACCURATELY LOCATE FOUNDATION C2 HSS5X5X1/4 3/4"X11"X11" FOR OTHER WIDTHS. D ONS WITH PRECAST 7. TOP OF INTERIOR FOOTING ELEVATION (TFE) = SEE PLAN. FLOOR SLAB SHALL BE 6" MINIMUM CONCRETE SLAB ON GRA C3 W12X40 1"X18"X12" WAY CENTERED HATCHED THUS: STEPS. E 8. S----S ON PLAN DENOTES STEPPED FOOTING. SEE SECTION 1/S4.1. E ICE RINK SYSTEM SUPPLIER SHALL PROVIDE MEASURES (RI DE WITH #4 @ 12" O.C. EACH 9. SEE DETAIL 2/S4.1 FOR DROPPED FOOTING AT ALL UNDERGROUND MECH HEAT, ETC.) TO IMPEDE FROST PENETRATION UNDER ADJAC 10 56' - 0" SITE DATUM:100'-0"=905.5' FOOTINGS. D BUILDING. GID INSULATION, IN-FLOOR S4.1 ENT CONTINUOUS WALL FOOTING SCHEDULE 0.8 - 4" 2' - 1"5' 10. F PROVIDE (2) #4 X 4'-0" DIAGONAL BARS IN SLAB ON GRA SEE DETAILS 4/S4.1, 5/S4.1 AND 6/S4.1 FOR TYPICAL FOUNDATION ANICAL LINES ENTERING MARK SIZE BOT REINF EW REMARKS 8 REINFORCING. OVERHEAD DOOR. F1 4'-0"X4'-0"X12" (5) #5 S4.1 DE AT EACH CORNER AT 11. WALL JOINTS AND CORNER G PROVIDE (2) #4 X 4'-0" DIAGONAL BARS IN SLAB ON GRA F2 5'-0"X5'-0"X14" (6) #5 SEE DETAIL 7/S4.1 FOR FOOTINGS AT NON-BEARING INTERIOR PRECAST 12 OF PERPENDICULAR FOOTINGS, PLACE UPPER FOOTING OVER TESTED/INSPECTED H S4.1 FILL. 8" MINIMUM CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE WITH #5 @ 12" DEO.C AT INSIDE CORNERS. WALLS. AT INTERSECTION J S S 12. "CX" ON PLAN DENOTES STEEL COLUMN SIZE. SEE STEEL COLUMN SCHEDULE ON WIDEN FOUNDATION WALL 4" FOR SLAB BEARING. 4' - 0" COMPACTED . EACH WAY CENTERED. EXIST FFE= 0.8 C K 2'-6" FTG 96'-0"± 13. "FX" ON PLAN DENOTES FOOTING SIZE. SEE FOOTING SCHEDULE ON THI FOUNDATIONS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED FOR A 50' WIDE FUTUR SPANNING STRUCTURE SUPPORTED BY PRECAST WALL OR NEW 92' - 0" A THIS SHEET. SEE 3/S4.1 FOR TYP 14. SEE PLAN AND SECTIONS FOR SIZE OF CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE FOUNDA ADJACENT TO PRECAST WALL. E ADDITION, ASSUMING 50' F CONTROL/CONST REINFORCING. S SHEET. 14 TFE= EXIST TFE= 94' - 0" ± L MECHANICAL OPENING IN FLOOR SLAB FOR REFRIGERATION WALL DIRECTLY JT DETAIL S4.1 15. FOR EXACT SIZE AND LOCATION. EXTEND ALL FOOTINGS MINIMUM 1'-0" BEYOND END OF WALLS UNO. TION WALLS AND 1'-0". TYP FFE=96'-6" M PRECAST SUPPLIER SHALL LEAVE OUT 6'-6" WIDE (UNO ON SYSTEM VALVE, SEE MECH 9 16. PROTECT EXISTING BUILDING FOUNDATION DURING NEW CONSTRUCT 25' - 5" RECESS, S4.1 PANEL BELOW SLAB ON GRADE ELEVATION FOR UNDERFLOOR F 92' - 0" SEE ARCH COORDINATE EXACT LOCATIONS WITH RINK SUPPLIER. 93' - 0" 17. PLAN) SECTION OF PRECAST FFE=96'-0" ON PLAN DENOTES NON-BEARING PRECAST WALL PANEL. SEE 7/S4.1. ION. SHORE AS REQUIRED. TFE= 20 44' - 7 1/8" 95' - 0" RINK PIPING, TFE= S4.1 0.7 C TYP 2'-6" FTG 30 C 1 TFE= S4.1 6 A C NEW OPNG www.htg-architects.com S S B 8" S S 6" MECH LINE TFE= 92' - 0" Minneapolis I.E.=90'-11", VERIFY . C S S A.3 A.2 W/ MECH S S M 8 TYP Bismarck SEE 2/S4.1 S4.1 152' - 0" 1010 Mainstreet, Suite 100 37' - 2" S S 94' - 2" 6' - 4" Hopkins, MN 55343 26' - 5" 5' - 4" 21' - 6" ± FV 15' - 8" 10" MECH LINE 10 TFE= Tel: 952.278.8880 I.E.=91'-1", VERIFY S4.1 93' - 0" 14 4" MECH LINE 4" MECH LINE 10 I.E.=93'-6", VERIFY I.E.=90'-9", VERIFY W/ MECH 94' - 0" S4.1 4 0° 16 1 ' SEE 2/S4.1 4 S4.1 5 W/ MECH - . C W/ MECH ' 6 0 9 S4.1 - TFE= " S SEE 2/S4.1 0 SEE 2/S4.1 " 1.4 1.4 16 ° S 0 S4.1 .0 C S S FFE=97'-0" 11' - 10" 4 F 0 PROJECT ' 9 F 3 - T 12 ' H T 8 - 3'-0" FTG F 0 12 G " SIM 15 E S4.1 F " TFE= TSE=92'-0" T 95' - 0" = 19 S4.1 T F T S4.1 F TFE= 91' - 0" 9 E S4.1 F 19 E 1 3 = E 6 ' = S4.1 = 17 - ' 9 EXIST FFE=96'-0"± 9 - 0 C S S 1 9 6 " 0 ' S4.1 5 ' - " ' - ROGERS 0 G 9 - C 0 " S S 0 15 19 " 3' - 9 5/8" FFE=97'-0" " S4.1 S4.1 TRENCH S4.1 C 10 TFE= 96' - 0" 8 " DRAIN, S ACTIVITY CENTER S4.1 D 17 SEE ARCH FFE=97'-0" . T S4.1 7 TRENCH F 12 S E 1.3 S4.1 DRAIN, SEE 3/S4.1 FOR TYP = M SIM . RAMP DN 9 F 3 EXPANSION SEE ARCH 8 CONTROL/CONST 6 ' T 4" MECH LINE - ' ' 6 G - - 19 FFE=97'-0" 19 19 FFE= " 6' - 0" JT DETAIL TFE= 9 4 / ECH 0 95' - 0" 14 19 I.E.=VERIFY W M ' 8' - 4" 8" 28' - 8" 1 " " 10 S4.1 S4.1 S4.1 96'-0" B - TFE= 9 3' - 0" C NEW ' FFE= S4.1 SEE 2/S4.1 SIM 8" OPNG - 0 S4.1 S4.1 " 0 4 98'-6" S " ' ROGERS, MINNESOTA S S - F2 F2 0 " . S 5 M 1.2 ' - RAMP DN . 7 S EXIST TFE= 95' - 0" ± S 1 . ' " M - C C M F 1 0 F 3 3 F 3 " ' ' ' T F T T S C - S T - T - 6 0 F G G F F 0 " " E E E " 6 = 3 = = " ' 9 9 - 9 TFE= 3 " 96' - 0" 5 6 INK DWG'S 0 0 FFE=97'-0" ' 3" PIPE, SEE R ' 23 TFE= ' FFE=97'-0" " D - - 96' - 0" - - 1' - 0" ' 0 0 L 6 0 S4.1 " " 'S 5' - 6" 1 " 8" PIPE, SEE RINK DWG 1' - 0" 5' - 4" 4' - 6" 8" 23 23 FFE=100'-0" S4.1 3 S4.1 23 2 ' TFE= S4.1 - 96' - 0" 1 21 31' - 5 3/4" 1 1 / 2 S4.1 S S C 2 '-6 TFE= " 10 F " 95' - 0" TFE= 96' - 0" S4.1 TG R 21 A S S C M 8 S4.1 P 0.6 D 2 N 6.00° TFE= 98' - 0" RAMP DNRAMP DN RAMP DNRAMP . S S C 2 8 ' 8" 21 - 7 . S4.1 " 19 4" 4" EXIST S4.1 SIM FFE= 8 98'-0"± S4.1 TYP F2 99' - 0" FFE=97'-0" ICE RINK & BASE BY OTHERS TFE= E 2 1' - 7 1/2" S S ISSUED SET 201' - 2" 8" 5' - 3" 8" EXIST TFE= 94' - 0" ± BID/PERMIT SET 01/09/26 7' - 2 1/2" 5' - 3" REVISIONS . S S DATE 8" 9 01/23/26 1 ADDENDUMNO #1 3'-0" EXIST FFE=100'-0"± 7' - 1 1/2" FTG 01/28/26 2 ADDENDUM #2 4 1 2 8 1 4 ' 6 2 7 - 1 ' ' ' 6 1 - 19 - - " 2 2 0 7 13' - 7 1/4" ' " " S4.1 - 1 0 / 2 " R " A F2 9" M 6' - 4" P 8" D N FFE= . 10 98'-6" 19 S4.1 EXIST TFE= 92' - 0" ± 22 9 SEE 3/S4.1 FOR S4.1 10" S4.1 TYP CONTROL/ 10 CONST JT S4.1 0.5 16' - 8 1/2" DETAIL 6 S S ' ° - 0 F2 25 .5 " 0 3 7 " 8 - S4.1 8' I hereby certify that this plan, specification or r 0.4 R 2 7' - 0" A J prepared by me or under my direct supervision and t M 2 C2 eport was 8 P FFE=100'-0" ' T duly Licensed Professional Engineer FE= - D hat I am a 7 under the laws of the State of Minnesota N " 2' - 6" EXIST TFE= 94' - 0" ± S 9 5' TFE= 95' - 0" - 0" FFE=100'-0" S 93' - 0" C S S EXIST . 27' - 5 1/2" 48' - 3 3/4"FFE= 70' - 9 3/4"Shawn G. Parks 25' - 5" C S S 22 T 100'-0"± TFE= TFE= F S4.1 57854 95' - 0" 22 E = TFE= 96' - 0" S4.1 01/09/2026 TFE= 9 Reg No. 93' - 0" 5 3 ' - 4 0 ' Date 9 7/8" - F1 " 22 9 0.3 S4.1 " 3 2 ' - 3 FFE=100'-0" TFE= 94' - 0" C 2'-6" FTG 1 / 8 A SEE 2/S2.1 EXIST TFE= 92' - 0" ± " 11 FOR LINK C 8 " " MECH LINE 0 T 6 FDN PLAN TFE= 95' - S4.1 F 1 ERIFY E .E.=92'-0", V 2 I F 3 ' = ' FFE=100'-0" T - - F 4 W/ MECH 0 G C S S 9 1 ' T " - S S 6 12 0 6 G E 2/S4.1 S S ' SE 1 " " - ' 39' - 6" 96' - 0" 0 = - TFE 5' - 0" 20 " 6 1' - 6" S4.1 " S S 0.1 LAYOUT POINTS S 0.2 S S (CORNER OF EXIST BRICK A 1 VENEER & FDN WALL) M ' 6' - 4 1/4" 172' - 0" 1.1 - 10" MECH LINE A 4" MECH LINE 1.1 2 1 12 T TFE= ' 1 VERIFY W/ I.E.=97'-2", VERIFY 94' - 0" C I.E.= - 10 5' - 0" S4.1 1 0 H / K W/ MECH " ECH . M 2 S4.1 L " 10 I 4.1 19' - 10 3/4" N SEE 2/S4.1 SEE 2/S S4.1 E 210' - 0" 2 1/2" MECH LINE I.E.=92'-0", VERIFY 6.50° W/ MECH SEE 2/S4.1 FOUNDATION PLAN N A.1 D C A.3 1 FOUNDATION PLAN S1.1 1/8" = 1'-0" Drawn By: JMW S1.1Checked By: SGP 71524 C O P Y R I G H T © H T G A R C H I T E C T S N 0 20' 40' LEGEND PROPERTY LIMITS CONSTRUCTION LIMITS 899 EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR 900 EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR 899 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR 900 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION DRAINAGE ARROW INLET PROTECTION SILT FENCE GRADE BREAKLINE SPOT ELEVATION KEY ROGERS ACTIVITY CENTER EXISTING ICE RINK BUILDING FFE = 905.5 HP HIGH POINT ELEVATION EXPANSION 905.46 ME 905.18 ME MATCH EXISTING 905.50 ROGERS, MINNESOTA TOW TOP OF WALL BOW BOTTOM OF WALL ME 905.21 FFE 905.5 EOF EMERGENCY OVERFLOW 905.50 GRADING NOTES 905.45 1. THE CONTRACTOR MUST CONSTRUCT/GRADE SIDEWALKS AND ACCESSIBLE ROUTES, INCLUDING CROSSING DRIVEWAYS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT ADA STATE AND NATIONAL STANDARDS. IMMEDIATE WRITTEN NOTIFICATION TO THE ENGINEER IS REQUIRED IF ADA CRITERIA CANNOT BE MET AT ANY LOCATION. 2. IMPORTED SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL NEEDED MUST BE APPROVED BY THE 902.50 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER BEFORE BRINGING IT ON THE SITE. 902.50 3. THE CONTRACTOR MUST COORDINATE REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH FFE 902.5 THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. 4. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EXCAVATING AND DISPOSING OF UNSUITABLE OR CONTAMINATED SOILS DISCOVERED ONSITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND AS DIRECTED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. 