View Other Items in this Archive | View All Archives | Printable Version

City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

April 11, 2011


1.         Roll Call

Mayor Roe called to order the Roseville City Council regular meeting at approximately 6:00 pm and welcomed everyone.  (Voting and Seating Order for April: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe).  City Attorney Charlie Bartholdi was also present.

2.         Approve Agenda

Councilmember McGehee requested removal of Consent Agenda Items 7.c and d, respectfully entitled “Set a Public Hearing to Consider Amending City Code, Chapter 302, to Allow for a Brewery and Off-Sale Retailing Liquor License;” and “Adopt a Resolution Supporting a Two-Year Budget Process.”  Councilmember McGehee suggested, and by consensus it was agreed, that Item 7.d be discussed under Agenda Item 13.b, entitled, “Discussion of 2012/13 Budgeting.”


Willmus moved, Johnson seconded, approval of the agenda as amended.


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.  

3.         Public Comment

Mayor Roe called for public comment by members of the audience on any non-agenda items.  No one appeared to speak at this time.

4.         Council Communications, Reports, and Announcements

Mayor Roe announced that Roseville’s Cedarholm Golf Course was now open, and advised that space remained on all leagues, additional information available by contacting City Hall or on the City’s website.


Mayor Roe announced that the City was seeking Roseville residents to serve on a Civic Engagement Task Force for the purpose of reviewing the City’s civic engage policies and subsequent recommendations to the City Council for improvements in citizen engagement and involvement in its decision-making.  Mayor Roe asked those citizens interested in serving or seeking additional information to contact Carolyn Curti at City Hall at 651-792-7026.  Mayor Roe advised that the duration of the Task Force was anticipated to be approximately five (5) months, and was proposed to meet monthly beginning in late April of 2011.


Councilmember McGehee congratulated Mark Rancone with Roseville Properties on being a recipient of a Minnesota Green Award for their REI building parking lot.


Councilmember McGehee announced that the Roseville AMC Theater located at Rosedale showed movies for children with Autism one Saturday each month, and encouraged parents to contact the theater for their schedule and movie offerings on those Saturdays.


Councilmember McGehee advised that, as part of her learning about her role as a Councilmember, she was reviewing other communities and their operations.  During that review process, Councilmember McGehee noted that the City of St. Louis Park had recently constructed a Fire Station, and given their similar needs to those of Roseville, suggested that Roseville take advantage of their Request for Proposals (RFP) and contracts as a model for Roseville, and as a cost-saving measure rather.  Councilmember McGehee noted the energy efficiencies and environmentally sound design used by St. Louis Park  in accordance with their Green Building Policy, and encouraged Roseville to consider similar measures.  Councilmember McGehee noted the willingness of St. Louis Park staff in providing assistance to the City of Roseville in sharing resources and saving monies; their hiring of a construction manager and efficiencies that method provided; and identification of candidate firms selected from the Fire Chief’s Association.

5.         Recognitions, Donations, Communications

a.         Recognize and Accept a $10,000 Donation from Hugh and Julie Thibodeau to fund the acquisition of a new K-9 to replace retired Major

Police Chief Rick Mathwig introduced and recognized the Thibodeau’s long-time support of the City’s Police Department, and their most recent donation to replace Major, with any additional funds to be used for recurring costs for the City’s K-9 program. 


Mr. Hugh Thibodeau expressed their family’s ongoing interest in supporting the City’s Fire and Police Departments to ensure the safety of the community; and noted their specific interest in the City’s K-9 unit and its importance to the Roseville Police Department; and the need to get a new dog trained and in service as soon as possible.


On behalf of the City Council, the community, and staff, Mayor Roe thanked the Thibodeau’s.


Pust moved, Johnson seconded, approval to accept the Thibodeau donation; and to recognize the Thibodeau’s by showing the City’s appreciation for their generous support of the City’s Police Department.


Councilmember Johnson offered his personal thanks to the Thibodeau’s; and while recognizing their generous financial contributions to the community, noted his recent service with Hugh Thibodeau on the Fire Station Building Study Committee, recognizing their civic engagement through generous donations of their time and talents as well.


Councilmember Pust echoed Councilmember Johnson’s comments; opining that the Thibodeau’s were a great asset to the community, and offered her personal thanks as well.


Mayor Roe, recognizing that this recognition could only express the City’s appreciation in a small way to the Thibodeau’s, and thanked them again for their generosity.

Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


b.         Recognize Outgoing Advisory Commissioners

Mayor Roe thanked all those serving on the City’s various advisory commissions; and presented recognition plaques to those retiring advisory commissioners having completed their terms the end of March.  Those available and present for public recognition included: Patrick Schmidt (Ethics); James Stark and Councilmember Bob Willmus (Parks & Recreation); and Teresa Bailey (Police Civil Service).


Mayor Roe advised that staff would see that the remaining retiring Commissioners would receive their plaques.

c.         Proclaim April 29, 2011 as Roseville Arbor Day

Mayor Roe read a proclamation designating April 29, 2011 as Arbor Day in the City of Roseville.


Johnson moved, Pust seconded, proclaiming April 29, 2011 as Arbor Day in the City of Roseville.

Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.

6.         Approve Minutes

a.            Approve Minutes of March 28, 2011  Meeting

Mayor Roe had submitted comments and corrections to the draft minutes prior to tonight’s meeting and those revisions were incorporated into the draft presented in the Council packet.


McGehee moved, Pust seconded, approval of the minutes of the March 28, 2011 meeting as presented.

Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; and Roe.

Nays: None.

Abstentions: Johnson.

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 Bill Malinen briefly reviewed those items being considered under the Consent Agenda.


a.            Approve Payments

Pust moved, Johnson seconded, approval of the following claims and payments as presented.         

ACH Payments







Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


b.            Approve General Purchases and Sale of Surplus Items Exceeding $5,000

Pust moved, Johnson seconded, approval of the submitted list of general purchases and contracts for services presented as follows:





Info Tech.

Software House Int’l

Microsoft Licenses Renewal



Americana Fireworks

Fourth of July Fireworks Display



Gopher State One Call

Blanket P.O. for Utility Locate Requests



McCaren Designs Inc.

Boulevard Maintenance on County Road C



Highway Technologies Inc.

2011 Centerline Painting



Upper Cut Tree Service

Blanket P. O. for Tree Removal



Ess Brothers

Blanket P. O. for Sanitary Sewer Manholes




Ess Brothers

Blanket P. O. for Storm Sewer Manholes



















Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


e.            Approve a Contract with Allina for Medical Direction Services and Education

          Pust moved, Johnson seconded, authorization for the Fire Department to enter into contract (Attachment A) with Allina Hospitals and Clinics (“Allina Medical Transportation”) for medical oversight and education.


                                                Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


d.            Approve a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with Minnesota Commissioner of Public Safety, Forensic Science Laboratory, for a New Breath Test Instrument

At the request of Councilmember Pust, Police Chief Mathwig confirmed that this was the breath test instrument previously under public scrutiny, but confirmed as an accurate testing system.


          Pust moved, Johnson seconded, authorization for the City to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA – Attachment A) with the State of Minnesota through its Commission of Public Safety, Forensic Science Laboratory, for a Data Master DMT-G with Fuel Cell Option breath test instrument.


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


e.            Adopt Resolution Awarding Bid for 2011 Pavement Management Projects

          Pust  moved, Johnson seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10888 (Attachment A) entitled, Resolution Awarding Bids for 2011 Pavement Management Project to North Valley, Inc. of Nowthen, MN, in the amount of $1,793,246.46.”


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


f.             Award 2011 Street Maintenance Materials and Contractual Concrete and Paving Bids

Pust moved, Johnson seconded, a motion rejecting the bid for FA2 sealcoat aggregate from Dresser Traprock.


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


Pust moved, Johnson seconded, accepting the following bids for street maintenance materials and contractual work:



Class 5 aggregate base

Bryan Rock


Concrete panels, curb pedestrian ramps

Ron Kassa Construction, Inc.


Bituminous reclaiming and paving

Bituminous Roadways


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


Pust moved, Johnson seconded, accepting the following bids for street maintenance materials:


LVNW35030B Base Asphalt ¾”

Commercial Blacktop


LVWE45030B Asphalt Wear Mix ½”

Commercial Blacktop


LVWE35030B Asphalt Wear Mix ¾”

Commercial Blacktop









Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.

8.         Consider Items Removed from Consent

a.            Set a Public Hearing to Consider Amending City Code, Chapter 302, to Allow for a Brewery and Off-Sale Retailing Liquor License (Former Consent Item 7.c)

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen briefly reviewed this item as detailed in the RCA dated April 11, 2011.


Councilmember McGehee noted that the proposed ordinance did not limit the number of this type of establishment; and suggested that the City only consider one establishment at this time until operations were put into practice and a determination made on the number desired.


