View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
Council Meeting Minutes
April 14, 2014
1. Roll Call
Mayor Roe called
the meeting to order at approximately 6:00 p.m. Voting and Seating Order:
McGehee; Willmus; Etten; Laliberte; and Roe. City Manager Pat Trudgeon and City
Attorney Mark Gaughan were also present.
2. Approve Agenda
Etten seconded approval of the agenda as presented.
Laliberte; Etten; McGehee; and Roe
3. Public Comment
Mayor Roe called
for public comment by members of the audience on any non-agenda items. No one
appeared to speak.
Communications, Reports, and Announcements
Roe announced a current vacancy on the Human Rights Commission for a partial
term to expire on March 31, 2015; with application deadline of April 25, 2014.
Additional information is available 651/792-7001 or
Mayor Roe announced
a Public Hearing at the Shoreview Community Center on April 17, 2014 at 6:30
p.m. for the purpose of a presentation and public testimony on Comcast's
proposal to renew its cable franchise with the ten member cites, including the
City of Roseville. Mayor Roe advised that a formal proposal would be heard
from Comcast, followed by questions of the public; and will also be broadcast
on several cable access channels. Additional information is available at
651/792-7554 or ctv15.org.
Roe announced the receipt by the City of Roseville, in conjunction with School
District No. 623, and other community organizations in the amount of $8,000, to
be used for dementia related efforts in the community. Mayor Roe noted that
School Board member Kitty Gogins was the contact person for additional
information, available at 651/481-7500.
Willmus thanked Councilmember Etten for his coordination of efforts and members
of the Minnesota National Guard, and volunteers from the community for their
organized clean-up over the weekend at Villa Park, Reservoir Woods, and
Mayor Roe echoed
that appreciation, noting that this is not the first time for Councilmember
Etten to take on those efforts.
Donations and Communications
Recognize Outgoing Commissioners
On behalf of
the community, the City Council and staff, Mayor Roe recognized and presented
certificates to retiring commissioners, and thanked them for their service.
Mayor Roe personally presented a certificate to Public Works, Environment and
Transportation Commissioner Jan Vanderwall for his service of two full, three
year terms, most recently serving as Chair of the Commission.
Vanderwall, on behalf of the Commission, thanked the City Council and community
for the honor of serving.
announced other Commissioners who would be provided certificates included:
Human Rights Commissioners Jill Brisbois, and Michelle Corneya, and Gary
Grefenberg; Ethic Commissioner Ann Callopy; Parks & Recreation Commissioner
Greg Simbeck; and Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commissioner and
former Chair Jim DeBenedet.
On behalf of
the community, City Council and staff, Mayor Roe thanked these volunteers for
their service in an advisory capacity to the City of Roseville and the City
Accept Police Department Donation from Granite Foundation
Chief Rick Mathwig provided background information and summary of this local,
family foundation that provided assistance to non-profit organizations and
individuals in financial need, including various proceeds to the City's Police Department on several occasions. Chief Mathwig noted their most recent donation of funds to the Department for GPS devices and monthly monitoring charges to address and combat theft and burglary crime in Roseville. Chief Mathwig advised that these devices were used across the country, including in several areas in Ramsey Council, but this would be the City's first step in using this technology.
moved, Laliberte seconded, acceptance of a donation of $1,000 from the Granite
Foundation to the City's Police Department, for the purpose of purchasing and
monthly monitoring charges for global positioning system devices in an effort
to combat theft and burglary crimes in Roseville.
Willmus; Laliberte; Etten; McGehee; and Roe
On behalf of
community, City Council, and staff, Mayor Roe thanked members of the foundation
for their generous donation and interest in the safety of the community.
Recognize and Accept a Donation from the Roseville Police
Chief Mathwig introduced members of the foundation present tonight - Vice
President Julie Wearn, Treasurer Michael Bilski, and member Hugh Thibodeau -
and provided a background of this recently formed Minnesota non-profit, 501©(3)
corporation. Chief Mathwig advised that this had been a goal of his for
several years, and had finally come to fruition due to the great work of this
group; with this proposed donation one of many planned for the future, with
this donation for a tactical vest for Canine Officer Sieger, partnered with
Roseville Police Officer Brooke Jennings; and valued at $2,718.00.
the prompting of Mayor Roe, Treasurer Bilski expressed the Foundation's gratefulness in helping fund things outside the normal budget to make the City and its Police Department safer, for the overall benefit of Roseville citizens.
Willmus seconded, acceptance of a donation from the Roseville Police Foundation
to the City's Police Department, for the purpose of providing a canine tactical vest for Roseville K9, Sieger, at a value of $2,718.00.
On behalf of the
community, City Council and staff, Mayor Roe thanked the Foundation for
6. Approve Minutes
and corrections to draft minutes had been submitted by the City Council prior
to tonight's meeting and those revisions were incorporated into the draft
presented in the Council packet.
Minutes of April 7, 2014 Meeting
Laliberte seconded, approval of Meeting Minutes of April 7, 2014, as amended.