902.24 5. EXISTING TOPSOIL ON-SITE VARIES IN DEPTH. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING SURFACE VEGETATION, TOPSOIL, AND OTHER UNSUITABLE MATERIAL 902.50 FROM IMPERVIOUS AREAS AND OTHER DESIGNATED AREAS BEFORE PLACING 902.50 SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL, AS DIRECTED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. ME 902.11 5 6. EXCAVATE, COMPACT EMBANKMENT/SUITABLE FILL, AND BACKFILL IN ACCORDANCE 902.50 WITH THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND WITH MN/DOT SPEC 2106 SPECIFIED DENSITY 1/23/2026 1 ADDENDUM #1 902.47 903 METHOD. THE CONTRACTOR MUST MEET MOISTURE CONTENT/CONTROL 1/27/2026 2 ADDENDUM #2 902.50 902.50 REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN/DOT 2106, THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, 2/18/2026 4 ASI #1 4/17/2026 5 PR#1 904 AND SITE TESTING REQUIREMENTS. FFE 902.5 904 ME 901.92 7. ONSITE EMBANKMENT MATERIAL FREE OF ORGANIC SOIL AND DEBRIS MAY BE 902.50 905 CONSIDERED FOR REUSE AS SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL IN PERVIOUS AREAS BUT MUST 901.88 905 BE APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. ME 901.72 902.00 901.85 PROPOSED BUILDING 8. THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD PROMPTLY BACKFILL SUBGRADE AND TRENCH ADDITION = 905.5 FFE EXCAVATIONS AFTER EXCAVATION. 901 901.60 901.58 EX SANITARY 9. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR QUANTIFYING SOIL IMPORT OR EXPORT AND ME 901.26 MANHOLE CONDUCTING THEIR OWN QUANTITY TAKEOFFS FROM THE DRAWINGS. ADDITIONAL 901.43 RIM: 902.03 ON-SITE EXCAVATION OR OFF-SITE IMPORT MAY BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE FINAL LP 901.45 905 902 904 GRADES, AND THE CONTRACTOR MUST COORDINATE THESE ACTIONS WITH THE 903 OWNER AND ENGINEER. THE SUITABILITY OF OFFSITE IMPORT MATERIAL MUST BE LP 901.25 EX CATCH BASIN RIM: 902.5 VERIFIED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. ANY EXCESS MATERIAL, UNLESS NOTED EX CATCH BASIN 902 OTHERWISE, BELONGS TO THE CONTRACTOR AND SHOULD BE MOVED AND DISPOSED EX. RETAINING WALL 902.00 RIM: 899.93 OF OFFSITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS. 901 10. GRADING DISCREPANCIES IN EXISTING OR PROPOSED GRADES MUST BE REPORTED IN 901.73 JOE LUCHT HP 902.15 WRITING TO THE ENGINEER BEFORE PLACING PAVEMENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD 900 901 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 899 CATCH BASIN OBSERVE PAVEMENT AREAS FOR EVIDENCE OF PONDING BEFORE PLACEMENT TO 898 RIM: 900.4 902.11 ENSURE ADEQUATE DRAINAGE. 3/26/2026 897 52858 902 896 11. EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS AT MATCH POINTS ARE BASED ON SITE SURVEY DATA. 895 THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING CONNECTION POINTS BEFORE 902.00 894 INSTALLATION OF IMPROVEMENTS AND MUST NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IN WRITING OF 893 902.47 ANY FIELD DISCREPANCIES. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REWORK OF ANY 902.50 892 902.33 DISCREPANCIES THAT ARE NOT COMMUNICATED TO THE ENGINEER IN WRITING AT NO FFE 902.5 ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. ME 902.14 LP 901.41 12. THE PROPOSED CONTOURS PERTAIN TO THE FINISHED SURFACE GRADE, UNLESS ME 902.37 903.45 902.50 OTHERWISE INDICATED. 902.50 13. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MEETING GRADING/COMPACTION 903.40 905.40 REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR FFE 902.5 903.36 903.40 THE PROJECT. 903.39 902.30 905.50 1 3 6 0 5 1 s t A v e n u e N . # 1 0 0 902.23 905.40 14. IMPORTED SUITABLE FILL MATERIAL MUST BE APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL Plymouth, MN 55441 | ae-mn.com HP 903.40 P 763.412.4000 | F 763.412.4090 902.50 902.73 903 903 ENGINEER BEFORE BRINGING IT ON THE SITE. Anderson Engineering of Mi nneso ta, L LC 903.35 901.92 15. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING DEWATERING MEASURES AS 904 ME 904.57 ME 903.82 27'-3" 902 REQUIRED OR AS DIRECTED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER AT NO ADDITIONAL ME 904.00 905 COST TO THE OWNER. BOW 903.67 16. COMPACTION TESTING SHALL FOLLOW THE FREQUENCY OUTLINED IN THE BOW 902.41 ME 904.57 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT OR MNDOT SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS CONTROL. WHERE NO CATCH BASIN TOW 905.01 GRADING TOW 903.16 FREQUENCY IS PROVIDED, CONSULT THE ENGINEER FOR MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. RIM: 902.5 CATCH BASIN RIM: 901.7 905.50 17. GRADING ELEVATIONS SHALL CONFORM TO MNDOT SPEC 2106.3.I. PLAN ACCESSIBILITY NOTES 1. PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO TOP OF FINISHED SURFACE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED IN LEGEND . EXISTING FIELD HOUSE 2. ALL CONSTRUCTION OF HANDICAP STALLS, ROUTES, & CURB RAMPS TO COMPLY AW JL BUILDING FFE = 905.5 WITH THE 2020 MN ACCESSIBILITY CODE. 3. CONTRACTION JOINTS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG ALL GRADE BREAKS. ALL GRADE BREAKS SHALL BE PERPENDICULAR TO THE PATH OF TRAVEL . 4. TO ENSURE RAMPS & LANDINGS ARE PROPERLY CONSTRUCTED, LANDINGS MAY BE C3 CAST SEPARATELY. 5. TOP OF CURB SHALL MATCH PROPOSED ADJACENT WALK GRADE. © Page 60 of 129Page 61 of 129Page 62 of 129Page 63 of 129Page 64 of 129Page 65 of 129Page 66 of 129Page 67 of 129Page 68 of 129Page 69 of 129Page 70 of 129Page 71 of 129Page 72 of 129Page 73 of 129Page 74 of 129Page 75 of 129Page 76 of 129Page 77 of 129Page 78 of 129Page 79 of 129Page 80 of 129Page 81 of 129Page 82 of 129Page 83 of 129Page 84 of 129Page 85 of 129Page 86 of 129Page 87 of 129Page 88 of 129Page 89 of 129Page 90 of 129Page 91 of 129Page 92 of 129Page 93 of 129Page 94 of 129Page 95 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.6 Subject: Accept Resignation of Officer Hunter Wilhoite and Authorization to Advertise, Recruit, and Fill Police Officer Positions Prepared By: Dan Wills, Chief of Police Recommended Council Action Accept Resignation of Officer Hunter Wilhoite and Authorization to Advertise, Recruit, and Fill Police Officer Positions Overview / Background / Analysis Officer Hunter Wilhoite began his police officer career with the Rogers Police Department on October 13, 2020. He has served our citizens and City with professionalism, and we wish him well in his new endeavors. His resignation letter indicated his last day of employment is September 2, 2026. Staff is seeking authorization to advertise, recruit and hire a police officer to backfill this vacancy. Additionally, it is our intent to use the new eligibility list to backfill the upcoming sergeant promotion in October 2026, which will move our authorized staff level from 25 to 26 sworn officers. The list may be used for future vacancies into 2027, if necessary. Staff Recommendation Accept Resignation of Officer Hunter Wilhoite and Authorization to Advertise, Recruit, and Fill Police Officer Positions Financial Impact: Source Fund: Budgeted? Supporting Documentation None Page 96 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.7 Subject: Approve Resolution 2026-78 Increasing Paid-on-Call PERA SVF Pension Amount Prepared By: Patrick Farrens, Fire Chief Recommended Council Action Approve Resolution 2026-78 Overview / Background / Analysis In 2025, a plan was presented to raise paid-on-call pensions to $8,200 by 2028. At the time, that brought us up to the median pension plan value for similarly sized communities. This is the next step to bring the pension plan closer to this goal. Increasing the pension amount to $7,700 still leaves the plan funded at 106%, provides limited risk to the department, and requires no additional impact to the levy (beyond the annual City contribution already provided, fire pension funds are not City tax dollars). The 2026 median value of annual pension amount for similarly sized communities is $11,200. To remain competitive, we will continue to increase this as much as possible for the forthcoming years. Staff Recommendation Approve Resolution 2026-78 Financial Impact: None Source Fund: N/A Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. 