Mayor Roe clarified that the ordinance was in draft form as a starting point for public information, with tonight’s action only for establishing a Public Hearing to receive public comment; with further policy discussion by the City Council subsequent to that Public Hearing.


City Manager Malinen differentiated breweries and brew pubs; and limitations under State Statute on their specific operations and retail sales.


Councilmember Johnson noted that the City already had a brew pub selling “growlers,” at Granite City; and questioned if special consideration was provided for their operation.


City Manager Malinen clarified that Granite City had a full liquor license, and that they were an establishing selling food as well, and therefore, were licensed and regulated differently than other off-sales and the City’s self-imposed limit of ten (10) such licensed establishments.


Mayor Roe questioned if Granite City could sell alcohol products for removal from their site (off-sale); and if that was appropriate under their on-sale license.


Councilmember Pust questioned if Granite City was violating their liquor license; and if so, why there was no action being taken; since no other restaurant could sell alcohol products (off-sale) to take off-site.


Finance Director Chris Miller clarified that Minnesota State Statute provided an exception for a restaurant making their own beer to sell the product to be taken off-site; as well as exceptions for a restaurant to allow patrons to take unfinished bottles of wine off-site.  Mr. Miller advised that beer and wine were the only exceptions of which he was aware, not hard liquor.


With Councilmember consensus, Mayor Roe asked that staff, as part of this process, provide the City Council with further clarification on the specifics for brewing and/or selling; and licensing standards within City Code and State Statute.


Johnson moved, Pust seconded, approved scheduling a Public Hearing for April 25, 2011, to consider amending City Code, Chapter 302, to allow for a Brewery and Off-Sale Retailing Liquor License.


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


Councilmember Pust requested, as part of staff’s additional research, that they research other municipalities where such a Brewery and Off-Sale Retailing Liquor License had been proposed, but not passed, and their rationale for denial.

9.         General Ordinances for Adoption

10.      Presentations

11.      Public Hearings

12.      Business Items (Action Items)


a.            Consider Approving Request by Meritex Enterprises, Inc. for a Preliminary Plat of the Industrially-Zoned Property at 2285 Walnut Street

City Planner Thomas Paschke briefly reviewed the request of Meritex Enterprises to plat the southernmost triangle of the parcel at 2285 Walnut Street as a separate lot, leaving the remainder of the parcel as an outlot until future development plans necessitate platting more of the property.


Mr. Paschke noted the Planning Commission meeting minutes, included as detailed in the RCA dated April 11, 2011, the split vote and recommendation of the Planning Commission based on pending technical information to be submitted by the applicant for review by the City’s Engineering Department.  Mr. Paschke noted that the Planning Commission majority felt it was appropriate for staff to review that technical information and continue working with the developer and their consultants to finalize that information.  Mr. Paschke advised that staff had since then received the information from the developer, and supported the proposal.


Mr. Paschke advised that the Final Plat and Public Improvement Contract would come before the City Council for consideration in the near future; with the Public Improvement Contract addressing completion of utility and infrastructure work prior to development of the proposed subdivision.


Councilmember McGehee expressed frustration that the agenda packet did not include information discussed at the April Planning Commission meeting related to the ponds; and questioned their location on the subject parcels.


Mr. Paschke clarified that the April Planning Commission discussion was a separate issue that would come forward to the City Council in the near future; but was a separate process.


Discussion among Councilmembers and staff included the size of the overall acreage, and this parcel; demolition of the existing building on the parcel; development of the property to facilitate the proposed AirGas project as a separate and distinct land use review process; and proposed use for this parcel for an office/warehouse use by an automotive parts distribution firm.


Councilmember McGehee noted that this was a good time to reference the size of this acreage, and the need for the City to maximize its tax base rather than covering such a sizable parcel with asphalt and single-story warehousing.


Mayor Roe recognized Councilmember McGehee’s concerns.


Councilmember Pust clarified that this was not City property, but private property.


Dan Williams, Chief Investment Officer with Meritex

At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Williams advised that the overall acreage of the parcels owned by Meritex was forty-two (42) acres; with twenty-eight (28) acres represented in the two (2) parcels; and another fourteen (14) across Walnut Street, and that development of those fourteen (14) acres was the area most currently under discussion at the April Planning Commission meeting.  Mr. Williams clarified that this request was for the southern most portion of the lot, for use by a wholesale automobile body parts firm selling to automobile repair shops; and their proposal for a 60,000 square foot office/warehouse facility on this approximate five to six (5 to 6) acre site. 