Page 16, Line 6
- typographical error as noted (Etten)
Page 24, Line 4
- typographical correction of last word in sentence to read: "welding" rather
than "thawing." (Etten)
7. Consent Agenda
At the request
of Mayor Roe, City Manager Patrick Trudgeon briefly reviewed those items being
considered under the Consent Agenda.
Etten seconded, approval of the following claims and payments as presented.
73301 - 73372
Approve Business Licenses & Other Licenses & Permits
McGehee moved, Etten seconded, approval of business license applications
for the period of one (1) year, for the following applicants:
Type of License
Jorge Padilla; Massage Envy
2480 Fairview Avenue N, #120
Approve General Purchases and Sale of Surplus Items in Excess of
At the request
of Councilmember Laliberte, City Manager Trudgeon reviewed the intent of the
remodeled lower level City Hall office space, intended for Public Works and Information
Technology office use and Parks & Recreation storage use.
At the request
of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Trudgeon advised that the need for moving
Historical Society records and materials to City Hall was determined to be
inadequate; and therefore, staff was working with the group to relocate that
material to Evergreen Park at Fairview Avenue and County Road B in the future,
to an existing building, following some minor rehabilitation of that facility.
Mr. Trudgeon noted that this location had been supported by vote of the Board
of Directors and would allow for interaction of the Historical Society, School
District and Park users; with everyone excited about the possibilities of that
location, with programming in the future available during the day and weekends
as other activities and events were planned. However, prior to finalizing that
potential, Mr. Trudgeon advised that negotiations and discussions were underway
between the City and School District for this shared facility, with he and the
School Superintendent defining the roles and responsibilities for an
overarching agreement and written understanding, that will continue to be
developed over the next few months before presentation to the School Board and
City Council for their approvals.
Etten seconded, approval of the submitted list of general purchases and
contracts for services presented as follows; and as detailed in the Request for
Council Action (RCA) dated April 7, 2014; and Attachment A entitled, "2014
Capital Improvement Plan Summary - Updated 04/08/1403/31/2014."
Remodel Old Fire Admin
Office furniture for new area
RCM Equipment Co., LLC
Spray injection asphalt patcher
Adopt a Resolution to Accept the Work Completed, Authorize Final
Payment and Commence the One-Year Warranty Period on the 2013 Pavement
Willmus suggested that, in the future, warranty periods be set to expire
mid-summer to allow experience with one complete freeze/thaw cycle.
advised that staff would take that under consideration; with Mayor Roe noting
that the warranty period typically commenced with final payment, but agreed
that was a good point to consider in the future.
Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11142 (Attachment A) entitled,
"Final Construction Acceptance - 2013 Pavement Management Project;" starting
the one-year warranty period, and authorizing final payment in an amount not to
Consider Items Removed from Consent
General Ordinances for Adoption
Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at
approximately 7:25 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 7:35 p.m.
Meeting with Community Engagement Commission
welcomed the members of the newly-formed Community Engagement Commission
(CEC). Members present included: Gary Grefenberg; Desiree Mueller; Scott
Becker; Michelle Manke; and Katherine Ramundt, with Commissioner Theresa
Gardella arriving at approximately 6:47 p.m. Mayor Roe noted that Commissioner
Jonathan Miller had previously advised that he had a scheduling conflict and
was unable to attend tonight's meeting.
recognized Communications Manager Garry Bowman as the official staff liaison
for the Commission and reviewed several process and housekeeping details for
directing communication primarily through Mr. Bowman, and public meeting
notifications required by Minnesota Open Meeting Laws that applied to this
group as well. Mayor Roe further noted the need for the Commission, at their
first formal meeting, to appoint its Chair and Vice Chair to serve on an annual
suggested individual Councilmembers share their thoughts and areas of interest
with the CEC before hearing from the CEC.
Willmus welcomed members of the CEC and thanked them for volunteering to
serve. While questioning the need to get into the website issues at this
point, Councilmember Willmus expressed his interest in finding out the group's
perspective on that issue; and asked for clarification by the individual
members not having served on the Civic Engagement Task Force as to whether or
not they had yet had an opportunity to review the summary report of that group.
Laliberte opined that it would be great for the CEC to start with that task
force report as a starting point; however, she expressed her interest in the
group not being bound that that document, but for being able to move forward
quickly, and use the document for reference. Councilmember Laliberte expressed
her confidence in the ordinance for this Commission and places for the CEC to
start, particularly in the opportunities available neighborhoods and the business
community to strengthen them beyond the work done to-date by the Housing &
Redevelopment Authority (HRA) using the ordinance as a foundation from which to
Etten concurred with the comments of Councilmember Laliberte, opining that the
ordinance highlighted and listed a number of important points and functions for
the CEC, in addressing those collaborations and how open dialogue could benefit
them and in turn benefit the entire community by nurturing existing groups
(e.g. Northeast Youth and Family Services). Councilmember Etten spoke in
support of the CEC addressing Item D of the ordinance in facilitating effective
two-way communication, both of those frequently contacting the City and the
remainder and majority of citizens who don't make that contact, but still find out what's important to them, including the business community.