2026-78 SVF Benefit Increase Page 97 of 129 RESOLUTION NO. 2026-78 A RESOLUTION FOR THE BENEFIT LEVEL INCREASE OF THE STATEWIDE VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER (SVF) PLAN WHEREAS, the city previously authorized the fire department to join the Statewide Volunteer Firefighter (SVF) Plan administered by the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA); and WHEREAS, the city requested and obtained a cost analysis of increasing the benefit level for firefighters who are vested in the SVF Plan from PERA not more than 120 days ago; and WHEREAS, the city understands that Minnesota statutes do not have provisions for a decrease in benefit levels; and WHEREAS, the City highly values the contributions of City Fire Department members to the safety and well-being of our community and wishes to safeguard their pension investments prudently. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED: by the City Council of Rogers, Minnesota: 1. The city hereby approves an increase in the benefit level for those who have completed the fire department’s minimum required years of service for vesting as a member of the SVF Plan administered by PERA at the $ 7,700 benefit level per year of service, effective January 1, 2027; and 2. The city clerk/administrator and mayor are hereby authorized to execute all documents necessary to bring this resolution into effect. 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 this 25th day of August, 2026. ATTEST: ___________________________ ___________________________ Shannon Klick, Mayor Stacie Brown, City Clerk Page 98 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.8 Subject: Approval of a Corrective Quit Claim Deed Related to the Dahlheimer Billboard at PID 23-120-23-41-0012 Prepared By: Brett Angell, Community Development Director Recommended Council Action Motion to approve a corrective quit claim deed related to the billboard at PID 23-120- 23-41-0012, subject to the final review and approval by the City Attorney. Overview / Background / Analysis The Dahlheimer family has submitted a request to the City of Rogers for a corrective quit claim deed related to a billboard at PID 23-120-23-41-0012. The subject billboard is located near the end of Church Avenue abutting Interstate 94 (near Rogers Tech Center). The location of the billboard is on current city-owned property. When the city acquired the property, there were two billboards located on the site. With the acquisition, the city granted CUP and easement approvals related to the billboards. One of the billboards, the subject of this item, was granted an easement for the billboard in perpetuity. The other billboard, not a subject of this item, has an expiration in 2031 and must be removed at that time. A location map of the subject billboard is attached. The Dahlheimer family is currently in the process of selling their easement rights to the subject billboard. Through their sale process, the buyer has requested the proposed quit claim deed. The quit claim deed, in essence, states that the city is not subject to the outstanding lease for the billboard nor the annual rent payments as defined in the lease. The city is only the grantor of the easement and the proposed document is not in conflict with any of the previous city approvals or recorded easements. The proposed quit claim deed does not influence or alter the city ownership rights of the property. Since the access easement for the billboard is in perpetuity, it is anticipated that the billboard will remain at the location until the point the easement grantee and/or billboard company deem it to be no longer needed and it is removed. Due to the structuring of the easement and past acquisition of the property, the city is not currently entitled to lease proceeds from the billboard. The proposed quit claim deed has been reviewed by the City Attorney. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the corrective quit claim deed related to the billboard at PID 23-120-23-41-0012, subject to the final review and approval by the City Attorney and staff. Page 99 of 129 Financial Impact: Not applicable. Source Fund: Not applicable. Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. Dahlheimer Billboard Quit Claim Deed B. Billboard Location Map Page 100 of 129 (Top 3 inches reserved for recording data) QUIT CLAIM DEED Business Entity to Business Entity eCRV number:____________________________ DEED TAX DUE: $1.65 (Total consideration is $-0-) DATE: August ___, 2026 THIS DEED IS TO CORRECT THE RIGHTS RESERVED BY THE GRANTEE IN THOSE CERTAIN WARRANTY DEEDS DATED FEBRUARY 23, 2011 and APRIL 8, 2011 AND RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NOS. A9627843 and A9643023 RESPECTIVELY, AS CLARIFIED BY THAT CERTAIN BILLBOARD, VIEW, ACCESS AND USE EASEMENT AGREEMENT DATED APRIL 8, 2011, AND RECORDED ON APRIL 8, 2011, AS DOCUMENT NO. A9643024 (THE “RESERVED EASEMENT”). FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, City of Rogers, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota (“Grantor”), hereby conveys and quitclaims to Dahlheimer Real Estate Partnership, a general partnership under the laws of Minnesota (“Grantee”), any interest held by Grantor in that unrecorded lease between Grantee, as Lessor, and Adams Outdoor Advertising, Inc., as Lessee, originally dated Jun 28, 1996, as amended, and any subsequent leases by Grantee of its rights under the Reserved Easement with respect to that certain real property in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A hereto. Check here if all or part of the described real property is Registered (Torrens)  together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto. Check applicable box: Grantor X The Seller certifies that the Seller does not know of City of Rogers any wells on the described real property.  A well disclosure certificate accompanies this document or has been electronically filed. (If electronically filed, insert WDC number: […].) By: Shannon Klick  I am familiar with the property described in this Its: Mayor instrument and I certify that the status and number of wells on the described real property have not changed since the last previously filed well disclosure By: Stacie Brown certificate. Its: Clerk ECB-1035 Page 1 of 2 Page 101 of 129Page 2 of 2 QUIT CLAIM DEED State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin This instrument was acknowledged before me on August 25th, 2026, by Shannon Klick, and by Stacie Brown, respectively, the Mayor and Clerk of the City of Rogers, a municipal corporation, on behalf of such corporation. (Stamp) (signature of notarial officer) THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: TAX STATEMENTS FOR THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN Craig Kepler THIS INSTRUMENT SHOULD BE SENT TO: Dahlheimer Real Estate Partnership Best & Flanagan LLP c/o Nancy Berend 60 South Sixth Street, Suite 2700 5709 Newport Drive Minneapolis, MN 55402 Edina, MN. 55436 (612) 349-5640 Page 102 of 129 Exhibit A Property Legal Description ECB-1035 Page 3 of 2 Page 103 of 129BILLBOARD LOCATION MAP Page 104 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 5.9 Subject: Approve Resolution 2026-79 Accepting Donations for Rogers Fire Department Open House Prepared By: Patrick Farrens, Fire Chief Recommended Council Action Approve Resolution 2026-79 Accepting Donations for Rogers Fire Department Open House Overview / Background / Analysis The Rogers Fire Department is hosting its annual Fire Department Open House on Saturday, September 12th, at Rogers Fire Station 1 from 11 AM - 2 PM. Several regional businesses have donated to make this day a success. The following donations of goods or services have been received: • Johnny Pop's - 400 popsicles • Restoration Network — bottled water • Highmark Restoration — Fire Department Squirt House • Lindstrom Restoration — Side-by-side Close Before You Doze Live Burn Trailer Prop Staff Recommendation Approve Resolution 2026-79 Accepting Donations for Rogers Fire Department Open House Financial Impact: N/A Source Fund: N/A Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. 