Public Comment

Written comment was received via e-mail from Megan Dushin, 2249 St. Stephen Street, on this item and was included as a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part hereof.


No one was present in the audience to speak on this issue.


Johnson moved, Pust seconded, approval of the proposed PRELIMINARY PLAT at 2285 Walnut Street; based on the comments and findings of Sections 4-6, and the recommendations of Section 7 of the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated April 11, 2011.


At the request of Councilmember Pust, Mr. Paschke confirmed that all engineering items would be completed as part of the Final Plat approval and a component of the Public Improvement Contract, with most items already addressed.


At further request of Councilmember Pust, Mr. Paschke reviewed apparent concerns of the minority of Planning Commissioners that those infrastructure and utility items were still in design stages; and that the information would be included in agenda packet materials when Final Plat approval comes forward.


At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Paschke confirmed that Parks and Recreation Commission recommendations for park dedication fees for this development would be acted on separately by the City Council as part of the Final Plat approval process.


At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Paschke advised that the property owner was responsible for costs of any additional curb cuts or site development.


Mayor Roe spoke in support of the motion; and while recognizing the need to maximize parcels, he opined that a different development could come forward as the process proceeded.


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


b.            Consider Authorizing Police Department Restructuring

Police Chief Rick Mathwig briefly reviewed the request as detailed and outlined in the RCA dated April 11, 2011 and the Draft Organizational Chart (Attachment A). 


Councilmember Pust expressed appreciation for the draft Organizational Chart, but questioned the location of the Sergeant positions.


Chief Mathwig reviewed the Chart and Sergeant positions in the Day A/B, Night A/B and IMPACT positions.


At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Chief Mathwig reviewed the cost-savings realized through this reorganization, with the Captain position remaining vacant following the retirement of former Police Chief Sletner several years ago; and shuffling of positions from Administration to Patrol.  Chief Mathwig confirmed that the savings came from funds already allotted for the Captain position in this year’s budget, and reallocated among the other positions.


Councilmember McGehee noted that with this proposed change the funds would become permanent, and could not be removed and reallocated from department operations.


Councilmember Pust and Mayor Roe noted that, had the Captain position remained intact, it would have been subject to COLA and other benefit increases as well, so the funds would still have been expended.


At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Chief Mathwig addressed potential future needs for sworn officers and street strength of the department, based on crime trends, and whether cost-share discussions came to fruition for a retail officer.  Chief Mathwig confirmed that any future needs would come before the City Council for their review and approval.


Councilmember Johnson questioned how this restructuring of the Department impacted a Patrol Officer’s ability to get ahead in rank, and if it made the department more competitive from the Chief’s perspective.


Chief Mathwig responded affirmatively, noting that the previous rank structure locked positions in for ten to fifteen years, creating roadblocks for newer officers; but that this structure gave them something to look forward to within five to ten years; and provided career enhancement for officers, as well as succession planning for a department of this size.


City Manager Malinen thanked and acknowledged Chief Mathwig for his development of this structure, following discussion of several possible scenarios upon his appointment as Chief; and for his leadership in developing this helpful structure for the long-term viability of the department.


Pust moved, Willmus seconded, approval of the Police Department restructuring as outlined and detailed in the RCA dated April 11, 2011 and attached Organizational Chart 2011 (Attachment A).


At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen advised that the City currently had a broad Lieutenant job description in place, and that it would be adjusted to reflect administrative versus patrol duties, and that no formal City Council action was required to adopt a new job description.


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.

Abstentions: McGehee.

Motion carried.


c.            Consider Authorizing Creating the Housing Program Manager Position for the Roseville Housing and Redevelopment Authority (RHRA)

In the absence of Community Development Director and HRA Executive Director Patrick Trudgeon, City Manager Malinen summarized this request for a change in job duties and creation of a new job classification as detailed in the RCA dated April 11, 2011.  Mr. Malinen advised that this reflected the original assumptions and long-term evolution of this position as anticipated when the position was originally created and discussions among the City Manager, HRA Executive Director and HRA Chair.


Councilmember Johnson expressed his support of the request, with the exception of making the change retroactive, and rationale and justification for that part of the request.


Councilmember Pust, speaking as a member of the HRA, noted her civil service experience in creating formal job descriptions and comparing job duties to ensure they were accurately depicted.  Councilmember Pust noted that, since its inception, the position had remained in flux until actual day-to-day operations could reflect the duties and where it should be classified; and now that experience had provided for a realistic and official classification, as recommended; and that with that classification in place, it affected a change in salary, which should reflect when the person started those duties and thus be retroactive.


