View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
Council Meeting Minutes
December 8, 2014
1. Roll Call
Mayor Roe called
the meeting to order at approximately 6:00 p.m. Voting and Seating Order: Laliberte,
McGehee, Willmus, Etten, and Roe. City Manager Patrick Trudgeon and City Attorney
Mark Gaughan were also present.
2. Approve Agenda
McGehee seconded, removal of Item 13.d from tonight's agenda for separate
consideration and as part of a broader discussion of the Twin Lakes redevelopment
Area that the City Council had previously promised residents.
Willmus spoke in opposition to the motion, stating that he wanted to allow
discussion of that item this evening.
Mayor Roe spoke
in opposition to the motion, stating that this was a different topic, with
previous discussions regarding input from residents more related to uses and
Etten, and Roe.
Willmus seconded, moving Business Action Items 1, d and d before Item 12 Budget
Items on tonight's agenda.
Laliberte also requested moving Business Action Item to approve or deny
expanded hours for on-sale brewer taproom establishments immediately following
the public hearing. Councilmember Laliberte advised that her rationale in
these agenda adjustments was based on residents in the audience who may wish to
speak to these items without having to stay too late and not having any comment
on the budget discussion that may be lengthier.
Willmus spoke in opposition to the motion.
Etten spoke in opposition to the motion, noting the estimated times listed on
the public agenda, with changes possibly making things more confusion or
having that item occur prior to a resident's arrival to speak to a specific
item, basing their arrival on projected times.
Mayor Roe noted
that often the City Council took action on an item immediately following the
public hearing without formally adjusting the agenda.
appeared that the motion would fail and was not supported by the seconder of
the motion, Councilmember Laliberte withdrew her motion.
requested removal of Items 7.f and 7.j from the Consent Agenda for separate
requested removal of Item 7.g from the Consent Agenda for separate
Etten moved, Willmus
seconded approval of the agenda as amended.
McGehee, Willmus, Etten, 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
Mayor Roe announced
previews of new park buildings on December 16 (Lexington Park Shelter) and
December 17 (Sandcastle Park at 3060 Patton Road) from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. with
light refreshments served.
announced the upcoming Minnesota Wild practice at the OVAL on December 12 from
9:00 a.m. to Noon, with the Wild on the ice at 11:00 a.m.; with family activities
planned during those hours, including free skating with skate rentals.
announced donation opportunities for winter clothing sponsored by the Roseville
Visitors Association in conjunction with OVALumination events; with donations
accepted throughout the winter months and drop boxes located in various areas
of the OVAL.
Donations and Communications
Chris Miller introduced the City's new Assistant Finance Director Jason Shirmacher
to Councilmembers and the public.
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.
Approve Minutes of November 10, 2014 Meeting
McGehee moved, Etten
seconded, approval of the Meeting Minutes of December 1, 2014 as amended.
Page 2, Lines 11 - 12 (Laliberte)
read: ".... be hosting the March of 2015 meeting at the Roseville Fire Station
in the training room[.] ,at which time [T]he
[January] agenda [will] would include
meeting with state legislators"
Page 25, Line 19 (McGehee)
correction: " to"
Page 26, Line 1 (Willmus)
correction: add "Willmus" after Councilmember...
Laliberte, McGehee, Willmus, Etten, and Roe.
7. Approve Consent Agenda
There were no
additional changes to the Consent Agenda than those previously noted. At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Patrick
Trudgeon briefly reviewed those items being considered under the Consent
Willmus moved, McGehee
seconded, approval of the following claims and payments as presented and
detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated December 8, 2014, and
attached check register.
75903 - 75996
Approve Business Licenses & Other Licenses & Permits
Willmus moved, McGehee
seconded, approval of business license applications for the period of one (1)
year, unless otherwise noted, for applicants as listed in the RCA dated December
Approve Resolution Awarding Bid for 2015 Sanitary Sewer Main
Willmus moved, McGehee
seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11192 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution
Awarding Bids for 2015 Sanitary Sewer Main Lining;" to Insituform Technologies
USA, LLC in the amount of $856,787.00.
Consider not Waiving Statutory Liability Limits for 2015
moved, McGehee seconded, approval of a motion to NOT waive the Statutory Liability
Limits for 2015.
Consider Approving a Three-Year Audit Services Agreement with
kern DeWenter Viere (KDV)
moved, McGehee seconded, authorizing staff to enter into a three-year agreement
for audit services with KDV as presented and detailed in the RCA dated December
Consider Approving a Premises Permit to Destination Education
& Scholarship Foundation to Conduct Lawful Gambling Activities at 1754
Lexington Avenue (Ol' Mexico Restaurant)
moved, McGehee seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11199 (Attachment A)
entitled, "Resolution Approving a Lawful Gambling Premise Permit to Destination
Education, A Scholarship Foundation;" granting a premises permit to conduct
lawful gambling activities at 1754 N Lexington Avenue (Ol' Mexico Restaurant)
by DESF, a new non-profit organization formerly operating under the name of the
North Suburban youth Foundation (NSYF).
Centennial lakes Police IT Shared Services Agreement
moved, McGehee seconded,, approval of a Shared Services Agreement (Attachment
A) with Centennial Lakes Police for the purpose of providing Information Technology
Fire Department & Allina Health Emergency Medical Services
Medical Direction and Oversight Contract Extension Agreement
Willmus moved, McGehee
seconded, authorizing the Fire Department to enter into a contract extension
(Attachment A) with Allina Health Emergency Medical Services for medical
oversight and education for a period of ninety days.
12. Consider Items
Removed from Consent
Fire Department & Northeast Metro Intermediate District 916
Medical Training Program Agreement
the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Patrick Trudgeon briefly reviewed this
item being considered as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014, for
student ride-along opportunities with Roseville Fire EMT's.
the request of Councilmember McGehee, Fire Chief Tim O'Neill confirmed that
this item had been brought forward for consideration by the City Council in June
of 2014. However, Mr. O'Neill advised that students were just starting spring
break, so the program had been delayed, and was just now being initiated.
Chief O'Neill further advised that two changes to the document had been incorporated
at the previous request of City Council, and therefore was being submitted to
the City Council for their approval and authorization.
moved, Etten seconded, authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an
agreement (Attachment A) with Northeast Metro Intermediate District 916 for
teaching assistance for their Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) Program.
Consider Approval and Support of Special Legislation Regarding
the Composition of the Roseville Fire Relief Association Board of Trustees
the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Patrick Trudgeon briefly reviewed this
item being considered as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014; and
deferred to Relief Association President Breen for further detail.
Breen, President of the Roseville Firefighter's Relief Association
Breen concurred with the summary by City Manager Trudgeon, and as detailed in
the RCA; advising that the legislation was intended to allow continued local
governance of the relief fund. Mr. Breen advised that this also opened the
door for the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) to govern the fund,
while funds would remain under the City's control via PERA's administration and
segregated from other PERA funds.
the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon advised that the general
concept had been approved by the City Council earlier in 2014, and legislative
staff was asking for formal City Council approval of the specific proposed
legislation before moving forward.
Etten, in his removal of this item from the Consent Agenda, noted this opened
up legislative options never talked about; and while he trusted President Breen
and the Relief Association Board, he asked that Mr. Breen address the benefits
of such legislation and the PERA option specific to the annuity and how
legislation may or may not affect the fund.
Breen advised that there were fifty-two retired firefighters, in addition to beneficiaries
of other retirees, who remained in the Relief Association, in addition to
approximately forty active firefighters.
Etten clarified that he fully supported that portion of the legislation and
this request; however, he was seeking additional information on the PERA
Breen noted that, with the number of people still involved, it would be extremely
expensive to set an annuity for that many, with the financial need exceeding the
value of the fund, and no longer an option in today's economy.
Breen advised that the PERA option provided a solution if and when the current
Relief Board could no longer be staffed; with the legislative commission intending
to set it up long-term, and not just for a ten-year stretch, but to assure the
viability of the fund's administration long-term. Mr. Breen noted that at some
point in the future, due to lack of interest, age of members, or other issues,
the fiduciary responsibilities of the board will need to be addressed if that
governance was no longer available. Mr. Breen noted that the City Council
could not serve in that capacity, and therefore someone needed to be available
to handle those administrative duties, such as making monthly payments and
taking care of the fund. Mr. Breen noted that PERA could administratively
handle lump fund payouts as well as monthly benefits, and perhaps down the road
may be able to manage the fund at a reasonable cost, which was currently under
discussion at the PERA level.
Manager Trudgeon clarified that, for that action to happen, both the Relief
Board and City Council would need to jointly approve whether or not PERA was
brought in to govern the fund.
Roe, with confirmation by Mr. Breen, noted that at any point active members
voted by majority to allow dissolution of the Relief Board at the prompting of
the Board, that issue would subsequently be brought to the City Council for action.
Mayor Roe noted that there were a number of choices as to how the Association
could dissolve in the future, but clarified that such dissolution would involve
decisions of the Association membership and City Council.
At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Breen advised that he would need
to confirm which two legislative committees this was being addressed by for
drafting a proposed bill for special legislation, and would disseminate that
information to the City Council via City Manager Trudgeon. In referencing the
outline letter included in the agenda packet, Mr. Breen noted the detail
required for the process; and advised that the committees didn't see any issues
with the legislation proceeding with little delay. Mr. Breen noted that the
Relief Association had attempted this legislation last year, but had not
realized the number of steps required and therefore didn't meet necessary
Roe also requested information from Mr. Breen or Mr. Trudgeon on any
opportunities for Councilmembers to lobby in support of this bill.
moved, Willmus seconded, approval and support by the City Council for the
Roseville Firefighters Relief Association to pursue special legislation
regarding Fire Relief Association Board membership as presented in Attachment A
dated October 2, 2014.
Confirm Citizen Advisory Commission Reappointment/ Appointment
the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Patrick Trudgeon briefly reviewed this
item being considered as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014.
McGehee noted that she had learned immediately prior to the meeting that Public
Works, Environment and Transportation Commissioner Duane Seigler did wish to be
considered for reappointment.
Councilmember McGehee also requested that, at the City Council's January 5,
2015 organizational meeting, the agenda include discussion of the City
Council's policy for determining who to interview. Councilmember McGehee
stated that she would prefer those interviews to not take time from the January
12, 2015 City Council Worksession.
moved, Laliberte seconded, confirmation of the citizen advisory commission
reappointment/appointment process as detailed in the RCA dated December 8,
Ordinances for Adoption
Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at
approximately 6:40 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 6:41 p.m.