2022-79 Accept Donations For OpenHouse Page 105 of 129 RESOLUTION NO. 2026 - 79 A RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS FOR ROGERS FIRE OPEN HOUSE WHEREAS, the City of Rogers Fire Department conducts on-going fire prevention efforts through the City and conducts an annual open house; and WHEREAS, the City of Rogers City Council supports these programs; and WHEREAS, these donations have been made for the specific purpose of supporting the Fire Department’s Annual Open House; and WHEREAS, the City of Rogers has received the following donations: • Johnny Pop's - 400 popsicles • Restoration Network — bottled water • Highmark Restoration — Fire Department Squirt House • Lindstrom Restoration — Side-by-side Close Before You Doze Live Burn Trailer Prop WHEREAS, the City of Rogers acknowledges the gracious donation from these community partners and authorizes the documented receipt of the aforementioned donations. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rogers, that the above-referenced donations are to be used to support the Fire Department Annual Open House. 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 this 25th day of August, 2026. Shannon Klick, Mayor ATTEST: Stacie Brown, Clerk Page 106 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 7.1 Subject: Approval of Resolution No. 2026-80, A Resolution Providing for the Competitive Negotiated Sale of $39,235,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2026B Prepared By: Bridget Bruska, Finance Director Recommended Council Action Motion to Approve Resolution No. 2026-80, A Resolution Providing for the Competitive Negotiated Sale of $39,235,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2026B Overview / Background / Analysis On April 28, 2026, the City Council approved Bid Package #1 for the Civic Campus, followed by approval of Bid Package #2 on July 28, 2026. The project includes construction of a new City Hall, Council Chambers, and Police Department at the entrance to downtown Rogers, located at the intersection of Main Street and Industrial Boulevard on the former Holiday Gas Station and Boyer Truck sites. The total anticipated project cost is $45,385,000. The project will be funded through several sources, including the issuance of General Obligation (GO) Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Bonds. GO CIP Bonds allow cities to finance eligible capital improvements, with repayment backed by the City’s full faith and credit and typically funded through property taxes. The Capital Improvement Plan Act (Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521) allows cities to issue bonds for certain facility-related capital improvements, including city hall, public works, and public safety facilities, without first holding a referendum, subject to the requirements of the Act. On November 14, 2023, the City Council held a public hearing and adopted a Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan identifying $60 million of eligible projects for 2024 through 2028, including the Civic Campus. In 2024, the City issued $7,405,000 in GO CIP Bonds for the construction of Fire Station #2, leaving $52,595,000 of the identified CIP bonding authority. The proposed Civic Campus bond issuance is estimated at $39,235,000, which is within the remaining amount identified in the adopted CIP. The bonds are anticipated to be repaid through a combination of property taxes, Underserved Municipalities Distribution (UMD) revenues, and annual revenues from the City’s tower and billboard leases. The UMD is a distribution provided through the metropolitan fiscal disparities program to certain municipalities, including Rogers, and effectively returns a portion of fiscal disparities contributions to qualifying communities. Page 107 of 129Rogers is a net contributor to the fiscal disparities pool, meaning the City contributes more tax capacity to the regional program than it receives through the general distribution. As with any General Obligation Bond, the City’s full faith and credit ultimately secures the debt; therefore, if pledged revenues are insufficient and other funding sources are unavailable, the City may be required to levy additional property taxes to make the required debt service payments. Jason Aarsvold, the City’s Municipal Advisor, will be in attendance at the Council meeting to review the attached Pre-Sale Report. The Pre-Sale Report provides the City Council with an overview of the proposed bond issuance, including estimated interest costs, repayment structure, and financing impacts. Lastly, staff is requesting Council approval of Resolution No. 2026-80, A Resolution Providing for the Competitive Negotiated Sale of $39,235,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2026B. Approval of this resolution authorizes staff to proceed with the bonding process. The City Council will still need to approve the final sale of the bonds at its October 6, 2026, meeting. Staff Recommendation Motion to Approve Resolution No. 2026-80, A Resolution Providing for the Competitive Negotiated Sale of $39,235,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2026B Financial Impact: $39,235,000 Source Fund: Civic Campus Capital Project Fund Budgeted? N/A Supporting Documentation A. Presale Report 2026B GO CIP Bonds B. Resolution No. 2026-80 Page 108 of 129 August 25, 2026 PRE -SALE REPORT FOR City of Rogers, Minnesota $39,235,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2026B Prepared by: Advisors: Ehlers Jason Aarsvold, Senior Municipal Advisor 3001 Broadway Street, Suite 320 Keith Dahl, Senior Municipal Advisor Minneapolis, MN 55413 BUILDING COMMUNITIES. IT’S WHAT WE DO. Page 109 of 129 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF PROPOSED DEBT Proposed Issue: $39,235,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2026B Purposes: The proposed issue includes financing, with other available funds, for construction of the new Civic Campus within the City that will include a City Hall and new police facilities. The City will utiliz e general obligation bonds authorized through a capital improvement plan (CIP). Debt service will be paid from ad valorem property taxes. The C ity intends to use other revenues annually to write -down the required tax levy for the bonds. These include the Underserved Municipalities Distribution , tower and b illboard lease revenues , as well as facility capital reserve funds. Authority: The Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter: • 475.521 The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which its full faith, credit and taxing powers are pledged. The Bonds count against the City’s general obligation debt capacity limit of 3% of the City’s estimated market value (EMV) . T he EMV in the City for pay 20 26 is $ 3,766,112,600 . Therefore, the total amount of outstanding debt cannot exceed $ 112,983,378 . As of August 25 , 20 26 , the City will have $ 9,980,000 subject to the legal debt limit . This will increase to $49,215,000 with issuance of the 2026B Bonds, which is still below the debt capacity limit. In addition, a separate limitation under the CIP Act is that, without referendum, the total amount of principal and interest in any one year on all CIP Bonds issued by the City debt cannot exceed 0.16% of the total EMV in the municipality. In the City, that maximum annual debt service amount is $ 6,025,780 for the Pay 20 26 tax year ( $3,766,112,600 x .0016). The annual principal and interest payments on the CIP Bonds in the City will average approximately $ 3,752,450 after issuance of the 20 26B bonds. As such, debt service on the City’s CIP Bonds will be within the annual limits under the CIP . The CIP Bonding Authority requires a public hearing and 30 -day reverse referendum period. This public hearing was held on November 14, 2023. Presale Report August 25, 2026 City of Rogers, Minnesota Page 1 Page 110 of 129 Term/Call Feature: The Bonds are being issued for a term of 2 0 years . Principal on the Bonds will be due on February 1 in the years 2028 through 2047. Interest will be due every six months beginning August 1, 2027. The Bonds will be subject to prepayment at the discretion of the City on February 1, 2036 or any date thereafter. Bank Qualification: Because the City is issuing, or expects to issue, more than $10,000,000 in tax -exempt obligations during the calendar year, the City will be not able to designate the Bonds as “bank qualified” obligations. Rating: The City’s most recent bond issues were rated by S&P Global Ratings. The current rating on those bonds is “AA+” /positive outlook . The City will request a new rating for the Bonds. If the winning bidder on the Bonds elects to purchase bond insurance, the rating for the issue may be