City Manager Malinen noted the delay in bringing this forward, due to lack of opportunities for HRA meetings and their subsequent recommendation, with several meetings being cancelled over the last few months due to the lack of a quorum.  Mr. Malinen advised that, if the City Council so desired, they could delay action until Mr. Trudgeon was present to provide a more detailed background for this request.


Councilmember McGehee opined that the main motivation appeared to be the additional duties affiliated with the Living Smarter Fair, and sought additional information on those actual duties.


Councilmember Pust reviewed some of the various duties for this continuously evolving event as an HRA showcase and marketing effort for Roseville to encourage environmental stewardship.  While noting that the Living Smarter Fair was a large piece of the duties of this position, Councilmember Pust noted that when the HRA was first created, the Community Development Director had served as their Executive Director and hands-on person; and that the HRA was attempting to transition that position back to its regular operating duties, with less time spent on HRA activities as applicable.  Councilmember Pust noted that it represented a responsible way for government to look at how it used its limited resources at various levels.


City Manager Malinen concurred with Councilmember Pust’s comments; and noted that going back to 2007, transitioning within the City Manager and Community Development Director positions, and lower level staff supporting the positions, had continued to evolve following Ms. Kelsey’s hire and her taking on more of those duties.


Mayor Roe concurred with comments of both Councilmember Pust and City Manager Malinen, noting that transitioning those duties would get the Community Development Director position back on track.


At the request of Councilmember Pust, City Manager Malinen advised that this action was before the City Council due to creation of a new job classification, not just adjusting an existing job description; and included a change in salary range. 


Councilmember Pust noted that while the job description came before the City Council for review and approval, the position was funded in its entirety from HRA Levy funds. 


Mayor Roe concurred, noting that the position was budgeted by the HRA from their 2011 Levy, which had remained the same as the 2010 Levy.


Johnson moved, Pust seconded, authorizing the reclassification of the Housing Program Coordinator position to a Housing Program manager position; and further move that Jeanne Kelsey, currently the Housing Program Coordinator be promoted to the Housing Program Manager position, retroactive to January 1, 2011.


Councilmember McGehee noted, even with this discussion, she was very impressed with Ms. Kelsey’s job performance and her most recent presentation to the City Council.


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.

13.      Business Items – Presentations/Discussions

a.    Twin Lakes Regulating Map Discussion

City Planner Thomas Paschke briefly summarized and provided a short background on tonight’s presentation and introduced Michael Lamb of the Cuningham Group, consultant for the development of the Twin Lakes Regulating Map and Plan; as a subsequent action required by the recent completion of the City’s Zoning Code update, and creation of the Community Mixed Use District.


Michael Lamb, Cuningham Group

Mr. Lamb reviewed the Commercial and Mixed Use District – Statement of Purpose (1005.01) and utilization and incorporation of many parts of the Urban Design Principles previously created for the Twin Lakes area, with updates as appropriate.  Mr. Lamb focused on urban design principles under consideration including, types of mixed uses; connections to public spaces; commercial visibility; transition and connectivity; gateways; dispersed parking; walk-ability; public edges; ranges of transportation modes; street lighting; public signage; trees; frontage types supports street life; minimizing setbacks and street walks; and sustainability.  Mr. Lamb provided several examples from other urban communities and how they achieved pedestrian-oriented development.


Mr. Lamb reviewed the components of a regulating map versus typical zoning maps, with emphasis on uses with a pedestrian-oriented nature and recognizing streets as a public investment with multi-modal characteristics and lines showing desirable patterns to enhance pedestrian environments.


Mr. Lamb noted existing and new rights-of-way and street improvements already in place in the Twin Lakes area; utility and easement networks; and features to serve as a basis for a regulating map; including area features to built upon, such as Langton Lake Park and the how this enormous amenity can be used now and for future generation stakeholders as well, and serve to maintain adjacent property values.


Mr. Lamb and Mr. Paschke reviewed the proposed next steps in the process, including an Open House, Public Hearing at the Planning Commission level, followed by City Council approval of the Regulating Map and Plan.  While recognizing that there would be additional details forthcoming, questions and feedback from the City Council were solicited at this time.


Mayor Roe asked that Mr. Lamb further expound upon how buildings moved closer to streets promoted a pedestrian-friendly environment.


