Rochester City Council Meeting - February 18, 2026
Rochester City Council Meeting - February 18, 2026
The Rochester City Council convened on February 18, 2026, for a regular meeting covering public comments, consent agenda, two public hearings, a contract amendment for the Sixth Street Bridge project, and other business. Key topics included floodplain development, a major subdivision, and ongoing labor disputes with Transdev.
Consent Calendar
- The council approved items F1 through F11 and F13 through F21 on the consent agenda, with Councilmember Wall polling F12 (not approved). The motion carried unanimously.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Linda Parker criticized local leaders for using official positions to promote personal or partisan beliefs, stating it violated public trust when officials remained silent about crimes.
- Myron Rosted described a March 23, 2025 flood in his basement caused by a ruptured city water main. He incurred approximately $58,000 in damages, with a $19,000 cleaning bill and $12,000 bathroom replacement. The city denied his claim, deeming it an "act of God." He asked the council to justify that decision.
- Adam Busby (representing Workers Strike Back) accused Transdev of union-busting tactics, citing harsh discipline and a growing labor dispute.
- Ryan Timlin (former president of ATU Local 1005) stated that 14 operators had been suspended without completed investigations, including a 14-year employee with no prior record who received a three-day suspension. He called it a morale issue and a hostile work environment.
- Emma Smith (Workers Strike Back) demanded the city not renew its contract with Transdev unless all worker demands were met, accusing the company of choosing profit over people.
- Toby Holloway Holiday reported that union members voted unanimously to reject Transdev's "last best final offer" and authorized a strike. On February 17, 2026, 95% of members voted no on a second final offer. She noted 13 workers had been suspended, two after the strike authorization vote.
- Rick Labor questioned why the city leases transit operations to Transdev while running other departments directly, asking for ridership comparisons.
- Molly Dennis (former council member) echoed support for workers and criticized council accountability. She highlighted council salaries ($56,000/year for members, $65,000 for the president, $84,000 for the mayor) and expressed concern about lack of office hours and community presence.
Discussion Items
- City Administrator's Report: Alison Elms acknowledged park, forestry, and transit crews, noted Black History Month events, announced block-by-block closures on February 20-21 for equipment moves, and updated on the transit system: on February 11, 40% of fixed route drivers called in, causing 37 missed trips. A federal mediator had been requested, and Transdev contracted a driving company to improve reliability. The contract vote on February 17 did not pass, but negotiations continued.
- Mayor's Report: A town hall on advanced policing technology (drones, cameras) is scheduled for March 3, 2026 at the Heinz Center, 6-7:30 p.m., hosted by Mayor Norton and Rochester Police Department.
- G1 – Conditional Use Permit – ML Group LLC: The applicant sought a conditional use permit (CUP) to place excavated fill within the 100-year flood-prone subdistrict and provide compensatory storm storage for future multifamily development southeast of Country Club Road West and 45th Avenue Southwest. Staff recommended approval with three conditions. The applicant, Bill Twaiten (WSE Engineering), stated the design ensured no rise in flood levels, supported by hydraulic modeling. Public speakers:
- Matt Puffer (Meadow Lakes HOA) argued the design had flaws: stormwater infiltration basins too deep, compensatory storage ponds too deep (bottom at 1,016 elevation while normal creek water levels are 1,021-1,023), and altered water flow that could increase erosion. He urged caution before moving dirt.
- Jamie Newman cited concerns about flooding and traffic increases affecting the Cascade Lake parking structure and nearby developments. Council questions focused on modeling assumptions, groundwater levels, and coordination with other projects. Staff affirmed that the design does not count storage below groundwater and that no adverse impacts are expected. The motion passed 5-2-1 (Councilmember Miller voting no).
- G2 – Major Land Subdivision – Westbury First: The applicant requested subdivision of 35.4 acres into 105 single-family lots (55 ft wide, 120 ft deep) east of 60th Avenue NW. The general development plan was approved in March 2025 for 220 lots. Conditions included a temporary fire access road or sprinklers for lots with single access. No public testimony was given. The motion passed unanimously.
- H1 – Professional Services Contract Amendment – Sixth Street Bridge Project: Staff requested a $981,449 amendment to cover additional design work for the bridge, road safety, and riverfront improvements (total project cost ~$36.5 million). The amendment accounted for design iterations (e.g., clear span not feasible due to hydraulics), regulatory compliance, and enhanced public engagement. Councilmember Wall raised concerns about reducing construction funds, but staff assured value engineering had been applied (e.g., seeding instead of potted plants) and that bids may include alternates. The motion passed unanimously.