higher than the City's bond rating in the event that the bond rating of the insurer is higher than that of the City. Basis for Recommendation: Based on your objectives, financial situation and need, risk tolerance, liquidity needs, experience with the issuance of Bond s and long -term financial capacity, as well as the tax status considerations related to the Bond s and the structure, timing and other similar matters related to the Bond s, we are recommending the issuance of Bond s as a suitable option . Method of Sale/Placement: We are recommending the Bonds be issued as municipal securities and offered through a competitive underwriting process. You will solicit competitive bids, which we will compile on your behalf, for the purchase of the Bonds from underwriters and banks. An allowance for discount bidding will be incorporated in the terms of the issue. The discount is treated as an interest item and provides the underwriter with all or a portion of their compensation in the transaction. If the Bonds are purchased at a price greater than the minimum bid amount (maximum discount), the unused allowance may be used to reduce your borrowing amount. Premium Pricing: In some cases, investors in municipal bonds prefer “premium” pricing structures. A premium is achieved when the coupon for any maturity (the interest rate paid by the issuer) exceeds the yield to the investor, resulting in a price paid that is greater than the face value of the bonds. The sum of the amounts paid in excess of face value is considered “reoffering Presale Report August 25, 2026 City of Rogers, Minnesota Page 2 Page 111 of 129 premium.” The amount of the premium varies, but it is not uncommon to see premiums for new issues in the range of 2.00% to 10.00% of the face amount of the issue. This means that an issuer with a $2,000,000 offering may receive bids that result in proceeds of $2,040,000 to $2,200,000. For this issue of Bonds we have been directed to use the net premium to reduce the size of the issue resulting adjustments may slightly change the true interest cost of the issue, either up or down. The amount of premium can be restricted in the bid specifications. Restrictions on premium may result in fewer bids, but may also eliminate large adjustments on the day of sale and unintended impacts with respect to debt service payment. Ehlers will identify appropriate premium restrictions for the Bonds intended to achieve the City’s objectives for this financing. Review of Existing Debt: We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedness for the City and find that there are no refunding opportunities at this time. We will continue to monitor the market and the call dates for the City’s outstanding debt and will alert you to any future refunding opportunities. Continuing Disclosure: Because the City has more than $10,000,000 in outstanding debt subject to a continuing disclosure undertaking (including this issue) and this issue does not meet an available exemption from continuing disclosure, the City will be agreeing to provide certain updat ed Annual Financial Information and its Audited Financial Statement annually, as well as providing notices of the occurrence of certain reportable events to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the “MSRB”), as required by rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The City is already obligated to provide such reports for its existing bonds, and has contracted with Ehlers to prepare and file the reports. Arbitrage Monitoring: The City must ensure compliance with certain sections of the Internal Revenue Code and Treasury Regulations (“Arbitrage Rules”) throughout the life of the issue to maintain the tax - exempt status of the Bonds. These Arbitrage Rules apply to amounts held in construction, escrow, reserve, debt service account(s), etc., along with related investment income on each fund/account. IRS audits will verify compliance with rebate, yield restriction and records retention requirements within the Arbitrage Rules. The City’s specific arbitrage responsibilities will be detailed in the Tax Certificate OR Arbitrage Certificate (the “Tax Compliance Document”) prepared by your Bond Attorney and provided at closing. The Bonds may qualify for one or more exception(s) to the Arbitrage Rules by meeting 1) small issuer exception, 2) spend down requirements, 3) bona fide debt service fund limits, 4) reasonable reserve requirements, 5) expenditure within an available period limitations, 6) investments yield restrictions, 7) de minimis rules, or; 8) borrower limited requirements. Presale Report August 25, 2026 City of Rogers, Minnesota Page 3 Page 112 of 129 An Ehlers arbitrage expert will contact the City within 30 days after the sale date to review the City’s specific responsibilities for the Bonds. The City is currently receiving arbitrage services from Ehlers in relation to the Bonds. Investment of Bond Proceeds: Ehlers can assist the City in developin g a strategy to invest your Bond proceeds until the funds are needed to pay project costs Other Service Providers: This debt issuance will require the engagement of other public finance service providers. This section identifies those other service providers, so Ehlers can coordinate their engagement on your behalf. Where you have previously used a particular firm to p rovide a service, we have assumed that you will continue that relationship. For services you have not previously required, we have identified a service provider. Fees charged by these service providers will be paid from proceeds of the obligation, unless you notify us that you wish to pay them from other sources. Our pre -sale bond sizing includes a good faith estimate of these fees, but the final fees may vary. If you have any questions pertaining to the identified service provid ers or their role, or if you would like to use a different service provider for any of the listed services please contact us. Bond Counsel: Kutak Rock LLP Paying Agent: Bond Trust Services Corporation Rating Agency: S &P Global Ratings (S&P) Summary: The decisions to be made by the City Council are as follows: • Accept or modify the finance assumptions described in this report Presale Report August 25, 2026 City of Rogers, Minnesota Page 4 Page 113 of 129 PROPOSED DEBT ISSUANCE SCHEDULE Pre -Sale Review by City Council: August 25, 2026 Due Diligence Call to Review Official Statement: Week of September 21, 2026 Conference with Rating Agency: Week of September 21, 2026 Distribute Official Statement: September 24, 2026 City Council Meeting to Award Sale of the Bonds: October 6, 2026 Estimated Closing Date: October 22, 2026 Attachments Estimated Sources and Uses of Funds Estimated Proposed Debt Service Schedule Resolution Authorizing Ehlers to Proceed with Bond Sale (sent separately by Kutak Rock LLP) EHLERS’ CONTACTS EHLERS’ CONTACTS Jason Aarsvold, Senior Municipal Advisor (651) 697 -8512 Keith Dahl, Senior Municipal Advisor (651) 697 -8595 Emily Wilkie, Senior Public Finance Analyst (651) 697 -8588 Alicia Gage, Senior Financial Analyst (651) 697 -8551 Presale Report August 25, 2026 City of Rogers, Minnesota Page 5 Page 114 of 129 City of Rogers, Minnesota $39,235,000 General Obligation CIP Bonds, Series 2026B Assumes Current Market Non-BQ "AA+" Rates plus 50bps 20 Years Sources & Uses Dated 10/22/2026 | Delivered 10/22/2026 Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $39,235,000.00 Tower & Billboard Lease Fund 2,200,000.00 Estimated Interest on Bond Proceeds 895,000.00 Facilities Capital Reserve 3,540,000.00 Total Sources $45,870,000.00 Uses Of Funds Total Underwriter's Discount (0.800%) 313,880.00 Costs of Issuance 171,000.00 Deposit to Project Construction Fund 45,385,000.00 Rounding Amount 120.00 Total Uses $45,870,000.00 Series 2026B GO CIP Bonds | SINGLE PURPOSE | 8/19/2026 | 9:23 AM Page 115 of 129 City of Rogers, Minnesota $39,235,000 General Obligation CIP Bonds, Series 2026B Assumes Current Market Non-BQ "AA+" Rates plus 50bps 20 Years Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 10/22/2026 - - - - - 08/01/2027 - - 1,267,512.50 1,267,512.50 - 02/01/2028 940,000.00 3.050% 817,750.00 1,757,750.00 3,025,262.50 08/01/2028 - - 803,415.00 803,415.00 - 02/01/2029 1,420,000.00 3.150% 803,415.00 2,223,415.00 3,026,830.00 08/01/2029 - - 781,050.00 781,050.00 - 02/01/2030 