OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Red Wing, Minnesota/City Council
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

City Council Workshop on North Service Drive Sidewalk and TIF Agreement, June 22, 2026

City Council — Monday, June 22, 2026
BodyRed Wing, Minnesota
SessionCity Council
DateMonday, June 22, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:10:37

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Unassigned speaker

0:10

All

Speaker 1

0:11

right, I'll call us to order.

0:12

Tonight is

Speaker 2

0:12

Monday, June 22nd, and we do have a workshop.

0:15

So two items.

0:17

And again, thank you for coming on this beautiful night.

0:20

And I do think we have everybody here, but I think we'll start with our North Service Drive sidewalk update and snow removal policy.

0:27

I think we have Zach and Sean on this.

0:29

And I've been told we're kind of looking for input and make sure you get comments.

Speaker 3

0:37

Yeah, uh, thank you.

0:39

So I'll give a quick intro and then uh this ties in with public works here, too.

0:44

So that's why Sean's up here for any questions.

0:46

Um yeah, so workshop we're looking for essentially a consensus um as

Unassigned speaker

0:53

far

Speaker 3

0:53

as your support of the direction we're heading in or not, so we know to change direction if need be.

1:00

Uh, but our sidewalk project, which uh is currently still in the finalizing design phase and acquiring easements throughout that process.

1:10

We have been talking with the residents and business owners to get these temporary and permanent easements, and kind of from the get go, one of the concerns we've heard is snow removal, which we you know is always common no matter what when you're adding in sidewalk and that responsibility for those adjacent property owners to maintain, which is what our current policy is.

1:32

Um, in this case would be adjacent property owner maintains

Unassigned speaker

1:36

it.

Speaker 3

1:37

Um, it is a slightly atypical um design here.

1:41

Um, just because we have such a limited right away, we have a very limited about two and a half foot wide paved buffer between the sidewalk and the street, which really isn't any it is not enough room to have a factual snow storage, so it essentially gets all the snow from the street on

Unassigned speaker

2:01

there.

Speaker 3

2:02

Um so it is a little bit more snow than would be in a new design where you have a boulevard.

2:09

Anyways, um, in those discussions, Lisa, we got that pushback and and feedback from the property owners, and then between myself, Sean, and Administrator Um Heinemann, we've we're discussing our snow removal policy, which primarily um Sean's group and Chris have been talking about a revamp anyway, and we're preparing to bring that to you folks before the next snow season.

2:33

Um, and when we talked about that, we agreed or decided that we were gonna move forward with the direction that this segment would be maintained by the city in the future with that policy update this fall.

2:48

And so that's what we're looking for.

2:49

Feedback if that would be supported by um you all in general.

2:54

Uh, a couple notes to make on there.

2:56

As you see in the map here, the dark blue lines are essentially what we're looking to build as new sidewalk that is currently not there.

3:05

The lighter blue color is sidewalk that is currently there.

3:10

Technically, the strip by targets actually a trail.

3:14

Um, but either way, it's a pedestrian facility, and we would look to maintain that whole stretch with this proposal to kind of connect that whole corridor.

3:25

And we did note in there that

Speaker 4

3:27

if

Speaker 3

3:28

the city is doing it, obviously that's extra load, and we don't necessarily have a built-in buffer, but if we did update

Unassigned speaker

3:35

our

Speaker 3

3:35

policy or ordinance to a two or a three-day snow removal, that likely Sean's group would be able to accommodate that with more or less the same staff and equipment that we have now, just with that extra time rather than costing too much and extra funds.

3:52

Um, and that's really it.

3:54

So mainly just seeking consensus if you would think moving forward, the direction of city maintaining the sidewalk in the winter months would be agreeable or not.

4:04

And if Sean has anything to add, I'll let him add before you

Unassigned speaker

4:07

all

Speaker 3

4:08

discuss.

Speaker 5

4:09

Um not a lot to add, just um based on some resident feedback back in about February or so about the current snow and ice policy, which was adopted by the council in 2021.

4:20

That's kind of our our our guiding light, if you will.

4:23

That's exactly that we follow that policy to a T.

4:27

And the uh based on that feedback, it was brought through the ranks and Administrator Heinrich and I discussed a potential revamp.

4:37

Currently, def the the anything that is a blacktop surface is considered is defined as a trail, and anything that's a concrete surface is defined as a sidewalk.

Unassigned speaker

4:48

And that's how we differentiate between between the two, what what gets maintained and what doesn't trails are not maintained unless specifically directed by the city council to be maintained, and that's all memorialized in that snow and ice policy.

Speaker 5

5:02

And sidewalks by city code are maintained by either the either the city or the resident, the the property, the adjoining private budding property owner.

Speaker 2

5:13

Any concerns, questions?

5:14

Vicky Joe, I have a lot.

Speaker 6

5:16

But uh okay.

5:17

I thought sidewalk and trail was width, not stuff that makes it.

5:23

Not in the

Speaker 5

5:23

current policy,

Speaker 6

5:24

no.

5:25

Okay.

5:25

So that being said, then

Unassigned speaker

5:29

so

Speaker 6

5:29

Cobble Park, all the way around, that is maintained by the city too, right?

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Economic Development███████████████████████████████████35%
Tax Increment Financing████████████████████████████████32%
Engineering And Infrastructure███████████████████19%
Public Safety████4%
Port Authority████4%
Procedural███3%
Historic Preservation██2%
Public Engagement█1%
Summary of Proceedings

Red Wing City Council Workshop: North Service Drive Sidewalk and TIF Agreement, June 22, 2026

The Red Wing City Council held a workshop on Monday, June 22, 2026, at 5:00 PM to discuss two items: an update on the North Service Drive sidewalk project and snow removal policy, and a proposed Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement for the Fleischmann Maltery redevelopment project at 110 Broad Street. The workshop was attended by council members, city staff, and representatives from the Port Authority and financial consultants. The workshop adjourned at 6:10 PM.