Community Engagement Commission (CEG) Joint Meeting
Mayor Roe welcomed
members of the CEG to this second joint meeting.
Grefenberg and Members Michelle Manke, Theresa Gardella; Scot Becker; Jonathan
Miller; Desiree Mueller were present and introduced themselves.
As detailed in
the RCA dated December 8, 2014, Chair Grefenberg noted 2015 priority Work Plan
items as identified, seeking City Council feedback on those recommended
policies and strategies going forward. Chair Grefenberg advised that all
recommendations were approved by a consensus or majority vote of the CEG.
Plan Priority Items for 2015
and Encourage the Formation of Roseville Neighborhood Associations
Grefenberg noted that this was a continuation of community discussions in 2007
and as part of the Imagine Roseville 2025 visioning process.
Conference on Community Engagement in Roseville
noted that the priority items were developed through the CEG dividing into 4-5
workgroups to develop them, and then presented to the full CEG for discussion
and approval. Ms. Gardella advised that the process took seven months to
accomplish, but served to make the process more manageable.
Form a Joint
Task Force with the Planning Commission to Study Notification Issues and
noted the ongoing interest in getting information out to the public; and while
he found those attempts better than they were eight years ago, there was still
room for improvement. Chair Grefenberg suggested that items coming forward for
land use or zoning consideration that were of a more significant environmental
nature (e.g. asphalt plant) should receive a wider notice distribution than
typically used for zoning notices. Chair Grefenberg noted that this recommendation
had also been provided to the Council by the Community Engagement Task Force.
Mr. Grefenberg advised that he presented this idea to the Planning Commission
at their October 2014 meeting, and he was surprised and pleased to receive
positive feedback from all Planning Commissioners and their agreement to work
toward that goal. Chair Grefenberg referenced items found under zoning
notification in the RCA; and sought authorization to move forward with those
Online Civic Engagement Module for New City Website
noted the need to implement and dovetail broader themes into the structure for
projects that would reap long-term benefits and drive community engagement.
Mr. Becker advised that the CEG had been consulting with three vendors and
hoped to make a recommendation to the City Council on a chosen vendor to
proceed at the January 15, 2015 CEG meeting.
Priorities and Emerging Opportunity
Grefenberg used this opportunity to hear feedback from individual City
thanked members for report and for serving the community; and expressed his
excitement and encouraged the CEG to continue working on creating neighborhood
associations. Councilmember Willmus opined that the CEG was the perfect
conduit to help facilitate that effort.
Etten concurred with the comments of Councilmember Willmus, and also thanked
the CEG for their work to-date. Councilmember Etten opined that neighborhood
associations were great and helped bring people together to work together and
could use some of the expertise from their group to affect decisions at the
City Council level. Councilmember Etten referenced page 7 of the CEG report
related to engaging Roseville renters and non-single family homeowners (e.g.
condominiums and co-ops) and expressed his interest and the need to engage that
more. As a piece of that, Councilmember Etten noted the need to examine how
those residents were approached and their specific situations where electronic
methods may not work and how to engage them otherwise. Councilmember Etten
noted that each apartment building or complex and unit or renter may approach
this differently, and therefore a multi-modal approach was necessary.
Grefenberg noted the intent that a joint Planning Commission and CEG effort
would work to get that information out for leased properties. As an example,
Chair Grefenberg noted that information on or notice about the pawn shop issue
currently before the City Council had not been received by residents of the adjacent
apartment building. Chair Grefenberg expressed his interest in the Planning
Commission's willingness to work with the CEG on those communication efforts.
Laliberte also expressed her appreciation of the hard work by the CEG in getting
a new commission up and running and dealing with different personalities; and
expressed her excitement about the great work yet to come forward. Referencing
the Task Force report, Councilmember Laliberte noted how cumbersome it would
have been for the entire CEG to address the many issues brought forward; and
expressed her support for the recommendations brought forward to-date and as
detailed in the RCA. Councilmember Laliberte advised that she shared the
logistical concerns raised by Councilmember Etten, and noted the challenge in
implementing the recommendations in getting information to those renters and
residents in condominiums or co-ops that may inadvertently be excluded from
current communication efforts. Councilmember Laliberte noted her personal
interest in this area, and advised that she would be following the efforts of
the CEG closely as they moved forward.
Grefenberg suggested one way to accomplish that communication effort could be
through formation of a task force to advise the CEG on how best to implement
some of those items. Chair Grefenberg pointed out that some policies and
strategies as detailed in the RCA didn't require a lot of work, but simply City
Council approval and their subsequent direction to staff.
a conference on community engagement in Roseville, Councilmember Laliberte asked
for more information on proposed speakers and format of such a conference; as
well as seeking additional information on how and what had been done to-date
regarding the referenced request for proposals (RFP's).
advised that details were not in place yet, but the intent of the working group
was to map out a structure, then come back as a full CEG to make the
recommendations, targeting the fall of 2015 for holding a conference. Member
Gardella opined that the first conference probably wouldn't be too large; and
suggested some potential agenda items could include happenings in other communities
with similar commissions to the CEG to talk about their experiences, successes,
and lessons learned; inviting different cultural groups in Roseville to talk
about their personal experiences and areas needing attention; and those
multi-family rental building owners and/or managers who have successfully
engaged renters in the past; as well as hearing from the City Council on
specific areas of community engagement of interest to them.
advised that regarding the CEG's RFP module and process to-date had been
creation of criteria by the committee, evaluation of vendors, and delivery of a
Request for Information on those vendors to Communications Manager Garry
Bowman. Member Becker noted that one of three vendors was the current vendor
for the City's website update, and their work would come with the website
package. Member Becker noted that part of the criteria in selecting a vendor
would be cost; but opined that it would prove a relatively low investment compared
to other city costs and investments.
Laliberte sought information on her previous request for information on where
the former "Roseville University" was at; and expressed her interest in
continuing that process of engaging and education residents. Councilmember
Laliberte expressed her disappointment that the course had not been offered for
over a year, since she considered it so effective.
advised that "Roseville U" came up in task force recommendations a lot and had
been considered a successful structure for community engagement. However,
Member Gardella stated that she understood that the City was rethinking or
tweaking it and therefore, the CEG didn't pursue it much at this time.
Grefenberg noted that, in the CEG report, they recommended resumption of
further noted that the CEG had some specific recommendations as part of
reformatting "Roseville U."
Laliberte opined that she would like to see it reinstated sooner rather than
Willmus concurred that "Roseville U" was a great program and offered his support
in bringing it back. However, Councilmember Willmus advised that one critique
he'd heard was the length of time or number of sessions required to finish it;
with many residents unable to make that long of a commitment. Councilmember
Willmus suggested tightening up that schedule to avoid fallout from the current
noted that a "Mini Roseville U" had been one consideration of the CEG.
neighborhood associations, Councilmember McGehee suggested there may be
different views of them depending on the personalities involved or the way they
came to be. Councilmember McGehee questioned if the role of the CEG was to
assist the process other than in facilitating the neighborhoods
self-identifying themselves and coming forward to express their interest in
forming. Councilmember McGehee noted that, efforts from various neighborhood
associations had been somewhat thwarted in the past when they came forward
seeking neighborhood signage to identify themselves, and previous City Councils
had rejected those requests.
Grefenberg noted that signage was included in the CEG report.
McGehee questioned how the CEG saw its role in assisting and creating
neighborhood associations versus those neighborhoods self-identifying and
coming to the City for assistance; with one of those efforts top down and the
other bottom up.
Grefenberg stated that he supported the bottom up method; and if the City
Council approved the CEG moving forward, they had already held preliminary
discussions with three neighborhood associations who had experienced working
solo to-date. Chair Grefenberg suggested that a task force could bring back suggestions
to the full commission; and offered his interest in coming back to the City
Council with those recommendations for how the City Council could support
neighborhood associations. Chair Grefenberg noted the excellent track record
of the Cities of Edina and St. Louis Park in encouraging the formation of
associations served as an excellent resource in communication between the City
and those neighborhoods, Mayor Roe noted other aspects that had nothing to do
with the City. Mayor Roe advised that his number one reason for supporting the
neighborhood association concept was to connect residents with each other in a
smaller geographic area, and secondary to that first priority in their creation
was to foster communication and receive their feedback from a city
perspective. Mayor Roe opined that it made sense that the associations develop
bottom up and self-identify; but noted the challenges and past experiences in attempting
to get them going. Mayor Roe suggested that the role of the CEG may be to
develop a list of best practices or to draft up options available as organizational
documents that interested residents could tap into to create a neighborhood
association. Mayor Roe stated that such a role was what he was interested in
seeing; as well as ways to connect rental communities while recognizing some of
the challenges with a more transient resident versus long-term residents.
However, Mayor Roe suggested those long-term residents could serve as the core
group for such an association.
stated that he wholeheartedly endorsed "Roseville U" and had heard nothing but
positive things in the past; and suggested that it remain an option available
to residents. Mayor Roe stated that he was fine with keeping the course as
delivered in the past, or tweaking it, but either way to move forward with it.
Mayor Roe noted that he heard no objections from individual City Councilmembers
in the CEG moving forward with their identified priorities; and highlighted the
City Council's expressed feedback and interest in pursuing and engaging renter
residents and reinstating "Roseville U."
Grefenberg thanked the City Council for their feedback.
Grefenberg noted the recommendations provided by the CEG regarding filling
commission vacancies, and encouraged the City Council to review them before
they got further into the mechanics.
thanked the CEG for their work to-date; opining that they were progressing
Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at
approximately 7:09 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 7:10 p.m.
Public Hearing to Consider Amending City Code, Chapter 302, to
Allow for Expanded Hours of Operation for On-Sale Brewer Taproom Establishments
Director Chris Miller summarized the request as detailed in the RCA, with this
entity serving as the sole on- and off-sale brewer taproom establishment in the
City under these restrictions of City Code, Chapter 302. Mr. Miller noted the
two requests: one for expanded hours of operation for any on-sale brewer taproom
establishment; and waiving the hours of operation limitation for the upcoming
New Year's Eve date.
ensued regarding this specific taproom; revisions to the city-wide ordinance
for hours of operation; and requirements under Minnesota State Statute as well
as under City Code.
Willmus offered his support of amending current City Code to allow such an
establishment, including this applicant, to remain open until 1:00 a.m.