1,465,000.00 3.200% 781,050.00 2,246,050.00 3,027,100.00 08/01/2030 - - 757,610.00 757,610.00 - 02/01/2031 1,510,000.00 3.300% 757,610.00 2,267,610.00 3,025,220.00 08/01/2031 - - 732,695.00 732,695.00 - 02/01/2032 1,560,000.00 3.350% 732,695.00 2,292,695.00 3,025,390.00 08/01/2032 - - 706,565.00 706,565.00 - 02/01/2033 1,615,000.00 3.450% 706,565.00 2,321,565.00 3,028,130.00 08/01/2033 - - 678,706.25 678,706.25 - 02/01/2034 1,670,000.00 3.550% 678,706.25 2,348,706.25 3,027,412.50 08/01/2034 - - 649,063.75 649,063.75 - 02/01/2035 1,730,000.00 3.650% 649,063.75 2,379,063.75 3,028,127.50 08/01/2035 - - 617,491.25 617,491.25 - 02/01/2036 1,790,000.00 3.800% 617,491.25 2,407,491.25 3,024,982.50 08/01/2036 - - 583,481.25 583,481.25 - 02/01/2037 1,860,000.00 3.900% 583,481.25 2,443,481.25 3,026,962.50 08/01/2037 - - 547,211.25 547,211.25 - 02/01/2038 1,935,000.00 4.000% 547,211.25 2,482,211.25 3,029,422.50 08/01/2038 - - 508,511.25 508,511.25 - 02/01/2039 2,010,000.00 4.100% 508,511.25 2,518,511.25 3,027,022.50 08/01/2039 - - 467,306.25 467,306.25 - 02/01/2040 2,090,000.00 4.550% 467,306.25 2,557,306.25 3,024,612.50 08/01/2040 - - 419,758.75 419,758.75 - 02/01/2041 2,190,000.00 4.600% 419,758.75 2,609,758.75 3,029,517.50 08/01/2041 - - 369,388.75 369,388.75 - 02/01/2042 2,290,000.00 4.650% 369,388.75 2,659,388.75 3,028,777.50 08/01/2042 - - 316,146.25 316,146.25 - 02/01/2043 2,395,000.00 4.700% 316,146.25 2,711,146.25 3,027,292.50 08/01/2043 - - 259,863.75 259,863.75 - 02/01/2044 2,505,000.00 4.750% 259,863.75 2,764,863.75 3,024,727.50 08/01/2044 - - 200,370.00 200,370.00 - 02/01/2045 2,625,000.00 4.800% 200,370.00 2,825,370.00 3,025,740.00 08/01/2045 - - 137,370.00 137,370.00 - 02/01/2046 2,750,000.00 4.850% 137,370.00 2,887,370.00 3,024,740.00 08/01/2046 - - 70,682.50 70,682.50 - 02/01/2047 2,885,000.00 4.900% 70,682.50 2,955,682.50 3,026,365.00 Total $39,235,000.00 - $21,298,635.00 $60,533,635.00 - Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $478,424.63 Average Life 12.194 Years Average Coupon 4.4518267% Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.5174337% True Interest Cost (TIC) 4.4932189% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 4.4041427% All Inclusive Cost (AIC) 4.5421828% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.4518267% Weighted Average Maturity 12.194 Years Series 2026B GO CIP Bonds | SINGLE PURPOSE | 8/19/2026 | 9:23 AM Page 116 of 129 City of Rogers, Minnesota $39,235,000 General Obligation CIP Bonds, Series 2026B Assumes Current Market Non-BQ "AA+" Rates plus 50bps 20 Years Debt Service Schedule 105% Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Overlevy 02/01/2027 - - - - - 02/01/2028 940,000.00 3.050% 2,085,262.50 3,025,262.50 3,176,525.63 02/01/2029 1,420,000.00 3.150% 1,606,830.00 3,026,830.00 3,178,171.50 02/01/2030 1,465,000.00 3.200% 1,562,100.00 3,027,100.00 3,178,455.00 02/01/2031 1,510,000.00 3.300% 1,515,220.00 3,025,220.00 3,176,481.00 02/01/2032 1,560,000.00 3.350% 1,465,390.00 3,025,390.00 3,176,659.50 02/01/2033 1,615,000.00 3.450% 1,413,130.00 3,028,130.00 3,179,536.50 02/01/2034 1,670,000.00 3.550% 1,357,412.50 3,027,412.50 3,178,783.13 02/01/2035 1,730,000.00 3.650% 1,298,127.50 3,028,127.50 3,179,533.88 02/01/2036 1,790,000.00 3.800% 1,234,982.50 3,024,982.50 3,176,231.63 02/01/2037 1,860,000.00 3.900% 1,166,962.50 3,026,962.50 3,178,310.63 02/01/2038 1,935,000.00 4.000% 1,094,422.50 3,029,422.50 3,180,893.63 02/01/2039 2,010,000.00 4.100% 1,017,022.50 3,027,022.50 3,178,373.63 02/01/2040 2,090,000.00 4.550% 934,612.50 3,024,612.50 3,175,843.13 02/01/2041 2,190,000.00 4.600% 839,517.50 3,029,517.50 3,180,993.38 02/01/2042 2,290,000.00 4.650% 738,777.50 3,028,777.50 3,180,216.38 02/01/2043 2,395,000.00 4.700% 632,292.50 3,027,292.50 3,178,657.13 02/01/2044 2,505,000.00 4.750% 519,727.50 3,024,727.50 3,175,963.88 02/01/2045 2,625,000.00 4.800% 400,740.00 3,025,740.00 3,177,027.00 02/01/2046 2,750,000.00 4.850% 274,740.00 3,024,740.00 3,175,977.00 02/01/2047 2,885,000.00 4.900% 141,365.00 3,026,365.00 3,177,683.25 Total $39,235,000.00 - $21,298,635.00 $60,533,635.00 $63,560,316.75 Significant Dates Dated 10/22/2026 First Coupon Date 8/01/2027 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $478,424.63 Average Life 12.194 Years Average Coupon 4.4518267% Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.5174337% True Interest Cost (TIC) 4.4932189% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 4.4041427% All Inclusive Cost (AIC) 4.5421828% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost 4.4518267% Weighted Average Maturity 12.194 Years Series 2026B GO CIP Bonds | SINGLE PURPOSE | 8/19/2026 | 9:23 AM Page 117 of 129 City of Rogers, Minnesota $39,235,000 General Obligation CIP Bonds, Series 2026B Assumes Current Market Non-BQ "AA+" Rates plus 50bps 20 Years Debt Service Schedule Underserved Facility Municipalities Tower & Capital 105% of Total Distribution Billboard Lease Reserve Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Levy Revenue Revenues Revenues Net 02/01/2027 - - - - - - - - - 02/01/2028 940,000.00 3.050% 2,085,262.50 3,025,262.50 3,176,525.63 2,392,000.00 360,000.00 350,000.00 74,525.63 02/01/2029 1,420,000.00 3.150% 1,606,830.00 3,026,830.00 3,178,171.50 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,732,171.50 02/01/2030 1,465,000.00 3.200% 1,562,100.00 3,027,100.00 3,178,455.00 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,732,455.00 02/01/2031 1,510,000.00 3.300% 1,515,220.00 3,025,220.00 3,176,481.00 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,730,481.00 02/01/2032 1,560,000.00 3.350% 1,465,390.00 3,025,390.00 3,176,659.50 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,730,659.50 02/01/2033 1,615,000.00 3.450% 1,413,130.00 3,028,130.00 3,179,536.50 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,733,536.50 02/01/2034 1,670,000.00 3.550% 1,357,412.50 3,027,412.50 3,178,783.13 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,732,783.13 02/01/2035 1,730,000.00 3.650% 1,298,127.50 3,028,127.50 3,179,533.88 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,733,533.88 02/01/2036 1,790,000.00 3.800% 1,234,982.50 3,024,982.50 3,176,231.63 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,730,231.63 02/01/2037 1,860,000.00 3.900% 1,166,962.50 3,026,962.50 3,178,310.63 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,732,310.63 02/01/2038 1,935,000.00 4.000% 1,094,422.50 3,029,422.50 3,180,893.63 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,734,893.63 02/01/2039 2,010,000.00 4.100% 1,017,022.50 3,027,022.50 3,178,373.63 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,732,373.63 02/01/2040 2,090,000.00 4.550% 934,612.50 3,024,612.50 3,175,843.13 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,729,843.13 02/01/2041 2,190,000.00 4.600% 839,517.50 3,029,517.50 3,180,993.38 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,734,993.38 02/01/2042 2,290,000.00 4.650% 738,777.50 3,028,777.50 3,180,216.38 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,734,216.38 02/01/2043 2,395,000.00 4.700% 632,292.50 3,027,292.50 3,178,657.13 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,732,657.13 02/01/2044 2,505,000.00 4.750% 519,727.50 3,024,727.50 3,175,963.88 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,729,963.88 02/01/2045 2,625,000.00 4.800% 400,740.00 3,025,740.00 3,177,027.00 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,731,027.00 02/01/2046 2,750,000.00 4.850% 274,740.00 3,024,740.00 3,175,977.00 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,729,977.00 02/01/2047 2,885,000.00 4.900% 141,365.00 3,026,365.00 3,177,683.25 1,196,000.00 250,000.00 - 1,731,683.25 Total $39,235,000.00 - $21,298,635.00 $60,533,635.00 $63,560,316.75 $25,116,000.00 $5,110,000.00 $350,000.00 $32,984,316.75 Significant Dates Dated 10/22/2026 First Coupon Date 8/01/2027 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars $478,424.63 Average Life 12.194 Years Average Coupon 4.4518267% Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.5174337% True Interest Cost (TIC) 4.4932189% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 4.4041427% All Inclusive Cost (AIC) 4.5421828% Series 2026B GO CIP Bonds | SINGLE PURPOSE | 8/19/2026 | 9:23 AM Page 118 of 129 CITY OF ROGERS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2026-80 RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATED SALE OF $39,235,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2026B BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the “Council”) of the City of Rogers, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “City”) as follows: Section 1. Bonds Authorized 1.01. It is hereby found, determined and declared that the City should issue its General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2026B (the “Bonds”) in the approximate principal amount of $39,235,000, in order to finance capital improvements set forth in the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan for Issuance of General Obligation CIP Bonds: City of Rogers, Minnesota 2024-2028 (the “Plan”) including but not limited to the acquisition, construction, betterment and equipping of a new Civic Campus in the City, that will include a City Hall and new police facilities (the “Project”), plus costs of issuance of the Bonds, subject to further details regarding the sale of the Bonds to be set forth in a resolution to be considered by the City Council at a subsequent meeting. 