Agenda and Packet

COMMON COUNCIL AGENDA August 25, 2026 T he public may view/listen to the meeting by: • Viewing the City's YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/cityofriverfalls C all Meeting to Order – 6:30 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Approval of Minutes – July 28, 2026 Council Meeting Approval of Bills: $ P UBLIC COMMENT, PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. Public Comment If you are unable to attend the meeting in person but would like to submit a comment, please e-mail to the City Clerk’s office (awhite@rfcity.org) PUBL IC HEARING 2. First Reading: Ordinance 2026-15 An Ordinance Amending Title 17 Zoning, Chapter 17.08 3. First Reading: Ordinance 2026- 16 An Ordinance Amending Title 12 Streets, Sidewalks, Other Public Places and Property Use Impacts, Chapter 12.04 Creating new section 12.04.050 4. First Reading: Ordinance 2026-17 An Ordinance Amending the Official Traffic Control Map CO NSENT AGENDA 5. Acknowledgement of the following Boards Commission Committee Minutes a. Library Board b. Park and Recreation Advisory Board c. P lan Commission d. Historic Preservation Commission e. Utility Advisory Board 6. Resolution Approving Award for Sewer Collection Manhole Rehabilitation 7. Resolution Approving Purchase of Two Mechanic Tool Sets 8. Resolution Authorizing the Submittal of an Application to the Wisconsin Community Development Investment (CDI) Grant Program for the Creamery Project 9. Resolution Approving Amendment to the Purchase Agreement and First Right of Refusal with Decentralized Foods, LLC O RDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 10. Resolution Providing for the Sale of Approximately $6,435,000 General Obligation Promissory Notes, Series 2026A 11. Resolution Approving 2025 Audit and Financial Statements 12. Resolution Approving Adoption of the City-Wide Park Impact Fee Funding Policy and Priority Park Improvements Projects R EPORTS 13. 2026 WDNR Annual Drinking Water Testing Report 14. Administrator Report 15. Comptroller Report 16. Mayor’s Good News ANNOUNCMENTS 17. Mayor’s Appointments ADJOURNMENT NOTE: Any person who has a qualifying disabilit y accommodation the Americans with Disabilities Act that requires the meeting or materials to be in an accessible location or format, may contact City Clerk Amy White at (715) 426-3408 or in person at 222 Lewis Street, for accommodations. Requests for accommodation should be made at least three (3) business days in advance of the meeting. Every effort will be made to arrange accommodation. Posted at City Hall on 8/14/26; Publish: The Pierce County Journal: 08/19/26 Website: 08/14/26 CITY OF RIVER FALLS, WISCONSIN COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS July 28, 2026 Mayor Page called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. City Council Members Present: Mei Mei Abdouch, Todd Bjerstedt, Nick Carow, Sean Downing, Diane Odeen, Michael Page, Rose Walker Staff Present: City Administrator Scot Simpson; Community Services Director/City Clerk Amy White ; City Attorney Chris Gierhart; Sergeant Travis Rudesill ; Chief of Staff Jennifer Smith; Utility Director Kevin Westhuis; Assistant Director of Community Development Emily Shivley ; Senior Planner Harley Muhlhorn; IT Technician Jon Smits The pledge of allegiance was said. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 14, 2026 meeting minutes MSC Odeen/Walker to approve the minutes. Unanimous. APPROVAL OF BILLS: MSC Bjerstedt/Odeen moved to approve the bills. Unanimous. PUBLIC COMMENT, PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: William Hansen – Hansen expressed concerns about the funding sources for the Corridor project, particularly the use of electric utility funds to support ongoing project expenses. Steve Leitch – Leitch, a representative of the River Falls Economic Development Corporation (EDC) , thanked the Council for its past support of the Innovation Center and expressed appreciation for consideration of the proposed amendment to the EDC agreement on the consent agenda. Sy Pitzen – Pitzen reiterated concerns about the City's Flock camera system, raising questions about privacy, data sharing, and the company's practices. He urged the Council to reconsider the use of the cameras and remove them from the community. Tonya Schmitt – Schmitt urged the Council to adopt a moratorium on data center construction and to develop policies governing the ethical and safe use of artificial intelligence to protect residents, employees, and visitors. Dana Linscott – Linscott expressed concerns about transparency related to the City's use of Flock cameras and urged the Police Department to provide greater transparency and more comprehensive public information regarding the camera system. CONSENT AGENDA Acknowledgement of the following minutes: Police and Fire Commission (6/1/26); Park and Recreation Advisory Board (6/17/26) ; Plan Commission (6/2/26) ; Historic Preservation Commission (4/15/26, 5/13/26 & 6/10/26); Utility Advisory Board (6/15/26) Resolution No. 7100 to Apply for Exemption from County Library Tax Resolution Approving Specific Implementation Plan for The Creamery at Cedar→→pulled by Downing Resolution Approving Development Agreement with Creamery at Cedar, LLC→→pulled by Downing Resolution Approving Addition of a RG-3 Optional Residential Rate→→pulled by Downing Resolution No. 7101 Approving Purchase of Whitetail Ridge Corporate Park Street Lighting Resolution No. 7102 Approving Luther Memorial Church for Noise Control Exemption for Special Event Resolution No. 7103 Approving 7th and Linden Neighborhood Block Party Open Container Exemption for Special Event City Council Minutes for July 28, 2026 Page 2 Resolution No. 7104 Approving Amendment to the 2017 Development Agreement with the River Falls Economic Development Corporation for the St. Croix Valley Business Innovation Center Resolution No. 7105 Approving the Purchase Agreement for 404 S. Winter Street MSC Odeen/Bjerstedt to approve the remaining Consent Agenda. Unanimous. Resolution No. 7106 Approving Specific Implementation Plan for The Creamery at Cedar Councilmember Downing expressed support for the implementation plan and asked whether parking and directional signage identified in the plan would be incorporated into the City's broader wayfinding plan to better direct visitors to public parking areas. Administrator Simpson responded that future wayfinding updates could include these improvements and noted that the City could evaluate the effectiveness of the parking strategy over time and make additional changes, including signage, if needed. MSC Downing/Odeen to approve the resolution. Unanimous. Resolution No. 7107 Approving Development Agreement with Creamery at Cedar, LLC MSC Downing/Bjerstedt to approve the resolution. Unanimous. Resolution No. 7108 Approving Addition of a RG-3 Optional Residential Rate Councilmember Downing expressed support for the proposed RG -3 optional residential electric rate, noting its potential to help customers save money while encouraging off-peak electric vehicle charging to reduce system-wide power costs. He asked whether the rate included the same one-year enrollment commitment as the existing RG -2 rate. Utility Director Westhuis confirmed that RG -3 also requires a one-year commitment to support utility planning and cost management. MSC Downing/Odeen to approve the resolution. Unanimous. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Resolution No. 7109 Authorizing the City Administrator Use Due Diligence to Pursuing the Necessary Next Steps for Required Approvals and Referendum in the Purchase of St. Croix Gas Utility Director Westhuis provided a presentation on the proposed acquisition of St. Croix Gas, outlining the utility’s history, customer base, service territory, financial condition, staffing, and the rationale for City ownership. He explained that St. Croix Gas serves approximately 10,000 customers and operates similarly in scale to the City’s electric utility. The presentation highlighted that the negotiated purchase price is $6.4 million and that the acquisition would include the utility’s assets, equipment, inventory, and real estate. Administrator Simpson explained that several steps remain before a purchase could occur, including additional financial and legal due diligence, review and approval by the Public Service Commission, and ultimately a community referendum. Councilmember Bjerstedt asked whether current St. Croix Gas employees would become City employees following the acquisition. Administrator Simpson responded that retaining employees is a priority and that the proposed agreement anticipates transitioning the existing workforce to City employment. Councilmember Downing asked whether the referendum would include the full costs associated with the acquisition, including studies and additional expenses. Administrator Simpson responded that by the time the referendum occurs, voters would have a complete understanding of the financial impacts, City Council Minutes for July 28, 2026 Page 3 purchase terms, and anticipated rate structure. He noted that the Public Service Commission review would provide additional information regarding costs and rates before the referendum. Councilmember Walker asked whether the Public Service Commission (PSC) establishes utility rates and whether the City purchases natural gas based on a commodity price rate. Utility Director Westhuis c onfirmed that the PSC establishes utility rates through a detailed cost -of- service analysis that considers the costs necessary to operate the utility. Councilmember Downing asked whether the planning process would include 20- to 30-year projections that account for customers transitioning to alternative energy sources. He also asked whether succession planning would be considered given the specialized nature of utility positions and potential retirements or departures. Utility Director Westhuis indicated that long-term changes in customer energy use would be considered as part of the planning process. He also stated that staff continually evaluates succession planning, staffing needs, and potential gaps to ensure the utility is prepared for future workforce needs. Mayor Page asked about future natural gas demand and whether long-term projections would consider changes in energy sources, including increased use of renewable energy. Administrator Simpson responded that long-term industry trends would be considered as part of due diligence. He noted that while the future energy landscape will continue to evolve, natural gas remains an important energy source in the region and that planning would focus on the expected useful life of the utility’s infrastructure. Councilmember Carow asked why other entities had not pursued purchasing St. Croix Gas if it was a good investment opportunity. Administrator Simpson explained that the acquisition appears to be a strong fit because of the City’s existing utility operations and commitment to retaining employees. He noted that the seller placed significant importance on ensuring employees and the community would be well served through the transition. Councilmember Odeen asked whether the City would continue serving customers located outside of the City limits. Administrator Simpson confirmed that the current plan is to continue serving those customers as part of the utility operation. MSC Odeen/Page to approve the resolution. Unanimous. REPORTS: Administrator’s Report Councilmember Carow asked for further discussion on the questions and concerns regarding the City’s Flock automated license plate reader system, including data retention, vendor oversight, access controls, and transparency. Administrator Simpson explained that while the City relies on vendor security measures, system access is monitored through audit tools and Police Department review processes. He noted that policies, contracts, and usage procedures are publicly available and that the City continues to update information in response to community questions. EMS Quarterly Report No questions or comments Mayor’s Good News Mayor Page reminded residents about the rescheduled Cookout and Conversation and Water Fun event at Hoffman Park on Thursday, July 30. City Council Minutes for July 28, 2026 Page 4 Mayor Page recognized local Boy Scout Jackson Tody for completing an Eagle Scout service project at the River Falls Dog Park. Jackson raised funds, purchased materials, and coordinated volunteers to install dog agility equipment, enhancing the park for community members and their pets. MSC Bjerstedt/Walker to adjourn at 7:47 p.m. Unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Amy White, Community Services Director/City Clerk 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Page and City Council FROM: Harley Mehlhorn, Senior Planner DATE: August 25, 2026 TITLE: ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 17 ZONING, CHAPTER 17.08, SECTION 17.08.070 – FENCES (FENCE HEIGHT ALONG STREETS) RECOMMENDED ACTION Hold a public hearing and first reading for ordinance amending Title 17. BACKGROUND This memorandum outlines proposed code amendments related to the fence ordinance. The proposed fence ordinance amendments were prompted by a series of right -of-way fence encroachments along West Division Street between Main Street and Dry Run Road. The fence ordinance was last amended in 2018, when the City adopted the current three- foot setback requirement for fences abutting a right-of-way, along with associated landscaping requirements. Those amendments were intended to preserve space for sidewalks and improve the overall streetscape. Although the proposed amendments were initiated in response to conditions on West Division Street, any ordinance changes would apply citywide. DISCUSSION In evaluating the existing ordinance, staff reviewed whether the current three-foot setback and landscaping requirements continue to achieve their intended purpose. Staff determined that smaller setback reductions would provide limited functional or aesthetic benefit, as narrower landscaped areas are generally difficult to maintain and unlikely to meaningfully contribute to the streetscape. Accordingly, the discussion centered on either retaining the existing standards or removing the setback and landscaping requirements. At their July 7, 2026, meeting, the Plan Commission recommended removing the three-foot setback requirement and the associated landscaping requirement for fences adjacent to a right- of-way. The recommended ordinance also clarifies that all appurtenances and structural members of such fences must be located entirely on private property to prevent footings or structural overhangs from encroaching into the public right-of-way. The Commission also noted that this change is in the spirit of recent policy decisions by the Council which are founded upon the Comprehensive Plan policy goals of efficient use of land and infrastructure, namely that such reduction in setback requirement for private fences would allow for greater use of smaller lots. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 2 2 CONCLUSION The proposed fence ordinance amendment removes the three- foot setback and associated landscaping requirements for fences adjacent to a right -of-way while clarifying that all fence appurtenances and structural members must remain on private property. Adopti on of the proposed amendment would establish updated standards applicable citywide and provide clearer guidance for future administration and enforcement. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed amendment for statutory compliance and ordinance formatting. ORDINANCE NO. 2026-15 ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 17 ZONING, CHAPTER 17.08, SECTION 17.08.070 - FENCES (FENCE HEIGHT ALONG STREETS) THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVER FALLS DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. That Chapter 17.08 – General Requirements, Section 17.08.070 - Fences of the City of River Falls Municipal Code be amended as follows: D. Location. … 2. Fence Location on Lot. Unless otherwise required, fences are permitted up to, but not over, the property line., except for where a fence abuts a street, then it must be set back a minimum of three feet from the property line. Fences shall be set back as needed to maintain a vision clearance triangle setback as required in Section 17.08.030. E. Height. Except where otherwise required by this code, the following regulations apply to fence height. For the purposes of fence height requirements, alleys are not considered a street. 1. Limitations. Except where otherwise required by this code or required by a condition of approval for a development application, the following limitations apply to fence height: Type of Yard Maximum Height for Body of Fence Fence within a residential zone Fence within a Nonresidential Zone Yard abutting a street 3 feet Front Yard: 3 feet Side or Rear Yard: 6 feet 6 feet Yard not abutting a street 6 feet 10 feet 4. Exceptions. a. A residential fence in a side or rear yard abutting a nonresidential zone may rise up to the height of eight feet. b. Commercial fences in a side or rear yard abutting a residential zone must rise up to a minimum of eight feet in height. c. A residential fence in a rear or side yard that abuts a street may rise up to a height of six feet if the fence is set back a minimum of three feet from the property line and adequate landscaping is installed and maintained on the street side of the fence. Landscaping to be approved as part of the permit. Grasses, shrubs or small trees along with flowers will be acceptable with the intent to break up the visual solidness of the wall. Native plants are always encouraged. These requirements apply to all such fences greater than three feet up to six feet. Section 2. Effective date. This ordinance amendment shall take effect from and after its date of publication as provided by law. FOR THE CITY OF RIVER FALLS Alison Page, Mayor ATTEST: Amy White, City Clerk Adopted: ____________ Published: ____________ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Page and City Council FROM: Harley Mehlhorn, Senior Planner DATE: August 25, 2026 TITLE: ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12 STREETS, SIDEWALKS, OTHER PUBLIC PLACES, AND PROPERTY USE IMPACTS, CHAPTER 12.04 (BOULEVARD MAINTENENCE) RECOMMENDED ACTION Hold a public hearing and first reading for ordinance amending Title 12. BACKGROUND This memorandum outlines a proposed code amendment related to boulevard maintenance. The amendment establishes an explicit requirement for property owners to maintain the boulevard adjacent to their property. While this expectation has historically been implemented in practice and referenced in specific sections of City Code, such as provisions governing managed natural landscapes, it is not currently stated as a standalone requirement. This amendment codifies an existing and longstanding expectation. DISCUSSION The proposed amendment is intended to clarify and codify the longstanding expectation that adjacent property owners maintain boulevard areas. Establishing the requirement as a standalone provision will provide clearer and more consistent administration of City Code. The Plan Commission recommended approval of the proposed boulevard maintenance amendment. Staff views this amendment as a clarification and codification of a longstanding maintenance expectation rather than a substantive policy change. CONCLUSION The proposed boulevard maintenance amendment codifies the longstanding expectation that adjacent property owners maintain boulevard areas, providing clearer and more consistent administration of City Code. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed amendm ent for statutory compliance and ordinance formatting. 3 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-16 ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12 STREETS, SIDEWALKS, OTHER PUBLIC PLACES, AND PROPERTY USE IMPACTS, CHAPTER 12.04 (BOULEVARD MAINTENENCE) THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVER FALLS DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. That Chapter 12.04 Streets and Sidewalks Generally be amended to create Section 12.04.050 – Boulevard maintenance of the City of River Falls Municipal Code as follows: 12.04.050 - Boulevard maintenance. A. Boulevard Areas to be Maintained. The owner or occupant of any lot or parcel shall maintain the boulevard area adjacent to such lot or parcel by keeping all grass, weeds, and other vegetation cut to a height not greater than six (6) inches, unless a Managed Natural Landscape Permit, as defined in Section 8.40.060 - Managed natural landscaping, has been obtained and all provisions and conditions thereof are complied with. For purposes of this section, “Boulevard” means the portion of the street right -of-way located between the back of curb line and the sidewalk or, where no sidewalk exists, the property line. B. Maintenance Standards. The boulevard area shall be maintained in a neat and orderly condition and shall be free of excessive vegetative growth, noxious weeds, and conditions that interfere with the intended use of the public right-of-way or visibility for pedestrians and vehicles. C. Deposits and Obstructions Restricted. No person shall place, deposit, store, or allow materials, debris, yard waste, or other obstructions to accumulate within the boulevard area except as otherwise permitted. D. Abatement. 1. If the provisions of this section are not complied with, the city or designee shall serve written notice upon the owner, lessee, occupant, or any person having care or control of such lot or parcel to comply with the provisions of this section. 2. If the person upon whom the notice is served fails, neglects, or refuses to bring the boulevard area into compliance within seven (7) days from the date of such notice, or if no person can be found in the city who either is or claims to be the owner of suc h lot or parcel or who represents or claims to represent such owner, the city may cause such boulevard maintenance to be completed. 3. The cost of such maintenance, and other costs associated with it, at the discretion of the city, shall be billed to the property owner and payable to the city within thirty (30) days. Costs shall be invoiced per the city's current fee schedule. 4. Failure to pay the city for the services billed will result in the costs being assessed against the property as a special charge per Section 13.32.010. Section 2. Effective date. This ordinance amendment shall take effect from and after its date of publication as provided by law. FOR THE CITY OF RIVER FALLS Alison Page, Mayor ATTEST: Amy White, City Clerk Adopted: ____________ Published: ____________ 4 MEMORANDUM TO Mayor Page and City Council FROM: Tyler Galde, CPESC, Planning & Engineering Technician Todd Nickleski, P.E., City Engineer DATE: August 25, 2026 TITLE: FIRST READING ORDINANCE 2026-17 OFFICIAL TRAFFIC CONTROL MAP ________________ RECOMMENDED ACTION First Reading of an Ordinance authorizing amending the Official Traffic Control Map to include: 1. “School Bus Stop Ahead” signs in locations that meet the criteria. 