Bartley Blume, Bent Brewstillery
the request of Councilmember McGehee, the Mr. Blume advised that ideally he
would like the flexibility of remaining open until 1:00 a.m. to accommodate any
special events or applicable holidays, and without coming before the City
Council for each of those opportunities. Mr. Blume advised that, in the future,
they may choose to be open another day during the week based on the interest of
their patrons, and/or as demand indicates, and would like that flexibility
built in the ordinance as well. Mr. Blume noted the growing interest in
taprooms, with many open six days/week.
Blume reviewed the changes in the operation since the original license to this
establishment, formerly issued to Pour Decisions Brewery before the merger,
with that owner bound by family commitments and restrictions. However, the Mr.
Blume noted that this was his employment commitment, and that he worked with
his wife in the establishment, and didn't have similar family restrictions. Mr. Blume noted the large number of taprooms opening over the last 2.5 years in Roseville, as well as approximately 10-15 more opening in the metropolitan areas. Mr. Blume noted that the business's track record should speak for itself, with no issues during their 2.5 years of operation; with well-behaved patrons.
a legal or law enforcement perspective for consideration by the City, Councilmember
Etten asked Mr. Blume how he would differentiate his operation from other
liquor licenses in the City who paid a much higher license fee and were able to
operate for longer hours (e.g. bars). Councilmember Etten expressed concern
with the City setting a precedent, even though the establishment made its own
product, and questioned if that would provide enough distinction.
Blume responded that their establishment was not a bar that would be much more
established, with bars serving less expensive beverages in higher volume, in
addition to the luxury of extra revenue they received from the restaurant
side. Mr. Blume noted the difference in their establishment, serving a minimum
number of beers, no more than ten, and making its own high quality and more
expensive product with care and passion, such as a bakery establishment would
do for their particular product, and serving a much different clientele. Mr.
Blume opined that the distinction was already clearly stated in the limitations
placed on such operations by the State of Minnesota.
Roe opened the public hearing at approximately 7:23 p.m.
White, 430 Glenwood Avenue
White lent his voice of support for extended hours of operation for this type
Heier, 1435 Albany, Richfield, MN
a partner in another taproom in Minneapolis, just across Hennepin Avenue, Mr. Heier
advised that they could be open until 1:00 a.m. By not extending the hours in
Roseville for this type of operation, Mr. Heier opined that a patron could stay
at the Roseville taproom until they closed, and then move their business out of
Roseville to another suburb. Mr. Heier opined that it would be a good thing
for Roseville to extend hours of operation for this type of establishment.
no one else appearing to speak for or against, Mayor Roe closed the public
hearing at approximately 7:25 p.m.
Approve/Deny Amending City Code, Chapter 302 to Allow for Expanded
Hours of Operation for On-Sale Brewer Taproom Establishments
moved, Willmus seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1475 (Attachment A)
entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Title 3, Section 302, Liquor Control;" to
allow for expanded hours of operations for on-sale brewer taproom establishments
as presented with hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Sunday through
Councilmembers expressed their support for the motion; and Mayor Roe wished the
applicant the best of luck in his future business endeavors.
Miller and City Manager Trudgeon both briefly provided their final comments and
recommendations, as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014, lines 45-63,
noting some savings from the last presentation and revised projections.
Approve 2015 Levy & Budget
noted the additional $2,000 request of the Human Rights Commission (HRC), noted
on lines 57 - 59 of the RCA; and questioned if the Commission had any other
options to free up those funds.
Trudgeon advised that the HRC currently had $2,000 in their budget, which
included outsourcing their meeting minutes and for funding a variety of events
they hosted. If their request for funding civility training was included in
that budget, Mr. Trudgeon advised that they would have to reduce that spending
in some other way.
Mayor Roe noted
that this money would come from the General Fund, with only two commissions
having a specific budget.
At the request
of Councilmember Laliberte, City Manager Trudgeon advised that, if the City
Council chose to fund that civility training request, he would recommend the
funds be taken from the Communications Fund, which would affect the budget but
not the levy. Mr. Trudgeon clarified that the HRC was still pursuing grant
funding for the $3,000 program, and had received a $1,000 commitment and
location by the Ramsey County Library - Roseville Branch. Mr. Trudgeon noted
that, if the HRC did not realize any other funding or grant opportunities, it
would need to be funded by the City Council if they approved the expense.
McGehee stated that she considered that civility training feel under the purview
of communications; and would not be opposed to having the training become part
of the City's periodic ethics training. Councilmember McGehee noted that,
whether additional funds or grants became available, the HRC was facing a
deadline to confirm the library location for the training.
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miller clarified that the projected $10,000
budget reduction for fuel was on the tax-supported side, with the vast majority
of fuel usage for the Police and Fire Departments, and street vehicles. Mr.
Miller advised that there may be some savings on the non-tax-supported side,
but it would be minimal.
Mayor Roe made
a proposal, displayed for his colleagues and the public, and attached
hereto and made a part hereof, as his recommendation to deal with the
proposed levy by using some reserves to provide additional funding for the tax
levy. Mayor Roe reviewed his proposal for use of unrestricted reserves, as
well as reserves target range from the License Center Fund, and addressed
policies in place that related to target fund balances for each. Mayor Roe
opined that his proposal provided a conservative approach to retain a midpoint
level for those reserves by splitting the reserve in half, to be considered as
a revenue source to reduce the 2015 levy increase.
proportionally using $355,000 from the License Center Fund and $155,000 from
General Fund unrestricted reserves, along with approximately half of the
$200,000 projected by staff for 2014 operational savings, or $110,000, Mayor
Roe noted that this would reduce the tax levy increase from 2014 to 2015 at
McGehee noted that this did not pay back the full amount taken from reserves in
the past that the City Council had agreed to pay back. Based on her
calculations and these recommendations, Councilmember McGehee opined that only
$175,000 would be paid back when it was already short. To clarify the reserves
in the License Center Fund that some may choose to characterize as "hoarding,"
Councilmember McGehee noted that those funds were intended to be used to
construct a building for the License Center versus continuing to lease space at
in principle with mayor Roe's proposal for the General Operating Fund,
Councilmember McGehee opined that the City should be looking during the year
for operational savings that could be found citywide, such as through outsourcing
or contracting out some services, providing savings and not requiring these
drastic measures. As an example, Councilmember McGehee questioned if the City
of Roseville needed its own SWAT team; or if it could raise fees going forward
to achieve major savings rather than continuing to use reserves that were
intended to other purposes.
License Center reserves, Councilmember Willmus noted, in large part, the
reserves represented taxes paid in advance by Roseville taxpayers. Based on
his review of Finance Commission recommendations, Councilmember Willmus noted
that reserves remained $1 million to $1.5 million above the target goal;
therefore making it very much within the City Council's purview to use those
monies to offset the levy, in particular given the restructuring by Ramsey
County of residential and commercial property values for 2015. If the City Council
used the numbers proposed by Mayor Roe, Councilmember Willmus noted that this
would get the levy increase for 2015 to be consistent with the rate of inflation
over the past year. Councilmember Willmus opined that this would not limit the
City moving forward and would be a prudent step that he could support.
Etten stated that he was not a big supporter of using one-time money to patch
together a budget. However, Councilmember Etten stated that he was somewhat
amenable to the proposal by Mayor Roe this year given the severe shift of
property values from commercial businesses to residential family homes, which
was hitting homeowners significantly hard for 2015. Councilmember Etten noted
that the use of those reserves as proposed was significant and put the City at
a $540,000 hole before talking about anything for 2016. While comfortable using
some reserves, Councilmember Etten opined that that number was a large hole to
dig out of, and at some point would hit the City hard and limit future
decision-making. Speaking specifically to the comments about meeting Consumer
Price Index (CPI) percentages as part of the additional $220,000 for capital
needs outside operating increases, Councilmember Etten stated that he was more
comfortable with the $280,000 as part of that, but adding in the remainder to
bring the total 2015 levy increase to just over 2% in an effort to acknowledge
the City Council's attempt to keep things down for residents while not limiting the City's future.
clarified the intent of Councilmember Etten to reduce the increase suggested by
staff from $655,329 to $400,000; with Councilmember Etten agreeing by using
$220,000 to the CIP, bringing the levy increase to a little over 2%. Mayor Roe
clarified that he did not subtract the CIP.
McGehee concurred with the comments of Councilmember Etten, stating that she
had the same reservations stated by him. Councilmember McGehee expressed her
dislike to continuing to do this at year-end without addressing some of the
fundamental issues and making recommendations to reduce spending.
Councilmember McGehee opined that $540,000 was a huge amount, and she supported
retaining the CIP amount.
Laliberte noted that she had long advocated for reduced spending, and after
another year's budget process, that had yet to be achieved. While respecting
the recommendation of the Finance Commission for options available where
reserves are over reserve targets, and those two funds specifically proposed to
be used by Mayor Roe, Councilmember Laliberte expressed her opposition to using
reserves to fund recurring expenses. While not having a problem using them or an
investment for 2015, and recognizing that it was taxpayer money that should be
used for refunded and not stockpiled, Councilmember Laliberte expressed concern
is borrowing from reserves and then needing to repay them. Depending on how it
was considered, Councilmember Laliberte questioned if it needed to be repaid if
it represented excess money sitting in reserves if the Council chose to utilize
it for funding operations of capital expenditures.
Etten stated that he believed that the City was not actually paying back
reserves, but filling in with levy dollars paid with one-time dollars. By filling
in that budget amount previously agreed to versus one-time money, Councilmember
Etten opined that there were no additional monies going into the reserves.
McGehee concurred with Councilmember Etten's comments. However, when thinking
of a way to pay reserves back, Councilmember McGehee noted the amount of time
to build up some of those reserves; and if the City considered building a
License Center at some point, it would need the money, either from reserves or
by bonding. Councilmember McGehee stated that she strongly supported a "rainy
day" fund; and opined that the City wasn't paying the funds back, but they
needed to be available to avoid terrible fluctuations, such as being
experienced in 2015. While the City was lucky those reserves were available,
Councilmember McGehee opined that if they continued to be used as a general
policy, the City Council would not have them available in the future to help
taxpayers, and suggested caution. Councilmember McGehee stated that she was
less hesitant to use the reserves this year due to increased property
valuations; and expressed her hope that there were programs that could be cut,
some significantly, in the future, including utility rates with increases laid
entirely on residents, and requiring further review in the future compared to
commercial utility rates.
clarified that the utility rate increase was to the base fees and applied to
all utility customers, whether commercial or residential, with commercial properties
affected according to their meter size.