McGehee welcomed Commissioners, and also thanked them for being willing to
serve; and echoed the comments made by fellow Councilmembers. Councilmember
McGehee opined that one thing of great important to her is her view of this
group as a policy group, not an implementation group; but as a task force to
review and recommend strategies to come up with good ideas and policy
discussions, rather than for this group being responsible to do all things
versus pointing out opportunities to engage the community and facilitate
volunteerism. Beyond that, Councilmember McGehee echoed Councilmember
Laliberte's comments on the Task Force summary report; opining that she would
like this group to move beyond that document and not be bound by it, but to use it as a reference point, but not an end in itself, and to move beyond that to other policy issues.
Theresa Gardella arrived at this time, approximately 6:47 p.m.
echoed the comments of individual Councilmembers; and expounded on his
perception of the Task Force summary report for the CEC to become the stewards
of that document and its recommendations, not just to set it aside, but to
review other things beyond or in addition to that report. Mayor Roe opined that
the report provided valid recommendations to focus on as a city government;
with the CEC serving as stewards to make sure everything comes to fruition as
recommendations requiring City Council action for policies or needing
allocation of resources. Specific to Item F on the ordinance, Mayor Roe
advised that this item was based on his input for the future and update of the Imagine
Roseville 2025 community visioning efforts; and while not expecting the CEC
to address it in the first few months, to keep its importance in mind as a
product of those 2005 community efforts and identified aspirations summarized
from many ideas put forth. Mayor Roe opined that those goals could serve for
future ways to inform decision-making and should be at the forefront of any
discussions in the community to ensure they were being lived up to and the
community was still in agreement with those goals, or identifying those needing
updating or revision, to reflect those back into the process.
spelled out in the ordinance, Councilmember Laliberte suggested the need to
include looking at the City's senior population; and also for the CEC to
provide recommendations for tools that could be used to meet people where they
were with their busy, limited time available; and how to pass information on to
those residents in their daily lives.
Willmus echoed the comments of Mayor Roe regarding use of the Task Force summary
report; opining that it was an important document with lots of valuable
information, and with the CEC becoming stewards of that document, it could
serve to influence future decision-making.
same lines, Councilmember McGehee opined that a lot of the document is related
to policy and process; and further opined that a lot of existing policies in
Roseville have not been as inclusive or rewarding when they attempt to engage
the public. Councilmember McGehee noted that many discussions had been held
about educating the public about changes in the community, and how to engage
them in the process for topics of concern to them and how responsive the City
is to those coming forward with concerns or specific issues; with a need to
address implementation and policy issues needing direction.
Etten, as a caveat to previous comments, clarified that the CEC was a group
advising the City Council on policy, engagement, collaboration and
communication; and while recognizing that individual members of the CEC are
already actively involved in the community, he didn't want to stifle those natural extensions and ongoing outreach they already provided in the community. Councilmember Etten spoke in strong support of members of the CEC continuing to engage in those areas on behalf of the City Council.
concurred with Councilmember Etten's comments.
prompting of Mayor Roe, individual feedback was sought from the CEC.
sought clarification, from the twenty-page Task Force summary report, if the
City Council had determined or ranked their priorities in that document, or
identified which areas they wanted the CEC to focus on versus the entire
document. Member Ramundt opined that having some initial "wins" or areas of initial
agreement were important, and suggested the City Council provide that
information to the CEC at their earliest convenience.
recognized that this was a fair question.
Laliberte concurred that it was a good point; however, with recent changes made
to the system and in staffing since the presentation of that report, she
suggested that the document could use a review before providing that priority
opined that such a review would serve as a good discussion of the bodies at
their next joint meeting.
Willmus advised that several aspects of the summary report were of interest to
him: the two-way communication by the government and related to outreach
efforts, and accessibility to public officials, whether the CEC or City
Council; and how to create a mechanism for people to reach those serving on
commissions through the website or e-mail or phone options. Councilmember
Willmus expressed his interest in hearing the thoughts of the CEC on that. The
other area of interest expressed by Councilmember Willmus involved the website,
as he had previously alluded to; and recommendations of the Task Force and how
to move forward.
personal perspective, Mayor Roe stated that it would be easy to identify everything
in the report as important, as the report provided some prioritization itself,
and he wanted to remain deferential to that; but asked the CEC to review those
priorities in their role as advisors to the City Council, while respecting the
Grefenberg opined that the way the CEC preceded was influenced or directed by
the ordinance; and while not representing the citizens of Roseville, their role
was to make it easier for them to represent themselves. Member Grefenberg
opined that part of that was working in collaboration with staff; and he saw
his role as one of a resource to the City Council and staff, to avoid either
party from being blindsided by new proposals, but to be given a heads-up when
things come up. Member Grefenberg further stated that he hoped the way the CEC
worked could provide an example of what civic governance should be like in
Roseville; and with the Task Force summary report listing the paramount need
for clarity between the CEC and the City Council, and the CEC and staff, he
implored the City Council to pursue that same dynamic manner of communication
as he was currently experiencing with Communications Manager Bowman and City
Manager Trudgeon, expressing his appreciation for having that level of liaison
support in the upper echelons of the Administration Department.