2. “No Parking Here to Corner” signs on Radio Road near the roundabout 3. 35 mph speed limit signage on Powell Avenue from Apollo Road to Radio Road 4. No parking here to corner signs on North Wasson Lane from East Division St to the first driveway 5. Stop sign on Balmoral Place at the intersection of Newcastle Drive 6. Pedestrian Crossing signage and crosswalk at the intersection of North Freemont Street and West Division Street BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION 1. “School Bus Stop Ahead” signage Background: Staff met with the School District of River Falls Transportation Department and the River Falls Police Department to discuss vehicles passing school buses with their flashing lights on and stop bars out creating a safety issue for passengers entering and exiting the buses. Staff analyzed locations of incidents and noticed patterns of road conditions. Conditions that warrant new signage for bus stops are if the road classification is principal or minor arterial, the speed limit is 35mph or greater, located along a low visibility curve or otherwise determined a high-risk location. Discussion: Adding signage will improve the safety of passengers by warning drivers of bus stops. Using the listed criteria will prevent over signing. Future conversations with the School District and Police Department about incidents will help determine locations for additional signage. The City will advertise new signage via social media concurrent with installation. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 2 2. “No Parking Here to Corner” signs on Radio Road (From the North Driveway of The Current Apartments to the Roundabout at Paulson Road) Background: Currently parking is allowed on Radio Road. In the winter, residents park on the shoulders of Radio Road when their parking lots are being cleared of snow. This has created issues of passage for school buses, snowplows, and larger vehicles in the past, as vehicles parked close to the entrance of the roundabout. Discussion: Installing no parking signage will ensure free and clear passage for vehicles entering and exiting the roundabout from the south at Paulson Road. 3. “35 MPH Speed Limit” signage on Powell Avenue from Apollo Road to Radio Road Background: In late 2025, Council approved a speed limit reduction on Powell Avenue to 35 miles per hour from Apollo Road to the Powell Avenue Bridge. During sign installation the 35 miles per hour speed limit signage was temporarily extended on Powell Avenue from Apollo to Radio Road. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 3 Discussion: Due to the increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic associated with the Mann Valley Regional trail at Enterprise Drive, staff recommends permanently reducing the speed limit to 35 miles per hour on Powell Avenue from Radio to Apollo Road. 4. “No Parking Here to Corner” Signs on North Wasson Lane (at East Division Street) Background: The intersection of North Wasson Lane and East Division Street is a lower visibility intersection for drivers turning onto East Division Street as it has a higher elevation than North Wasson Lane. Currently parking is allowed on the entirety of North Wasson Lane. In spring through fall, there is heavy usage of street parking in the area for sporting events at the school district property, Hoffman Park, and First National Bank of River Falls Field. This can cause additional reduced visibility. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 4 Discussion: Adding no parking signs at the south side of the northernmost driveway on North Wasson Lane will prevent visual obstructions by parked vehicles, improving the safety for drivers and pedestrians utilizing these roadways. 5. Balmoral Place Stop Sign (Intersection of Newcastle Drive) Background: Drivers may not enter Balmoral Place from Casey Street/Sutherland Avenue. An access driveway was built for Little Adventures Daycare on Balmoral Place, allowing vehicles to drive into the Sterling Ponds neighborhood. Because traffic was previously unable to drive southeast there is no stop sign on Balmoral Place where it meets Newcastle Drive. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 5 Discussion: Adding a stop sign on Balmoral Place at the intersection of Newcastle Drive will conform with other intersections of this type in the city and increase safety by creating a controlled intersection. 6. Pedestrian Crossing (Intersection of North Freemont Street and West Division Street) Background: West Division Street is a minor arterial roadway and currently there is only one intersection with pedestrian crossing signage, located at North Grove Street. West Division Street is used frequently by residents of the surrounding neighborhoods, including children crossing it when walking to school. There is continuous sidewalk on Fremont Street on the north and south sides of West Division Street. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 6 Discussion: Installing a painted crosswalk will require the addition of pedestrian crossing signage at the intersection. This will increase safety by warning drivers of potential crossings and give pedestrians another marked crossing on West Division Street. This corridor was identified by the School District of River Falls as a walking route for students attending the Montessori School. CONCLUSION Staff has reviewed these changes with the Police Department and recommend authorizing the Mayor to sign the resolution accompanying this memo following the second reading of this ordinance which is currently scheduled for September 8, 2026. ORDINANCE NO. 2026-17 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL TRAFFIC CONTROL MAP OF THE CITY OF RIVER FALLS Miscellaneous Traffic Control Updates THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVER FALLS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. The Official Traffic Control Map, revised November 28, 20 23, and adopted pursuant to Section 10.08.010A of the Municipal Code of the City of River Falls, Wisconsin is hereby amended and recreated as follows: School Bus Stop Ahead Install signage in locations that meet criteria for high-risk bus stops. Radio Road Install “No Parking Here to Corner” signage north of the northernmost driveway for 2892 Radio Road, on the east and west sides of Radio Road. Powell Avenue Establish a speed limit of 35 miles per hour on Powell Avenue from Radio Road to Apollo Road North Wasson Lane Install “No Parking Here to Corner” signage on North Wasson Lane at East Division Street offset 85’ towards Wasson Circle. Balmoral Place Install a Stop Sign on Balmoral Place at Newcastle Drive per the Wisconsin Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (WMUTCD) North Freemont Street & West Division Street Install pedestrian crossing signage on the northwest and southwest corners of the intersection of West Division Street and North Freemont Street associated with striping a crosswalk at this location. Section 2: The Public Works Manager shall erect such signs and marking changes as are necessary to give adequate notice of the restrictions, prohibitions and limitations as shown on the Official Traffic Control Map including the following on the new speed limit sign, the new start school zone signs, and the new end school zone signs: A. A warning flag should be installed for a minimum of 6 months. Section 3: The Ordinance shall take effect the date after passage and publication as provided by law. FOR THE CITY OF RIVER FALLS Alison H. Page, Mayor ATTEST: Adopted: Amy White, City Clerk Published: River Falls Library Board of Trustees’ Minutes June 1, 2026 Present: Tanya Misselt, Mike Metro, Rebecca Ferguson, Tiffany Alexander, Ann Nelson, Jayne Hoffman, and Jean Ritzinger. Absent: Kari Heinselman, Lorraine Davis, and Nick Carow Guests: Mary Baumgartener (Library Foundation Representative), Kim Kiiskinen, and representatives from All Energy Solar, Martin Petrovsky (Commercial Solar Consultant) and Michael Thalhimer (Director of Business Development) 1.The meeting was called to order by President Metro. 2.Establish a Quorum: A quorum was established. 3.Compliance with Open Meeting Law: Misselt certified the meeting was properly noticed. 4.Approval of Agenda: A motion was made by Ferguson, and seconded by Nelson. Motion carried. 5.Presentation by representatives from All Energy Solar. 6.Approval of Minutes: A motion was made by Alexander, seconded by Hoffman , to approve the minutes with one correction. Nick Carow was listed in the previous minutes as both present and absent. He was absent. Motion carried. 7.Library Foundation Report: Report was given by Nelson 8.President’s Report: Nothing to report 9.Director’s Report: Was sent out earlier. 8. Consent Agenda: A motion was made byAlexander, seconded by Ferguson, to accept the consent agenda. Motion carried. 9. Adjournment: A motion to adjourn was made to adjourn at 7:30 by Alexander, seconded by Ritzinger. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Jean Ritzinger - secretary Community Development Department 222 Lewis Street River Falls, WI 54022 715.425.0900 www.rfcity.org PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES July 15, 2026 at 5:30 p.m. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER Meeting convened at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Matt Janquart (Chair), Sean Downing (Council Rep) , Brenda Gaulke, Eli Guthrie, Melissa Pedrini, and Natasha Schaefer. Members Absent: Phil Galli. Staff Present: Levi Myers –Natural Resources Coordinator , Kyle Mackey- Recreation Coordinator , Emily Shively -Assistant Director of Community Development, and Brenda Rundle-Customer Service Representative. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. MSC Guthrie/Downing to approve the minutes of the June 17 , 2026 Park and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) meeting. Unanimous. PUBLIC COMMENTS William Hansen of the T own of River Falls spoke about the Kinni River Corridor Project and asked a number of questions that he feels should be considered before moving forward with any kayaking enhancements in River Falls. He’d like to see more data on the subject before a dam, hydro generator and biodiversity are destroyed. He wonders if there is really a need for more water access. Beth Rausch, a City resident near Glen Park, thanks the board for their service. She expressed concerns about the Glen Park phase 2 discussion from last month. She recommends moving the proposed multi-sport court from the tree area in the northeast to the southwest corner of the park where the ballfield was proposed. This would be closer to parking and emergency access, allow for further expansion, offer increased visibility, and require no tree removal or light pollution next to the river. ACTION ITEMS 2. Levi Myers and Emily Shively shared a presentation about a proposed development on approximately 50 Johnson acres at CTY Hwy M and 1060 th St called Ironhorse Neighborhood (EW Homes) with 179 housing units . The land was approved for annexation by City Council on June 9, 2026. A 2.3 acre park and a 0.8 acre “tot lot” play area is included, along with trail connections. Schaefer would like to be sure the space and equipment is accessible. Downing would like to see a pollinator rain garden. PRAB seems to feel a natural wood playground may not be the best fit for this neighborhood. They seemed interested in built -in outdoor games but would like to know about the accessories. Shade and benches are encouraged. The board can continue to have conversations about the design and amenities in the new City park. MSC Gaulke/Schaefer to recommend approval of combination of new park land and cash- in-lieu of land be accepted for park dedication for the Ironhorse neighborhood (EW Homes) at CTY Hwy M and 1060th St. Unanimous. DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. Rick Cleary of Kinnickinnic Off-Road Cyclists (KORC) gave their annual report. The Border Crossing was held May 17. It is one of their main funding sources. The grade 6-12 race with nearly 1,000 riders will be in September. The Ice Box 480 running event will be held on November 7. Many of their big events are staged in Lot C which is for sale by the City. They hope to work with the future owner of the property. They have re-vamped the skills park and added 1.5 miles of new trail on the Fox easement land, but signage is not up yet. They purchased a mini-excavator to continue to build trail. Many volunteers work on the Whitetail Ridge bike trails. They feel fortunate about the relationship they have with the City. PRAB thanked KORC for the asset to our City. STAFF REPORTS 4. Levi Myers gave the Public Works Maintenance Staff Report. The section of the White Pathway (offshoot of the Kinnickinnic Pathway) near the fishing pier and benches overlooking Lake George has received improvements including invasive vegetation clearing, three new concrete pads and picnic tables, decomposed granite hardscape, and new landscape with over 300 native shrubs, perennials, and grasses to help restore the area and support pollinators. The dugouts at Hoffman Park softball fields were power washed and a River Falls 10U Baseball Team painted them black. At DeSanctis Park, over 600 native trees, shrubs, perennials, and grasses were planted in June 2026 as part of the City’s Bee City pollinator initiatives. This includes the first four of 10 pollinator gardens. Thank you to staff, Bee City Committee, and volunteers for all their hard work! Electric Utility staff installed vinyl wraps of the 2026 Bee City Committee Pollinator Art Contest elementary school winners on three different utility boxes at DeSanctis Park. CALENDAR The next Parks and Recreation Advisory Board meeting will be Wednesday, August 19, 2026 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. ADJOURNMENT29 MSC Schaefer/Gaulke to adjourn the meeting at 6:29 p.m. Unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Brenda Rundle, Customer Service Representative Page 1 of 6 Community Development Department 222 Lewis Street River Falls, WI 54022 715.425.0900 www.rfcity.org MINUTES PLAN COMMISSION JULY 7, 2026 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Members Present: Chris Holtkamp, Rob Gormanson, Diane Odeen, Rebecca Prendergast, Steven Severson, Michael Woolsey Members Absent: Alison Page Staff Present: Emily Shively, Becky Corson, Harley Mehlhorn , Joe Reardon, Anna Shakal CALL TO ORDER Meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Gormanson, S/Woolsey to approve minutes. Motion carried 6/0. PUBLIC COMMENTS ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Special Sign Permit for Sycamore Two Senior Living/Memory Care at 816 Sycamore Street (Frisbie Companies, LLC, and RF2 QOZB, LLC). Anna Shakal, Planning Intern with the City of River Falls gave a presentation on a Special Sign Permit request for the Sycamore Two Senior Living/Memory Care facility. Shakal provided a brief recap of the project which is currently under construction and will be a 24-unit senior living facility with 8-units of townhomes. Shakal presented that the proposed monument sign consists of a 5’ 4 1/2” by 9’ sign display area, with a total square footage of 26.7’. Shakal indicated that the sign would be supported by a brick base and stone capping that matches the architecture of the development and that the sign would be lit by 2” overhead lighting that would be powered within the cabinet. Shakal summarized the design aspect of the sign meets ordinance requirements. Shakal indicated the deviance in the ordinance is in the location of the sign. The applicant is requesting that the sign be placed 2 feet from the property line rather than the 10- foot setback required by City ordinance. Shakal highlighted that the proposed sign would be located on the intersection of Esprit Way and Sycamore Street. Shakal highlighted an area map as well as covered the requested improvements of a painted stop bar and stop sign to ensure reduced setback does not create unsafe conditions in this location. Page 2 of 6 Shakal covered the criteria that must be met to approve a special sign permit and indicated it meets the requirements based on aesthetic quality, that the sign won’t cause inconvenience to traffic or pedestrians, and consideration to neighboring property owners with the placement and illumination of the sign. Shakal indicated they have met all these required criteria in addition to applying and paying the fee for the permit. Shakal summarized that based on this staff recommend forwarding approval with a favorable recommendation to City Council. Michael Woolsey made a motion to forward the proposed special sign permit for Sycamore Two to City Council for approval. M/Woolsey, S/Holtkamp – carried 6/0 Conversation was had about the location of the sign and location of a sidewalk. Shakal indicated that the sidewalk is on the street side of the sign. Resolution regarding a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) for The Creamery at Cedar, a planned brewery, tap room, and event center at W. Cedar Street and River Street (Bearcat Investments, LLC). Harley Mehlhorn, Senior Planner with the City of River Falls , gave a presentation on a Planned Unit Development Specific Implementation Plan for The Creamery at Cedar. Mehlhorn indicated that the SIP is the second and final piece of a PUD and must be substantially conformant with the Council approved General Development Plan which was approved by Council on April 28 th of this year. Mehlhorn covered where the site is located and that the site is approximately 0 .43 acres in size. Mehlhorn discussed that the site is located within a few layers of plans that impact the feasibility and vision for the development of the area. Mehlhorn presented the downtown overlay district map and discussed that this was considered when the commission and council evaluated the merits of an unorthodox parking plan, as was approved in the GDP. The site is located within the downtown transitional district. Mehlhorn covered that the subject site is zoned B-1 General Commercial District, which has been historically limited to the Downtown Core, with all parcels within the CBD being B-1 and a portion of the parcels within the Transaction District as well, such as the case with this site. As evaluated the proposed uses are compliant with the zoning. Mehlhorn explained that the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Designation for this site is “Mixed-Use” and this land use is identified as critical to the future planning of River Falls. This designation encourages vertical mixed- use development downtown, meaning a mix of commercial types and residential types, often in the same or adjacent buildings. The Land Use Technical Memorandum specifically identifies sites downtown along the river as candidates for Infill development with reduced setbacks and parking to accommodate efficient, human scale, and downtown compatible development types. The Kinni Corridor Plan also identifies this site as an area for potential economic revitalization and infill development. The KCP also outlines goals as it relates to the preservation of the Kinni, reducing thermal load from large parking lots proximate t o the River, and to generally reduce impervious surfaces downtown, which are all critical pieces in the analysis of a parking and site buildout strategy Mehlhorn explained. Mehlhorn highlighted that the proposal is for a 17,000 sq ft building with a footprint of 5,800 sq ft with three levels. Level 1 will be a taproom and small restaurant, level 2 is proposed as event Page 3 of 6 space for weddings and other gatherings, and level 3 will contain four short term rentals. Mehlhorn indicated the proposed architecture and layout is consistent with the council approved GDP. Mehlhorn indicated that staff find the proposed site plan to be in conformance with the GDP site plan with a few minor site changes proposed mainly the reconfiguration of the previously shown deck into an at-grade patio with more seating. Mehlhorn explained that there are various guiding documents affecting the site which were taken into consideration as the GDP was approved. As such, the remaining item to discuss is the formalization of the parking plan which the GDP does allow for the ado ption of a non -standard parking plan in the SIP, which was contemplated to be created by combining off -site private parking agreements, limited on- site parking, proximate public parking, and limited on- street parking. Mehlhorn summarized the code required parking spaces needed to be 177. The proposed parking plan identifies 214 stalls, with a mixture of private spaces with private parking agreements with the Moose Lodge (50), Jensens (16), 8 on- site stalls, and public s paces such as Heritage Parking Lot and Main and Division Parking Lot. Mehlhorn indicated the forecasted demand in the provided study also shows the supply to be oversized as compared to the anticipated demand, namely that an average weekday demand ranges between 30-45 spaces and a weekend event typically produces demand for 113 spaces, while peak demand is the estimated 177 spaces. Mehlhorn covered the reasons that staff supports the parking plan. First the total load of the site during peak hours events on any given day is projected to be far less than the spaces provided. Second the parking plan meets the goals of the conceptual approval within the GDP, mainly that the parking agreements have been entered into record with the county and the City has been provided a copy of each. Along with the applicant agreeing to reasonable condition on limiting occupancy in the case that a privat e parking agreement is terminated. And third the proposed plan is in alignment with the same policy, framework that underpinned the approval of the GDP those being the Comprehensive Plan, the downtown overlay, and the Kinni Corridor Plan. Mehlhorn summarized by indicating that staff is aware there will likely be an increase in on-street parking adjacent to the proposal along Clark, Cedar, Pine, and Lewis. Though mitigatory measures are being taken, economic activation downtown often does result in an increase in on- street parking and from a planning perspective, if done correctly it is a sign of a desirable and healthy downtown. Mehlhorn summarized by indicating that staff have found conformance with the GDP, the Comprehensive Plan, and other guiding documents, and as such staff recommend forwarding the approved resolution to City Council with a favorable recommendation subject to the proposed conditions. Commissioner Odeen made a motion to forward the proposed resolution regarding