In response to
the preference to not use reserves for ongoing expenses, Mayor Roe suggested
one way to look at it as proposed for 2015 (referencing page 3 in the RCA),
under budget additions, such as additional CIP replacements, if it created more
comfort, the reserves could be used to pay $500,000 of those proposed $723,570
additional 2015 capital replacements, and not considered to be used for ongoing
expenses. While not being able to remember the proposed 2016 capital needs and
whether or not it was sustainable, Mayor Roe noted that it fluctuated annually,
as evidenced with this 2015 CIP including a $700,000 increase.
saving for a new License Center, Mayor Roe noted that the discussion had been
held earlier in 2014, and it was not actually a City Council policy per se, it
was certainly worth having a conversation about. However, Mayor Roe further
noted that his proposal did not completely eliminate those reserves, but it
would set them back, but still allowed that conversation to move forward while
still using funds to provide relief for Roseville taxpayers at this time.
McGehee seconded, a 2% levy increase at $373,181 through the use of General
Fund reserves, covering the remaining $100,000 needed through using from
expected 2014 carryover monies, with the remaining $182,000 through use of
License Center Fund reserves.
At the request
of Councilmember Laliberte as to why he was opposed to using all of the
reserves as proposed by Mayor Roe, Councilmember Etten noted that his motion
used a chunk of reserves, but preferred not to use all of it until further discussions
could take place, and more information available over the next six months.
Laliberte noted that the City didn't start out at a zero budget each year, but built on the previous year's base, with padding and carryover included each year. With staff stating that $200,000 was easily available now, Councilmember Laliberte opined that, based on previous years' carryover, there should be no concern in applying the full $200,000 now.
moved, Roe seconded, using the full 2014 carryover amount of $200,000; and
$282,000 in License Center Fund reserves.
estimated that this would reduce the 2015 levy increase to approximately 1.46%.
Willmus spoke in support of the amendment, opining that the original motion and
the amendment represented responsible steps in the current environment and were
consistent with inflation rates over the last year.
Etten spoke in opposition to the amendment for the same reasons, opining that
it dumped more and more onto future Councils and did not represent a great way
to budget monies.
McGehee concurred, speaking in opposition to the amendment, opining that it was
a guess and not prudent.
Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of the amendment, and while respecting
and understanding that this may place a burden on future City Council's, she
noted that it would be the individuals currently at the table for the next few
years, and she was willing to take on that burden, while at the same time
looking at cutting spending wherever and however possible while continuing to replace capital needs and infrastructure. Councilmember Laliberte noted that this would be an ongoing debate.
Etten noted that the City Council had an opportunity to do so earlier in 2014
and didn't take action, but now seemed willing to pass the dollar on, which he
found troubling. Councilmember Etten stated that he was okay in considering a
partial use of reserves, but opined that this got the City in too deep of a
Amendment to Laliberte Amendment to the Original Motion
suggested a slight modification to Councilmember Laliberte's amendment, that if
the 2014 savings proved less than $200,000, that the remainder come from
General Fund reserves, which would fall under the intent expressed in
Councilmember Etten's original motion.
Laliberte accepted Mayor Roe's amendment to her motion.
Mayor Roe noted
that he was fully aware that the 2015 budget was not approached through
spending cuts, but opined that there were a number of things the City Council obviously
found important to continue or needed to enhance or improve the City as
discovered during previous discussions. Mayor Roe opined that it was not the
City Council's role to continually cut spending, but to be good stewards of
taxpayer monies and continue to strive to do a better job from year to year or
become more efficient in delivery of services and programs. Mayor Roe stated
that he was also very aware of the impact on taxpayers, and expressed his
confidence that the economy would continue to recover, and that development
would continue in Roseville, so that the City wouldn't be facing the same
issues in the near future. Mayor Roe suggested that, in order to use the levy
in the future to recover reserves, and having it available for tax relief as
needed, the City Council needed to seriously look at those reserve funds on a
McGehee stated that she hoped, over the course of the year in 2015, that the
City didn't attempt to cut existing programs, opining that there were changes that could be made to the City's tax base or steps to facilitate development that could enhance the tax base and improve the community in that way. However, Councilmember McGehee stated the need to make sure those steps were fair and the things supported by the City Council were what the residents wanted and supported, by giving the residents options and having open discussions with the public by providing full and transparent information to residents and letting them make the decisions. Councilmember McGehee stated that she was not in favor of making cuts in line items as done in the past.
Laliberte/Roe Amendment Restated
moved, Roe seconded, using the full 2014 carryover amount of $200,000; $282,000
in License Center Fund reserves; and if 2014 savings prove less than $200,000,
the remainder come from General Fund reserves.
Willmus, and Roe.
Motion Restated as Amended
McGehee seconded, a 1.5% levy increase at $273,181 through the use of General
Fund reserves; use of $282,000 from License Center Fund reserves; and using
the full 2014 carryover amount of $200,000, and if 2014 savings prove less than
$200,000, the remainder come from General Fund reserves.
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miller provided updated numbers for the draft
resolution (Attachment A-page 5 of the RCA) as shown below.
Willmus moved, Laliberte
seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11193 entitled, "Resolution Submitting
the Final Property Tax Levy on Real Estate to the Ramsey County Auditor for the
Fiscal Year of 2015;" as amended with $14,796,902 for programs and
services; debt service remaining at $3,480,000; and total 2015 tax levy at
Laliberte, Willmus, and Roe.
Etten and McGehee.
McGehee moved, Etten
seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11194 (Attachment B) entitled, "Resolution
Directing the County Auditor to Adjust the Approved Tax Levy for 2015 Bonded
Debt;" as presented, and increasing the amount from 2014 by the amount of
Etten moved, McGehee
seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11195 (Attachment C) entitled, "Resolution
Adopting the Final 2015 Annual Budget for the City of Roseville;" in the amount
of $52,045,290, of which $26,055,340 is designated for the
noted that an upcoming agenda item tonight would include discussion on new
positions, but asked for a better understanding and discussion on the proposed
full-time forestry position now before voting on the 2015 budget.
Councilmember Laliberte sought clarification on how the position would be used,
under which department would it be located, whether hiring would be at the
beginning of 2015 or mid-year, and whether or not the budget could be adjusted
accordingly, similar to the Volunteer Coordinator hiring mid-year.
Trudgeon advised that staff's preference would be to get the position up and
running as soon as possible if funded in the 2015 budget, especially with
emphasis on development projects already underway and those anticipated in the
spring of 2015. While still under his review, Mr. Trudgeon advised that he anticipated
the full-time forestry position as a shared position with the initial thought
to have it housed in the Parks and Recreation Department as is the current part-time
position and based on their institutional knowledge. Mr. Trudgeon advised that
the current position helped with the park system and street trees as well; and
he saw that role expanded to work on development projects. Mr. Trudgeon
clarified that there would be a lot of coordinated needed between the Parks
& Recreation, Community Development, and Public Works/Engineering Departments
as well as with new landscaping projects. Mr. Trudgeon expressed his and
staff's disappointment, along with that of the public and City Council, with
past projects; and opined that a full-time position would help address those
At this point,
Councilmember McGehee questioned whether she would support the full-time
forestry position at all, unless it was properly managed. Councilmember
McGehee stated that she had not been happy with the past program, not because
it was only a part-time position, but based on her interpretation of what was
needed for a forester to address, such as natural areas in the community rather
than exclusive use for park renewal program-related issues. Councilmember
McGehee further opined that the City's Public Works Department could not and
should not be asked to maintain street trees when not properly planted or
maintained; however, she did think the forester position should be available to
assist the Public Works Department in storm water ponds and drainage issues as
related to trees, since trees were a big part of that as well as the
development piece. As part of the consideration, Councilmember McGehee noted
that portions of the position could be charged to developers, but consideration
also was needed to make sure storm water was kept on properties versus roads.
Councilmember McGehee noted that this would require uniform management among
three different groups from three different directions; and stated that she
would reserve judgment on whether or not to support a full-time forester
position or use of a contract service as needed.
Trudgeon reminded the City Council that the full-time forester position is
proposed for funding from the Parks & Recreation Department and 50% from
the Community Development Department; but would be subject to change if found
different during practical use. Mr. Trudgeon further noted that the position
may need adjusting further to make sure the position and funds realized as part
of development or redevelopment funds were in accordance with state law for the
Community Development Department's use. Mr. Trudgeon advised that these adjustments
would come forward in future budget cycles.
McGehee opined that, while the Community Development Department could capture
the cost of the position from developer fees, the Public Works Department,
where she thought the strongest need was, didn't have much voice in the matter.
Mayor Roe noted
that, with the exception of the CIP, most expenses remained fairly flat from
2014 to 2015, with the budget for water operations actually going down, and
sanitary sewer and storm drainage going up.
Adopt the 2015 Final HRA Tax Levy
Director Miller noted that the HRA had revised their 2015 levy request to the
same as 2014, for a zero levy increase for 2015, as detailed in the RCA dated
December 8, 2014.
moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11196 (Attachment A)
entitled, "A Resolution Submitting the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, in
and for the City of Roseville, Special Property Tax Levy on Real Estate to the
Ramsey County Auditor for the Fiscal Year of 2015, in the amount of $703,579, a
zero percent increase from 2014."
Laliberte thanked the HRA members and staff and Council Representative Etten
for their work in revising their levy request for a flat levy.
Consider the 2015 Utility Rate Adjustments
Director Miller, in referencing the RCA dated December 8, 2014, advised that
there were no updates since the public hearing information presented at last
week's meeting, and previous discussions held in November with the City Council.
Etten moved, Laliberte
seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11197 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution
Establishing the 2015 Utility Rates:" as presented and detailed in the RCA
dated December 8, 2014.
Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at
approximately 8:20 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 8:28 p.m.
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miller provided updated impacts for Roseville
residents, based on the flat levy request by the HRA, and tax levy reductions
made tonight for the average taxpayer. Mr. Miller reported that the average
increase to a typical, median-valued home in Roseville had been projected for
2015 at $6.54, and with tonight's actions had been reduced to $4.98, or a
savings of $1.69 per month.
Mayor Roe noted
that the average single-family home in Roseville was looking at an 11% increase
in its market value, and with tonight's actions, residents could assume an
approximate $7.5% increase from 2014 property taxes.
Mayor Roe noted
his previous request that late in the year, the Finance Department publish an
official budget document providing results of tonight's actions and present
that budget document to the council in early 2015; duly noted by City Manager
Business Items (Action Items)
Consider Approval of Pawn America Minnesota, LLC's 2015 Pawn Shop
and Precious Metals Dealer License Renewal
Director Miller referenced the RCA dated December 8, 2014, noting that there
were no changes since the presentation at the previous meeting, with the exception
of the requested additional land use information provided by the Community
Development Department staff in the RCA, lines 11 through 55. Regarding City
requirements, Mr. Miller advised the City Council that Pawn America had met all
requirements, and therefore, from staff's perspective, they saw no reason to
deny the requested license renewal.