Specific to the
CEC's charge, Member Grefenberg noted that they had no identified budget; and
questioned if funding would be available for events or programs the CEC may
wish to sponsor in the future with approval by the City Council.
clarified that, as with all things done by the City that would be addressed on
a case by case basis by the City Manager or City Council as applicable at that
Grefenberg noted the CEC's desire to engage other residents in their work, particularly those candidates for the CEC who were not appointed; and questioned if the City Council had any objection to doing so.
opined that it made sense, and due to the broad scope of the CEC, suggested
interaction with other advisory commissions as well as part of their efforts.
While suggesting that those answers may not be readily available at this time,
Mayor Roe opined that the City Council would not necessarily be opposed to
those types of collaborations in the community, since the entire point was
opined that, if the City Council wasn't immediately providing direction on priorities from the Task Force summary report, one of the first steps for the CEC seemed to be to identify priorities and make their recommendation to the City Council, using the report as a reference. Member Becker expressed his curiosity with the website update coming up later in tonight's agenda, opining that since that was a key part on the Task Force recommendation list, he had some open-ended concerns in the City entering into a new contract without input from the CEC as to whether the recommended vendor supported efforts of the CEC
and to what extent it met those needs. In recognizing that the vendor was offering a small upgrade fee, Member Becker opined that it was still real money and questioned how long the City would be constrained by that platform versus another venue. Member Becker advised that he and other members of the CEC had thoughts they would like to share on that issue.
Laliberte encouraged members to stay and engage during those discussions.
concurred, or opened the floor to their feedback at this point as well.
concurred with Mr. Becker, opining that with this opportunity to upgrade
things, there may be other platforms that would be advantageous to reach a
greater number of people, and she would also like an opportunity for the CEC to
opined that this would be the first link pin for someone seeking an ability to
start on the website, and was important to the overall mission of the CEC.
Grefenberg noted, having gone through the previous consultant selection and how
to or not to do it, especially with the Request for Proposals (RFP's) or list
of expectations that haven't been received or vetted by users of the website,
he opined that it was inauspicious for the CEC to begin with the decision
already having been made to hire a consultant to redesign the website and what
the City was looking for in its website. Based on his last experience, Member
Grefenberg opined that the CEC may have suggestions to improve the bid by
CivicPlus, but also this served as a primary example of the CEC working with
staff on the detail and in addressing the e-mail correspondence sent regarding
this issue to the City Council by CEC members Miller and Becker. Member
Grefenberg opined that the process seemed set up to fail, and further opined
that, no matter the vendor, the process should begin with a discussion by the
CEC and staff, and subsequent recommendation of the CEC and staff to the City
Council. Member Grefenberg clarified that communication efforts were much
better than they were a year ago; and while the RFP didn't try to do everything, and only focused on the website design, it was a significant step forward, but questioned if it was based on the Civic Engagement module. Member Grefenberg opined that getting and finding information on a more dynamic website were items of interest for the CEC before the City Council took final action; and asked that they be given a chance to offer their advice and make recommendations to them and staff before taking action.
concurrence by Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon suggested it may be appropriate
to have the website presentation from staff at this time and allow that
Laliberte sought any other issues from the CEC that were not tied to the
website, to ensure they were not lost.
expressed her agreement with the CEC going through the Task Force summary
report and developing the body's own priorities, since each individual
commissioner was coming to the group with very different perspectives and ideas
that were all so much broader than just communications. Member Gardella opined
that there was interest from other communities on the CEC, opining that it
could serve as a real role model for other cities, suggesting the need for
thoughtful and well-developed recommendations after clarifying those goals by
the CEC. Member Gardella opined that it would be nice not to have pressure to
produce something quickly, but to allow time to build relationships among
themselves, and be clear on their vision and goals, and then have the City
Council on board with that.
opined that she was in complete agreement with the majority of the comments
made by fellow commissioners, and expressed her enthusiasm and excitement in
directed discussions toward the website redesign at this time.
Business Items (Action Items)
Manager Garry Bowman reviewed information and pre-loaded website examples also
done by CivicPlus, and as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA)
dated April 14, 2014.
reviewed the initial procedure he had pursued, with this item on the City's
docket now for well over a year, and one of the first things brought up during
his employment interview: the need to retool the website. Mr. Bowman advised
that as he dug into the site, one thing he became aware of was Civic Plus's service to over 1,700 various cities and agencies; and that of that number, the City of Roseville was only one of eight of those entities still using this old platform. In his review of old RFP's, Mr. Bowman advised that he reviewed scoring of the various proposals, and found agreement with their proposals and presentations if applicable. Mr. Bowman noted that he reviewed proposals from a value engineering approach, and therefore, interviewed two of the three offering the best pricing, and spoke personally with their representatives,
either in person or by phone, and reviewed their processes and back-up systems, including that of the current vendor. At the end of his analysis, Mr. Bowman advised that he had challenged CivicPlus on their price to obtain the best value for the City of Roseville, and opined that the service offered by the other vendor at an additional $10,000 offered anything more than available with CivicPlus; in addition to staff time for migrating the current system. With the whole goal was to provide a refresh of the site; and while not solving all problems, Mr. Bowman opined that his recommendation would provide a fresh platform and brought him to make this recommendation as detailed in the RCA dated April 17, 2014.