Mr. Lamb addressed human nature in seeking physical or sensory perception points for safety and harbor along a street; and the ability to cross a street in a reasonable amount of time and to safely do so.  Mr. Lamb noted that proving physical enclosures and frontages to facilitate a safe, convenient response for pedestrians was one of the patterns driving the concept.


Discussion among Councilmembers, Mr. Lamb, and Mr. Paschke included winter-related challenges and snow storage and removal responsibilities from streets and sidewalks; potentially increased costs for this type of development structure; how existing structures fit into the total vision; systematic and periodic cycling of development in communities providing incremental changes and opportunities; benefits to the City’s housing stock; and how to provide efficient and pedestrian-friendly traffic flow and movement.


Further discussion included parking solutions to avoid additional seas of asphalt; removal of polluted soil and additional green space; involvement of the community in the planning process.


Mr. Paschke advised that the goal was to have a public Open House and invite the public and property owners to speak to revisions or refinements in the proposed Regulating Map and Plan.


Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of having the citizens or property owners participate in ways other than an Open House that may not be well-attended, and to receive their input prior to a finished project being rolled out; a much different process than proposed by staff.


Mayor Roe suggested that a process be used similar to the successful model used for the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, providing exercises to involve the public in the process, including incorporating and involving immediately adjacent property owners in initial planning and interactive.  Mayor Roe encouraged involving those stakeholders in the decision-making, while not anticipating that the product would be produced in its entirety by those participants, but allowing for their input.


Further discussion included Twin Lakes Parkway and how to enhance green concepts and connectivity or unification of the area; potential for its connections in all directions; pedestrian connections and characteristics already in place, as well as future development once the framework was set in place; and how to enhance the vision of multi-modal transportation while recognizing the significant daily vehicle trips – existing and projected – from the proximity of the Parkway in relationship to the area freeway system; how that traffic volume can facilitate commercial development through managing flow and connections and to effectively address exposure, access and convenience, while addressing safety concerns.


Mayor Roe noted that the traffic analysis had been done a number of years ago with potential development projects at that time, and actually showed some decrease from the east/west traffic with the eastern end near Fairview Avenue; and opined that there was an opportunity to transition the Parkway in a number of ways.


Councilmember Johnson expressed his anticipation in seeing these issues addressed and presented in more detail, including how mixed uses were combined with medium and high density residential uses in that area.  Councilmember Johnson opined that staff was on the right track; and given the work done by past City Councils over the last few years, this was the next logical step.  Councilmember Johnson offered his support of the work in progress, and thanked staff and Mr. Lamb for their presentation, asking when the next update would be available.


Mr. Paschke reviewed the proposed schedule for holding an Open House, preferably within the next few weeks, to seek property owner/public engagement to shape the map and document; at which time that information would be refined and taken forward to a Public Hearing at the Planning Commission level.  Mr. Paschke advised that staff was open to whether the City Council wanted to see that information prior to the Planning Commission’s Public Hearing or later in the process, noting that the proposed schedule had been built into the proposal when staff had previously come before the City Council for approval of hiring the consultant.  At the request of Councilmember Johnson, Mr. Paschke advised that staff hoped to return to the City Council for review and adoption of the Regulating Map and Plan by June of 2011.


Councilmember Johnson noted crucial need to facilitate development in the area by getting the Map and Plan in place for developers to understand what uses the land could have and allowing marketing of parcels.


Mayor Roe clarified that the Regulating Map did not determine where specific uses were located, but provided a frame for types of uses and how things would appear on the land, with the zoning code addressing uses.  Mayor Roe asked staff how transitions would be determined, if part of the Regulating Map process or through other mechanisms.


Mr. Paschke responded that part of the process would be to create buffer areas, and corridors put in place to protect residential properties, including potential areas for park expansion or no-build zones or green areas to enhance that transition; and that it would be part of the Regulating Map to identify those buffers.


Mr. Lamb noted that the Regulating Map provided a lot of flexibility by providing a tool to address areas contiguous to certain amenities or adjacent to residential areas, by offering various approaches to calibrate that flexibility.


Concluding discussion included how to ensure public interaction for business owners and members of the community throughout the process, with Councilmembers encouraging staff to approach the process for notifying the public similar to that used in the Parks and Recreation Master Planning process; including announcing the opportunities for input at upcoming Council meetings and through other media sources.