At the request
of Mayor Roe, City Attorney Gaughan pointed out that, under City Code, licenses
were subject to renewal unless there was a violation of licensing provisions of
relevant state or local laws; and unless one or more of those conditions exist,
renewal would be appropriate per City Code.
Based on the
submitted pictures provided by residents at last week's meeting, Councilmember McGehee advised that she drove the area today, and the refuse and condition of the easement area immediately adjacent to people's back yards was terrible, with the hill and area full of tires, bed frames, trash and other junk. Councilmember McGehee stated that it was her understanding that the property actually belonged to the apartment building, and in her opinion, certainly represented a code violation. Councilmember McGehee expressed her confidence that Community Development Director Bilotta would alert the City's code enforcement team to remedy the situation; and also suggested a review by the City's Police
Department and other Community Development staff. Councilmember McGehee opined
that it seemed to be a very unfortunate situation back there, and looked
ramshackle, and unsafe. Councilmember McGehee opined that the area looked like
a frequently used pathway to area businesses, and suggested that the City
encourage beautification of the area, or even suggested that the City beautify the
area itself if it was easement property. Since the area was side enough to
drive a car through, Councilmember McGehee noted that obviously provided clear
access with kids using the hill for sledding. Councilmember McGehee further
opined that there were some real opportunities for the City to get together
with constituents to put something nice together back there and make it safer
than it appeared today. Councilmember McGehee expressed her appreciation of previous
public comments; and opined that a lot of the responsibility belonged to the
City of Roseville since the easement area belonged to the City; and obviously
the Pawn Shop was not the biggest contributor to the mess.
Mayor Roe asked
for an update from neighbors on the progress between them and Pawn America representatives
since the last meeting.
Etten concurred, asking neighbors to speak about where they were at with those
- 363 S McCarrons Blvd.
As Chair of the
McCarron's Neighborhood Association, Ms. Sanders displayed a map of property
owners in the immediate area.
Members from the Neighborhood Association appearing included Jim Moncour, 294 N
McCarrons Blvd.; Diane Hilden, 466 Bayview, and Ricky Sanders, 166 S.
McCarrons Blvd., owner of the property directly affected by the Pawn America
thanked the City Council for the ability to speak to this issue. Ms. Sanders
reported on the Board meeting with Pawn America representative, Chuck
Armstrong, noting his sincere desire to assist the neighborhood with the noise,
trash and light issues, and offered to make an appeal to the McCarron's Hill
Shopping Center for installation of a fence.
the meeting with Mr. Armstrong, Ms. Sanders advised that a problem beyond that
of concerns with Pawn America was discovered, on the whole easement used by
foot traffic separating homes from the shopping center and from the apartments
located behind Larpenteur, Woodbridge and Marion. Ms. Sanders noted that the
chain link fence had apparently been "altered" to create shortcuts to businesses
across Rice Street.
With that new
issue brought to light, Ms. Sanders advised that the Association wanted to
continue discussions, seeking resolution and cooperation by the owners of the
shopping center, G & G Management LLC, owners of fourteen buildings in this
area running along that easement. As part of that ongoing discussion, Ms.
Sanders advised that the Association was requesting a site plan review and for
staff to enforce City Code, but not limited to building regulations, but also
code, sanitation and zoning to address this matter.
Due to Pawn
America's willingness to assist the Association and address problems specific
to their operation and relocation of their door, Ms. Sanders stated that they
saw no reason to delay the renewal of their license.
294 N McCarrons Blvd.
clarified that the Association had no intent to create a problem, and they had
actually approached, with Community Development Director Bilotta, entities
responsible for the apartment building and had so far met with favorable
support. Mr. Moncour further clarified that Mr. Armstrong with Pawn America
had been nothing but positive; and were proving very cooperative.
Even though the
extent of the problem had yet to be identified and who the responsible parties
are for the area in general, Mr. Moncour sought and welcomed any help available
from the City in coordinating this function and dealing with this geographical
area and these entities. Mr. Moncour opined that it was the consensus of the
Association that the fence required by Pawn America from their location at the
top of the hill to block headlights and other distractions from adjacent
residential properties 50' lower would be a great step in the right direction.
advised that the Association did not wish to put any condition on the Pawn
America license renewal approval, opining that it would only serve to taint
discussions and the process already happening, even though they were not ready
to make an articulated statement on what resolution or legal resolution may be
needed. However, Mr. Moncour agreed that the Association found no problem in
the City Council renewing this license now that their concerns are part of the
record with Pawn America and its location in relation to this and the property.
expressed the Association's hopes that the gun shots and armed hold up were an isolated incident at Pawn America, and in summation, expressed their support of renewal of the Pawn America license at this point, and looked forward to the continued cooperation of this business in resolving some of the workable problems.
expressed the City Council's appreciation for the Associations comments and
update; and especially their contact with the apartment building owner.
thanked both parties for getting together to talk things through; and while
understanding that this is just as start, he asked that they keep individual
Councilmembers updated as things move forward.
concurred, asking for a progress report, whether positive or negative.
Hilden, 466 Bayview
opined that this was a great example of an association getting together; and
noted the many different facets of this problem requiring a many-pronged
approach. Ms. Hilden stated that the resolution would not happen overnight,
but expressed appreciation to the City Council providing a spotlight on that
corner and opening up the door to increasing and improving amenities in that
area. Ms. Hilden stated that the Association was seeking a long-term
resolution with G & G Management.
expressed hope that solutions could also be found with tenants in the
individual buildings as well through these efforts.
McGehee opined that she would like to see pathways for foot traffic in that
area, further opining that it would be a shame to block that entire area off,
and would like to see it cleaned up for a nice pathway to enhance the
community, as long as the Public Works Department could still access their sewer
concurred, opining that the Association continued to seek elimination of the "ICO"
station; and their slogan had become "ICO has got to go." Ms. Hilden offered
that the Association would do their part if the City of Maplewood would do theirs.
Sanders, 166 S. McCarrons Blvd., owner of the property directly affected by
the Pawn America remodel
noted that the meeting had been held at his home, and thanked Councilmember
Etten and Mr. Armstrong for attending and observing the problem from their
point of view. Mr. Sanders expressed hope that the apartment building owners
and G & G Management's zoning could be reviewed.
Sanders opined that the Pawn America license renewal should not be delayed.
McGehee seconded, approval of the 2015 Pawn Shop and Precious Metals Dealer
License renewal for Pawn America Minnesota, LLC, d/b/a Pawn America, located at
1715 N Rice Street; pending completion of successful background checks.
Consider Approval of Newly Created Positions in the 2015 City
the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly reviewed the new
positions, as approved in the 2015 City Budget just adopted, as detailed in the
RCA dated December 8, 2014, and sought official City Council approval of those
new positions. Mr. Trudgeon advised that the positions would be funded through
existing non-tax levy revenue sources with the exception of the Firefighters,
with that net cost estimated at $68,000 to be funded from levy funds.
McGehee noted that, according to previous presentation by Fire Chief O'Neill,
this left forty firefighters still covered in the Relief Association pension
fund. Councilmember McGehee reiterated her ongoing support to fast track this
additional liability and implement the restructuring plan sooner.
McGehee requested additional information on the Right-of-Way Coordinator
the request of Mayor Roe, Public Works Director Duane Schwartz provided an
overview of duties intended to be performed more efficiently by one position versus
those same duties being performed by a number of current staff members in the
Public Works and Engineering Departments. Mr. Schwartz noted that those duties
included numerous permit approvals, monitoring and inspections, Gopher State
one-call locates, review and coordination of private utility problems when new
fiber installations occur, and whether or not City, Ramsey County, or State of
Minnesota rights-of-way may be in conflict with existing City utilities. Mr.
Schwartz noted that often there may be multiple staff members currently
visiting the same sites, and this new position was intended to streamline
management of those efforts. Mr. Schwartz noted that other details of the
position were summarized in the RCA, pending completion of a job description.
McGehee stated that she was not happy with the proposed Forester position, at
least as the current part-time position exists, opining that the City didn't do
a very good job of keeping trees alive in streetscapes. Councilmember McGehee
noted that the Public Works Department performed maintenance along the streets,
but she had observed an amazing amount of maintenance of those streetscapes
that she deemed unnecessary, a lot of which was related to trees.
Councilmember McGehee noted that the Department was also responsible for trees
around wetlands and lift stations.
Schwartz clarified that all departments had a role in tree maintenance, and
admitted that streetscape trees and vegetation were challenging due to the
tough environments for those trees. However, Mr. Schwartz noted that staff
continued to learn over the years through research and recommendations for
stormwater management how to do a better job in planting and maintaining those
trees in parking lots and along streets. Going forward, Mr. Schwartz noted
that staff would be looking at different species and management techniques for
them to become even more successful, much related to stormwater management and
getting appropriate planting materials. Mr. Schwartz further clarified that
this didn't limit those same best practices for other development and park
McGehee questioned how Mr. Schwartz would see contract services serving in this
Schwartz responded that there may still be more expertise needed from outside
sources for design services, tree boxes or stormwater design. However, Mr.
Schwartz noted that those services were different than typical maintenance, trimming
and disease monitoring, and could be different people used for different
to the six new Firefighter positions as they proceeded with implementation,
Councilmember Willmus stated that he would be seeking additional discussion and
information from Fire Chief O'Neill of how callback rates and auto aid
agreements would work.
her perspective and from information provided to-date, Councilmember McGehee
reiterated that she would prefer departments to use contract services for a
Forester position and as needed.
Etten opined that the very reasons Councilmember McGehee brought up provided
sufficient reasoning relevant to why the City needed a full-time forester for
planning and coordination purposes to better streamline and manage that
moved, Willmus seconded, approval of the newly-created positions as detailed in
the RCA dated December 8, 2014; and authorizing staff to begin the process of
recruiting and filling those positions as presented by staff and outlined in
McGehee reiterated her opinion that a full-time forester didn't have sufficient
expertise; and would prefer to continue with a part-time forester position and
using the remaining funds to hire outside expertise as needed versus spending
the money on a single individual.
Laliberte recognized the positions expressed by both of her colleagues, and
while looking forward to see how this worked out logistically in practice, she
spoke in support of a less fractured approach to forestry-related issues
citywide rather than what could be accomplished through periodic outside
contracting services. Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of the
continued goal to centralize needs and to look holistically at the overall
picture to streamline staff and financial resources.