clarified that the City was not seeking an "architect" or "planner" at this
junction, but simply a "builder" for the initial design. Mr. Bowman assured
that he would put together a group of staff and members of the CEC in the next
step of the process as identified in the timeline of Attachment B to the
report, and for talking with CivicPlus for a third party software integration.
Mr. Bowman advised that he found CivicPlus very receptive to working with the
City on its needs, including third party software integration, noting that the
City already used NeoGov for Human Resource areas; and the vendor also
expressed willingness to work on an application route. Mr. Bowman noted that
part of his support for CivicPlus was their software's dynamic design, and
ability to support the estimated 30-40% hits from mobile sites, which allowed
full site viewing on mobile devices, which he was very impressed with, as well
as the feature allowing easy integration of third parties.
concluded that the bottom line for him was that he found few dynamic
differences between vendors, but he had found differences for staff in collaborating
with communities once they started putting those ideas forward. Specific to
websites, Mr. Bowman advised that he found little difference in the two
vendors, since 80% of the website content is similar and based on information
and/or documents, with differences found in staff in various departments having
taken the initiative to go the additional mile to incorporate a civic
engagement module or some other way to contact departments, with only
approximately 10% of any great difference. Mr. Bowman opined that this would
be where the CEC came in, beyond the basic website design, to addressing that
small percentage allowing for feedback from the CEC to take the site in the
desired direction. Mr. Bowman referenced and displayed other CivicPlus
websites (Attachment C) and the amount of depth and broad design abilities
provided in those examples, none of which looked like the current Roseville
website with its existing restraints. Mr. Bowman noted that the back end of
the website restrained adding those additional elements, and the counterparts
used by other organizations due to the older nature of the Roseville site. Mr.
Bowman advised that the CivicPlus proposal would provide for updating the front
end and back end interface dynamics; thus his recommendation to retain the
current vendor based on his dollar for dollar analysis, opining that it
provided the best chance to move forward and take the site to the next level,
without committing the City's future to CivicPlus beyond that one-time upgrade fee. Mr. Bowman clarified that, if the City found it wanted to go through the RFP process in the future, it could do so and not be tied in long-term with CivicPlus; however, from his analysis and research, he found little difference in design elements. Mr. Bowman opined that he found the greatest difference in what communities chose to do with those available design elements.
At the request
of Member Gardella, Mr. Bowman clarified that menu items, including photos and
sidebars, on the website were under in-house capacity control by staff, with
the basic architecture and upgrades controlled by CivicPlus, or any other
vendor of choice. Mr. Bowman advised that the only thing staff would not have
access to was the basic template, but once the basic website design was done,
changing and moving photos, text, and sidebar items would be under the complete
control of staff.
Grefenberg questioned if the CivicPlus software and basic template would allow
and facilitate two-way communication between residents, and allow, as with some
website, making that information available to the public to track their
requests and which staff member was addressing it or if it was receiving
attention or not.
advised that this involved the third-party aspect, and he didn't find that
aspect built in without adding a third party vendor, several of whom he'd
listed in the RCA, used to integrate seamlessly with the website; and available
as an add on at any time in the future.
Grefenberg questioned if the basic website from CivicPlus would allow non-staff
people to make suggestions or change incorrect information from their home
sites, with staff approval.
responded that he could access the site from anywhere already with the current
clarified that he intended his question to involve origination from a
commission member or resident's home, with staff review before that input went
on the website.
responded affirmatively, depending on whether that access was allowed in the future;
however, he expressed more of a comfort level if that information was directed
to his attention by e-mail.
At the request
of Member Manke, Mr. Bowman confirmed that the annual website hosting budget
was $7,000 and he didn't see any drastic changes in the future.
Grefenberg reviewed his notes from his involvement in the past and initial
eight vendors submitting RFP's, opining that CivicPlus was offering the same
services as they had in the past. Member Grefenberg opined that this had
caused him whiplash, when they originally scored as one of the least expensive,
and in the final report and recommendation from a year ago, 30% of the original
scores was based on cost; with CivicPlus not at that time being suggested as
the selected candidate, but now being recommended.
Mayor Roe noted
the staff changes since that original review, and involvement this round by
City Manager Trudgeon and Communications Manager Bowman. Mayor Roe asked Mr.
Bowman to address the advantages and/or disadvantages in having CivicPlus for a
potentially short-term fix or to step back and do another RFP for the
responded first to Member Grefenberg's perceptions, clarifying that he could
only base his analysis on his personal experience; with that experience based
on his experiences with CivicPlus's dedicated customer service representative.