Mr. Paschke advised that staff would provide the additional information and meeting dates as it became available.


b.    Discussion of 2012/2013 Budgeting

Mayor Roe provided a brief introduction and his intent for the flow of the discussion; and suggested that the recently-completed survey results be worked into the corresponding system with the City Council and staff providing their own numerical systems for comparison with each other.


Budget Exercise (Attachment A)

At the request of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Chris Miller briefly reviewed the exercise requested by the City Council, at the prompting of Councilmember Johnson, and staff’s presentation of a budget scenario for reducing programs/services from 2010 priorities by ten percent (10%).  Mr. Miller noted the challenges in eliminating programs altogether, given some contractual considerations that could impede the ability to do so; and identifying budget reductions without impacting programs ranked more highly by City Councilmembers.  Mr. Miller advised that the various program reductions or eliminations identified during the process , and as detailed in the RCA dated March 28, 2011, provided an estimated $1.4 million in cuts, with more possible at the direction of the City Council, but currently involving reducing staff by thirteen (13) full-time equivalent (FTE) employees.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Councilmember Johnson spoke to whether the exercise captured his intent.  Councilmember Johnson advised that his intent had been two-fold: showing the drastic impact possible to the budget based on the previous list of priorities, and what departments or programs were most susceptible; and to use that proposed ten percent (10%) reduction to meet the corresponding unfunded Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) needs.  Councilmember Johnson suggested that the exercise serve as an example as the current City Council reviewed and adjusted their future ranking and methodology of what needed to be considered in providing a well-rounded, balanced community versus more negative results.  Councilmember Johnson opined that it was unfortunate that a majority of the impacts seemed to be in the Parks and Recreation area; and noted the need to have a philosophical discussion on how to perform ranking.  Councilmember Johnson personally opined that he was not interested in sacrificing the hometown feel that Roseville now had and what it looked like going forward.


At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen suggested that Councilmember Johnson’s statement that most FTE’s were related to Parks and Recreation was not necessary accurate, while recognizing that the department would be impacted significantly.


In an effort to keep things in perspective, Mayor Roe reviewed some of those items identified for elimination that were not related to Parks and Recreation, while recognizing that a number of program listings for elimination were related to Parks.


Councilmember Pust noted that Councilmember Johnson’s comments pointed out a natural conclusion of the process used for ranking, that no matter how many different organizations go through line items, some were at the top, some at the bottom, and some in the middle.  Councilmember Pust concluded that, based on current rankings and use of numerical line items, the process didn’t allow for a broader discussion on the level of services the community wanted.  Councilmember Pust noted that it remained her bias, that such a discussion occur without mathematical computations.


Mayor Roe opined that part of the process should include looking at higher ranked items if staff advised lower items could not be reduced or eliminated based on contractual obligations or other perspectives; but further opined that mathematical computations allowed for part of that discussion.


Councilmember McGehee reviewed her personal identification of line items using 2010 and 2011 budget amounts, and provided several examples or ways to make cuts without eliminating jobs in the current economic environment and job market.  Councilmember McGehee suggested other options for making significant reductions with limited impacts to personnel, including furlough days each month for each staff person as a way to “give back” without eliminating jobs; shared services with other communities and agencies; possibly concentrating the City’s Police officers in the retail sector and contracting for police services in residential areas with Ramsey County; and addressing capital or replacement funds that are currently grossly underfunded under established targets, even before recent drastic reductions in interest earnings.   Councilmember McGehee noted the consistent spending over the last 5-6 years of approximately $2 million annually over revenues.  Councilmember McGehee had provided written comments related to examples of budget process of other metropolitan communities, via e-mail dated April 10, 2011, included as a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part hereof.


At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Miller confirmed that the City used interest earning projections as a revenue source for budgeting purposes; and that the interest was not part of the $2 million addressed by Councilmember McGehee.


Councilmember Willmus concurred with Councilmember Johnson’s perception on the overly onerous impacts to the Parks and Recreation Department, particularly when addressing past reductions in the department.


Councilmembers Johnson and Willmus advised that they were attempting to balance those impacts with other areas.


Councilmember Johnson, based on the exercise presented, spoke in support of a 10% shift or reduction, with that estimated $1.5 million going toward CIP needs.  Councilmember Johnson advised that, while the CIP Task Force was not yet ready to make their report to the City Council, there should be some annual reflection, even if not the full 10%, in the next year’s and subsequent annual budgets addressing those CIP needs if the CIP goals were ever to be met. 


Mayor Roe noted the need to incorporate capital set aside or depreciation funds as part of the prioritization exercise as part of the broader pictures.


