0:06The primary focus of the meeting was the review of three proposals for a community branding project, a significant effort intended to shape Oronoco’s identity. The three proposals, submitted by Cracker Jack from Rochester, Sers Creative from Red Wing, and Tulip Tree from Stewartville, presented varying scopes and costs, prompting a detailed evaluation by the EDA. Sers Creative’s proposal, at $34,000, was the most expensive, while Cracker Jack’s, at $7,500, included a branding study but required additional funding for implementation. Tulip Tree’s proposal, priced at $20,000, offered a comprehensive rollout strategy and project management, with the potential for a $10,000 grant to offset costs.

Concerns were raised about the transparency and clarity of the proposals, particularly regarding Cracker Jack’s lack of detail about additional costs in subsequent phases. To address these issues, the EDA discussed developing a decision matrix to evaluate the proposals uniformly. A member with experience in reviewing Requests for Proposals (RFPs) volunteered to draft an initial version of the matrix for further discussion at the next meeting, scheduled for March 25. The importance of obtaining additional materials, such as previous work examples from each proposal, was also emphasized to ensure a fair evaluation process.

14:41In parallel with branding efforts, the EDA is pursuing recreational and inclusive initiatives, aiming for up to $10,000 in potential funding for local park improvements. The funding application deadline is set for the 28th of the month, with results expected in early April. Discussions included adding park benches, garbage cans, and paths to enhance accessibility, and the authority is engaging with the Parks Board to identify urgent needs. Interest was expressed in establishing pickleball courts, viewed as age-friendly and beneficial to the community, with a suggestion to use existing surfaces for dual purposes such as basketball and pickleball.

27:38The EDA also explored potential housing developments, specifically a townhouse project near Cedar Woodlands. This proposed development includes 14 condominium buildings on a site of approximately 2.5 to 2.6 acres, zoned for residential and business use. A public engagement meeting had already been conducted, gathering input from approximately 30 community members who expressed concerns about traffic management and the integration of green space. The developer, who has experience with projects across the United States, showed a willingness to incorporate community feedback into the design process, including setting rental guidelines through a Condo Association.

40:22A member expressed uncertainty over whether the council valued the EDA’s contributions, citing a lack of response to previous communications. This sentiment was echoed by others, who noted that political and financial frustrations had led to the departure of several board members.

Despite these challenges, the EDA acknowledged the importance of planning for growth, with a member stating, “We can’t avoid growth,” and emphasizing the need for a vision for Oronoco’s future. The EDA’s role as a preparatory body for the Planning and Zoning Commission was highlighted, with members noting their function in conducting preliminary research to streamline the council’s decision-making process.