1.02. City staff are authorized and directed to take all other actions necessary to carry out the intent of this resolution. Section 2. Authority of Municipal Advisor. Ehlers and Associates, Inc. (the “Municipal Advisor”) is authorized and directed to negotiate the sale of the Bonds. The City Council will meet on Tuesday, October 6, 2026, or another date selected by City staff, to consider proposals on the Bonds and take any other appropriate action with respect to the Bonds. Section 3. Authority of Bond Counsel. The law firm of Kutak Rock, LLP, as bond counsel for the City (“Bond Counsel”), is authorized to act as bond counsel and to assist in the preparation and review of necessary documents, certificates and instruments relating to the Bonds. The officers, employees and agents of the City are hereby authorized to assist Bond Counsel in the preparation of such documents, certificates, and instruments. Section 4. Covenants. In the resolution awarding the sale of the Bonds, the City Council will set forth the covenants and undertakings required by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, as amended (the “Act”). Section 5. Official Statement. In connection with the sale of the Bonds, the officers or employees of the City are authorized and directed to cooperate with the Municipal Advisor and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. 4920-2650-0553.1 Page 119 of 129 6. Declaration of Official Intent to Reimburse Expenditures. 6.01 The Internal Revenue Service has issued Treas. Reg. § 1.150-2 (the “Reimbursement Regulations”) providing that proceeds of tax-exempt bonds used to reimburse prior expenditures will not be deemed spent unless certain requirements are met; the City expects to incur certain expenditures with respect to the Project that may be financed temporarily from sources other than bonds, and reimbursed from the proceeds of tax exempt bonds. 6.02 The City has determined to make a declaration of official intent (the “Declaration”) to reimburse certain costs with respect to the Project from proceeds of the Bonds in accordance with the Reimbursement Regulations. 6.03 All reimbursed expenditures will be capital expenditures, costs of issuance of the Bonds, or other expenditures eligible for reimbursement under Section 1.150-2(d)(3) of the Reimbursement Regulations. 6.04 This Declaration has been made not later than sixty (60) days after payment of any original expenditure to be subject to a reimbursement allocation with respect to the proceeds of the Bonds, except for the following expenditures: (a) costs of issuance of bonds; (b) costs in an amount not in excess of $100,000 or 5% of the proceeds of an issue; or (c) “preliminary expenditures” up to an amount not in excess of 20% of the aggregate issue price of the issue or issues that finance or are reasonably expected by the City to finance the project for which the preliminary expenditures were incurred. The term “preliminary expenditures” includes architectural, engineering, surveying, bond issuance, and similar costs that are incurred prior to commencement of acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of a project, other than land acquisition, site preparation, and similar costs incident to commencement of construction. 6.05 This Declaration is an expression of the reasonable expectations of the City based on the facts and circumstances known to the City as of the date hereof. The anticipated original expenditures for the Project and the principal amount of the Bonds described herein are consistent with the City’s budgetary and financial circumstances. No sources other than proceeds of the Bonds to be issued by the City are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set aside pursuant to the City’s budget or financial policies to pay such expenditures. 6.06 This Declaration is intended to constitute a declaration of official intent for purposes of the Reimbursement Regulations. Councilmember ______________ moved for the adoption of the foregoing resolution, and said motion was duly seconded by Councilmember ________________, and upon a vote being taken thereon after full discussion thereof, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 4920-2650-0553.1 Page 120 of 129 Adopted on August 25, 2026, by the City Council of Rogers. City Clerk 4920-2650-0553.1 Page 121 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 7.2 Subject: Approve Hiring of Tonya Larsen to the Position of Community Engagement Specialist Prepared By: Dan Wills, Chief of Police Recommended Council Action Motion to Approve Hiring of Tonya Larsen to the Position of Community Engagement Specialist Overview / Background / Analysis At the December 9, 2025 Rogers City Council Meeting, the City Council approved the addition of a Community Engagement Specialist position within the 2026 Police Department budget. The position was advertised and a competitive pool of applicants was reviewed. After a thorough screening and interview process, Tonya Larsen was selected as the top candidate for this role. Tonya Larsen is a detail-oriented professional with over eight years of experience in program coordination, scheduling, compliance, referrals, and family engagement within public education and early childhood programs. Her background includes roles as Screening Coordinator/Parent Educator at Monticello Public Schools, Assistant Teacher for Head Start, Special Education Assistant, and Employee Benefits Specialist. Tonya holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Social Science Education with a minor in Business Administration from North Dakota State University. Tonya successfully passed all pre-employment conditions and is recommended for hire. Her first day of employment with the City is anticipated to be Monday, August 31, 2026. Staff Recommendation Motion to Approve Hiring of Tonya Larsen to the Position of Community Engagement Specialist Financial Impact: Source Fund: Budgeted? Yes Supporting Documentation None Page 122 of 129 Page 123 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 7.3 Subject: Approve Recruitment For Hiring of Building Inspector II Position Prepared By: Patrick Farrens, Fire Chief Recommended Council Action Approve the recruitment of Building Inspector II. Overview / Background / Analysis During the 2027 budget process, we presented a need to council to transition our part- time Inspector 2 position to a full-time position for next year. This position was currently budgeted as a 0.75 part-time position in 2026. Due to unforeseen circumstances, the current part-time Inspector II has announced his resignation for September 1st, 2026. This was the only qualified Inspector II applicant we received in 2025, and we do not believe the market will provide a part-time replacement for this needed position in a timely fashion and workload is significant and steady. We will market this position using the current approved Inspector II Job Description. Staff Recommendation Approve the recruitment of Building Inspector II. Financial Impact: Approximately a Source Fund: 100-450-2400-41010-0000 $20,000 unbudgeted increase for October– December 2026. Budgeted? No Supporting Documentation None Page 124 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 