Roe spoke in support of the motion and this position based on the need for
balance and limitations in the contracting approach versus an approach with
more continuity. In previous discussions, Mayor Roe noted that the rationale
in seeking to expand this position was based on recognizing the deficiencies
with the current part-time position. Mayor Roe suggested this was a similar
expansion as done when revising the former Recycling Coordinator position to an
Environmental Coordinator position several years ago; and as with that
position, if further outside help is needed it can be requested as
Willmus, Etten, and Roe.
Twin Lakes Parkway Phase Three Design Services Contract
bench handouts were provided, consisting of e-mails dated December 8, 2014 from
David Miliotis, 1128 County Road C-2 and Karen Milton, 2939 Mildred Drive, both
requesting a delay in any decision regarding design of Twin Lakes Parkway.
Engineer Marc Culver reviewed this request as detailed in the RCA dated
December 8, 2014; noting that the City had now acquired all rights-of-way to accomplish
this alignment and corridor, with the exception of temporary construction
rights-of-way that may be needed; and was in ownership of all property needed
for the proposed expansion. Mr. Culver displayed a map of the proposed route
for the Parkway; and sought authorization for SRF Consulting Group to be hired
for design of the Parkway, Phase III, since they were also working on several
other elements and under contract for other projects as noted in the RCA.
Willmus questioned whether approval of this tonight would limit the City
Council's ability to update the traffic study.
Culver responded that it would not, and since SRF has been working on the
feasibility study, and did the traffic study for the original AUAR, they could
update this portion as well for area intersections.
the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Culver advised that a timeframe to
accomplish that update could be available in mid-February, after accumulating
additional data and reviewing a complete model of this area. Mr. Culver
clarified that the traffic study update would not be done during the holiday
season as it would skew the results and make them artificially high.
McGehee observed that the proposed Parkway appeared on the map to cut through
existing Langton Lake parkland.
Culver confirmed that at least portions of the right-of-way would involve that
parkland, but was unsure of official park boundaries. Mr. Culver noted that
the water feature in that area of the park had been constructed some time ago
for stormwater purposes; but assured Councilmembers and the public that further
design review would include defining areas north and south of that area for
stormwater management. However, Mr. Culver anticipated that there would be some
impact, but the design would be intended to create the least amount of impact
in the area. With updated designs, Mr. Culver advised that water treatment and
stormwater best management practices would hopefully improve those measures
beyond what is there today.
McGehee noted that the existing pond was built to improve stormwater
management, and opined that now staff was looking to cut it in half and further
pollute; and stated that she was not supportive of that portion of the
roadway. Councilmember McGehee stated that this was not a free road, but would
cost $120,000 for design purposes for a road estimated to cost $1.3 million.
Culver corrected that figure to indicate that the cost of the roadway was estimated
at $1.5 million total.
McGehee stated that this was taxpayer money, not a free road, and taxpayers had
already paid for infrastructure in that area; questioning why taxpayers should
be required to pay additional money for a road the City would need to maintain and
with no reason for the community to support. Councilmember McGehee opined that
the roadway could be designed differently to avoid the park and water feature.
Culver reviewed the intended design and AUAR studies to-date that aligned the
Parkway to intersect with Terrace Drive for a four-way intersection to create
the most advantageous collector street and as the best option for moving
traffic. While the design of that intersection could be offset as suggested by
Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Culver advised that it would not then move traffic
east and west of Fairview Avenue more efficiently or in a more convenient way
as a function of a more comprehensive road network as envisioned for the
community through studies completed to-date.
McGehee questioned if Mr. Culver concurred with this assumption to provide the
stop where it was proposed at the end of Arthur Street, or continuing all the
way through as viable options.
his professional perspective as an Engineer, Mr. Culver questioned from what
perspective "viable" was being determined. Mr. Culver advised that his recommendation
would be to provide a choice for through-movements in this area; opining that
the citywide and area transportation network would be detrimentally affected if
the design were to disconnect from Twin Lakes Parkway and significantly and
negatively impact traffic to other areas in the community.
McGehee opined that Mr. Culver was looking at the situation only from a
transportation network only, and not taking into consideration environmental
concerns and concerns of adjacent neighbors.
Roe questioned if the pond was recently constructed in the narrow space where
the Parkway was intended to be extended. Mayor Roe further asked Mr. Culver if
he anticipated that the road could be built without polluting the pond.
Culver advised that he was unsure of the original intent; but anticipated the
road could be built without significant impact to the existing pond. Mr.
Culver noted that the map showed the entire road and right-of-way corridor
through there, but clarified that the roadway would not be that wide. Mr.
Culver advised that, as the design proceeds, a more detailed review would be
undertaken to see if there was a way to pipe stormwater underneath the roadway
to reduce impacts to the overall system as it is today.
Roe opened discussion to public comment.
Callaghan, 3062 Shorewood Lane
Callaghan stated that he saw no way to build a roadway with wastewater, sand
and salt coming off it that would not pollute Langton Lake. Mr. Callaghan
questioned the idea of minimizing that impact, opining that it would flow into
the lake as it had no place else to go. Mr. Callaghan opined that this design
was done thirteen years ago, and questioned its validity today; opining that it
wasn't a very favorable design back then, only marginal, and what was being
proposed would have a major effect on the residential area. Mr. Callaghan
further opined that traffic would not continue along Terrace Drive; and the
intersection of County Road C and Snelling Avenue was already heavily
overloaded, and this would dump traffic on Fairview Avenue where it was already
Callaghan opined that this fantastic traffic management plan took none of that
into account; and there were no indications of a change from the AUAR traffic
plan with changes already made to the Twin Lakes area (e.g. WalMart). Mr. Callaghan
stated that residents were told two years ago that a report would be forthcoming
on the effects of the WalMart development on traffic on Fairview; however, it
was not yet included, and opined that he had been told a falsehood, since that
information was not included in the engineer's report. Since this is a development
plan from years ago, Mr. Callaghan questioned whether it was still appropriate;
and opined that more discussion was needed to determine if this was the best
design for the road, or whether there were ways to change it or at a minimum
reconfirm that design in today's world rather than following a plan many years
Callaghan opined that many developments in the city don't follow plans, and suggested postponing this until a detailed discussion of what was best in Twin Lake now before more expenses. Mr. Callaghan stated that he didn't expect to see any benefit to this whole development area within his lifetime; since over the last 27 years the City was still holding tax increment financing money while residents were paying for all the support services that area received (e.g. snowplowing, and police/fire protection) and they weren't paying for anything. Mr. Callaghan opined that the City would end up with two local WalMarts, since they initially indicated this was going to be a local store, but shortly after they had closed one in an adjacent community. Mr. Callaghan questioned how long this one would stay open, opining that WalMart's reputation was use the best tax advantages available. Mr. Callaghan stated that the City needed to look at what they were doing before spending any more money; and
personally saw no reason to do a lot of things that were being done.
Stoner, 2866 Merrill Street
Stoner advised that, during his discussion with Mr. Brokke during tonight's meeting, he had received answers to most of his questions. However, Mr. Stoner opined that the arc shown between Prior Avenue and Arthur Street was a disaster, and questioned what it would look like in ten years. Based on his conversation with Mr. Brokke, Mr. Stoner opined that the stormwater retention area was not actually on park land. At first glance, Mr. Stoner opined that the road didn't look like a good thing for the park, but if proper buffering was done with Langton Lake, Mr. Stoner questioned if this could become a blueprint for buffering on other sides of Langton Lake when developed. Mr. Stoner opined that it would be nice to see a good job done now to provide for that blueprint later on.
Tosi , 1766 Millwood Avenue
Tosi expressed concern about more traffic being funneled to County Road C and
Terrace Avenue, with traffic at the stoplight on County Road C already backed
up. Ms. Tosi asked that further consideration be given to safety concerns, as
well as echoing concerns raised by a previous speaker regarding the pond and
McCormack, Wheeler Street
McCormack expressed appreciation for other speakers' comments tonight.
However, Ms. McCormack advised that her comments were with respect to the draft
contract as presented, initially understanding that its purpose was to get confirmation
of things moving forward. However, after further reviewing it tonight, Ms.
McCormack opined that it didn't seem to be the case, and she suggested a more
staged approach than presented in the draft agreement to obtain preliminary
data and then bring it back for an update for residents and those currently
living in the area and still getting up to speed on plans from many years ago
that they may or may not have been privy to. Ms. McCormack opined that this
stepped approach could foster better information and understanding in the
long-run and offer more transparency.
Erickson, Centennial Drive
not being an engineer, but living one block from this proposed roadway, Ms.
Erickson stated that she knew her neighborhood having lived there for thirty
years. When this came up in August of this year, Ms. Erickson noted that the
neighborhood has asked for a traffic study, since there was so much development
proposed for that area now, and it was difficult not to feel threatened or
under attack. While recognizing that this was a "hot" corridor, Ms. Erickson
stated that the neighbors didn't want to be reactionary and expected development or redevelopment, but didn't think enough discussion of thought had gone into that development. Ms. Erickson referenced current difficulties on Lincoln Drive to get around the corner to Snelling Avenue, often taking three signal light cycles or twenty minutes.
Erickson also referenced the ongoing growth and student enrollment increases of
Bethel University and the University of Northwestern, as well as the additional
property purchases off those campuses by those institutions, as well as increasing
student rental housing. Ms. Erickson noted one example of a single-family home
with thirteen vehicles repeatedly parked there, with parking issues along Lydia
Erickson also expressed concern with construction of another main road from
Fairview, and even with a signal light, was concerned that they wouldn't be able to get off Centennial Drive and traffic would be slowed even further, since there was already a huge congestion point there. With a proposal to add a development for 200 new households on Twin Lakes Parkway and Fairview Avenue, Ms. Erickson asked that more time be given to thinking about the consequences; and even with the addition of Bus Rapid Transit, opined that there would be a huge increase in traffic.
Ms. Erickson stated that they loved their neighborhood and while not wishing to
be negative, opined that development would affect the neighborhood, including
additional school bus traffic. Most of all, Ms. Erickson stated that the
neighbors didn't want to see their neighborhood cut off from the rest of Roseville with development surrounding them.
Kapaun, 1840 West County Road C-2
Kapaun stated that she was surprised to see this on tonight's agenda; and expressed her interest in the City Council taking more time to think about the effects of this proposal, even though a lot of thought had probably already gone into it, but that was a long time ago. With new information available, and the possibility of adding more traffic in front of their home, Ms. Kapaun expressed concern with safety for her family, opining that any more congestion resulting in more accidents was beyond what she could imagine.