- Ordinance Readings:
- First reading of ordinance creating Chapter 5-24 on film permits.
- First reading of rezoning 13 acres (west of Highway 63, north of 60th St SW) from AG to R1.
- Second reading of rezoning 2.04 acres (southwest corner of East Center St and 6th Ave SE) from R2X to R4. All passed.
- Other Business – Councilmember Palmer:
- Reported on a county land use plan amendment meeting (continued for cooperation with township and developer).
- Called for expedited review of the city's Tax Increment Financing (TIF) policy, citing the need for attainable housing and noting that each 20% cost increase translates to $200 more per month for rent. City Administrator Elms noted a contract had been approved to review the policy by June. Councilmember Keene and Miller argued against expediting, preferring to await comprehensive consultant analysis (urban three analysis and TIF component). No vote was taken, but the discussion indicated a June timeline.
Key Outcomes
- Consent agenda approved (items F1-F11, F13-F21) with F12 pulled by Councilmember Wall (no action on F12).
- G1 – CUP for floodplain fill (CD 2025-007 CUP) : Approved 5-2-1 (Councilmember Miller nay, Councilmember Doring absent).
- G2 – Westbury First subdivision (CD 2026-001 plat) : Approved unanimously.
- H1 – Contract amendment for Sixth Street Bridge project : Approved unanimously.
- Ordinance readings (J1, J2, K1) all passed.
- TIF policy review remains on track for June; no expedited action taken.
- Transit contract negotiations with Transdev continue; federal mediator involved; union authorized strike; no council action taken on the matter.
Meeting Transcript
Please rise as you're able for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge a legal United States of America. One nation under whatever you disparal. Welcome everybody to this snowy evening of February 18th in our Rochester City Council meeting. We begin each council meeting with our open comment period. This is an opportunity for anyone from the public to speak on items that we will not be taking public testimony during a public hearing later in the agenda. Each person has up to two minutes to speak for a total of 20 minutes. I'll be keeping time through two methods. One, the stoplight here, and the red uh digital clock uh to my left. Uh I'd request each speaker to be concise to allow for more uh people to speak during the designated time. Participants are further encouraged to limit comments to topics that are within the scope and jurisdiction of the city council's ability to affect policy. Council members and staff do not respond to your comments during public comment, but will instead follow up on any specific requests separately. If you have materials to share with the council, please give them to the city clerk who is to my right to distribute, and you will be invited up in the order in which you signed up. We will start with Linda Parker. Good evening, Commission. Glad to be here. Thank you for giving me this opportunity. I recently listened to the mayor address a couple of newly appointed committee members that once you hold an official title, you're no longer speaking as a single group, you're representing the entire community. When you're using your official position in your comments to promote personal beliefs or partisan viewpoints, it creates a false impression that those views reflect the will of the whole community. When local leaders support the effort to dismantle enforcement entirely while remaining silent about crimes committed against citizens, it's a violation of public trust and the duty of their office. And I find that unacceptable. Next up, we have Myron Rosted. Hi, Ruth. Hi, City Council. My name is Myron Rostett. I'm a resident of 821, 26th Street, Southeast, Rochester, Minnesota. I'm here tonight because on March 23rd last year, at 11 o'clock, I was welcomed by a neighbor to go check my basement in which she said she had water and herds. I checked, I got a split level home. I checked my basement and I had the entire basement flooded. And it got flooded due to because of a sewer line, which got ruptured by a water main street by my house. I called them that night and we got a claim number and stuff. Uh documented all the damages and stuff. I had a service cleaner come in. I was able to get one that day come in. He evaluated the situation, read the situation, and told me everything. Sheetrock had to be cut, all the doors had to be taken out because he says if you don't do this, you will not be able to sell it because of the damages. So I had to have all that done. Everything that was accounted for. After I got everything done, it's like I have uh roughly 58,000 in my basement. And when I go to try to submit all this, nobody would ever. I called the number on the sheet that said we give you a helping hand, everything let us know. Nobody would return my calls. I will reach out to my insurance agent. And she tried to get some answers. She got answers that was uh they are not going to pay anything on the claim and close the claim due to because it was an act of God. Now I don't see how a water main and that, which is considered interest structure of the city can be considered an act of God when a mechanical function breaks, causing me hardship on all this. Um I just asked the representatives to look me straight in the eye and uh tell me that it's justifiable that I gotta accept that it was an act of God and eat the billing. I have documentation of all the work that I've had done, the cleaning bill, the cleaning bill alone ran me close to 19,000. And then, like I say, replacing other sheetrock. I had a bathroom that wasn't even a year old yet that I had totally redone.
openpublica.com