a Planned Unit Development Specific Implementation Plan for The Creamery at Cedar . M/Odeen, S/Woolsey – carried 6/0 Conversation was had on counting the spaces with the Moose Lodge and Jensens as well as what will be available at Jensens with cars waiting to be serviced. Mehlhorn indicated that those are entered into a formal agreement for these spaces to be used for events at The Creamery. He also indicated that currently The Creamery is not taking any of the allotted 30% for on- street parking and that can be utilized if they exit the agreement with Jensens. Page 4 of 6 Conversation was had on the downtown overlay district allowing for development without parking included. Mehlhorn indicated that B -1 zoning allows for general commercial to have no parking provided but that is not a general blanket applied to all and something staff will keep in mind as future downtown projects are underway. As well as questions were asked about painting lines on the street to identify for parking spaces. Melhorn indicated if needed we can look into that in the future. Conversation was had about permit parking if residents are having an issue with no available parking and if Council could act on that and Melhorn indicated that is correct. Potential ordinance amendment to Title 17 – Zoning: Chapter 17.08.070 – Fences; regarding setbacks and performance standards (height, materials, landscaping) for fences abutting a street. Harley Mehlhorn, Senior Planner with the City of River Falls gave a presentation on fence and boulevard maintenance ordinance updates . Mehlhorn covered that the fence ordinance has a long history of amendments going back about 40 years with the most recent of such being the 2018 fence ordinance amendment, which introduced the current 3’ setback standard for fences along street sides as well as the landscaping requirement. Mehlhorn indicated the amendments are due to a unique situation of fence encroachments into the right of way along Division Street between Main Street and Dry -Run Road on the south side of Division. These encroachments must be relocated out of the right of way but in working with property owners, many independently noted the increased bur den of having to setback the fence an additional 3 feet beyond the property line due to existing structures on their private property. Mehlhorn indicated this feedback prompted conversations with staff internally to look at the ordinance and upon that it was noted that the ordinance has some implementation difficulties and is, to some degree, a subjective policy decision. Mehlhorn did indicate that changes to ordinance would be applied universally in the City, not just exclusive to the encroached properties. Mehlhorn stated for boulevard maintenance it was long assumed that property owners or occupants would maintain the strip of land between their properties and the curb, whether a sidewalk is there or not. There has been no recorded issue exclusive to boulevard maintenance, but there is nothing in code making this an explicit requirement, as such staff is bringing forward the ordinance as well this evening. Mehlhorn highlighted the existing standard for fences 3’ tall must be setback 3’ along any property line abutting right of way. Side and rear yard fences may rise to a height of 6’ provided they are setback 3’ and planted with landscaping on the street side which must be maintained. Mehlhorn indicated various considerations were discussed before bringing this forward to Plan Commission. First , the current ordinance has proved a bit difficult to implement, mainly the landscaping requirement has been difficult to administer. Some plantings are absent or unmaintained, some blend into the boulevard making separation of public and private opaque and there are few actual examples of the conditions the ordinance is intending to capture as corner lots are inherently less common than mid-block lots. Mehlhorn indicated in discussing this with our City Engineer, he felt that there is unlikely to be any benefit or detriment to the current 3’ setback. Mehlhorn highlighted a few graphics on screen to show examples used to illustrate the need for the amendment. Two images of fences along Division were shown with no landscaping between the fence and curb. In contrast another image was shared showing the ideal ordinance compliant case, a fence adequately setback and planted to create an aesthetic streetscape and to prevent conflict with sidewalk or utility work. Page 5 of 6 Mehlhorn indicated that staff discussed internally multiple ideas as potential amendments such as materiality, incremental reduction in setbacks rather than removal, landscaping standard changes, and more. As for materiality, it was determined that while this is also a legitimate policy consideration, it does not have bearing on the setback question inherently and introduces another variable into the discussion. As for incremental reduction in setbacks, such as keeping a setback but reducing it to 1 – 2 feet, this was determined t o be converse to the goals of the ordinance. Mehlhorn indicated that a 3’ setback allows for maintenance, access, and some visual impact, whereas a smaller setback would still be an additional requirement with little public benefit as realistically it would be difficult to plant and maintain. Mehlhorn indicated that there are two options for consideration for the commission. Option one would be to recommend taking no action and to leave the ordinance as is. This would have the result of requiring the Division Street properties to fully comply w ith the existing ordinance and preserve the status quo across the City. Option two would be the removal of both the 3’ setback and landscaping requirement, this would have the effect of a more permissive ordinance and more usable private space for resident s while having the tradeoff of potentially reducing the aesthetic quality of the streetscape. The City Engineer stated that if the fence footings are outside of the right of way, there is no engineering concerns or impact to infrastructure. Mehlhorn summarized by saying either option would be legitimate to policy decisions and neither to be detrimental to the public good or contrary to the Comprehensive Plan. Mehlhorn next discussed boulevard maintenance and that the proposal is that property owners or occupants must maintain the boulevard, which is the land between the property lines and the curb, to the same standard as private lawns. Mehlhorn indicated this has been a long-standing expectation without a formal ordinance. In cases of negligence, the same code enforcement process as sidewalk snow clearing requirement would be followed, giving a notice followed by a remedy period then potentially the City contracting the work and holding the owner responsible for fees incurred. Mehlhorn reviewed two maps with areas showing different boulevard conditions that would be held to the same standard, and he indicated residents would only maintain the boulevard adjacent to their property. In summary, Mehlhorn indicated staff recommends forwarding a recommendation regarding the fence ordinance and boulevard maintenance to City Council with a favorable recommendation. Conversation was had about boulevard trees and who would be maintaining those. Conversation was also had on a difference between commercial and residential properties in the City. Conversation was also had on if the fence would be within the right of way even if there is no sidewalk in that area. Mehlhorn indicated they can not put a fence in the right of way ever. Commissioner Holtkamp made a motion to forward the proposed ordinance amendment to Title 17 – Zoning: Chapter 17.08.070 to option of no setbacks to City Council M/Holtkamp, S/Woolsey – carried 6/0 Charles Beranek (421 N Dallas St) – Spoke on the fence was already in the property when he purchased his home. He spoke on pulling the fence in another 3’ into his yard which only leaves a little bit of side yard space. Conversation was had about how changing the ordinances to allow for smaller lots and smaller setbacks provides a more compact use of space which is consistent with that if we move forward with the no setbacks option. Page 6 of 6 Commissioner Odeen made a motion to forward the proposed boulevard maintenance ordinance M/Odeen, S/Holtkamp – carried 6/0 Planning Update Emily Shively gave a planning update that another link for a webinar was sent out from WEDC on development. Shively also indicated she can send out the link to watch the recorded webinar afterwards if you are unable to attend. Shively also indicated we were not awarded the BUILD grant that we applied for earlier this year. There was only one project funded in Wisconsin and it was a transit project in Milwaukee. Shively indicated we believe we had a strong application, and we will evaluate applying for this grant again in the future. Shively did indicate we applied for the Safe Streets for All grant, and we will hear more from that one later this year. Conversation was had on how this impacts the process with improvement projects. Shively indicated that this would have funded the majority of the street improvements with utility funding the other portion. Shively indicated we will evaluate applying for this grant again in the future if it is funded again. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Woolsey made a motion to adjourn at 7:07 p.m. S/Holtkamp; motion carried 6/0. Respectfully submitted, Becky Corson, Community Development Coordinator Community Development Department 222 Lewis Street River Falls, WI 54022 715.425.0900 www.rfcity.org HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES July 8 2026 at 6:00 pm RIVER FALLS LIBRARY – Main Level Conference Room CALL HPC MEETING TO ORDER 6:02 APPROVAL OF AGENDA/MINUTES Minutes of the June 10, 2026 meeting. Motion approval with corrections Friede/Huebel, carried unanimously HPC MEMBER VOLUNTEER HOUR REPORT Paavola – 3 Huebel – 20 Hoffman – 40 Friede – 1 Anderson – 8 PUBLIC COMMENTS – Non-Agenda Items 1. Hoffman spoke with the rotary regarding the displays 2. Mehlhorn stated that the bridge COA would be forthcoming in September. 3. Radford and Huebel stated disappointment with the way the 2 nd street house was torn down, namely the communication from the city and requested it be added to next meeting 4. Huebel mentioned a forthcoming antique tractor show event in Elmwood. 5. Anderson mentioned the “Little Log Cabin Historic Village” event coming the 3rd week of July. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Budget Workshop a. Commission discussed budget. 2. River Falls Day Discussion Continued a. The postcard strategy was discussed and Mehlhorn stated he would message out to those walking in the parade to ask if employees want to hand out postcards 3. Kiosks a. Hoffman created and brought a kiosk inventory handout, the commission discussed options for putting smaller historic interpretive displays in the kiosks. Mehlhorn was instructed to fact find and come back next meeting. 4. Powerplant Items a. Hoffman asked if Mehlhorn could facilitate access for the final documentation and tagging of the powerplant items. Mehlhorn agreed to do so and requested the commission communicate when a good time would be to access the items, in collaboration with facilities. 5. Library Display a. Commission discussed and then walked down to the library display. CALENDAR Next Historic Preservation Commission meeting August 12, 2026, in the City Hall Foster Conference Room. ADJOURNMENT Friede/Huebel MCU CITY OF RIVER FALLS UTILITY ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES JULY 20, 2026 The meeting was called to order by Utility Advisory Board (UAB) Chair Chris Lick at 6:30 p.m. The pledge of allegiance was said. Utility Advisory Board Present: Amber Bjork, Joel Donna, Lance Hovland, Mark Klecker, Chris Lick, Tim Thum, and Rose Walker Staff Present: Utility Director Kevin Westhuis; WPPI Energy Services Manager Jenna Willi; Public Works Manager Erica Ellefson; Executive Assistant Lanae Nelson and IT Technician Joe Reardon Approval of Minutes: Meeting Minutes: 06-15-2026 MSC Walker/Bjork approved minutes. Unanimous. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Patricia LaRue – LaRue welcomed new Utility Advisory Board (UAB) members Joel Donna and Lance Hovland. Spoke about renewable energy, the history of Junction Falls Hydroelectric Dam and studies related to the dam and Lake George. William Hansen – Hanson thanked UAB for their service and welcomed new members Joel Donna and Lance Hovland. Spoke about renewable energy at the Junction Falls Hydroelectric Dam and the biodiversity of Lake George. NEW BUSINESS: Resolution 2026 – 07 Recommending Purchase Approval of Whitetail Ridge Corporate Park Street Lighting Utility Director Westhuis presented the proposed purchase of Lumec streetlight poles and luminaires for the Whitetail Ridge Corporate Park street-lighting project as part of the City's Capital Improvement Program. He reviewed the project history, first-phase design, lighting specifications, and aesthetic plan. Two quotes were received, with Border States submitting the lowest bid of $162,288. MSC Klecker/Walker moved to approve the resolution. Motion passed unanimously. Resolution 2026 – 08 Recommending Approval of Addition of a RG-3 Optional Residential Rate WPPI Energy Services Manager Jenna Willi presented the proposed RG-3 optional residential Time-of-Use rate designed to encourage off-peak energy use, particularly for electric vehicle charging. She reviewed the current residential rate options, the benefits of the proposed three- tier rate, and the anticipated wholesale cost savings for the utility. If approved, WPPI Energy will coordinate a group filing with the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin. MSC Donna/Walker moved to approve the resolution. Motion passed unanimously. REPORTS: Finance Report Public Works Manager Ellefson reviewed the monthly financial reports, including revenues, expenditures, budget status, and capital expenses for the electric, water, wastewater, and stormwater utilities. Utility Dashboards Westhuis reviewed utility performance dashboards. Monthly Report Utility reports for June 2026 were included in the meeting packet. Utility Director’s Report Welcomed Joel Donna and Lance Hovland to the Utility Advisory Board. Update provided on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Biosolids Dryer project. Thanked customer service staff for assisting customers facing service disconnection. There is 1 disconnection for today. Thanked Amber Bjork and Rose Walker for being a part of the River Falls Parade float on July 10. Community Appreciation Event is August 5 at the City Hall Plaza. Sign up is available. Water department has started annual hydrant flushing ADJOURNMENT: MSC Klecker/Walker to adjourn. Motion caried unanimously. UAB Chair Lick adjourned the meeting at 7:41 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Executive Assistant Lanae Nelson 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Page and City Council FROM: Bradley Vick, Water/Wastewater Superintendent DATE: August 25, 2026 TITLE: RESOLUTION APPROVING AWARD FOR SEWER COLLECTION MANHOLE REHABILITATION _____________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDED ACTION Adopt a resolution awarding the contract of sewer collection rehabilitation work from Total Excavating & Grading in the amount of $63,791 and authorize the City Administrator to execute all documents necessary to complete the project work of sewer collection manhole rehabilitation for the manhole MH1101, the location of this manhole is on a washed out riverbank that is located south of the Winter Street Substation and Junction Falls Hydroelectric Dam on South Winter Street and runs underneath the Kinnickinnic River that leads to the Wastewater Treatment Facility located on South Apollo Road. BACKGROUND The River Falls Municipal Water/Wastewater Utility department initiated a competitive solicitation for the rehabilitation of Manhole MH1101 by contacting multiple qualified contractors capable of performing this specialized work. Despite these efforts, only one contractor, Total Excavating & Grading submitted a proposal within the requested timeframe. No additional bids or proposals were received. The Water/Wastewater department evaluated and determined the limited response was due to contractors availability and the specialized nature of the rehabilitation work, rather than a lack of competitive outreach. The department made reasonable efforts to obtain multiple quotes but was unable to secure additional responses. The rehabilitation of sanitary manhole MH1101 is necessary to maintain the integrity of the wastewater collection system, reduce infiltration and inflow, and ensure reliable system operation. Because the repairs are time-sensitive and delaying the work could increase the risk of further deterioration and higher repair costs, staff recommends proceeding with the sole responsive contractor. Figures: Exhibit A: Manhole #1101 and Exhibit B: Map of the Manhole #1101 location. For larger pictures, please see Exhibit A and Exhibit B. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 2 DISCUSSION Contractor availability has continued to be a challenge, particularly for specialized wastewater structure rehabilitation work. Staff made multiple attempts to solicit proposals from qualified contractors but received only one responsive proposal. Given the limited number of contractors that perform this type of specialized work, the lack of additional responses appears to be the result of contractor availability rather than a lack of competitive solicitation. The proposed work includes the rehabilitation of Sanitary Manhole MH1101, including all labor, materials, equipment, and associated work necessary to restore both structures, improve their long-term performance, and extend their service lives in accordance with the project specifications. Total Excavating & Grading will mobilize to the site and install a floating silt curtain to protect the waterway during construction. Their work includes removing the existing sanitary manhole cone and two upper sections, then installing a new 48 inch sanitary manhole equipped with a 4' x 4' steel weir wall while maintaining the existing bottom section in place. The contractor will also core and reconnect the existing 12 inch DIP watermain. Sewer bypass operations will be required for a minimum of one week and will be provided by others. Due to the deteriorated condition of these manholes and the need to prevent further structural degradation, infiltration, and potential impacts to the wastewater collection system, delaying the project to re-advertise for additional bids is not recommended. Staff recommends proceeding with the sole responsive contractor as the most practical and cost-effective approach to complete the repairs in a timely manner and maintain the reliability of the City's wastewater infrastructure. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS The total project cost is $63,791. Funding is available within the approved Fiscal Year 2026 Wastewater Utility Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for sewer collection manhole rehabilitation, the total amount available is $100,000. Given the specialized nat ure of the work that needs to be completed in the sewer collection manhole rehabilitation, this project is needed to be completed in a timely manner and the project is consistent with the City’s planned infrastructure maintenance and replacement program. Completing this project at this time is expected to reduce future maintenance and repair costs associated with aging infrastructure while minimizing the potential for emergency sewer collection manhole repairs. CONCLUSION Staff recommends the City of River Falls Common Council approve the sewer collection manhole rehabilitation contract award to Total Excavating & Grading with the rehabilitation of Sanitary Manhole (MH1101) in the amount of $63,791 and authorize the City Administrator to execute all necessary documents related. Company Quote Total Excavating & Grading $63,791 Sources Amount Uses Amount Wastewater Utility Fund $63,791 Manhole Rehabilitation $63,791 Total Sources $63,791 Total Uses $63,791 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING AWARD FOR SEWER COLLECTION MANHOLE REHABILITATION WHEREAS, the City of River Falls Utility Advisory Board recommends that the River Falls Common Council approve the quote for the sewer collection manhole rehabilitation from Total Excavating and Grading; and WHEREAS, Total Excavating and Grading has submitted a quote for the sewer manhole rehabilitation project; and WHEREAS, the 2026 Capital Improvement Plan includes funding in the amount of $100,000 for the sewer manhole rehabilitation project; and WHEREAS, Total Excavating and Grading has submitted a quote in the amount of $63,791; and WHEREAS, Water/Wastewater Department staff have reviewed the quote and determined it to be acceptable; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the River Falls Common Council authorizes the purchase of the City Administrator to sign the quote for the sewer collection manhole rehabilitation work with Total Excavating and Grading in the amount of $63,791. Dated this 25 th day of August 2026. __________________________ Alison H. Page, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Amy White, City Clerk Exhibit A: Manhole #1101 Exhibit B: Map of the Manhole #1101 location To: Contact:CITY OF RIVER FALLS CITY OF RIVER FALLS SEWER MANHOLE 1101 REBUILDProject Name: Bid Number: 2026-105 Fax: Address: RIVER FALLS, WI 54022 Phone: Project Location: RIVER FALLS, WI Bid Date: 7/30/2026 UnitItem DescriptionItem # Estimated Quantity 100 1.00 LSMOBILIZATION 150 100.00 LFFLOATING SILT CURTAIN 200 1.00 LSREMOVE EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE (1) CONE & (2) SECTIONS 600 1.00 EACHINSTALL NEW 48" SANITARY MANHOLE W/ STEEL WEIR WALL (4' X 4') (1) CONE & (2) SECTION, LEAVE EXISTING BOTTOM SECTION (SEWER BYPASS BY OTHERS) 601 1.00 EACHCORE & RECONNECT EXISTING 12" DIP WATERMAIN 900 1.00 LSSEWER BYPASS (1 WEEK MINIMUM) Total Bid Price: $63,791.15 Notes: • EXCLUSIONS: BONDS, PERMITS, SURVEYING, CONCRETE, PAVEMENT, SOIL TESTING, SIGNAGE, FOUNDATION EXCAVATION, DEWATERING, ROCK EXCAVATION, RESTORATION, FINE GRADING, SEWER BYPASS, WINTER CONDITIONS OR ANY ITEMS NOT SPECIFCALLY IN PROPOSAL Payment Terms: NET 30 - PAYMENT DUE IN 30 DAYS FROM INVOICE DATE METHODS: CASH, CHECK OR ACH TRANSFER ACCEPTED: The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. Buyer: Signature: Date of Acceptance: CONFIRMED: Total Excavating & Grading Authorized Signature: Estimator: Nikko Miller 715-307-7673 nikkom@totalexcavating.net 7/30/2026 3:34:10 PM Page 1 of 1 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Page and City Council FROM: Ken Thill, Facilities and Fleet Manager Erica Ellefson, Public Works Manager DATE: August 25, 2026 TITLE: RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE OF TWO MECHANIC TOOL SETS RECOMMENDED ACTION Adopt a resolution awarding the quote for $65,481 to Snap-On Industrial for two Industrial Fleet Pro Master Tool Sets and locking toolboxes. BACKGROUND The City of River Falls fleet mechanics provide their own toolboxes and hand tools to maintain the City’s fleet. DISCUSSION The City currently requires mechanics to provide their own toolboxes and hand tools. To assist with the maintenance of those tools, the City provides each mechanic with a $300 annual tool allowance that may be used to replace broken tools or purchase new tools. While this benefit helps employees maintain their tool inventories, the tools and toolboxes remain the property of the employee and leave the organization upon retirement, resignation, or other separation from employment. Many municipalities have historically required mechanics to provide their own hand tools while the employer provides larger shop equipment and specialty tools. However, there has been a growing trend among public sector fleet organizations to provide mechanics with City-owned tool sets and toolboxes as part of their overall fleet maintenance program. This trend is driven by the desire to standardize maintenance operations, retain assets purchased with public funds when staffing changes occur, and ensure mechanics have access to the equipment necessary to perform repairs safely and efficiently. Quotes were received from Matco Tools and Snap-on Industrial for a few different box and tool count options ranging from $14,742 to $50,063 each. After careful review of the quotes and options, it is recommended to purchase two of the Snap-on Industrial Fleet Pro Master Tool Sets for $32,740 each with a lifetime warranty because they offer the best long-term value for the City. Each set comes with a locking toolbox, a comprehensive assortment of tools, and foam tool organizers which help keep the toolbox clean and organized and make it easier to identify missing tools. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 2 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION The cost for two mechanic toolboxes and tool sets is $65,481. The cost will be split amongst each department because the mechanics repair and maintain the entire City fleet including police squads, fire trucks, street maintenance equipment, and utility equipment. The table below is a suggested departmental cost split based on proportionate share of fleet equipment. CONCLUSION Staff recommend City Council award the quote for the purchase of two Industrial Fleet Pro Master Tool Sets and locking toolboxes from Snap-On Industrial and authorizes the City Administrator to execute all necessary documents related to the purchase. Sources Amount Uses Amount General Fund $40,771 Snap-on Tools $65,481 Electric Utility Funds $6,383 Water Utility Funds $4,839 Wastewater Utility Funds $4,839 Motor Pool Fund 4,942 Facility Maintenance Fund $3,707 Total Sources $65,481 Total Uses $65,481 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE OF TWO MECHANIC TOOL SETS WHEREAS, the City of River Falls solicited quotes from Matco Tools and Snap -On Industrial, both on Sourcewell, a cooperative purchasing venture; and WHEREAS, The City of River Falls determined that the Snap-On Industrial Fleet Pro Master Tool Set with locking toolbox provided the best long-term value; and WHEREAS, each tool set comes with a lifetime warranty; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the River Falls Common Council award the quote to Snap-On Industrial for the purchase of two Industrial Fleet Pro Master Tool Sets with locking toolboxes for $65,481 and authorize the City Administrator to enter into an agreement for the same. Dated this 25th day of August 2026 __________________________ Alison H. Page, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Amy White, City Clerk Quote Quote Number 1 MP-001679382 Quote Date 7/9/2026 Quote Expiration Date 11/6/2026 Customer Name RIVER FALLS, CITY OF Customer BP 201661126 Contact lnformation: Name David Holodnack E-mail dholodnack@rfcity. erg Phone Number 715-425-1698 Sales Rep BENSON, BLAKE Mobile# 763-614-8407 E-mail Address Blake.Benson@snapon.com Line Number Part Number Description 1 FMTKHUGERAYBM MTOOLKIT ASSMB W/RED KTL1023AP 2 FMTKHUGEBLAYBM MTOOLKIT ASSMB W/BLU KTL1.023AP Tax and freight shown are estimates. Applicable tax and freight will be charged to the Customer's account. Submit to Ship Via Payment Terms Ship to Bill to Quantity 1 1 Total Weight Sub Total Shipping Tax Snap-on Industrial 3011 IL RTE 176, Door 1 Crystal Lake, IL 60014 877-740-1900 1- UPS GROUND P30- NET 30 DAYS 201661126 RIVER FALLS, CITY OF PUBLIC WORKS 950 BENSON STREET RIVER FALLS WI 54022 201661125 DO NOT MAIL 222 LEWIS STREET kthill@rfcity.org RIVER FALLS WI 54022 List Price Un it Net Price $32,740.56 $32,740.56 $32,740.56 $32,740.56 2,600.00 lbs $65,481.12 $0.00 $O.DO LineTotal $32,740.56 $32,740.56 The sale of product is subject to Snap-on I ndustrial's standard terms and conditions ofsale. Placement atan arder is Customer's assent to these terms and conditions and Snap-on hereby objects to any additional and/or different terms, which may be contained in any Customer forms ar other documents. No such additionalterms will be of a ny force ar effect. Custom too! kits, too! designs and prints that have been approved and ordered cannot be canceled or refunded. The sale of product is subject to Customer meeting Snap-on I ndustrial's credit approvals. Financing througt'finap-on Credit LLC is available on most purchases. Ask your Sales Rep far more information. *Please provide vendar and pricing information to customer service on this part number. 8 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Page and City Council FROM: Becky Corson, Community Development Coordinator DATE: August 25, 2026 TITLE: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION TO THE WISCONSIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT (CDI) GRANT PROGRAM FOR THE CREAMERY AT CEDAR PROJECT _____________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDED ACTION Approve the resolution authorizing the City of River Falls to submit an application to the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC) Community Development Investment (CDI) Grant Program in support of The Creamery at Cedar. BACKGROUND The CDI Grant Program through WEDC is intended for communities looking to invest in community development, with special consideration given to downtown development. It supports urban, small city and rural community redevelopment efforts by providing financial incentives for shovel-ready projects. Grant recipients must demonstrate measurable benefits in jobs, property values, and/or leveraged investments by building, rehabilitation, infill development, historic preservation, downtown infrastructure and more. The Creamery at Cedar Project represents a significant investment in the continued revitalization of downtown River Falls and the City’s connection to the Kinnickinnic Riverway. The project will create a year -round destination supporting local businesses, entrepreneurship, tourism, recreation, and community programming. The Creamery at Cedar will be a new 17,000 square foot three- story, mixed-use development. The building will include a first-floor brewery and taproom, a flexible second floor event venue for weddings, private events, workshops, performances, and community gatherings, and a third floor consisting of 4 short term rentals to support visitors, event guests, and university -related travel. The project will also include site and infrastructure improvements, including sewer upgrades, sidewalk and bike path connections, paving, landscaping, and other site enhancements that will better connect the development to downtown and the riverfront. Memorandum to Mayor Page and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 2 DISCUSSION The Creamery at Cedar Project is envisioned as a signature gathering place and a gateway between historic downtown River Falls and the Kinnickinnic Riverway. The project will complement the City’s ongoing investments in downtown revitalization, public infr astructure, parks and trails, and river corridor improvements while supporting the City’s long- term vision for a more connected and vibrant community. The project is anticipated to generate significant economic and community benefits by: creating a new year -round destination and opportunity for community gathering; supporting local businesses and encouraging entrepreneurship; increasing opportunities for tourism and visitor spending; strengthening connections between downtown, the Kinnickinnic River, parks and trails; enhancing the City’s identity and sense of place; and serving as a catalyst for additional public and private investments and future commercial activity. The City is seeking to support The Creamery at Cedar in pursuing funding through WEDC’s Community Development Investment (CDI) Grant Program. The grant would provide funding for eligible project costs and leverage significant local, regional, and private i nvestment in the development. The CDI Grant will match one-quarter of eligible project costs and requires a signed resolution in support of the application. The City will serve as a pass -through entity for the grant and will not be obligated to contribute City funds toward the project. Authorization of the resolution allows staff to submit the CDI grant application. If the application is successful, the City Administrator or designee would be authorized to execute the necessary grant documents and administer the grant in accordance with WEDC requirements. ng Rotation CONCLUSION The Creamery at Cedar Project presents an opportunity to advance downtown revitalization, strengthen connections to the Kinnickinnic Riverway, support economic activity, and create a unique community destination. Pursuing CDI grant funding will help levera ge additional investment and support the successful implementation of the project. Staff recommends approval of the resolution authorizing the submission of the CDI grant application for The Creamery at Cedar Project. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE WISCONSIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT (CDI) GRANT PROGRAM FOR THE CREAMERY PROJECT WHEREAS, the City of River Falls places a high value on economic development, downtown revitalization, placemaking, and investments that enhance the quality of life for residents and visitors; and WHEREAS, The Creamery Project is a transformational investment that will create new, year-round community destinations designed to support local businesses, entrepreneurship, tourism, arts and culture, recreation, and community programming; and WHEREAS, The Creamery Project will create a signature gathering place and serve as a signature gateway between historic downtown River Falls and the Kinnickinnic Riverway, strengthening connections to the City’s parks, trails, river corridor, and other natural and recreational assets; and WHEREAS, The Creamy Project complements the City’s broader investments in downtown revitalization, public infrastructure, parks and trails, river corridor improvements, and future Kinnickinnic River restoration efforts, while serving as a catalyst for additional public and private investment, economic vitality, an d commercial development; and WHEREAS, the City of River Falls recognizes that The Creamery Project aligns with its long- term economic development, tourism, and placemaking goals and will generate lasting economic and community benefits for the residents, businesses, and visitors, and therefore desires to pursue funding through the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation’s Community Development Investment (CDI) Grant Program to assist with the project and leverage significant local, regional, and private investment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of River Falls authorizes the submission of an application to the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation for funding through the Community Development Investment (CDI) Grant Program in support of The Creamery Project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Common Council hereby authorizes the City Administrator or designee to execute all documents necessary to submit the application, accept grant funds if awarded, and administer the grant in accordance with Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation requirements. Dated this 25 th day of August 2026. ___________________________________ Alison H. Page, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ Amy White, City Clerk 9 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Keri Schreiner, Economic Development Manager DATE: August 25, 2026 TITLE: RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO THE PURCHASE REAL ESTATE AGREEMENT AND FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL WITH DECENTRALIZED FOODS, LLC RECOMMENDED ACTION Approve Resolution approving Amendment to the Purchase Real Estate Agreement and First Right of Refusal with Decentralized Foods, LLC. BACKGROUND Earlier this year, City staff started working with the owners of the Vanilla Bean Project who was interested in purchasing land to build and move their manufacturing facility from Minnesota to River Falls. The Vanilla Bean Project is a fast-growing company with a small, dedicated team (3.5 FTEs) and a national customer base that ranges from passionate home bakers to professional kitchens and innovative consumer packaged goods brands. They anticipate gradual but growing employment in the coming years (7-10.5 FTEs). The company is a Global Food Safety Institute (GFSI) accredited manufacturer, which is a pre- requisite to sell to the largest food companies in the world. Additionally, the products are certified organic, and three years ago they became the first vanilla company in the world to be Regenerative Organic Certified® (ROC). The Vanilla Bean Project is continually working to reduce their environmental impact and manufacture vanilla products with leading eco- friendly attributes. On April 28, 2026, the City Council approved a Purchase Agreement and First Right of Refusal (FRR) with Decentralized Foods, LLC. The company proposed the development of an approximately 10,000 sq/ft manufacturing building on the south two acres of Lot B in the Whitetail Corporate Park. The FRR is for the north three acres of Lot B and allows the City to work with a different developer should there be interest in the lot and Decentralized Foods, LLC chooses not to proceed with development on the site. DISCUSSION On April 28, 2026, the City Council approved the purchase of the approximately two-acre parcel in the Whitetail Ridge Corporate Park to build an approximately 10,000 sq/ft manufacturing building on the south two acres of Lot B and a First Right of Refusal for the north three acres of Lot B. This property is located in Tax Increment District 13 , created in 2018 and is scheduled to close in 2045 . This approximately two-acre lot is valued at $173,300 ($86,650/acre). The Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 2 developer has agreed to purchase the lot for $173,300 and the closing for the property was scheduled on or before July 15, 2026. However, the closing did not occur within the approved timeline in the original Purchase Agreement. The Amendment to Agreement to Purchase Real Estate and First Right of Refusal (Exhibit 1) extends the closing date to February 26, 2027, or earlier if mutually agreed upon by the two parties. The Amendment also modifies the First Right of Refusal so that it begins on the Effective Date of July 15, 2026, and expires on July 15, 2028. Decentralized Foods, LLC has agreed to close on the approximately two-acre property during this expanded timeline. CONCLUSION Staff recommends approval of the Resolution approving the Amendment to the Purchase Agreement and First Right of Refusal with Decentralized Foods, LLC. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO THE PURCHASE REAL ESTATE AGREEMENT AND FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL WITH DECENTRALIZED FOODS, LLC WHEREAS, on April 28, 2026, the City Council approved the Purchase Agreement and First Right of Refusal with Decentralized Foods, LLC with a closing date for July 15, 2026, or such an earlier date as mutually agreed upon by both parties for an approximately two-acre parcel in the Whitetail Ridge Corporate Park; and WHEREAS, the closing did not occur within the approved timeline in the original P urchase Agreement; and WHEREAS, an amendment to the P urchase Agreement and First Right of Refusal has been negotiated, subject to approval from the Common Council; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of River Falls approves the attached amendment to the Purchase Agreement and First Right of Refusal with Decentralized Foods, LLC setting a new closing date to on or before February 26, 2027, modifies the First Right of Refusal so that it begins on the Effective Date of July 15, 2026, and expires on July 15, 2028 , and authorizes the City Administrator or designee to finalize the sale of the property. Dated this 25th day of August, 2026. Alison H. Page, Mayor ATTEST: Amy White, City Clerk 1 AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE AND FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL THIS AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE AND FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL (the "Amendment") is by and between Decentralized Foods, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company d/b/a Whisk Capital (“Buyer” or “Grantee”) and the City of River Falls , a Wisconsin municipal corporation (“Seller” or “Grantor”). WHEREAS, Buyer and Seller entered into an Agreement to Purchase Real Estate with an effective date of April 28, 2026 (the “Agreement”); and WHEREAS, as a condition of closing as described in the Agreement, Grantor and Grantee were to enter into a First Right of Refusal (the “FRR”) as set forth in Exhibit B to the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to extend the closing date as set forth in the Agreement and modify the term of the FRR. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Buyer and Seller agree as follows: 1. Closing. The Closing as set forth in the Agreement is extended to February 26, 2027, or earlier as mutually agreed by the parties. 2. Term of FRR. Section 3 of the FRR is modified in its entirety to read as follows: “The term of this Agreement begins on the Effective Date and shall expire at 5:00 p.m., prevailing central time on July 15, 2028.” 3. Authority. Each of the parties represents and warrants that it has the full capacity, right, power and authority to execute, deliver and perform this Amendment, and all required actions, consents and approvals therefor have been duly taken and obtained. 4. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, all of which in the aggregate shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Amendment may be executed and delivered electronically with such signatures being deemed original signatures for purposes of enforcement and construction of this Amendment. 5. Remaining Terms. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement, unless specifically amended herein, shall remain in full force and effect. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] [Signature Page to Amendment] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Buyer executed this Amendment effective as the date of the last signature hereto (the “Effective Date”). SELLER/GRANTOR By: Alison H. Page, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Amy White, City Clerk BUYER/GRANTEE By: Andrew J. Kubiak, Authorized Representative 10 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Page and City Council Members F ROM: Josh Solinger, Finance Director/Treasurer DAT E: August 25, 2026 TI TLE: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF APPROXIMATELY $6,435,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION PROMISSORY NOTES, SERIES 2026A RE COMMENDED ACTION Adopt the required resolution providing for the sale of approximately $ 6,435,000 in General Obligation Promissory Notes. The Promissory Notes will be used to finance a portion of the City’s fire station project. The te ntative schedule for the approval and issuance of the notes is as follows: • August 25 – Initial approval by the City Council. • September 22 – Bids received and final City Council approval. • October 13 – Receipt of closing documents, closing, and receipt of funds. BA CKGROUND Fire Station Remodel and Renovation On September 23, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution 7005 accepting a construction bid from BCI Construction totaling $9,010,069. The bid included remodeling and renovating the existing fire station and former city hall and police station site, new floors above the existing structure, a fifth apparatus bay, roof replacement for the existing structure, and a fitness room. The f ire station project totals $10,513,998 and is comprised of design, construction, furniture, fixtures, and equipment (F/F/E), miscellaneous work that included surveying, hazard abatement, and communications planning, a community art component, and contingency. Project Component Budget Construction $ 9,010,069 Design 723,100 F/F/E 330,350 Contingency 250,000 Miscellaneous Work 120,479 Community Art 80,000 Total $ 10,513,998 Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 2 Debt financing totaling $7,355,000 was originally contemplated for this project. However, the City Council’s good fiscal stewardship over the past several years enabled the City to use additional unassigned fund balance for the project. The result is that less debt financing is needed, which reduces future interest expenses by an estimated $500,000. Original Financing Plan Updated Financing Plan Change Debt Financing $ 7,355,000 Debt Financing $ 6,235,000 $ (1,120,000) Cash Financing 1,758,998 Cash Financing 2,878,998 1,120,000 Grant Financing 1,400,000 Grant Financing 1,400,000 - Total $ 10,513,998 Total $ 10,513,998 - DISCUSSION Approval of the following resolution is recommended to finance the fire station project. • Resolution Providing for the Sale of Approximately $6,435,000 General Obligation Promissory Notes, Series 2026A – Resolution will authorize issuance of the debt. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS Presale Report The attached presale report contains information about the financing plan for this debt issuance. In addition to $6,235,000 in financing for the project, issuance -related costs totaling $200,000 result in a total sale of $6,435,000. Conservative estimates for interest rates are used for the financing plan and may be as high as 0.50 percent over what the City gets offered. Annual debt service payments are estimated to range from approximately $477,000 to $482,000 per year. Rural Fire Association The City’s 2027 -2046 contract with the Rural Fire Association provides for an annual payment totaling $241,530 per year to be applied toward debt service for the fire station. This reduces the amount of debt service that goes onto the tax levy each year. Fire Impact Fees In addition to the Rural Fire Association payment, the City is in the process of updating its impact fees, which include a fire impact fee. Future impact fee collections could be applied toward the annual debt service payment for this project, further reducing the borrowing’s levy impact. Estimated Levy Impact The cumulative effect of partially cash financing the project, grant funding for the project, and the Rural Fire Association’s payment toward annual debt service results in an estimated levy impact of about $0.12 per $1,000 of property value. This equates to about $42 per year , or $3.50 per month, for a property assessed at $350,000 compared to $56 per year as originally planned. CONCLUSION The City requires debt financing for the Council -approved fire station project . The staff recommendation is to approve the proposed resolution providing for the sale of $6,435,000 in General Obligation Promissory Notes. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF APPROXIMATELY $6,435,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION PROMISSORY NOTES, SERIES 2026A WHEREAS, the City of River Falls, Pierce and St. Croix Counties, Wisconsin (the "City") is presently in need of approximately $6,435,000 for public purposes, including paying the cost of remodeling and renovating the fire station (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, it is desirable to borrow said funds through the issuance of general obligation promissory notes pursuant to Section 67.12(12), Wisconsin Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City that: Section 1. Issuance of the Notes. The City shall issue its General Obligation Promissory Notes, Series 2026A (the "Notes") in the approximate amount of $6,435,000 for the purpose of paying the cost of the Project. Section 2. Sale of the Notes . The Common Council hereby authorizes and directs that the Notes be offered for public sale. At a subsequent meeting, the Common Council shall consider such bids for the Notes as may have been received and take action thereon. Section 3. Notice of Sale . The City Clerk (in consultation with Ehlers & Associates, Inc. ("Ehlers")) be and hereby is directed to cause notice of the sale of the Notes to be disseminated in such manner and at such times as the City Clerk may determine and to cause copies of a co mplete Notice of Sale and other pertinent data to be forwarded to interested bidders as the City Clerk may determine. Section 4. Official Statement. The City Clerk (in consultation with Ehlers) shall cause an Official Statement to be prepared and distributed. The appropriate City officials shall determine when the Official Statement is final for purposes of Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 and shall certify said Official Statement, such certifica tion to constitute full authorization of such Official Statement under this resolution. Section 5. Reimbursement. The Common Council hereby officially declares its intent pursuant to Treasury Regulation Section 1.150 -2 to reimburse any expenditures made in connection with the Project prior to the issuance of the Notes with the proceeds of the Notes in an amount not to exceed $6,435,000. Adopted, approved and recorded August 25, 2026. _____________________________ Alison H. Page Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Amy White City Clerk (SEAL) August 25, 2026 PRE-SALE REPORT FOR City of River Falls, Wisconsin $6,435,000 General Obligation Promissory Notes, Series 2026A Prepared by: Ehlers 3001 Broadway Street, Suite 320 Minneapolis, MN 55413 Advisors: Sean Lentz, Senior Municipal Advisor Peter Meidal, Municipal Advisor Brian Reilly, Senior Municipal Advisor BUILDING COMMUNITIES. IT’S WHAT WE DO. Presale Repo rt City of River Falls, Wisconsin August 25, 2026 Page 1 Proposed Issue: $6,435,000 General Obligation Promissory Notes, Series 2026A Purposes: The proposed issue provides financing for the City’s Fire Station remodeling and renovation. Debt service will be paid from ad valorem property taxes. Authority: The Notes are being issued pursuant to Wisconsin Statute(s): • 67.12(12) The Notes will be general obligations of the City for which its full faith, credit and taxing powers are pledged. The Notes count against the City’s General Obligation Debt Capacity Limit of 5% of total City Equalized Valuation. Following issuance of the Notes, the City’s total General Obligation debt principal outstanding will be $40.072 million which is 36% of its limit. Remaining General Obligation Borrowing Capacity will be approximately $72.749 million. Term/Call Feature: The Notes are being issued for a term of 20 ye ars. Principal on the Notes will be due on October 1 in the years 2027 through 2046. Interest will be due every six months beginning October 1, 2027. The Notes will be subject to prepayment at the discretion of the City on October 1, 2034 or any date thereafter. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF PROPOSED DEBT Presale Report City of River Falls, Wisconsin August 25, 2026 Page 2 Bank Qualification: Because the City is expecting to issue no more than $10,000,000 in tax exempt debt during the calendar year, the City will be able to designate the Notes as “bank qualified” obligations. Bank qualified status broadens the market for the Notes, which can result in lower interest rates. Rating: The City’s most recent bond issues were ra ted by Moody’s Investors Service. The current rating on those bonds is “Aa2”. The City will request a new rating for the Notes. Basis for Recommendation: Based on your objectives, financial situation and need, risk tolerance, liquidity needs, experience with the issuance of Notes and long-term financial capacity, as well as the tax status considerations related to the Notes and the structure, timing and other similar matters related to the Notes, we are recommending the issuance of Notes as a suitable option. Method of Sale/Placement: We are recommending the Notes be issued as municipal securities and offered through a competitive underwriting process. The City will solicit competitive bids for purchase of the Notes, which we will compile on your behalf. 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 Notes are purchased at a price grea ter 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 (t he 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 exce ss of face value is considered “reoffering 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. The amount of premium can be restricted in the bid specifications. Restrictions on premium may result in fewer bids, but may also elimin ate large adjustments on the day of sale and unintended impacts with respect to debt service payment. Ehlers will identify appropriate premium restrictions for the Notes intended to achieve the City’s objectives for this financing. Presale Report City of River Falls, Wisconsin August 25, 2026 Page 3 For this issue of Notes, any premium amount received that is in excess of the underwriting discount must be placed in the debt service f und and used to pay a portion of the interest payments due on the Notes. Review of Existing Debt: We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedne ss 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 disc losure, the City will be agreeing to provide certain updated 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 obligat ed 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 Notes. 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 reba te, yield restriction and records retention requirements within the Arbitrage Rules. The Ci ty’s specific arbitrage responsibilities will be detailed in the Tax Exemption Certificate (the “Tax Compliance Document”) prepared by your Bond Attorney and provided at closing. The Notes 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) expenditur e within an available period limitations, 6) investments yield restrictions, 7) de minimis rules, or; 8) borrower limited requirements. An Ehlers arbitrage expert will contact the City within 30 days after the sale date to review the City’s specific responsibilities for the Notes. The City is currently receiving arbitrage services from Ehlers in relation to the Notes. Investment of Note Proceeds: Ehlers can assist the City in developing a strategy to invest your Note proceeds until the funds are needed to pay project costs. Presale Repo rt City of River Falls, Wisconsin August 25, 2026 Page 4 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 provide 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 providers 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 and Disclosure Counsel: Quarles & Brady LLP Paying Agent: TBD Rating Agency: Moody's Investors Service, Inc. Presale Report City of River Falls, Wisconsin August 25, 2026 Page 5 Pre-Sale Review by Common Council: August 25, 2026 Due Diligence Call to Review Official Statement: Week of September 7 Conference with Rating Agency: September 10, 2026 Distribute Official Statement: September 15, 2026 Common Council Meeting to Award Sale of the Notes: September 22, 2026 Estimated Closing Date: October 13, 2026 Attachments Estimated Sources and Uses of Funds and Proposed Debt Service Schedule General Obligation Borrowing Capacity Estimated Net Tax Levy for Debt Service Sean Lentz, Senior Municipal Advisor (651) 697-8509 Peter Meidal, Municipal Advisor (651) 697-8552 Brian Reilly, Senior Municipal Advisor (651) 697-8541 Tess Kuhn, Public Finance Analyst (651) 697-8518 Na Lee Lee, Financial Analyst (262) 796-6170 PROPOSED DEBT ISSUANCE SCHEDULE EHLERS’ CONTACTS City of River Falls, WI Year Ending Principal (10/1) Est. Rate1 Interest Total 2027 230,000 3.20% 248,302 478,302 2028 230,000 3.25% 249,504 479,504 2029 240,000 3.30% 242,029 482,029 2030 245,000 3.37% 234,109 479,109 2031 255,000 3.46% 225,853 480,853 2032 265,000 3.50% 217,030 482,030 2033 270,000 3.62% 207,755 477,755 2034 280,000 3.71% 197,981 477,981 2035 295,000 3.81% 187,593 482,593 2036 305,000 3.91% 176,353 481,353 2037 315,000 4.05% 164,428 479,428 2038 330,000 4.15% 151,670 481,670 2039 340,000 4.20% 137,975 477,975 2040 355,000 4.25% 123,695 478,695 2041 370,000 4.30% 108,608 478,608 2042 385,000 4.35% 92,698 477,698 2043 405,000 4.40% 75,950 480,950 2044 420,000 4.25% 58,130 478,130 2045 440,000 4.45% 40,280 480,280 2046 460,000 4.50% 20,700 480,700 Total 6,435,000 3,160,639 9,595,639 Notes: 1) Estimated Rate assumes current GO BQ "Aa2" market rates + 50 bps Issue Summary Dated Date: 10/13/2026 First Interest Payment: 10/1/2027 First Principal Payment: 10/1/2027 True Interest Cost (TIC): 4.30% All Inclusive Cost (AIC): 4.52% Sources and Uses Sources Par Amount of Bonds 6,435,000 Total Sources $6,435,000 Uses Total Underwriter's Discount 80,438 Costs of Issuance 116,914 Deposit to Project Construction Fund 6,235,000 Rounding 2,649 Total Uses 6,435,000 Estimated Sources and Uses and Debt Service Schedule Totals River Falls Financing Plan 2026.xlsx Prepared 8/12/2026 G.O. Borrowing Capacity Analysis City of River Falls, WI Notes: 1) Projected TID IN Equalized Value assumes no growth. $112,822,160 Total G.O. Borrowing Capacity 0 20,000,000 40,000,000 60,000,000 80,000,000 100,000,000 120,000,000 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 Existing Prin. Outs. New Prin. Outs. Debt Limit River Falls Financing Plan 2026.xlsx Prepared 8/12/2026 Estimated Net Tax Levy for Debt Service City of River Falls, WI Notes: 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000 1,600,000 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 Existing Net Debt Levy 2026A Debt Service River Falls Financing Plan 2026.xlsx Prepared 8/19/2026 11 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Page and City Council FROM: Josh Solinger, Finance Director DATE: August 25, 2026 TITLE: RESOLUTION APPROVING AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORT FOR PERIOD ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2025 RECOMMENDED ACTION Adopt the resolution approving the 2025 audited financial statements and management report. BACKGROUND The auditors at CliftonLars onAllen LLP completed the audit of the City’s 202 5 financial statements. In their report, they have concluded that the City’s financial statements fairly reflect the financial position of the City, and as such, expressed an unmodified opinion on the governmental activities, business -type activities, and the City’s component unit (Business Improvement District). DISCUSSION The report contains five main sections: • The first section contains the auditor’s opinion. The City received an un modified opinion, which indicates the City complied with generally accepted accounting principles and statutory regulations, and fairly disclosed any matters that may affect the financial health of the City. • The second section contains Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A), which provides additional detail into the financial outcomes of the year, and a brief description of the planned events in the current year. • Section three includes the basic financial statements and notes to the financial statements. • Section four is required supplementary information, including budget to actual reports for the General Fund. • Section five contains detailed combining and individual statements and schedules for the City’s funds. The audit report includes information regarding the City’s accounting policies, including a description of funds. The governmental funds include the general fund, debt service funds, capital project funds and special revenue funds. The business -type funds include the electric, water, wastewater, storm water and ambulance (EMS) funds. The Business Improvement District financial statements are also included in the report. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 2 The following is a summary of the City’s financial condition at the end of 2025: • The City of River Falls concluded the fiscal year with an accumulated total net position of $150.8 million, an increase of $5 .1 million from the previous year. This increase is an aggregate result of $4.6 million decreased net position in governmental activities and $0.5 million increased net position in business-type activities. • At the close of 2025, the General Fund ending fund balance was $14.3 million, an increase of $0.3 million. • The City’s enterprise funds closed the year with operating income of $1.6 million, and a change in net position of $0.5 million. A summary statement of activities comparing 2024 and 2025 is on the next page (Appendix A). Report on Internal Control The auditors also prepared an accompanying report on the City’s internal controls. Management’s responses to the comments are summarized below. There was one material finding related to how a deferral of revenue was recognized. Prior to 2025, the City recorded the collection of capital cost contributions from developments as unearned revenues. The revenues were treated as earned when expenses associated with the contributions were incurred. This was an acceptable approach to the City’s previous auditor. Moving forward, the revenues will be recognized as earned and recorded in fund balance. The adjustment moves the capital cost contributions from the liability section of the balance sheet to the fund balance section (Table 1). Staff will treat the capital cost contributions as committed fund balance and available for purposes enumerated in development agreements associated with the capital cost contributions. This could be changed with future Council action. Table 1. Fund Balance Summary for General Capital Fund 2024 (Before) 2024 (After) Assets $ 4,442,413 $ 4,442,413 Liabilities $ 4,748,632 $ 615,680 Fund Balance $ (306,219) $ 3,826,733 The impact of this change is that past fund balances in governmental activities were understated compared to now. The adjustment is noted in Appendix A, and the corresponding increase to fund balance after restatement is shown. This was not a cash-related issue and was instead related to how this was accounted for in the financial statements. CONCLUSION The auditor expressed an unmodified, or clean, opinion of the City’s financial statements. An unmodified opinion is the best audit opinion a government can receive. Staff recommend Council adopt the resolution approving the 2025 audited financial statements. The audited financial statements and accompanying notes provide information in more detail and are found on the City’s website. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 3 Appendix A 2025 2024 2025 2024 2025 2024 Revenues Program revenues: Charges for services $3,284,429 $2,445,802 $25,288,106 $22,191,789 $28,572,535 $24,637,591 Operating grants and contributions 1,423,139 2,724,335 - - 1,423,139 2, 724,335 Capital grants and contributions 2,244,235 431,486 1,256,296 1,076,412 3,500,531 1, 507,898 General revenues: Property taxes 10,812,048 9,865,683 - - 10,812,048 9, 865,683 Other taxes 219,872 278,882 - - 219,872 278, 882 Intergovernmental 3,073,698 3,223,720 - 67,950 3,073,698 3, 291,670 Investment earnings 1,197,859 1,536,236 685,878 1,081,756 1,883,737 2, 617,992 Miscellaneous 1,397,629 648,457 116,652 87,305 1,514,281 735,762 Total revenues 23,652,909 21,154,601 27,346,932 24,505,212 50,999,841 45, 659,813 Expenses General government 3,536,120 3,039,817 - - 3,536,120 3, 039,817 Public safety 5,236,555 5,208,625 - - 5,236,555 5, 208,625 Public works 4,668,169 4,383,741 - - 4,668,169 4, 383,741 Health services 2,370 17,438 - - 2,370 17, 438 Leisure 4,031,128 2,728,408 - - 4,031,128 2, 728,408 Conservation and development 3,074,611 2,689,057 - - 3,074,611 2, 689,057 Interest and fiscal charges 729,826 1,281,970 - - 729,826 1,281,970 Electric utility - - 15,954,642 14,822,269 15,954,642 14, 822,269 Water utility - - 3,483,142 2,262,183 3,483,142 2, 262,183 Sewer utility - - 4,030,285 3,826,541 4,030,285 3, 826,541 Storm water utility - - 849,372 553,262 849,372 553, 262 Ambulance service - - 341,232 337,611 341,232 337,611 Total expenses 21,278,779 19,349,056 24,658,673 21,801,866 45,937,452 41,150,922 Change in net position before transfers 2,374,130 1,805,545 2,688,259 2,703,346 5,062,389 4, 508,891 Transfers 2,230,514 (674,786) (2,230,514) 674,786 - - Increase in net position 4,604,644 1,130,759 457,745 3,378,132 5,062,389 4, 508,891 Net position January 1 62,293,476 61,162,717 79,381,350 76,003,218 141,674,826 137,165,935 Error Correction 4,132,950 - - - 4,132,950 - Net position January 1 , restated 66,426,426 61,162,717 79,381,350 76,003,218 145,807,776 137,165,935 Net position December 31 71,031,070$ 62,293,476$ 79,839,095$ 79,381,350$ 150,870,165$ 141,674,826$ City of River Falls Summary Statement of Activities Governmental Activities Business-Type Activities Total RESOLUTION NO. _____ RESOLUTION APPROVING AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORT FOR PERIOD ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2025 WHEREAS, the City of River Falls contract ed with CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP to conduct an audit for the year 2025; and WHEREAS, the River Falls City Council reviewed the audit, which includes the opinion on the general purpose financial statements; and WHEREAS, the River Falls City Council accepts the information in the audit and related communications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of River Falls hereby approves and accepts the audited financial report for the period ended December 31, 2025. Dated this 25th day of August, 2026. Alison Page, Mayor ATTEST: Amy White, City Clerk 12 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Page and City Council FROM: Brooks Ostendorf, Conservation and Parks Manager DATE: August 25, 2026 TITLE: PARK IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDED ACTION Adopt the res olution approving the collection of Park Impact Fees in one singular fund and directing the proposed expenditure of existing Park Impact Fee fund balance. BACKGROUND Park Impact Fees, authorized under Wisconsin Statute 66.0617 and established locally by City Ordinance No. 2002-17, are collected from new development to fund the capital costs of public park facilities required to serve a growing population. While the City’s informal practice has been to direct fees to the parks nearest to the developments that generated them, this approach has created imbalances in available funding between newer neighborhoods and more established areas. This memorandum provides analysis of the City’s current collection and use of Park Impact Fees in order to shift to a more strategic and equitable use to better meet community needs. Drawing on park inventories, condition assessments, and strategic priorities, this memo identifies specific short-term funding recommendations and proposes a more flexible, city -wide approach for managing Park Impact Fees moving forward. Priority projects include completing Phase 02 of the Glen Park Master Plan, implementing key elements of the Sterling Ponds Park master plan, and providing water service at DeSanctis Park to accommodate Grow To Share’s move from Hoffman Park. Longer term, the development of a master plan for each City park is recommended to ensure that future Park Impact Fee investments are guided by a clear vision, informed by community input, and focused on equitable access and amenity distribution. This shift in policy will position the City to use Park Impact Fees more effectively, avoid the risk of funds expiring unused, and ensure that investments address the highest-priority needs across the park system. PARK IMPACT FEES Wisconsin Stat. § 66.0617 gives cities, villages, and towns explicit authority to enact ordinances imposing impact fees (cash contributions, contributions of land or interests in land, or any other items of value) on developers of land to pay for some or all of the capital costs necessary to accommodate a development project. “ Capital costs” means the costs to construct, expand, or improve certain public facilities required because of new land development. Eligible “public facilities” are highways and other transportation facilities, traffic control devices, facilities for collecting and trea ting sewage, facilities for collecting and treating storm and surface waters, facilities for pumping, storing, and distributing water, parks, playgrounds and land for athletic Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 2 fields, solid waste and recycling facilities, fire protection facilities, law enforcement facilities, emergency medical facilities, and libraries. “Public facilities” does not include facilities owned by a school district. Impact fees must have both an “es sential nexus” to the government’s land-use interest and a “rough proportionality” to the development’s impact on that land- use interest. See Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, 144 S.Ct. 893 (2024) In April 2002, a Facilities Needs Assessment report was published for the City of River Falls and set the basis for the imposition of parks and fire protection facilities impact fees, which was subsequently approved by Council via City Ordinance No. 2002 -17. The ordinance states that impact fees “shall be placed in one or more segregated, interest -bearing accounts and shall be accounted for separately from other City funds.” It also states that they should be used within 20 years after collection to pay the capital costs for which they were imposed or otherwise be refunded to the owner to which the fees were imposed. The ordinance also states that the impact fees be used “solely for the purpose of paying the proportionate costs of providing public facilities that may become necessary due to development .” Relevant to this memo, Wisconsin State Statute 66.0617(6) sets the following standards for the use of Impact Fees: • Shall bear a rational relationship to the need for new, expanded or improved public facilities that are required to serve land development. • May not include amounts necessary to address existing deficiencies in public facilities. • May not include expenses for operation or maintenance of a public facility. Upon collecting park impact fees, the City has applied an internal policy to allocate those funds to Regional or Local Parks, dependent on where the development generating the fees is located. The intent being that the immediate area surrounding development will be most affected and the local park, in turn, should proportionately r eceive funding for improvements. The split between funds allocated to Regional and Local Parks has roughly been 40% and 60%, respectively, though there are exceptions. There are fees collected from development that cannot be tied to a specific development or neighborhood park, and are thus collected in a “Miscellaneous/All” neighborhood park category. Park impact funds also collect interest over time, which gets placed in a third “General/Regional” category. Because interest isn’t generated from any particular development or geographic area it has been placed in a general category to allow for greater flexibility in where it can be spent. Table 1 summarizes fees available for each park: eight neighborhood parks have fees available while four neighborhood parks are not included on the list due to a lack of nearby development. Golf View Park is the lone park identified as having negative fees: this is related to the installation of the play structure in the park in 2007. This is indicative of the lack of new development in the surrounding area, as impact fees have not been collected at a significant rate to offset that cost. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 3 Table 1 – Available Park Impact Fee Summary (as of June 11, 2026) OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN Completed in March 2023, the Outdoor Recreation Plan lays out a roadmap for implementing the community’s vision for outdoor recreation, including how future needs and demands can be addressed within existing city parks. In this memo, seven goals listed in the Outdoor Recreation Plan have been used to guide the utilization of Park Impact Fees: 1. Maintain existing parks to continue offering a variety of amenities and activities. 2. Maintain active partnerships with the community and agencies that support recreation needs. 3. Enhance existing network of green corridors. 4. Prioritize spaces that create opportunities to connect with people and resources. 5. Balance recreational needs, social opportunities, cultural celebration, and public art opportunities into park infrastructure. 6. Provide access to all. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 4 7. Focus maintenance and operations to ensure safe, equitable, and accessible recreational opportunities for all. The Outdoor Recreation Plan also addresses priorities for improvements in the short (2030), medium (2035), and long (2045) term. Many of the priorities relate to the Kinni Corridor Plan, which will not be addressed as a part of this effort due to the ongoing status of the US Army Corps of Engineers’ feasibility study. Of the existing parks, Sterling Ponds and Glen Park were identified as parks with short term goals with medium to high priority for implementation. Those parks will be addressed in more depth in this document. Improvements identified in the Outdoor Recreation Plan that can be addressed through Park Impact Fees include the following: • Provision of ADA-compliant play features. • Provision of ADA-compliant amenities. • Non-traditional and natural elements, including pollinator gardens, natural playgrounds, and sensory gardens. • Enhancing green corridors. MASTER PLANS There are 28 parks in the City but only three have m aster plans: Hoffman Park, Glen Park, and Sterling Ponds Park. These master plans identify short - and long- term actions that guide investment and decision making, and Park Impact Fees are a critical funding source for accomplishing those actions. Without a master plan, decision making for a park tends to be reactive rather than proactive and results in more piecemeal improvements. A master plan provides a vision for a park that is reflective of its existing conditions while identifying opportunities for improving it based on the City’s dynamic needs. Having a master plan for each City park would provide clear direction for park improvements and inform staff on how and when to appropriate P ark Impact Fees. For the purposes of this memo, priority should be given to Glen Park and Sterling Ponds Park, both of which have master plans and have had some, but not all, elements of those plans implemented. Due to the ongoing Hoffman Detention Basin Study, an update to the Hoffman Park master plan should be completed before any further construction occurs. Staff intends to complete master plans for each City park to guide future improvements. PARK AMENITIES At a Park and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) meeting in February of 2024, there was a discussion about what the Board recommends as standard amenities for three levels of City Park (Pocket, Neighborhood, and Regional). Linear and Special -Use Parks were not specifically addressed. In summary, the board made the following recommendations for the type of amenity that should be present in each park category: Pocket Parks • Picnic tables, garbage cans, and dog bags. Neighborhood Parks • Picnic tables, garbage cans, dog bags, equitable shade*, an ADA-compliant play structure, ADA-compliant swings, and a sporting activity item (i.e. baseball backstop, basketball hoop, etc.). Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 5 Regional Park • Picnic tables, garbage cans, dog bags, equitable shade*, an ADA-compliant play structure, ADA-compliant swings, and a sporting activity item (i.e. baseball backstop, basketball hoop, etc.), flushable toilets, water fountain, closed air shelter, a trail/path system, and sufficient parking. *Note: there was no discussion at the PRAB Meeting about what defines “equitable”, but the intent was to encourage the provision of shade at neighborhood and regional park s. Shade can be provided through natural means (i.e. mature canopy trees) or constructed (i.e. built shelter or canopy structure). The following table is an inventory of each City park relative to the recommendations made by PRAB: Table 2 – Park Inventory Summary While the recommendations are reasonable for new parks, it is worth considering the financial implications of providing those amenities at each existing park in the City. The physical characteristics of a site may also preclude the provision of an amenity from being installed: for example, Brandan’s Park is only 0.8 acres and may not have the room to accommodate all the prescribed amenities. PRAB’s recommendations should serve as a goal addressed in each master plan, in which analysis of the opportunities and constraints of each site – in addition to community feedback – will direct which amenities are feasible for the site. PRAB did not assign priority to the order in which these amenities should be incorporated, nor did they assign priority to which parks should be improved as a part of this exercise. Further discussions need to be had with PRAB to determine these priorities. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 6 Accessibility needs to be addressed at the master plan level to ensure that amenities are integrated into the design of each park and are not added on simply to meet a requirement. As currently designed, many of the playgrounds in the City do not have an ADA-compliant entrance, surfacing, or play features. It is possible to add additional structures on to existing play areas, however this would not be an inclusive approach as it would be segregating areas by user’s capabilities. Prior to adding ADA-compliant equipment to existing play structures that were not designed accordingly, they should be re-assessed at the master plan level in the context of other amenities and site conditions. 2025-2026 STRATEGIC INITIATIVES City Council establishes and implements strategic initiatives to create a roadmap for allocating resources, guiding policy, and measuring progress. Workplans for the strategic initiatives are drafted in two-year cycles to reflect the vision and priorities for the community and organization. The adopted 2025- 2027 Strategic Initiatives encompass 11 priority projects and includes Glen Park Phase 2, which falls under the Connected Community strategic priority. It is clear that the organization, community, committee members, and Council are in alignment with implementing Phase 02 of the Glen Park Master Plan and availability of Park Impact Fee funds presents an opportunity to readily do so. PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD REVIEW Staff presented an iteration of this memo to PRAB on January 21, 2026 and the Board unanimously approved Staff’s recommendation with minor alterations. Staff subsequently presented an updated memo to PRAB on June 17, 2026 to seek direction on the expenditure of additional funds available via Park Impact Fee fund balance. That memo was also unanimously approved with minor alterations, which is reflected in this memo. DISCUSSION The following summary includes parks with identified short-term priorities and master plans, or have accrued sufficient fund balance to be considered for park improvements. Parks that have not been included have either not been identified as an immediate priority or do not have sufficient fund balance to be assessed for the purposes of this study. Upon development of park plans and updated priorities, the remaining parks will be reassessed at a future date. GLEN PARK Glen Park is centrally located within River Falls and is the City’s oldest park. It is sited at the intersection of the Kinnickinnic River and the South Fork of the Kinnickinnic River, with the former Lake Louise basin to the west, and thus benefits from exceptional water access . Residential neighborhoods border the park opposite the river to the north, along the east side, and to the south. To the west beyond the former Lake Louise basin is city-owned land, utilities (wastewater treatment plant; municipal power plant), and open space. Established in 1898, Glen Park offers an historic and scenic setting for park visitors. It is broadly divided into two topographic areas: 1) the “upper area” is a generally flat plateau approximately 200 feet above the Kinnickinnic River and former Lake Louise basin where large mature trees provide a substantial canopy; and 2) the “lower area” , with wooded slopes and nature trails that weave throughout. The variety of natural resources within the park offers different opportunities for visitors to interact with nature, including picnicking, hiking, and gathering. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 7 Glen Park also offers a variety of active recreational uses. One of the most popular amenities is the municipal swimming pool. Built in 1934, the swimming pool continues to be a local highlight in the summer, and the bathhouse was recently renovated. The splash pad was completed in 2020 along with a pavilion, additional parking, and vehicular entry drive. Other athletic features in the park include a basketball court, sand volleyball court, and four pickleball courts. Additional amenities include picnic areas, river access, a pavilion structure with bathrooms and storm shelter, an open-air picnic shelter, and a bathroom structure. There is a series of four seperate play areas that offer different types of play structures for a range of ages. The 2015 Master Plan and subsequent 2017 Preliminary Design Package for the park consolidate these four play areas into one centralized location just east of the pavilion. The curbs for this play area have been poured but only the tot lot equipment (ages 2- 5) and some safety surfacing has been installed. The intent is for the play area to have a nature theme. Access into the park from the north is available by way of W Cascade Avenue and the Swinging Bridge: this access point was proposed to be improved in the master plan. This route was highlighted to be improved as pedestrian traffic is likely to increase following implementation of the Kinni Corridor and Main Street projects. It is also intended to provide a safer pedestrian connection to Glen Park for those traveling from the Riverwalk Pathway and the west side of the Kinnickinnic River. Master Plan The City initiated the Glen Park Master Plan in 2013 to create a long-term vision that addressed circulation, access, activities, and future maintenance needs of the park. With guidance from city staff, stakeholders, consultant HKGi, and extensive community input, the plan was finalized and adopted in June 2015. The master plan outlines improvements to better serve a growing community while incorporating feedback gathered from open houses, surveys, and public hearings. It also provides a comprehensive analysis of the Glen Park site, highlighting the wooded nature of the site, relationships between park features, circulation, and issues and opportunities for the park. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 8 Figure 1: 2015 Glen Park Master Plan City Council later decided to implement much of the plan in a single coordinated project, funded in part through the Capital Improvement Program and supported by a FEMA grant for a safe room integral to the new event building. Between 2017 and 2018, the project team refined the renovation plans through public meetings, input sessions, and collaboration with various city boards and committees. Cost estimates showed that full implementation of all improvements would exceed the $4.4 million budget, prompting prioritization of key components. PRAB identified the pavilion building, parking and trail adjustments, a splash pad, western trail loop improvements, and conversion of an existing park building to maintenance use as the top priorities. Additional features, such as a creative play area and picnic shelter, were listed as secondary priorities if funding became available. Staff and consultants made further modifications to reduce costs while preserving the plan’s over all vision, and in March 2018 the revised preliminary plans received favorable consensus from PRAB and later approval by City Council for the final design of the renovation. The remaining improvements from the 2017 plan include pool reconstruction, a multi -use sport court, a multi -purpose park building, nature-themed play area, overlook and improved/restored lower trail connections, watercraft unloading area and trailhead at West Park Street, and additional parking and circulation. The short-term goals listed in the Outdoor Recreation Plan for Glen Park include completion of Phase 2, which includes the completion of the play area, construction of a multi-use sports court, construction of a multi-purpose park building, and access improvements from W Cascade Avenue. Recommendation Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 9 Completion of Phase 02 of the Glen Park Master Plan should be prioritized. This could include the following work: • Removal of the existing bathroom structure, open air pavilion, and associated pavement. • Removal of sand volleyball court. • Removal of all play structures, not including what was installed in 2019 (play area immediately southeast of pavilion). • Removal of basketball court. • Construction of multi-use sport court, including winter use accommodations. • Construction of a multi-purpose park building. • Completion of play area, including poured- in-place safety surfacing and playground equipment. • Construction of paved pathways to connect the proposed amenities to the existing trail system. • Improved W Cascade Avenue trail connection. Figure 1 – 2017 Glen Park Renovation Plan (proposed Phase 02 highlighted in yellow) The 2017 plans also show a proposed parking lot on the east side of the park, but Staff has determined that the existing parking layout meets the demands of the park. In summary, upon the completion of Phase 02 the following park improvements will remain from the Glen Park Master Plan: • North Trail Loop Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 10 • Pool Reconstruction • Overlook • Nature Trail Improvements • Picnic Shelter Given impending Kinni Riverway projects and their impact to the City-wide trail system, the North Trail Loop, Overlook, Natural Trail Improvements, and Picnic Shelter projects would benefit from implementation after Kinni Riverway projects have been completed. The pool remains a vital resource for the City and, while modernization is imminent, it is not currently identified as a priority project. Staff will continue to plan for these projects in the medium to long- term timeline as described in the Outdoor Recreation Plan (2035-2045). STERLING PONDS PARK Sterling Ponds Park is a neighborhood park located in the Sterling Ponds Neighborhood. The park features a playground, basketball half -court, and sand volleyball court surrounded by an open grass area. The site also includes benches and picnic tables, along with a small mound that is used for sledding. There are trees planted throughout the park but are not yet large enough to provide significant shade. There are no paved trails in the park and none to connect the various park amenities. The park is also adjacent to an undeveloped 5.12 acre outlot dedicated to the public for park space. The total acreage of the developed and undeveloped outlot is 9.16 acres. The park borders the Sterling Ponds subdivision to the northeast, Sterling Ponds Corporate Park to the northwest, STH 35 to the southwest, and a newer phase of the Sterling Ponds subdivision to the southeast. The Sterling Ponds Neighborhood has experienced significant changes since it was first planned in the early 2000s. Originally envisioned entirely for residential development, shifting market conditions in the late 2000s led the City to designate part of the area for the Sterling Ponds Corporate Park, which opened in 2014. While the 2003 preliminary plat showed about 22– 23 acres of parkland, much of that land was later reconfigured, leaving two dedicated park outlots totaling 9.16 acres, recorded in 2009 and 2017. Since annexation in 2002, the neighborhood has steadily grown with multiple housing phases, a church and pavilion, and a 60- unit apartment complex, with additional mixed housing. Though not a part of the Sterling Ponds Neighborhood, Brookgreen Townhomes are currently under construction: this development is west of STH 35 but will add 100 units that will have access via pedestrian trail to Sterling Ponds. Although the only dedicated public parkland in the neighborhood is Sterling Ponds Park, other forms of open space exist throughout the area. These include stormwater infrastructure corridors and Sterling Hill Disc Golf Course . Additionally, Sterling Heights Townhomes maintains a small stormwater pond and a 0.41-acre private playground as part of its developer’s agreement. While the park itself was built in 2012, construction of the surrounding community was recently completed and the overall composition of the neighborhood is changing. A master plan for the park was completed in 2020 to address the needs of the growing community and adapt the park to those needs. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 11 2020 Park Plan The Sterling Ponds Park Plan provides an extensive analysis of the neighborhood, demographics, and existing park, noting that the size of the park – including the developed and undeveloped portions of the park – exceeds what would typically be expected of a neighborhood like Sterling Ponds. The plan concludes that the City’s resources should be focused on providing high-quality park features within the existing park space rather than minimally developing areas that don’t currently have any amenities. The Ci ty’s analysis, coupled with a public engagement process, determined that the park should incorporate the following: • Picnic Shelter • Paved trails • Additional playground equipment • Benches • Signage • Upgraded Berm Trees and Landscaping Given the age of existing trees, there is currently a lack of shade and therefore doesn’t meet the minimum requirement set forth by PRAB. Additionally, the features that are present are not ADA- compliant due to the lack of paved trails. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 12 Figure 2: 2020 Sterling Ponds Park Plan Recommendation The City should pursue completion of the Sterling Ponds Park Plan, prioritizing a picnic shelter. This project was previously approved as a 2026 Capital Improvement Project (Project Number 26-410-010). Operations budget can be used towards upgrading site landscaping with an emphasis on pollinator gardens and tree plantings: additional trees on the berm will further screen the park from STH 35. The Sterling Ponds Park Plan also includes paving a trail from Kettering Road to Huppert Street along the Old Jersey Road alignment past the Sterling Hill Disc Golf Course. Staff recommends paving this trail when Huppert Street is urbanized to provide an accessible connection to a future trail on Huppert Street. The existing gravel roadway has been suitable for providing access and parking for the Sterling Hill Disc Golf Course but should be improved/paved in the future. DESANCTIS PARK The City acquired DeSanctis Park through the DeSanctis Family Trust by way of assistance of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Urban Green Space Program grant in 1995. The conditions of the associated development agreement stipulated the park should be a family-oriented park with no organized or competitive sport activities. The DNR grant requires that all uses of the park be publicly accessible and consistent with the intent of providing public outdoor recreation. For those reasons the park became the City’s designated passive park, emphasizing low-impact recreational activities in a naturalized setting. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 13 Figure 3: 1994 DeSanctis Park Plan The 1994 Concept Plan for DeSanctis Park illustrated a variety of amenities throughout the park that would have made it a more active park, including several volleyball courts, tennis courts, basketball court, several play structures, and a nature center. While a basketball court and play structure have been constructed, tennis and volleyball courts have not been installed while Glover School House has replaced the nature center. Since the original 1994 plan, several improvements have been made, including: • 1999: the City, with the services of the US Air Force 943 rd Civil Engineering Squadron, graded the park to create level fields, ponds, and berms, including a sledding hill. • 2000-2001: a new 1.1 mile-long pathway system was constructed. • 2003: the Glover School House was moved to the park. • 2007: a prairie was planted in the northeast section of the park. • 2010: a play structure and a basketball half-court was installed. • 2021: in conjunction with the construction of Milltown Residences on the DeSanctis property, a new parking lot was constructed at the south end of the park and the Glover School House was fully renovated. The next improvement to the park will include the move of Grow To Share from Hoffman Park to the east end of DeSanctis Park . In July 2025, PRAB and City Council approved a new lease agreement for Grow To Share to create a community garden in the park , acknowledging that a community garden falls within the passive nature of the park. Relocating to DeSanctis Park will Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 14 provide Grow to Share greater certainty for future planning and allow the organization to continue offering gardening, education, and food donation programs while aligning with City goals for recreation, partnerships, and resource stewardship. The move is currently underway. Additionally, a park shelter with a safe room in the park is currently a CIP item slated for design in 2029 and construction in 2030. This project is planned to be funded through a FEMA grant and TID #16, not by Park Impact Fees, though the availability of grants through FEMA for future projects is currently uncertain. Figure 4: Grow To Share Leased Premises at DeSanctis Park Recommendation The lease agreement between the City and Grow To Share states that the City will provide water service to the leased premises, which Grow To Share will need in advance of their next growing season. The City shall complete water line service to the Grow To Share community garden by spring of 2027 . This project was previously approved as a 2026 Capital Improvement Project (Project Number 26-410-007) SPRING CREEK PARK A 1.3 acre neighborhood park located within the Spring Creek Estates Subdivision. The park includes a play structure, basketball half-court, bike racks, and seating. The park is accessible via a paved pedestrian trail from Kimberly Circle to the west and Greenwood Valley Drive to the east. Aside from the accessways, the park is surrounded by single-family residential homes. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 15 The paved trail runs east -west through the park: all park amenities are on the south side of the trail, while the north side of the trail is lawn area with a drainage swale running parallel to the trail. There is also a swale on the east side of the park, between the swings and the eastern -most residences. Swales excepted, the park is generally flat with open lawn throughout. There are several benches and picnic tables, mounted on concrete pads scattered throughout the park, in addition to a bike rack and two garbage cans. Large canopy trees are located throughout the park and provide shade for the amenities. The play structure and swing structure are in separate areas: the play structure is contained by a modular curb system while the swing structure is in a mulch area with no containment. Neither area is ADA-compliant, but the play structure does have a path connected to it, albeit with no ADA-compliant ramp. The swing structure was added to the park in 2021. The park’s residential context creates an intimate and secluded setting offset from the adjacent roads. Mature trees within the park help buffer the park from the adjacent houses and provide sufficient shade for park uses. Aside from paved surfaces and the playground, the park is mostly open lawn area which provides flexibility in use but requires frequent maintenance. There is opportunity for converting lawn area to unmown area, ornamental landscape, or native restoration area, especially in the swale areas. While there are ADA accessibility issues – there are no ADA- compliant features or access to the playground structure - all the existing park amenities are in good condition. Additionally, there are 56 acres of dedicated park land within the Spring Creek Estates Plat, which includes trail access to the Rocky Branch Creek. Trails within these areas are access ed via trailheads at Spring Creek Drive, Greenwood Valley Drive and Michael Lane, as well as Devin Lane. Trail entrances are paved for portions but are largely compacted, unpaved trails. Recommendation While the park has $82,144.92 in available funds, no park impact fees should be utilized at this time. There are no specific priorities or recommendations outlined in the Outdoor Recreation Plan for the park and the park currently meets most of PRAB’s recommendations. A master plan should be created to direct future park improvements, including addressing ADA accessibility upgrades. Improvements to trails within the Spring Creek Estates Plat should also be studied in the master plan. HIGHVIEW MEADOWS PARK Highview Meadows Park is a neighborhood park within the Highview Meadows subdivision on the east side of River Falls. There are several recreation amenities, including a backstop, horseshoe court, basketball half -court, in addition to a play structure with swings. The backstop and basketball court were added in 2013. There are several picnic tables, benches, and a covered pavilion. With a high point of 1112’, the park is the highest in the City and provides unique views of the surrounding landscape. The park is essentially a plateau, with a generally flat open space of 4 acres with moderate to steep slopes that define the remaining three sides of the park. The north side of the park is bordered by a path that runs east -west. The park is centrally located within the development and is surrounded by housing. The slopes of the park are planted with a native prairie mix with a 12’ mown trail that navigates the slopes. Adolescent trees are planted throughout the park and a community orchard with a variety of fruiting trees is planted on the west slope. Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 16 The lone trail in the park is limited to the northern- most portion of the park and serves as the pedestrian entrance from the east and west sections of the Highview Meadows development. While it serves as the entrance to the park, there are no paved connections to any park amenity and therefore no amenities within the park are ADA-compliant. Additionally, a paved loop trail would provide more access to viewpoints on the south side of the park. While there is a playground with swings, neither is currently ADA-compliant and therefore does not meet PRAB’s minimum requirements for park amenities. Recommendation While the park has $96,677.07 in available funds, no park impact fees should be utilized at this time. There are no specific priorities or recommendations outlined in the Outdoor Recreation Plan for the park and the park currently meets most of PRAB’s recommendations. A master plan should be created to direct future park improvements, including addressing accessibility and providing a paved loop within the park. DOG PARK In November of 2024, 22 mature Ash trees were removed from the small dog area of the dog park due to Emerald Ash Borer. While one stand of mature trees remains in each dog park area, the amount of shade available is insufficient for the scale of the dog park. In March of 2025, a group of patrons contacted the City to offer suggestions for providing equitable shade: provide a shade structure in each dog park area or relocate the small dog area to where there are existing shade trees. The group offered to as sist in the effort, including helping raise the required funds. Staff determined that the provision of a shade structure at each dog area would be the more equitable and cost-effective option. At the July 2025 PRAB meeting, the board approved a resolution to allow the Dog Park group to fundraise for the shade structures since no funds had been allocated from the City’s budget for the project. In subsequent months the group was unable to raise the funds for the project and ended the fundraising effort. At the January 2026 PRAB meeting, Staff proposed the initial proposal of how to spend available Park Impact Fee fund balance which did not include the Dog Park. The board unanimously motioned to allocate $10,000 of available Park Impact Fee fund balance to the provision of shade structures at the Dog Park. FISCAL IMPACT There is currently $950,000 available in Park Impact Fees to fund projects at City p arks. The following table is a summary of the anticipated costs for completing the recommended projects at Glen Park, Sterling Ponds Park, DeSanctis Park, and the Dog Park: Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 17 Table 3 – Cost Estimates for Priority Park Projects Note: estimated costs are based on input from City staff, solicited quotes from manufacturers, and recent completed projects. Final costs are dependent on final approved designs and are subject to change. RECOMMENDATION It has been an unofficial City policy that Park Impact Fees be collected and earmarked for parks within the general vicinity of where development occurs. This practice is not dictated by State nor City statute, nor has it been formally adopted by any City board (City Council, Park and Recreation Board, etc.). Since the ordinance was adopted in 2002, parks in older, more developed neighborhoods are not collecting fees at the same rate as parks in newer developments, thus creating an imbalance in which parks receive updates. Additionally, a park that is only 15-20 years old – or has amenities that are less than 20 years old – may not need any improvements beyond routine maintenance, which could potentially result in the loss of funds (if not used within 20 years) or adding amenities for the sake of using the funds. An older park in an older neighborhood may need updates but have little to no impact fees available due to no new development nearby. More flexibility in how Park Impact Fees fund balance is utilized would allow the City to assess needs on a park-by-park basis and prioritize improvements accordingly. It is Staff’s recommendation to have Park Impact Fees collected in a singular fund that can be utilized for any park, regardless of where the fees were collected from. Following the direction laid out in this memo, priority for which parks receive Park Impact Fee funds will be guided by the Outdoor Recreation Plan, community input, and a future PRAB workshop. At the time of this memo there is a total of $950,000 available in Park Impact Fees to fund projects at City parks. While every park in the City could benefit from improvements, projects have been identified in the Capital Improvement Plan and priorities have been set in the Outdoor Recreation Plan as well as Council’s Strategic Initiatives for 2025 -2027. Therefore, it is Staff’s recommendation that available funds should be focused towards completing the following projects: 1. Glen Park – Playground, Multi -Use Sport Court, Multi -Purpose Park Building, and W Cascade Avenue Trail Connection 2. Sterling Ponds Park - Picnic Shelter Memorandum to Mayor and City Council August 25, 2026 Page 18 3. DeSanctis Park – Water service to Grow to Share Community Garden 4. Dog Park – (2) Shade Structures Once these projects are complete and additional park master plans are completed, needs and prioritization therein will determine where impact fee funds are next utilized. RESOLUTION NO. ADOPTION OF A CITY-WIDE PARK IMPACT FEE FUNDING POLICY AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PRIORITY PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WHEREAS, Wisconsin Statute § 66.0617 authorizes municipalities to collect and expend Park Impact Fees for capital improvements necessary to accommodate growth and development; and WHEREAS, the City of River Falls adopted Park Impact Fees through Ordinance No. 2002-17 to support the acquisition, expansion, and improvement of park facilities serving new development; and WHEREAS, the City has historically applied an informal practice of allocating Park Impact Fees to parks located generally near the developments generating those fees; and WHEREAS, the recommended projects are consistent with the City’s Outdoor Recreation Plan, the 2025–2027 Strategic Initiatives, adopted park master plans, and the City’s goals of improving accessibility, recreation opportunities, and equitable access to park amenities; and WHEREAS, the Park Impact Fees will be collected and maintained within a singular city -wide fund to provide greater flexibility and allow the City to prioritize projects based on adopted plans, accessibility needs, community benefit, and strategic priorities; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of River Falls hereby approves and adopts a Park Impact Fee collection policy and approves the use of currently available Park Impact Fee fund balance as described: 1. Adoption of a policy to collect and maintain Park Impact Fees within a singular City-wide fund that may be utilized for eligible capital improvements at any City park, regardless of the geographic area in which the fees were originally collected. 2. Proceeding with the following priority park improvement projects utilizing available Park Impact Fee funds in an amount of $950,000: a) Glen Park Playground Improvements b) Glen Park Multi-Use Sport Court c) Glen Park Multi-Use Park Building d) W Cascade Trail Improvements at Glen Park e) Sterling Ponds Park Picnic Shelter f) DeSanctis Park Water Service for the Grow To Share Community Garden g) Dog Park Shade Structures Dated this 25th day of August, 2026. Alison Page, Mayor ATTEST: Amy White, City Clerk July 23, 2026 River Falls, WI 54022 Todd Nickleski Enclosed are the results of analyses for samples received by our laboratory on 7/16/2026. If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact a client service representative at clientservices@nlslab.com. River Falls Municipal Utilities 222 Lewis St Project: 2026 Annual Drinking Water Testing Project Number: 2026 WDNR Drinking Water Requirements Work Order: CE07733 Received: 07/16/26 PWS ID: 64802463 [TOC_1]Cover Letter[TOC] Sincerely, Northern Lake Service, Inc. Steven M. Hefter - Vice President | Laboratory Director Project: Project Number: Project Manager: Reported: River Falls, WI 54022 2026 Annual Drinking Water Testing 2026 WDNR Drinking Water Requirements 7/23/26 12:37 River Falls Municipal Utilities 222 Lewis St Todd Nickleski Work Order: CE07733 Northern Lake Service, Inc. Sample Summary Sample Lab ID Matrix Date Sampled Date Received Descriptions of all qualifiers and comments listed throughout this report can be found on the Qualifiers Definitions Page. CE07733-01 EP2 (PFAS) DW 7/15/26 11:20 7/16/26 8:35 CE07733-02 EP2 Field Blank DW 7/15/26 11:20 7/16/26 8:35 CE07733-03 EP3 (PFAS) DW 7/15/26 10:30 7/16/26 8:35 CE07733-04 EP3 Field Blank DW 7/15/26 10:30 7/16/26 8:35 CE07733-05 EP4 (PFAS) DW 7/15/26 10:45 7/16/26 8:35 CE07733-06 EP4 Field Blank DW 7/15/26 10:45 7/16/26 8:35 CE07733-07 EP5 (PFAS) DW 7/15/26 10:15 7/16/26 8:35 CE07733-08 EP5 Field Blank DW 7/15/26 10:15 7/16/26 8:35 CE07733-09 EP6 (PFAS) DW 7/15/26 8:00 7/16/26 8:35 CE07733-10 EP6 Field Blank DW 7/15/26 8:00 7/16/26 8:35 [TOC_1]Samples in Report[TOC] Analysis Qualifiers: Analysis QualifierLabNumber 537.1 Perfluorinated Chemicals by LC/MS/MS FBNA1cCE07733-01 537.1 Perfluorinated Chemicals by LC/MS/MS FBNA1cCE07733-03 537.1 Perfluorinated Chemicals by LC/MS/MS FBNA1cCE07733-05 537.1 Perfluorinated Chemicals by LC/MS/MS FBNA1cCE07733-07 537.1 Perfluorinated Chemicals by LC/MS/MS FBNA1cCE07733-09 InitialsCancelledAnalysisSampleLab ID Cancelled Tests: CE07733-02 EP2 Field Blank 537.1 Perfluorinated Chemicals (LOD/LOQ) FB 7/23/26 8:26 CSC CE07733-04 EP3 Field Blank 537.1 Perfluorinated Chemicals (LOD/LOQ) FB 7/23/26 8:26 CSC CE07733-06 EP4 Field Blank 537.1 Perfluorinated Chemicals (LOD/LOQ) FB 7/23/26 8:26 CSC CE07733-08 EP5 Field Blank 537.1 Perfluorinated Chemicals (LOD/LOQ) FB 7/23/26 8:26 CSC CE07733-10 EP6 Field Blank 537.1 Perfluorinated Chemicals (LOD/LOQ) FB 7/23/26 8:26 CSC Page 2 of 10 The contents of this report apply to the sample(s) analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document. No duplication of this report is allowed, except in its entirety. Project: Project Number: Project Manager: Reported: River Falls, WI 54022 2026 Annual Drinking Water Testing 2026 WDNR Drinking Water Requirements 7/23/26 12:37 River Falls Municipal Utilities 222 Lewis St Todd Nickleski Work Order: CE07733 Northern Lake Service, Inc. [TOC_1]Sample Results[TOC]Sample Results ResultAnalyte Date Analyzed MethodQualifier Units CE07733-01 (DW) Sampled: 07/15/26 11:20 Sample: EP2 (PFAS) AnalystLOD Date Prepared Laboratory FIDLOQ MCL Semi-Volatiles 22Analytes: 1.0 7/22/26 14:5811-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-1-sulfoni c acid (11Cl-PF3OUdS) BAS0.31 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 1.5 7/22/26 14:589-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanonane-1-sulfonic acid (9Cl-PF3ONS) BAS0.47 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 1.3 7/22/26 14:584,8-dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoic acid (ADONA) BAS0.41 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 3.1 7/22/26 14:58hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO DA) BAS0.93 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 3.8 7/22/26 14:58N-ethyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NEtFOSAA) BAS1.1 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 4.1 7/22/26 14:58n-methyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NMeFOSAA) BAS1.2 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 2.4 7/22/26 14:58perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS) BAS0.72 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 14:58perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA) BAS0.54 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 2.0 7/22/26 14:58perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA) BAS0.62 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 14:58perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA) BAS0.54 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 14:58perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA) BAS0.56 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 2.1 7/22/26 14:58perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) BAS0.63 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.7 7/22/26 14:58perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) BAS0.52 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.5 7/22/26 14:58perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) BAS0.47 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.6 7/22/26 14:58perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) BAS0.48 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 14:58perfluorotetradecanoic acid (PFTA, PFTeDA) BAS0.54 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 14:58perfluorotridecanoic acid (PFTrDA) BAS0.54 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.7 7/22/26 14:58perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUnA) BAS0.52 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 88% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-PFHxA 70-130% 7/22/26 14:58 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 88% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-HFPODA 70-130% 7/22/26 14:58 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 88% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-PFDA 70-130% 7/22/26 14:58 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 86% Surrogate: (SURR) d5-NEtFOSAA 70-130% 7/22/26 14:58 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: Page 3 of 10 The contents of this report apply to the sample(s) analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document. No duplication of this report is allowed, except in its entirety. Project: Project Number: Project Manager: Reported: River Falls, WI 54022 2026 Annual Drinking Water Testing 2026 WDNR Drinking Water Requirements 7/23/26 12:37 River Falls Municipal Utilities 222 Lewis St Todd Nickleski Work Order: CE07733 Northern Lake Service, Inc. ResultAnalyte Date Analyzed MethodQualifier Units CE07733-03 (DW) Sampled: 07/15/26 10:30 Sample: EP3 (PFAS) AnalystLOD Date Prepared Laboratory FIDLOQ MCL Semi-Volatiles 22Analytes: 1.0 7/22/26 15:2311-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-1-sulfoni c acid (11Cl-PF3OUdS) BAS0.31 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 1.6 7/22/26 15:239-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanonane-1-sulfonic acid (9Cl-PF3ONS) BAS0.48 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 1.4 7/22/26 15:234,8-dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoic acid (ADONA) BAS0.42 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 3.1 7/22/26 15:23hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO DA) BAS0.95 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 3.9 7/22/26 15:23N-ethyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NEtFOSAA) BAS1.1 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 4.2 7/22/26 15:23n-methyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NMeFOSAA) BAS1.2 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 2.5 7/22/26 15:23perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS) BAS0.74 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 15:23perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 2.1 7/22/26 15:23perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA) BAS0.64 