Mr. Bowman noted that, when he arrived at Roseville, he had found and been
asked to address a lot of things needing fixed; and his contact with the
CivicPlus representative several times each week for assistance. Mr. Bowman
advised that he had spent a considerable amount of time last week seeking
information on the analytical portion of the CivicPlus website, and opined that
he found it to be very dynamic. Mr. Bowman assured all that he had come into
the situation with clear eyes and no personal agenda, and had found a very
positive experience in dealing with CivicPlus.
on the backend of websites, Councilmember Laliberte opined that the frustration
with CivicPlus in the past may have been at the staff level in making changes
due to the outdated platform module, the 2007 version; and staff's lack of
information as to whether changing that outdated platform would allow them to
make desired changes. Councilmember Laliberte opined that the previous
situation may have not been clearly understood, or that the platform could be
better than it was.
Willmus advised that he was not concerned with Mr. Bowman having a different
recommendation than the previous staff recommendation, but expressed his
preference that staff vet some of those past discussions with members of the
CEC and proceed forward from there, perhaps over the next 1 -2 months, and then
return to the City Council after that process has been completed.
Trudgeon stated that staff could proceed in whatever direction preferred by the
City Council; but this attempt was to deal with short-term issues, recognizing
the need for more communication and involvement with the CEC for other
modules. Mr. Trudgeon suggested, if that was the preferred direction, the CEC
be charged with focusing on that feedback, since that portion of the website
content would take more time. Mr. Trudgeon expressed his personal preference
to not delay the initial portion of the process any longer, and suggested
limiting focus with the CEC for add-ons.
clarified staff's recommendation to improve the current website in the
short-term, and if found needing, to issue a future RFP; or to start over at
the beginning at this time. Mayor Roe sought City Council input as to their
preference and direction to staff.
McGehee spoke in support of moving forward with these basic updates at this
time, which would in turn allow implementing packages not currently available,
and future interactive packages the CEC would like to have but not available at
this point. Councilmember McGehee opined that this would also allow
additional research, time and thought; while allowing the current website to receive
an update and work better, allowing for future interactivity. Councilmember
McGehee noted staff involvement and support for this approach, making the
backend more accessible for staff to manipulate. Councilmember McGehee noted
that the policy issues raised by the CEC, and how web posting would be handled
in the future by all commissions. Councilmember Member McGehee spoke in
opposition to retaining the outdated website currently available.
Etten noted his initial skepticism without engaging the CEC in redesigning the
website; however, he noted that he had been swayed by Mr. Bowman's presentation
on key elements; and the future available for add-ons. Councilmember Etten
noted the high recommendations received by CivicPlus; and spoke in support of
moving on at this time. Councilmember Etten recognized the critical piece for
the CEC to spend time on in making future recommendations, based on the better
communication found in other cities; and a system that makes it easy to begin
with without even much discussion.
Willmus noted that he most often used the mobile interface; and his frustration
was in the inability to watch meeting replays, as it wasn't supported by C-TV. Councilmember Willmus asked if this upgrade would allow that aspect to be supported on his mobile unit with this new platform.
responded that, when accessing the meeting, you were leaving the City's
website; and expressed his surprise that C-TV had yet to move into another
delivery system that would be compatible. Mr. Bowman noted that he needed to
engage C-TV and encourage them to do so, not just for Roseville but for all
member cities, and offered his willingness to look into that.
advised that the information may be outdated, but C-TV may also not have
implemented that update yet.
Laliberte asked Mr. Bowman how he would engage the CEC over the next 3-4
advised that, not just the CEC, but staff from all departments, needed to
continue to meet, advising that he had formed an internal communications group
that had been meeting every week since the first of the year; and others added
who were heavy web users. Mr. Bowman advised that he saw the CEC playing a
large role in providing input; recognizing that this wasn't a "flip the switch"
process, and would take months to incorporate. However, Mr. Bowman noted that
input was needed on what was desired on the basic site, but things other cities
were also doing that Roseville wanted to do; along with research on third party
integration or CEC recommendations to make the site better, all part of the
Laliberte likened the process to interior design for building in fixtures to
get the site better.
likened the process beyond interior design, suggesting it was similar to taking
a rambler home to a multi-story structure.
McGehee used a different analogy: fundamental architecture or building to
support packages and make accessibility easier; with this first step
representing a fundamental infrastructure change; allowing for future input
from the CEC to make the site more accessible to the public and provide better
search tools to make the parts easier to access; not just how it looks, but a
Willmus sought individual CEC member feedback based on tonight's discussion.