Kapaun noted that the lake was beautiful and it was a favorite spot for her
family; however, she echoed the comments of Mr. Stoner about making a buffer to
protect Langton Lake, but expressed a need for residents to see those plans before
they happen. Ms. Kapaun opined that it was making the neighborhood "crazy" to
see these things happening in this area without having more information and the
City keeping its promises to talk about things before the neighbors found them
listed on meeting agendas, which made neighbors feel overwhelmed. Ms. Kapaun
asked for understanding on the City Council's part and providing the neighbors more time to allow more participation in discussions on new development in this area.
Roe closed public comment at this time, and asked City Engineer Culver to
respond to several questions raised during those comments.
rights-of-way acquisition, Mr. Culver reviewed the area for the existing
alignment as proposed, west of Fairview Avenue leading to Langton Lake Park;
with a federal grant award for acquisition of that additional right-of-way
along this Parkway alignment from the park and Prior Avenue.
the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Culver reviewed the process moving forward with
an engineering study and future end product. Mr. Culver advised that the
contract itself would still need to go through final design for the roadway,
including all aspects of stormwater management, geometric alignment and
included within that contract with SRF as proposed, one public meeting was
included to present that final design to the public to receive their feedback.
Mr. Culver noted that this would provide an opportunity for the public to
present their concerns about any environmental issues, after the information
and facts had been compiled, and also include another opportunity as staff
presented that final design - and those public comments - to the City Council
for their consideration and comment on that final design. Mr. Culver note that
the process would be for several months, and then staff would prepare for the
construction project beyond that, and after approval by the City Council.
Roe noted that between this contract before the City Council tonight and the
actual construction, the City Council would still need to take action to order
Culver concurred, noting that in addition, funding options would still need to
be finalized, with staff returning with that information as part of a
feasibility study, with any ordering of the project beyond that, and subsequent
action of the City Council for funding and ordering the project.
Willmus advised that, before he could support construction of a roadway, he
would want an updated traffic study, and asked for more discussion on how and
where that fit into this process.
Culver advised that staff had sought updated numbers that were generated in
early November as part of the feasibility study working with SRF for other Twin
Lakes area improvements, including updated numbers on Fairview Avenue and
County Road D to answer questions since WalMart had opened. Mr. Culver displayed
and reviewed how to interpret those preliminary numbers, noting that some
additional updating would be required on some roadways immediately adjacent to
this Phase II of Twin Lakes Parkway. Those preliminary numbers as displayed
are made a part of the RCA, Traffic counts were for the existing road(s), 2030
projected traffic projections not based on the full model but with current
traffic volumes and land use development to-date, including the proposed apartment
buildings and with consideration given to improvements programmed on I-694 and
likely improvements for the I-35W managed lane occurring along this area. Mr.
Culver clarified that there were other factors driving traffic in this area
that were beyond the Walmart development.
all that into consideration, Mr. Culver reviewed Fairview Avenue as an example
of current traffic volumes, projected volume in 2030 and increases or decreases
projected, and how that minor County arterial roadway would manage traffic with
further development in the area. Mr. Culver further reviewed impacts to County
Road D. Overall, Mr. Culver highlighted where ADT's were actually lower in
some cases for 2030 than originally projected in the 2007 AUAR.
Willmus questioned whether there would be other infrastructure improvements
indicated along Fairview Avenue with an updated traffic study and modeling.
Culver responded that there would be, noting that the 2007 AUAR had already
identified them, clarifying that even though the document had expired, it was
still used for informational purposes in helping to determine needed improvements
(e.g. traffic signals) as the area builds out. Mr. Culver advised that this
included coordinating with Ramsey County and other agencies to fund those
improvements as well.
McGehee reiterated her previous comments; and opined that whether or not Parks
& Recreation Director Brokke chose to call that area parkland or not, more
than any other Councilmember at the bench, she had spent more time at Langton
Lake than anyone. Councilmember McGehee further opined that the City had not
been a good park steward to-date, and at the initiation of the Ramsey County
Watershed District eight years ago, she had participated with water testing
under their direction; and had observed considerable parking lot drainage into
the lake without any buffering. While recognizing that some buffering had now
been installed, Councilmember McGehee noted that the parking lots still sloped
directly to the lake.
an example, Councilmember McGehee referenced Como Lake, which is considered
dead; but Langton Lake wasn't, thanks in large part to the infiltration pond at
the request of the Watershed District, with water quality actually having
improved and now at level "c." Councilmember McGehee noted that Langton Lake
was extremely shallow and therefore very sensitive in that regard; and opined
that the City could not adequately manage roadway runoff and traffic without
further damaging the lake and its ecosystem. When talking about natural areas,
which have been requested by residents, Councilmember McGehee opined that there
was a lovely pathway around Langton Lake that met that need, with the U. S.
Fish and Wildlife Service also recognizing the area as a flyway for migratory
birds. Councilmember McGehee noted that this property belonged to everyone,
including the residents surrounding the Lake; and opined that this proposed
roadway design was an unnecessary threat to this beautiful addition to the community.
McGehee stated that she had been a big opponent of WalMart being allowed to
develop, but with development of WalMart, the Metro Transit Park & Ride,
and two proposed hotels, she was observing that traffic from that area seemed
to effectively be going the other way. While recognizing the City Council's
penchant for building things, Councilmember McGehee questioned why there was a
need to do so, and "if it's not broken, don't try to fix it." Councilmember
McGehee opined that this would be exactly what would happen, that Langton Lake
and Langton Lake Park and its natural environment would be broken, which would
not be good for the park or the neighborhood.
McGehee opined that the City Council had made a commitment to the community
north of there that the City would engage them in the planning process, with
this proposed road being a very important piece of that. Councilmember McGehee
noted that, when the originally planning for it had taken place in 1983, it was
intended to hook up with Terrace Drive and go directly to Snelling Avenue.
However, Councilmember McGehee noted that this could and would not take place,
nor was access for development of the former PIK parcel, originally landlocked,
needed any longer with the City's completion of Mount Ridge Road and access off roundabouts on Prior Avenue and Arthur Street. Therefore, Councilmember McGehee opined that the two major goals of the Parkway connection were gone. When discussing the development of the regulating plan and map for this area several years ago with consultant Michael Lamb, Councilmember McGehee stated that he had told her that he was told from the outset that he was not to discuss or consider extension of the Parkway in his planning, thus circumventing his options.
McGehee opined that traffic plans had changed, and while lots of modeling had
been done, she further opined that she was not a big fan of modeling.
McGehee opined that the impact of the University of Northwestern had been huge:
traffic, parking and expansion off their campus; and further opined that their
campus's pollution of Little Johanna and Lake Johanna itself had been overwhelming.
Councilmember McGehee stated that she just found this whole thing as an
unreasonable clinging to something planned for in 1983 that was now completely
different. Councilmember McGehee opined that the whole idea originally was
that this area would become another CenterPointe, which it was not going to
McGehee opined that it was businesses, not retail, that provided tax base
revenue versus simply more traffic generation that the City and its taxpayers
needed to pay for. When talking about the City's tax base and protection of
residential neighborhoods, Councilmember McGehee opined that to deny this
neighborhood an opportunity to work with Community Development Director Bilotta
was not fair. Councilmember McGehee opined that this was not City Engineer
Culver's problem to solve, but one of tax benefits and the expense to residents
to build yet another structure to maintain. Councilmember McGehee opined that additional traffic routed up Fairview Avenue and onto County Road C-2 even with planned intersection changes were also additional expenditures and the tax increment financing proposed to pay for them could be used to buy or clean up land. Councilmember McGehee stated that she'd seen the City of Roseville already lose two really good business prospects to the City of New Brighton because the land was not cleaned up yet; and suggested that this was another case of "If you build it, they will come." Councilmember McGehee further opined that to deny the neighborhood a voice in the process, with little thought given to the current market and environment, was a terrible action environmentally.
to Councilmember McGehee's reference to Parks & Recreation Director Brokke,
Councilmember Willmus opined that Mr. Brokke had done more for the City's parks
than Councilmember McGehee had ever done.
to access to the interior of developable properties (e.g. the former PIK
parcel) Councilmember Willmus noted the potential for smaller businesses and
the need to provide a manner of access to allow those parcels to further
subdivide, and providing for access from all directions. Councilmember Willmus
opined that the Parkway would facilitate that, and would actually get the City
away from potential big box uses and allow those smaller businesses to come in.
to comments by Councilmember McGehee that the City had lost potential business
to New Brighton, Councilmember Willmus opined that one overwhelming factor in
that was that the City of New Brighton controlled the land versus multiple
private owners of this area in Roseville.
Willmus stated that his focus was how to move the community forward and work
with neighbors and property owners for everyone's future best benefit, and not continue looking over their shoulder. Councilmember Willmus opined that the best scenario to accomplish that was to pursue an updated traffic study and determine impacts based on information received today.
Etten sought additional information on the cost of an updated traffic study as
part of the larger work currently being done for the City by SRF.
Engineer Culver advised that SRF would rerun the model to make sure they had an
up-to-date and accurate projection of 2030 traffic volumes, as well as impacts
to traffic infrastructure in this area. Mr. Culver anticipated that update
could be accomplished for an estimated additional fee of $8,000 to $10,000.
Etten asked Mr. Culver if he saw any benefit of working with Ramsey County for
financial assistance for Lydia Avenue and/or County Road D improvements.
Culver responded that staff continued to pressure Ramsey County for updates for
Lydia and Fairview, but their cooperation would be dependent on receipt of
federal grants or other grant funding to accomplish the work. Mr. Culver
opined that updated traffic numbers would certainly further that cause,
however, he could not guarantee it would come to fruition.
Etten questioned if the City would derive more benefit from this through
working with other entities to relive some of the funding pressures.
Culver responded that it had already been determined with the 2007 AUAR that
these improvements would ultimately be needed, and opined that an updated
traffic study would allow the City to put pressure on those other entities to
move those remedies forward. Mr. Culver advised that staff had informally
continued to discuss with those entities the shifting of their focus to Lydia
Avenue, County Road D and Fairview Avenue.
Laliberte noted that, at the beginning of tonight's meeting, she had sought to delay this discussion.
moved, McGehee seconded, not acting on this design services contract at this
time; inviting Public Works staff and Commissioner McGuire to discuss the
entire Fairview Avenue area prior to pursuing a larger discussion with neighborhood
McGehee offered a friendly amendment that at the same time the City Council ask
Public Works staff to fund and make available the updated traffic study as requested
Laliberte stated that she was not sure how she felt about that friendly
amendment; while agreeing that the City needed an updated traffic study, it
would be an educated guess at this point as it how it may impact Fairview Avenue.