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 15:23perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 15:23perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA) BAS0.57 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 2.2 7/22/26 15:23perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) BAS0.65 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 15:23perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) BAS0.53 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.6 7/22/26 15:23perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) BAS0.48 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.7 7/22/26 15:23perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) BAS0.49 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 15:23perfluorotetradecanoic acid (PFTA, PFTeDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 15:23perfluorotridecanoic acid (PFTrDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 15:23perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUnA) BAS0.53 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 90% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-PFHxA 70-130% 7/22/26 15:23 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 89% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-HFPODA 70-130% 7/22/26 15:23 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 90% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-PFDA 70-130% 7/22/26 15:23 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 85% Surrogate: (SURR) d5-NEtFOSAA 70-130% 7/22/26 15:23 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: Page 4 of 10 The contents of this report apply to the sample(s) analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document. No duplication of this report is allowed, except in its entirety. Project: Project Number: Project Manager: Reported: River Falls, WI 54022 2026 Annual Drinking Water Testing 2026 WDNR Drinking Water Requirements 7/23/26 12:37 River Falls Municipal Utilities 222 Lewis St Todd Nickleski Work Order: CE07733 Northern Lake Service, Inc. ResultAnalyte Date Analyzed MethodQualifier Units CE07733-05 (DW) Sampled: 07/15/26 10:45 Sample: EP4 (PFAS) AnalystLOD Date Prepared Laboratory FIDLOQ MCL Semi-Volatiles 22Analytes: 1.0 7/22/26 15:4911-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-1-sulfoni c acid (11Cl-PF3OUdS) BAS0.31 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 1.6 7/22/26 15:499-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanonane-1-sulfonic acid (9Cl-PF3ONS) BAS0.48 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 1.4 7/22/26 15:494,8-dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoic acid (ADONA) BAS0.42 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 3.1 7/22/26 15:49hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO DA) BAS0.95 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 3.9 7/22/26 15:49N-ethyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NEtFOSAA) BAS1.1 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 4.2 7/22/26 15:49n-methyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NMeFOSAA) BAS1.2 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 2.5 7/22/26 15:49perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS) BAS0.74 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 15:49perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 2.1 7/22/26 15:49perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA) BAS0.64 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 15:49perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 15:49perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA) BAS0.57 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 2.2 7/22/26 15:49perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) BAS0.65 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 15:49perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) BAS0.53 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.6 7/22/26 15:49perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) BAS0.48 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.7 7/22/26 15:49perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) BAS0.49 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 15:49perfluorotetradecanoic acid (PFTA, PFTeDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 15:49perfluorotridecanoic acid (PFTrDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 15:49perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUnA) BAS0.53 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 92% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-PFHxA 70-130% 7/22/26 15:49 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 91% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-HFPODA 70-130% 7/22/26 15:49 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 93% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-PFDA 70-130% 7/22/26 15:49 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 85% Surrogate: (SURR) d5-NEtFOSAA 70-130% 7/22/26 15:49 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: Page 5 of 10 The contents of this report apply to the sample(s) analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document. No duplication of this report is allowed, except in its entirety. Project: Project Number: Project Manager: Reported: River Falls, WI 54022 2026 Annual Drinking Water Testing 2026 WDNR Drinking Water Requirements 7/23/26 12:37 River Falls Municipal Utilities 222 Lewis St Todd Nickleski Work Order: CE07733 Northern Lake Service, Inc. ResultAnalyte Date Analyzed MethodQualifier Units CE07733-07 (DW) Sampled: 07/15/26 10:15 Sample: EP5 (PFAS) AnalystLOD Date Prepared Laboratory FIDLOQ MCL Semi-Volatiles 22Analytes: 1.0 7/22/26 16:1511-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-1-sulfoni c acid (11Cl-PF3OUdS) BAS0.31 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 1.6 7/22/26 16:159-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanonane-1-sulfonic acid (9Cl-PF3ONS) BAS0.48 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 1.4 7/22/26 16:154,8-dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoic acid (ADONA) BAS0.42 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 3.1 7/22/26 16:15hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO DA) BAS0.95 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 3.9 7/22/26 16:15N-ethyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NEtFOSAA) BAS1.1 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 4.2 7/22/26 16:15n-methyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NMeFOSAA) BAS1.2 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 2.5 7/22/26 16:15perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS) BAS0.74 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 16:15perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 2.1 7/22/26 16:15perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA) BAS0.64 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 16:15perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 16:15perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA) BAS0.57 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 2.2 7/22/26 16:15perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) BAS0.65 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 16:15perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) BAS0.53 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.6 7/22/26 16:15perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) BAS0.48 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.7 7/22/26 16:15perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) BAS0.49 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 16:15perfluorotetradecanoic acid (PFTA, PFTeDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 16:15perfluorotridecanoic acid (PFTrDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 16:15perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUnA) BAS0.53 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 95% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-PFHxA 70-130% 7/22/26 16:15 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 93% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-HFPODA 70-130% 7/22/26 16:15 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 93% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-PFDA 70-130% 7/22/26 16:15 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 88% Surrogate: (SURR) d5-NEtFOSAA 70-130% 7/22/26 16:15 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: Page 6 of 10 The contents of this report apply to the sample(s) analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document. No duplication of this report is allowed, except in its entirety. Project: Project Number: Project Manager: Reported: River Falls, WI 54022 2026 Annual Drinking Water Testing 2026 WDNR Drinking Water Requirements 7/23/26 12:37 River Falls Municipal Utilities 222 Lewis St Todd Nickleski Work Order: CE07733 Northern Lake Service, Inc. ResultAnalyte Date Analyzed MethodQualifier Units CE07733-09 (DW) Sampled: 07/15/26 08:00 Sample: EP6 (PFAS) AnalystLOD Date Prepared Laboratory FIDLOQ MCL Semi-Volatiles 22Analytes: 1.0 7/22/26 16:4111-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-1-sulfoni c acid (11Cl-PF3OUdS) BAS0.31 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 1.6 7/22/26 16:419-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanonane-1-sulfonic acid (9Cl-PF3ONS) BAS0.48 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 1.4 7/22/26 16:414,8-dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoic acid (ADONA) BAS0.42 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 3.1 7/22/26 16:41hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO DA) BAS0.95 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 3.9 7/22/26 16:41N-ethyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NEtFOSAA) BAS1.1 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 4.2 7/22/26 16:41n-methyl perfluorooctanesulfonamidoacetic acid (NMeFOSAA) BAS1.2 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 ND 2.5 7/22/26 16:41perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS) BAS0.74 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 16:41perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 2.1 7/22/26 16:41perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA) BAS0.64 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 16:41perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 16:41perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA) BAS0.57 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 2.2 7/22/26 16:41perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) BAS0.65 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 16:41perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) BAS0.53 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.6 7/22/26 16:41perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) BAS0.48 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.7 7/22/26 16:41perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) BAS0.49 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 16:41perfluorotetradecanoic acid (PFTA, PFTeDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.9 7/22/26 16:41perfluorotridecanoic acid (PFTrDA) BAS0.55 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 1.8 7/22/26 16:41perfluoroundecanoic acid (PFUnA) BAS0.53 27/22/26 6:54ng/L EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0ND 86% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-PFHxA 70-130% 7/22/26 16:41 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 89% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-HFPODA 70-130% 7/22/26 16:41 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 90% Surrogate: (SURR) C13-PFDA 70-130% 7/22/26 16:41 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: 88% Surrogate: (SURR) d5-NEtFOSAA 70-130% 7/22/26 16:41 BAS EPA 537.1, Rev 2.0 7/22/26 6:54 Limits: Page 7 of 10 The contents of this report apply to the sample(s) analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document. No duplication of this report is allowed, except in its entirety. Project: Project Number: Project Manager: Reported: River Falls, WI 54022 2026 Annual Drinking Water Testing 2026 WDNR Drinking Water Requirements 7/23/26 12:37 River Falls Municipal Utilities 222 Lewis St Todd Nickleski Work Order: CE07733 Northern Lake Service, Inc. ExpiresNumber Laboratory Facility Identifications Code Description 2 NLS (Crandon) WDNR Laboratory ID No. 721026460 8/31/26 [TOC_1]Certifications[TOC] Page 8 of 10 The contents of this report apply to the sample(s) analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document. No duplication of this report is allowed, except in its entirety. Project: Project Number: Project Manager: Reported: River Falls, WI 54022 2026 Annual Drinking Water Testing 2026 WDNR Drinking Water Requirements 7/23/26 12:37 River Falls Municipal Utilities 222 Lewis St Todd Nickleski Work Order: CE07733 Northern Lake Service, Inc. Qualifier Definitions Item Definition FBNA1c The field sample had no detects at or greater than the minimum reporting limit of 2.0 ng/L, per method requirements the corresponding field reagent blank was not required to be analyzed. J Result is between LOD and LOQ and considered to be within a region of less-certain quantitation. ND Analyte NOT DETECTED at or above the LOD or MRL. LOD Limit of Detection. LOQ Limit of Quantitation. NA Not Applicable. Dry Dry Weight Basis. Wet Wet Weight Basis. % Dry Equal to: (mg/kg dry) / 10000. 1000 ug/L Equal to: 1 mg/L. MCL Maximum Contaminant Levels for Drinking Water Samples. Shaded results indicate >MCL. RPD Relative Percent Difference. %REC Percent Recovery. Source Sample that was matrix spiked or duplicated. All LOD/LOQs adjusted to reflect preparation volumes, dilutions, and/or solids content. [TOC_1]Qualifiers and Definitions[TOC] Page 9 of 10 The contents of this report apply to the sample(s) analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document. No duplication of this report is allowed, except in its entirety. Administrator’s Report S eptember 8, 6:30 p.m. – Council Meeting September 22, 6:30 p.m. – Council Meeting COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ensure sustained (re)development of the city from the prospect stage through construction • Brookgreen – Occupancy granted for Buildings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and Clubhouse. Buildings 7-10 are under construction. • Oak Hill – 3 permits issued, 1 CO issued. • The Preserve – 0 permits issued, 0 COs issued. • Thompson Heights – 0 permits issued, 1 CO issued. • Wildflower Meadows – 0 permits issued • The Wildflower Meadows subdivision on Powell Avenue is under construction. Water and Sewer utilities are currently being installed. • An application for a Planned Unit Development Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) has been submitted for The Creamery – a brewery, taproom, and event center with four short -term rental units at W. Cedar Street and River Street. Plan Commission recommended approval of the request at their meeting on July 7, 2026. City Council approved the SIP at their meeting on July 28, 2026. • At the July 7, 2026 meeting, Plan Commission approved a special sign permit request from Sycamore II for a monument sign; the permit was requested in order to locate the sign closer to the property line than t he ordinance allows. The proposed location was reviewed to ensure sightlines are maintained for vehicles and pedestrians. The proposed sign meets all other ordinance requirements. K innickinnic River Corridor Plan Phase I • Senator Baldwin included the Kinni Corridor Project design funding in her list for 2027 congressionally directed spending initiatives. We’ll know more later this year if it advances. Library renovations • The majority of the library remodel is complete. Safe Streets Action Plan (will be completed in 2026) • The Safe Streets for All Safety Action Plan was adopted by Council on May 12 th. Downtown Project • Our 2026 BUILD grant application to the Federal Highway Administration was not selected for a grant award. The Safe Streets for All Implementation Grant application has been submitted for a downtow n r econstruction project and we expect to be notified in Fall 2026 if that grant application is successful. Conservation and Parks Division • Park and Recreation Advisory Board recommended approval to City Council a combination of new park land and cash-in-lieu of land be accepted for park dedication for the Ironhorse neighborhood (EW Homes) at CYU Hwy M and 1060 th Street. • Jackson Tody, Eagle Scout candidate, fundraised for and installed a dog agility course at the River • BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED Permit Type JULY YTD Permit Value JULY Permit Value YTD Building Permits 18 164 $7,179,093 $39,408,000 New Home Permits 3 47 $670,000 $12,386,000 14 Fal ls Dog Park as a part of his service project. The project was completed on July 24, 2026. • Improvements to the fishing pier and picnic area along the White Pathway were completed. Staff c leared invasive and overgrown vegetation to improve visibility from the path to Lake George. Over 300 nat ive shrubs, perennials, and grasses were planted. Division Street crosswalks • The Safe Streets for All Action Plan is expected to include a concept plan for an improved pedestrian crossing at East Division and Wasson Lane. Stewardship of Public Infrastructure • The 2026 Mill and Overlay project was awarded to Lepke Trucking and Excavating. Work will occur starting in July and will occur on Paulson Road. City staff prepared a grant application and anticipates receiving a Wisconsin Local Roads Improvement Grant for $50,000 to support this project. Mapping • Map of available sites for development • Map of active development projects map POLICE DEPARTMENT Training • July 15 – ERU Training – Sgt. Rudesill, Sgt. Walker, Ofc. M. Miller, Ofc. Amaro, Ofc. Fairbairn, • July 28-30 – Intoximeter EC/IR II 3-Day Basic Breath Examiner Specialist Training – Ofc. Horn, Ofc. A ustin, Ofc. Zupanc • July 29 – Defensive Tactics – Sgt Rudesill • July 29 – ICAC Update / Refresher – Inv. R. Miller, Inv. Thomas FIRE DEPARTMENT Run Volume In July 2026, we responded to a total of 31 calls for service, which compares to 44 calls for the same period in 2025. Year to date: 2026 = 233 calls; 2025 = 222 calls. A ctivities/Highlights • Completed 91 fire inspections in July, bringing the 2026 total to 621. • Participated in River Falls Days Parade, kids water fights, and other related community events. • Provided fire department coverage for the Truck and Tractor Pull and the Demo Derby. • Held our annual RFFD Summer Picnic at Glen Park on 7/13 with members, families, and retired firefighters. • Supported the Fox 9 Townball Tour with the Ladder truck and a cooling water spray for kids. • Hosted a well-attended Water Fun Event and cookout with the Mayor. • Fire station construction remains on schedule; concrete poured and interior systems installation underway. UTILITIES Electric • Hired Chris White as a Meter Technician. • A1 Power is in town to begin directional drilling for cable replacement. Golfview will be the first neighborhood that work will begin on. • Work was started on the East Division cable replacement project. Completion will mean substantially less outages caused by overloaded underground cables. • Our Neighbors Place primary extension has been completed, and we are ready to install permanent electric service when the facility is ready. • Work has started on Valleyview Apartments (Mann Valley) primary extension. C ustomer Service • Customer Service staff began the disconnection process by sending out disconnection letters on July 8 t o 173 residential customers and 13 businesses with a past due balance of $250.00 or more. Outbound r eminder calls were made to 137 customers on July 14. In addition, 21 text messages were sent July 16 as a final form of communication prior to disconnection. • One disconnection took place on July 20. There were 38 payment arrangements in place on July 20 to avoid disconnection and provide more time to pay for their past due utilities. • The Customer Service team scheduled 31 water -related service orders. Most of these service order requests were water meter exchanges. • In-person absentee voting started July 28 for the Partisan Primary Election on August 11. E ngineering Technician Work • Mapped 37 AMI meters changes. • 2 plan reviews (The Whisk, The Creamery Resubmittal) • 1 training session (Annual Fire Extinguisher Training) • Worked with IT on Dropbox, Civiclens and sewer video link issues. • Assisted B&M locating. • Finished GPS and mapping of the water and sanitary for Wildflower Subdivision • Continued GPS and mapping on Skycoat • Put 2026 Rout & Seal Project on Quest bidding site and presided over the bid opening. • Started analysis for a 2027-2028 Sanitary Lining Project. • Performed a home lateral inspection. W ater/Wastewater department • Generator Preventive Maintenance (PM) was performed at all wells and treatment facility. Well 6 is the only well that needed some maintenance performed on generator. • Manhole rehabilitation: We have received quotes from Total Excavation on repairing two manhole that are needed and well overdue on repairs. Due to the severity of these manholes, I would like to address the issue of repairing them this year. The memo that is presented in this meeting will bring you up to dat e. • The team continues to work on meter change-outs, televising, service line potholing, and valve ex ercising. • Bettendorf Excavating repaired and replace one valve on Main St and one hydrant on Cascade. • Certification documents for the 2025 Notices of Known or Potential Service Lines Containing Lead for River Falls have been submitted. WIDNR will notify us when the certification documents have been reviewed. Still waiting for response. WPPI • Incentive Programs and Green Blocks o Total RFMU Program participation (as of August 1, 2026)  36 customers received $13,630 in incentives o Total River Falls Focus on Energy Participation (as of August 3, 2026)  241 customers received $275,144 in incentives o Total IRA (Inflation Reduction Act) HOMES and HEAR participation  4 customers received $18,309 in rebates o Green Blocks Update –  June had 3,558 blocks purchased by 1,249 customers  6,379,200 kWh of renewable energy purchased in 2026. • Upcoming Events of Interest o August 27-28 – WPPI Executive Committee Meeting o S eptember 16 -18 – WPPI Annual Meeting o October 8 – Orientation to WPPI* MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Alison H. Page, Mayor DATE: August 26, 2026 TITLE: MAYOR’S APPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED ACTION Consideration of the following appointments: Appointment of Sarah Jenkins to the BID Board through May 2027 17