River Falls City Council reviews draft 2025–27 strategic initiatives, weighs parks, innovation center and impact fee update

River Falls City Council staff presented a draft list of roughly 25–27 strategic initiatives at a council workshop, asking council members for feedback before the council considers adopting the list at its Aug. 26 meeting.

The draft groups initiatives under four themes — connected community, economic vitality, financial sustainability and quality municipal services — and highlights near-term projects including the Kinnickinnic River Corridor feasibility and design, the Safe Streets action plan, construction work on Glen Park phase 2, continued work on the downtown master plan, an innovation center expansion tied to likely Economic Development Administration funding, and a consultant-led review of the city’s impact fees.

Why it matters: The initiatives are intended to translate the council’s vision into prioritized projects that guide staff decision-making and resource allocation over the next two years. Staff characterized the list as a “scorecard” of priorities the council expects the city to accomplish rather than aspirational goals.

Staff presentation and key projects Staff framed the initiatives as a two‑year work plan and said the list builds on council direction from an April retreat. “This is not meant to be aspirational or stretch. These are meant to be an identification of priorities of the community via the council about things that you expect us to get accomplished,” Staff member said.

On the Kinnickinnic River Corridor, staff described the next step as completing a feasibility study and beginning project design; the council would need to take future action to move into detailed design and construction. For Glen Park phase 2, staff said the project is intended to move from planning into construction and likely include playground upgrades, path work, gazebos, sport‑court possibility, a new east restroom and new shelters, though staff said the city may not be able to fund every element.

The downtown master plan remains a staff‑led continuation of prior work; staff estimated the overall downtown project could require up to about $30,000,000 in federal and other funding. On economic development, staff emphasized “continued infill on corporate parks” and to market existing sites, while noting council members also expressed interest in feasibility for additional corporate park sites.

Innovation center funding and structure Staff told the council it recently received communication that the city is likely to receive about $2,200,000 from the Economic Development Administration for an innovation center expansion. Staff said the expected financing structure assumes a 50/50 funding split, with the River Falls Economic Development Corporation (EDC) providing the local match and the city acting as a pass‑through for grant funds: “the money is gonna come through the city, but it goes to the building. And we don't retain ownership, but we also don't have any fiscal obligation other than the time and effort that you have staff spending on it,” Staff member said.

Impact fee review and timing Staff recommended a consultant‑led review of the city’s impact fees, noting those fees were last set around 2001 and that state law has changed several times since. On statutory timing windows for spending impact fee revenue, Staff member said generally “there's a window. Generally speaking, it's 7 years,” but added the legislature has changed the law multiple times and that the consultant report will address specifics. The review will include policy decisions about cost‑recovery targets and how fees treat multifamily versus single‑family development.

Items not included and council debate Staff identified several items that “missed the cut” because of workload, including a comprehensive housing strategy, feasibility for added corporate park sites, updates to several park master plans (Houghton and DeSanctis), and a full dark‑sky legislative effort. Council members debated priorities: one council member argued corporate park development should be the top priority because of long lead times to make sites shovel‑ready, saying, “I really think we need to, not just a corporate park, but all our things. We need to do infills … I think those need to be filled before we really give too much consideration to … a [new] corporate park,” Council member A said. Another member urged staff to examine dark‑sky legislation as part of downtown or subdivision work: “there's an opportunity within some of these plans to do some of these actions that we can agree on,” Council member B said.

Staff cautioned council members that the list is intentionally aggressive and that adding major new initiatives would dilute capacity: “if we get some other really fantastic opportunity, we will really have to make a decision, like, take a time out on downtown or take a time out on utilities,” Staff member said.

Next steps: Staff asked the council to provide feedback that staff will use to revise the draft and return it to the council on Aug. 26 for possible adoption. Staff emphasized council direction is required to set priorities because “if we have a lot of priorities, then we have no priorities.”

Ending: The council workshop continued with member comments and questions; staff said it will incorporate feedback and return a revised strategic initiatives package for the Aug. 26 council meeting for adoption consideration.