McGehee withdrew her friendly amendment. Councilmember McGehee opined that the
least that the City Council could do was to pursue their commitment to the
community. Councilmember McGehee stated that she had repeatedly said to
residents that this was a better City Council in terms of wanting to facilitate
interaction and work with residents and try to understand their perspectives.
To push this design forward through approval of this contract at this time, Councilmember
McGehee opined was not in that spirit at all, since there remained plenty of
information yet to seek.
Etten opined that there was no reason this action needed to stop the City's
communication with neighbors, and it was important to continue it, and this
would provide additional information to facilitate those discussions, as well
as addressing any issues related to maintaining the water ponding or adding new
elements as part of any environmental work needed around that development,
along with environmental clean-up issues around Langton Lake. Councilmember
Etten noted that this study, along with the traffic study was all part of
that. From that perspective, Councilmember Etten spoke in opposition to the
a result of this and even though it will generate information, Councilmember
McGehee opined that, from her experience, once you approve going ahead with the
design process, it precluded any further discussion.
Roe stated that he did not support the motion to delay action; and expressed
his willingness to have discussions with residents or anyone interested in the
project. Mayor Roe noted that the City had already approved and accomplished
right-of-way purchase for the Parkway as designed and for construction as
shown, all decisions and actions of this very City Council. With the City
Council fully informed about and throughout the process, to now imply that
discussions with neighbors may change that location and general design, Mayor
Roe opined was not fair to the neighbors to make promises that could not be
kept when those changes were no longer an option. Mayor Roe stated that this
engineering project would provide the additional information needed to help
inform the overall process; and for those residents not previously involved,
offered to provide ways to get that information to them for their edification.
Mayor Roe opined that from his personal analysis there were many more benefits
in pursuing Phase III of Twin Lakes Parkway than concerns; and opined that
those benefits ultimately outweighed the concerns. Therefore, Mayor Roe
reiterated his opposition to a motion to delay the design work.
Laliberte challenged Mayor Roe's statement that because right-of-way had already been purchased, nothing could be done because of that, was not the only solution, as that acquired property could always be put back on the market.
McGehee, Willmus, Etten, and Roe.
moved, Laliberte seconded, pursuing an updated traffic study prior to entering
into a contract for design of Phase III of Twin lakes Parkway, and at a cost
estimated at $8,000 to $10,000.
the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Culver estimated approximately 3-6
months for completion of the updated traffic study, as part of the current work
under the RCA.
the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Culver advised that for any further
development in the area, an updated traffic study would be needed; and pending
any land use changes beyond current development proposals in process, the
traffic study remained doable and could be incorporated within those
timeframes. Mr. Culver reiterated that data would be collected throughout
January, and once the model was updated and redone, it could be tweaked if
needed and if a land use change came into play. However, with the current
developments and/or current proposals taken into account, Mr. Culver stated
that he did not see any reason other elements could not be incorporated into
Laliberte, McGehee, Willmus.
Roe and Etten.
agenda items 14.a and 14.b remaining, at approximately 10:00 p.m., Willmus
moved, Etten seconded, to extend the meeting to the conclusion of the remaining
Business Items - Presentations/Discussions
Request by the Community Development Department for Direction on
the Creation of a Formal Voluntary Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Waiver Process for Projects Zoned Community Mixed-Use (CMU) in the Twin Lakes
Development Director Paul Bilotta and City Planner Thomas Paschke were present
to discuss this draft worksheet, as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014.
Mr. Bilotta explained that the worksheet actually mirrored pieces of a formal
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), but where the City's Alternative
Urban Area-wide Review (AUAR) indicated there was no issue it provided a level
of review at a more cursory nature based on those lesser elements. Mr. Bilotta
noted that the City Council could then determine where specific changes may be
needed, mostly related to traffic issues, stormwater and hazardous waste
materials onsite, along with any other elements that may be evident as well.
On page 5, #26
(Visual Impacts), Councilmember Etten asked for more information on what and
how those visual impacts would be identified.
Paschke advised that it was taken from the existing AUAR and depended on how it
was answered at that time.
advised that it may vary depending on the actual location, and would be at City
Council discretion to consider those issues for each project.
proposed something that the City Council considered applicable, Councilmember Etten
asked if applicants were then not required to repeat that analysis; opining
that he thought the visual impact should be part of the preliminary review
concurred, opining that, even if the answer in the AUAR process was "no," the
City Council should still have the option of asking the question versus simply
responded that staff thought an applicant should answer every questions,
depending on the location of the development, to determine if and how it was
applicable, prior to the project being presented to the City Council for their
review and consideration.
opined that he preferred that the applicant answer ALL questions.
Etten concurred, that he preferred them all included.
Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11198 entitled, "A Resolution
Superseding and Repealing Resolution no. 11015, and replacing it with the
Roseville Environmental Review Worksheet Application (PFOJ0032); as detailed in
the RCA dated December 8, 2014;" similar in form to that provided as a
draft (Attachment D).
Discuss City Council and Staff Retreat
briefly summarized this discussion as detailed in the RCA dated December 8,
McGehee suggested, if discussing personnel-related issues, could a portion of
the retreat be held in Closed Session.
Gaughan responded that the retreat could not be held in Closed Session; and
clarified that such a Closed Session for the purpose of personnel review for
someone directly under the authority of the City Council, could only be held if
and when duly noticed. City Attorney Gaughan further clarified that, whether
this was a City Council retreat or a regular meeting, it remained subject to
all of the same Open Meeting Laws in accordance with applicable State Statute.
Willmus stated that he was not really interested in hiring a facilitator; and
if the retreat was agreed upon, would like it to focus on strategic planning or
goal setting. Regarding public access to the meeting, Councilmember Willmus
opined that, since it was a meeting of the City Council, access should be
afforded to the public; but remained open as to whether through live broadcast
or videotaping for later viewing. Councilmember Willmus based his concern in
open access with that of former Roseville City Council Work Sessions that gave
the perception of a closed environment, and therefore, made it difficult to
determine the intent of meeting discussions. Councilmember Willmus stated that
he was open to meeting during the middle of the workday if that proved more convenient
for staff. Councilmember Willmus opined that the retreat did not require two
Laliberte agreed that her vision of a retreat was for the purpose of goal
setting, prioritization and proactive planning; and also did not see a need for
a facilitator, as she was not in favor of spending money on a facilitator
and/or another location. Councilmember Laliberte opined that the retreat
should be recorded and should have meeting minutes; but was open to whether or
not it was broadcast live or held on videotape for the archives. With enough
prior notice as to the date and time, Councilmember Laliberte stated that she
was supportive of a weekday retreat if it was easier for staff to attend, and
advised that she could be available as long as there was sufficient time for planning
her work schedule ahead. Councilmember Laliberte also agreed that two days
were not necessary for the retreat.
Etten concurred with the strategic planning and goal setting purpose, and
supported having staff involved, as well as doing it during the weekday.
Councilmember Etten suggested a Friday afternoon meeting with staff for four or
five quality hours, but no more than that; and then if necessary the City
Council could continue the next morning (Saturday) for a few hours. Councilmember
Etten spoke in support of using the City Council Chambers; or suggested one of
the new park structures (e.g. Lexington Park) that would allow the brain to
operate differently and be a positive change from the normal location.
Councilmember Etten spoke in strong support of having minutes, and if held at
an alternative site, was fine with having a videotape for the archives, which
would preclude the need for a live broadcast.
Mayor Roe noted
that it was easier to do videotaping or a live broadcast if the Retreat was
held in the City Council Chambers, and agreed that he saw no need to go
off-site. Regarding an agenda, Mayor Roe supported strategic planning and City
Council and City goals for the next year, along with prioritizing them. Mayor
Roe opined that having it on a weekday was good for the part of the Retreat
involving staff; and several half days would probably be adequate. Regarding a
facilitator, Mayor Roe advised that, having served as a Facilitator while acting
as Chairperson, from his past experience had not been productive, nor allow him
to participate in discussions. Mayor Roe suggested that facilitator services
may be available at a more reasonable cost than originally estimated by staff;
and suggested several resources, including Barbara Raye as an option.
McGehee opined that hiring a facilitator didn't represent that much of an expense, if you wanted to have the Chairperson running the meeting as well as participating in discussions. Councilmember McGehee suggested that the cost could come out of Communication Funds reserves. Councilmember
Willmus advised that he was not necessarily against hiring a facilitator, just
against spending the money to provide one, and suggested looking to other
Mayor Roe suggested
a look at alternatives may provide less expensive options for a facilitator.
Laliberte expressed her openness to resources available; and spoke in support
of having part of the meeting with staff and the other part without staff if
broken into two partial days.
Etten stated that he'd be open to a facilitator who could move discussions in a
positive manner and forward versus circling around. Councilmember Etten also
spoke in support of having staff available for part of the meeting, or possibly
before and after the City Council meetings. However, Councilmember Etten stated
that he'd like to initially hear from staff to work into a broader discussion.
Mayor Roe spoke
in support of staff's involvement, as long as their participation was not in
the form of a "presentation" but part of a general discussion and with everyone
getting their fair share of time. Mayor Roe
opined that he was impressed with this City Council, and that it was one of the
most effective City Council's he'd served with to-date.
Trudgeon advised that he would take this feedback and return with suggestions
and a proposed framework for the City Councils January 5, 2015 organizational
meeting; along with potential dates and other logistics for finalization. Mr.
Trudgeon sought the City Council's intent for staff's involvement; with Mayor Roe responding that several concepts were brought forward tonight, and would need further fleshing out.
Laliberte supported Councilmember Etten's suggestion for conversations with Department Heads as the first part of the Retreat allowing City Councilmembers to digest that information and factor it into their priorities, and then spending the second half of the meeting without staff and in planning strategies and goals.
questioned if Councilmember Laliberte was supporting staff remaining available
as a resource or not; she responded that she would not ask them to come in on a
Saturday; but was suggesting that the City Council use that time to discuss
their goals and priorities and what they wanted to accomplish over the next
questioned what might happen if the City Council set their goals that were not
in line with staff's with Councilmember Laliberte expressing her assurance that staff would be quick to subsequently set things straight.
City Manager Future Agenda Review
Trudgeon distributed written preliminary agendas for several upcoming meetings.
Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings
Willmus moved, Etten
seconded adjournment of the meeting at approximately 10:19 p.m.