Grefenberg opined that he didn't find it traumatic to delay action for one
month for the CEC to meet with staff to review this; and expressed his interest
in continuing this discussion with staff and state what was desired from the
architecture. From his perspective, Member Grefenberg opined that what the
site looked like was not of the greatest importance, but the need for the CEC
to be listened to and be allowed to meet with staff, opining that this was his
perception of what the City Council initiated the CEC for in the first place.
stated that as long as she knew the opportunity for input and changes were
available within the updated website structure, she was fine with the staff
recommendations and process to proceed at this point. Recognizing that the CEC
only met monthly, Member Gardella opined that a one month delay would not allow
them to address the situation, and suggested that the CEC needed more time. If
the RFP may be open again in the future if needed, Member Gardella opined that
if the CivicPlus site was not working, and changes not working, she was fine
moving forward with that potential for change available if and when needed.
concurred with the comments of Member Gardella; and based on Mr. Bowman's
comments, the vehicle was available to get to the goal and provide input later.
based on his experience and career designing websites, opined that when he
reviewed proposals such as this one, he looked for "gotcha's." Member Becker
opined that, when going with a contract management platform such as this, you
were essentially locked in; and he had concerns about that, and continued to
have many open questions, whether they were deal breakers or not. From his
perspective, Member Becker opined that CivicPlus seemed inexpensive, and
questioned if their initial proposal would require additional add-ons and
additional money to accomplish them. One example used by Member Becker was
whether consulting costs would apply from CivicPlus if and when a third party
integration occurred and two-way dialogue needed. Member Becker advised that
there were too many unknowns to him at this time; and many layers (e.g. mobile
applications and GPS integration) that may all be additional things supported
by the CEC, but not necessarily available from this simple redesign and relook
of the current website; getting to the entire issue of parity. Member Becker
encouraged the City Council to seriously think about that, and any potential
design fee or annual fee from CivicPlus.
expressed her interest in receiving answers to those questions at this point
versus waiting for those answers later and finding that the money could have
been better spent.
clarified that any third party component would be over the basic website
redesign; and at this point in his research, he had found none he found
satisfactory in providing two-way communication modules. However, Mr. Bowman
advised that he had found third party modules that were much better and they
would be his recommendation for the CEC to step in and review them to help
streamline the vision; no matter which vendor was chosen at this time, if the
City Council decided to take action tonight.
opined that staff's recommendation sounded good to her; and expressed her concern with budget constraints, and if staff and the City Council were willing to spend more money for additional features. Member Ramundt sought the commitment, recognizing this was a great start, but the CEC would be seeking third party add-ons, and whether there was any commitment if significant differences were found in the prices for those additional features.
advised the third party was where those costs could be determined, with no cost
from CivicPlus for third party build ins or ability to add onto the design
moving forward; but what could the City want to integrate and build in at the
backdoor for integrating it reasonable, with all applications having a initial
cost and subsequent annual fees. Mr. Bowman advised that, while he had not
addressed that right in tonight's discussion, CivicPlus had not initially included that dynamic design cost, but he had negotiated considerably with them and they added that in their proposal. Mr. Bowman clarified that this information is not a contract, just a proposal, and a subsequent contract would be outlined. Mr. Bowman further clarified that the RCA should have reflected removal of that initial cost by CivicPlus based on further negotiations with them to include that portion, basically a $4,000 component that he had gotten them to provide at no additional cost.
Etten referenced the City of Chanhassen site, also provided by CivicPlus, and
how well it worked on his mobile unit, even though he didn't like all features
of the overall website on mobile applications; but recognizing their abilities.
clarified that staff's current recommendation, followed by Mr. Bowman's research, was for a $14,000 expenditure versus the initial staff recommendation last year at $70,000 when the City had a budget of $20,000 for this upgrade. Under that scenario, Mayor Roe sought clarification as to whether staff saw an additional $50,000 on top of this initial $14,000 expenditure to complete those add-ons being discussed tonight.
advised that a huge portion of the previous RFP was the testing aspect; and
while nice if resources were available, since the City didn't have such resources, he set aside that component completely in the current recommendation. Mr. Bowman noted that CivicPlus can provide economies of scale, and their price point reflects that. Mr. Bowman opined that he didn't think future add-ons were going to be a huge investment; and only cautioned that if the City went through this process and found itself unhappy with the integration and update, then another RFP process in a year would be required, with those bids remaining an unknown, but probably well over the $20,000 budget. However, Mr. Bowman opined that he didn't see that happening with the CEC and him actively engaged in the process to reach the goal; with everyone invested to get the best product possible.
Laliberte concurred with staff's recommendation, opining that there would be a
significant cost to move to another vendor and have to move all that
information from the current vendor to another framework, representing
significant costs financially and for staff to do so.
to table this item for thirty days; with the Mayor ruling the motion failed for
lack of a second.
Grefenberg sought to clarify Mr. Bowman's comments indicating this isn't
necessarily a contract, noting that the RFP didn't mention that this could be
short-term. Member Grefenberg therefore sought middle ground for the CEC to
work with staff on a contract to make sure a few of their concerns were
addressed if needed, seeking to find a way to have total confidence in moving
forward at this time. Member Grefenberg reiterated his concern that the CEC
not be allowed to have further input before this issue was finalized if the
City Council refused to delay action for one month.
Laliberte had no response for Member Grefenberg; and while struggling with
tonight's requested action, opined that it would get things moving, and seemed
to be a cost-effective way to get done with what was needed at some point.