7.4 Subject: Approve Hiring of Paid-on-Call Firefighters Prepared By: Patrick Farrens, Fire Chief Recommended Council Action Approve the hiring of paid-on-call firefighter apprentices: Jennifer Stowe, John (Tommy) Boone, Andrew Kraabel, Joe Kubes, Josh Booker, and Tyler Strombeck, with an effective start date of September 1st, 2026. Overview / Background / Analysis The Rogers Fire Department has an approved strength of up to 45 paid-on-call firefighters. Currently, the Fire Department has 29 active and four inactive paid-on-call firefighters. The department launched an aggressive recruitment campaign this year, and six candidates have met all pre-employment requirements, including a psychological examination, a complete background check, a medical and drug screening, physical agility test, and more. Apprentice Firefighters will first complete the EMS portion of their education from September to December, and then proceed to Fire 1/2 and Hazardous Material Operations certifications from January to June 2027. Staff Recommendation Approve the hiring of paid-on-call firefighter apprentices, with an effective start date of September 1st, 2026: • Jennifer Stowe (EMT Certified and Fire Citizen Academy Graduate) • Tommy Boone • Andrew Kraabel • Joe Kubes • Josh Booker • Tyler Strombeck Financial Impact: N/A Source Fund: N/A Budgeted? Yes Supporting Documentation Page 125 of 129None Page 126 of 129 STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: August 25, 2026 ROGERS CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 7.5 Subject: Items Related to Street Maintenance • Accept Resignation (Retirement) and Recognize Street and Stormwater Supervisor Mike Sable • Approve Promotion of Brian Scharber to Street and Stormwater Supervisor • Approve Promotion of David Tiemam to Street and Stormwater Crew Leader • Authorize the Backfill of Street Maintenance Heavy Equipment Operator (HEO) Prepared By: Doran Cote, Public Works Director/City Engineer Recommended Council Action Motion to Accept Resignation (Retirement) and Recognize Street and Stormwater Supervisor Mike Sable Motion to Approve Promotion of Brian Scharber to Street and Stormwater Supervisor Motion to Approve Promotion of David Tiemam to Street and Stormwater Crew Leader Motion to Authorize the Backfill of Street Maintenance Heavy Equipment Operator (HEO) Overview / Background / Analysis In April 2026 the City Council approved several items related to Park Maintenance including recognizing the retiring Park Maintenance Supervisor, approving 2 promotions and authorizing the backfilling of a vacancy created by the promotions. At that time staff advised the City Council that there was a likelihood that similar events would be forthcoming with the retirement of the Streets and Stormwater Supervisor in August. On July 27, 2026, Streets and Stormwater Supervisor Mike Sable submitted his resignation (retirement) with a last date of employment of October 1, 2026, and his last actual day in the office will be September 1, 2026, due to an unexpected leave of absence. Mike has served as Street and Stormwater Supervisor with the City of Rogers for over 20 years. During his tenure, he has played a key role in overseeing street operations, maintenance programs, staff supervision, and snow fighting efforts. He has also been a daytime paid-on-call firefighter for Rogers. Mike has performed roles as Park Supervisor, Street and Stormwater Crew Leader and Street and Stormwater Supervisor for the City of Rogers. He has also worked for the cities of Eden Prairie and Bloomington. His leadership has contributed to the enhancement of the city’s street and stormwater infrastructure, implementation of operational efficiencies, and delivery of high-quality transportation services. Mike is Page 127 of 129also a 32-year veteran of the Maple Grove Fire Department. Throughout his career, Mike has demonstrated a strong commitment to public service and public safety. Notable accomplishments include: • Oversight of street maintenance, snow fighting and capital improvement projects • Leadership and mentorship of maintenance and operations staff • Implementation of safety protocols and operational best practices • Collaboration with MnDOT, Hennepin County and neighboring communities • Support of department initiatives and long-term planning efforts • Development of the city’s street system • With the annexation of Hassan Township in 2013, Mike's responsibilities expanded to include the former Township's roadway and stormwater systems including 7 miles of gravel roads MIke's institutional knowledge and dedication have had a lasting positive impact on the street and stormwater system and the community it serves. The retirement of Mike Sable marks the conclusion of a distinguished career in public works. Staff recommends that the City Council recognizes his contributions and express gratitude for his service. With Mike’s retirement, staff are recommending his replacement through a promotion. In March 2025 the City Council approved the promotion of Brian Scharber to Streets and Stormwater Crew Lead. Two candidates had applied for the position, and both were interviewed by a panel consisting of the Public Works Director/City Engineer, Street Supervisor, Park Supervisor and the Hopkins Public Works Director. Both candidates did very well in the interview and at the conclusion there was unanimous agreement that Brian Scharber was the best candidate for the position. Brian is the Street and Stormwater Crew Lead with a proven track record at the city, excelling in maintenance and repair of roads while fostering team collaboration. He is skilled at operating a wide range of construction equipment, ensuring project precision and safety compliance. He is a dependable and hardworking team leader and collaborator, demonstrating a strong commitment to operational excellence and teamwork. Brian's education consists of coursework at North Hennepin Community College in the following areas: • Public Works Operations and Maintenance • Public Works Management and Communication • Public Works Organization and Administration • Technical Aspects of Public Works • Principles of Interpersonal Communication After his promotion, Brian earned his APWA-MN Public Works Certificate. The Public Works Certificate Program focuses on the management of local public works organizations and operations. Course material is delivered by public works professionals. This program is designed to further the understanding of: Page 128 of 129 • Organization and functions of public works and public works professionals • Technical functions undertaken by public works professionals, with emphasis on roadway design, construction, and maintenance • Advanced concepts in public works operations and maintenance • Effective creation and delivery of workplace and technical documents Staff are also recommending Brian's replacement through a promotion. David Tieman, the other candidate for the Streets and Stormwater Crew Lead position, has been actively involved in street maintenance, gravel road maintenance, trail work, and seasonal operations including snow removal and asphalt paving. He has extensive experience operating a wide range of equipment and takes pride in maintaining safe, efficient job sites. David is also a four-time winning Roadeo contestant at the APWA-MN Minnesota Fall Maintenance Expo with two first place wins, second place and fourth place. The Roadeo is an obstacle course speed contest using a fully equipped snowplow truck. David also competed in the national Roadeo in Denver. The next item is seeking approval to fill the Street Maintenance Heavy Equipment Operator vacancy created by David's promotion. The filling of this position is critical with the upcoming snowplow season. Please note that none of these recommended changes add any positions and have no budgetary impact. Staff Recommendation Motion to Accept Resignation (Retirement) and Recognize Street and Stormwater Supervisor Mike Sable Motion to Approve Promotion of Brian Scharber to Street and Stormwater Supervisor Motion to Approve Promotion of David Tiemam to Street and Stormwater Crew Leader Motion to Authorize the Backfill of Street Maintenance Heavy Equipment Operator (HEO) Financial Impact: N/A Source Fund: N/A Budgeted? Yes Supporting Documentation None Page 129 of 129