North Service Drive Sidewalk Update/Snow Removal Policy

  • Engineering Director Zach Regnier and Public Works Director Shawn Blaney presented the sidewalk project and the city's snow and ice policy. The proposed sidewalk would be maintained by the city due to limited boulevard space and snow storage issues from plows. Business owners expressed concerns about maintenance, and the city is considering a tiered snow removal policy (tier one: streets; tier two: priority sidewalks and trails). Council members expressed support for city maintenance and the tiered approach, with the understanding that property owners would still be responsible for driveway aprons.

TIF Agreement for Fleischmann's Malting Project

  • Community Development Director Kyle Klatt presented the TIF assistance agreement for TIF District 9-3, covering multiple downtown parcels. The Fleischmann Maltery project would involve a total project cost of approximately $36.8 million, with an estimated annual gross TIF increment of about $455,000. The developer requests $6.1 million in TIF assistance (95% of increment) over 26 years. Baker Tilly Municipal Advisor Kolbe Kryzanowski presented the "but for" test analysis, concluding the project would not proceed without TIF assistance. Developer Apurva Patel presented project plans including 45 apartments, 54 fully furnished units, 31 condos, and retail space. Discussion included options for revenue bonds vs. pay-as-you-go TIF notes, with city staff noting revenue bonds increase city risk. Port Authority Board Chair Paul Reding suggested revenue bonds could lower interest costs, but city attorney Jenny Boulton explained that revenue bonds may not be more efficient given project uncertainties. Council members asked clarifying questions about the project's financial viability and the combination of TIF and revenue bonds. The city's financial consultant noted that the project meets the but-for test.

Key Outcomes

  • Council members expressed consensus to proceed with the direction of city maintenance for the North Service Drive sidewalk and to revise the snow and ice policy with a tiered system.
  • Council discussed the TIF agreement for the Fleischmann Maltery project and will consider formal approval at the regular meeting later that evening (Agenda Item 9C).
  • Staff will work with the developer to address outstanding issues, including an amendment to TIF District 9-3 to reflect updated valuations and continued coordination with the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) on grant funding.

Meeting Transcript

All right, I'll call us to order. Tonight is Monday, June 22nd, and we do have a workshop. So two items. And again, thank you for coming on this beautiful night. And I do think we have everybody here, but I think we'll start with our North Service Drive sidewalk update and snow removal policy. I think we have Zach and Sean on this. And I've been told we're kind of looking for input and make sure you get comments. Yeah, uh, thank you. So I'll give a quick intro and then uh this ties in with public works here, too. So that's why Sean's up here for any questions. Um yeah, so workshop we're looking for essentially a consensus um as far as your support of the direction we're heading in or not, so we know to change direction if need be. Uh, but our sidewalk project, which uh is currently still in the finalizing design phase and acquiring easements throughout that process. We have been talking with the residents and business owners to get these temporary and permanent easements, and kind of from the get go, one of the concerns we've heard is snow removal, which we you know is always common no matter what when you're adding in sidewalk and that responsibility for those adjacent property owners to maintain, which is what our current policy is. Um, in this case would be adjacent property owner maintains it. Um, it is a slightly atypical um design here. Um, just because we have such a limited right away, we have a very limited about two and a half foot wide paved buffer between the sidewalk and the street, which really isn't any it is not enough room to have a factual snow storage, so it essentially gets all the snow from the street on there. Um so it is a little bit more snow than would be in a new design where you have a boulevard. Anyways, um, in those discussions, Lisa, we got that pushback and and feedback from the property owners, and then between myself, Sean, and Administrator Um Heinemann, we've we're discussing our snow removal policy, which primarily um Sean's group and Chris have been talking about a revamp anyway, and we're preparing to bring that to you folks before the next snow season. Um, and when we talked about that, we agreed or decided that we were gonna move forward with the direction that this segment would be maintained by the city in the future with that policy update this fall. And so that's what we're looking for. Feedback if that would be supported by um you all in general. Uh, a couple notes to make on there. As you see in the map here, the dark blue lines are essentially what we're looking to build as new sidewalk that is currently not there. The lighter blue color is sidewalk that is currently there. Technically, the strip by targets actually a trail. Um, but either way, it's a pedestrian facility, and we would look to maintain that whole stretch with this proposal to kind of connect that whole corridor. And we did note in there that if the city is doing it, obviously that's extra load, and we don't necessarily have a built-in buffer, but if we did update our policy or ordinance to a two or a three-day snow removal, that likely Sean's group would be able to accommodate that with more or less the same staff and equipment that we have now, just with that extra time rather than costing too much and extra funds. Um, and that's really it. So mainly just seeking consensus if you would think moving forward, the direction of city maintaining the sidewalk in the winter months would be agreeable or not. And if Sean has anything to add, I'll let him add before you all discuss. Um not a lot to add, just um based on some resident feedback back in about February or so about the current snow and ice policy, which was adopted by the council in 2021. That's kind of our our our guiding light, if you will. That's exactly that we follow that policy to a T. And the uh based on that feedback, it was brought through the ranks and Administrator Heinrich and I discussed a potential revamp. Currently, def the the anything that is a blacktop surface is considered is defined as a trail, and anything that's a concrete surface is defined as a sidewalk. And that's how we differentiate between between the two, what what gets maintained and what doesn't trails are not maintained unless specifically directed by the city council to be maintained, and that's all memorialized in that snow and ice policy. And sidewalks by city code are maintained by either the either the city or the resident, the the property, the adjoining private budding property owner. Any concerns, questions?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com