However, Councilmember Laliberte advised that she was struggling with not
allowing time for the CEC to have the ability to provide input, and while not
looking to cut off that opportunity, she didn't perceive another process going
down a road that would accomplish something gravely different than the current
proposal. Councilmember Laliberte noted her desire to let the CEC jump into
the process, while still getting the website update going; and if the CEC could
participate and provide input in developing the contract, that would provide
some relief for her concerns.
McGehee opined that she heard a majority of the CEC members say they were
comfortable with the proposed action; recognizing the concerns expressed by
Member Gardella in their ability to study packages available, which was not a
simple one-month project. As pointed out by Councilmember Laliberte,
Councilmember McGehee recognized the huge undertaking in time and money top
pick a different platform and migrate the entire content of the current website
onto that platform. Councilmember McGehee opined that she had much less
reservation going forward with staff's recommendation and allowing the CEC to
get started right away in setting their priorities and the website applications
they want to review, allowing sufficient time for them to do so based on
available monies and integration of them; with the potential for another RFP
after one year if this site was vendor couldn't meet those needs with an
McGehee seconded, approval of entering into a contract with CivicPlus for
redesigning the City's website; at a cost not to exceed $13,760.00; subject to City Attorney review.
Etten agreed with the sentiments expressed by Councilmember Laliberte;
reiterating that his intent when arriving at tonight's meeting was to not
approve the recommended action. With the additional components available as
separate add-ons, no matter which vendor is selected, Councilmember Etten
opined that his initial concerns no longer held sway after Mr. Bowman's
presentation and clarification of those components following his extensive
review; and allow the process to move forward at this time. Councilmember
Etten opined that this would allow drawing back a team who helped staff with
their great expertise and redevelopment of design elements.
Willmus advised that he would vote in opposition to the motion; not because he necessarily
disagreed with Councilmember Etten; but based on his desire for the CEC to have
a thirty-day period to review the direction of the City's electronic
communication efforts and to have a more unified voice available.
Laliberte advised that she would also be voting in opposition to the motion,
based on her belief that the CEC is just getting started and should be able to
make comments beyond the design they were hit with tonight. Just as much as
she preferred not to cut off their ability to provide input, Councilmember
Laliberte stated that it was important for the CEC not to get stuck in the
weeds, recognizing that many other things they were charged with in the
ordinance. Councilmember Laliberte opined that it would be easy to get stuck
in this issue and not move on, and if it does move forward tonight, she would
prefer some parameters be established so when it came back, the CEC would
return to discuss other issues as well.
For a number of
reasons stated by Councilmember Laliberte in her intent for voting in
opposition, Mayor Roe stated his intent to vote in support of the motion for
those similar reasons. Mayor Roe stated that he didn't want the CEC to spin their wheels on this process, but to focus on the 30,000 foot items. Mayor Roe echoed comments that the CivicPlus approach would get the City beyond where it was currently; and while it may be found further down the road that a change was needed, if that recommendation ultimately comes, it will then have significant input from the CEC. Mayor Roe stated that he was comfortable moving forward at this point; and assured CEC members that they would not be
shut out of the action based on their input received tonight.
Etten; McGehee; and Roe
Willmus and Laliberte.
Willmus thanked the CEC for their attendance, their comments, and for their
willingness to serve.
echoed those comments; and expressed his excitement in the CEC taking on their
Business Items - Presentations/Discussions
City Manager Future Agenda Review
Trudgeon reviewed upcoming agenda items.
Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings
Willmus requested, in Worksession format, a future discussion by the City
Council on Planned Unit Developments for LDR-1 and/or LDR-2 zoning districts,
based on past land issues before the City Council, or those proposed to come
before the body.
Laliberte expressed appreciation to staff in following up with Ramsey County on
Hamline Library access issues; with Mr. Trudgeon cautioning that confirmation
of attendance of Ramsey County staff was still pending, as their traffic study
results were currently underway.
announced that he had a scheduling conflict and would not be available for the
May 5, 2014 regular meeting.
accordance with Section 13.d of Minnesota State Statute, Mayor Roe advised that
meetings of the City Council were to be held in open session with few
exceptions, one of which was to discuss offers for the sale or purchase of
land, with that potential discussion scheduled tonight regarding Mounds View
School property located at 2959 Hamline Avenue N.
moved, Willmus seconded, adjourning to Closed Session at approximately 8:07
Ayes: Willmus; Laliberte; Etten; McGehee; and Roe
Potential land Acquisition at 2959 Hamline Avenue N
Mayor Roe convened the City
Council in closed executive session at approximately 8:15 PM to consider
possible land acquisition at 2959 Hamline Avenue North. In addition to the City
Council members, City Manager Pat Trudgeon, Parks & Recreation Director
Lonnie Brokke, and City Attorneys Mark Gaughan and Charlie Bartholdi were in attendance.
Laliberte moved, Etten seconded
to adjourn the closed session and return to open session at approximately 8:40
McGehee seconded adjournment of the meeting at approximately 8:40 p.m.