Councilmember Pust clarified, for the public, that past and/or current City Councils had not taken CIP funds for use in the operating budgets; but that, other than the Pavement Management Plan (PMP), those funds had not been set aside; and as a responsible financial planning process, the City Council was attempting to get those set-asides on track.  Councilmember Pust further noted that the City had yet to be advised of employee health care cost increases that would significantly impact the budget, and potentially usurp the entire 3.9% mandated levy increase limit.


Budget Ranking Prioritization/Methodology (Attachment C)

Mayor Roe referenced Councilmember Willmus’s written comments, provided as a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part hereof.  Councilmember Willmus expounded on those written comments and his philosophy on budget ranking and methodologies based on community-based visions and goals rather than categorization rankings.


Mayor Roe noted that, as an added thought, those items noted for the highest priority or score were perceived to be those items doing the most to accomplish the vision in the various documents used by the City, including the Parks and Recreation Master Plan document, Comprehensive Plan update, Imagine Roseville 2025 community visioning process, and the recently-completed random community survey.


Councilmember Johnson opined that the proposed community-based system was a good place to start, with the current system not providing a sense of community for him; and suggested that the language used in the Imagine Roseville 2025 document be used as a basis for ranking methodologies.  Councilmember Johnson expressed support for this approach versus that used in the past.


Mayor Roe noted that using such a ranking methodology would place a higher priority for those items addressed in community visions and goals, while having an impact across all departments and organization; and that if something was highly ranked, it achieved an aspect of that community vision, or was related to that specific function and should be part of the overall process and providing a linkage between programs/functions. Mayor Roe suggested that Councilmembers be cognizant and agree on various goals or visions prior to the individual ranking process.


Further discussion included individual rankings based on community vision; recognizing staff costs and impacts, no matter ranking methodologies or community visions and goals; assumptions that each program/service had significant staff costs, but relating priorities to how the visions is delivered to the community, not based on staff, with that information still part of the process.


After additional discussion, it was the consensus that individual Councilmembers develop several priorities or vision/goal statements for review and consideration by the full body at their next meeting; and using the documents previously referenced for development of their statements, and recognizing that some of the documents were more current than others not yet updated.


Further discussion included how to determine what the number rankings meant based on vision/goal statements; whether to retain only five (5) levels.


Mayor Roe asked that Councilmembers, at their earliest convenience and for inclusion in the Council Agenda packet materials, provide staff with their individual statements for further discussion at the next meeting to finalize ranking methodologies.


Related to the revised budget schedule (Attachment A), Mayor Roe sought consensus, resulting in support of the schedule as revised, and inclusion of Item #19 as suggested by Mayor Roe.


Mayor Roe directed staff to include formal adoption of the schedule on the next meeting agenda, allowing staff to make further revisions based on tonight’s discussions.


Budget Documentation

Mayor Roe provided two (2) bench handouts, attached hereto and made part of hereto; with program listings ordered by budget fund and department, and divided within departments based on the particular function within the organization; and providing program descriptions, based on past information provided by staff on various programs/services.


Johnson moved, Willmus seconded, approval of the Concept Documents as addressed in page three (3) of Attachment B.


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.


Budget Calendar

As previously discussed, it was the consensus to formally adopt the budget calendar at the next meeting.


Adopt a Resolution Supporting a Two-Year Budget Process (Former Consent Item 7.d)

          Councilmember McGehee opined that, given previous discussion, now hardly seemed the time to revise the budget process from annual to biennial, further opining that it would provide less oversight, and that the City Council needed to carefully monitor what was occurring.


Councilmember Pust opined that the same arguments were in support of a two-year process; building a review into the process and allowing for revisions as unforeseen things occurred.  Councilmember Pust opined that government could not plan ahead if it only looked at its budget in 12-month period without forward thought or planning ahead.  Councilmember Pust expressed her assumption that each Department Head worked from long-range budgetary process within their specific departments and were aware of their staffing and resource needs and replacements, even though the City Council may not be aware of them. Councilmember Pust further opined that the City Council needed to have a similar view, and spoke in support of a five (5)-year budget goal to address long-term spending and resources, as well as reducing the time spent each year on budget processes and address more substantive work that needed to be accomplished and that was supported by the citizens.


Councilmember Willmus noted that, his parting words in 2008 as he completed his appointed service in fulfilling the term of former Councilmember Thomas Kough, were in support of and advocating for a biennial budget to allow built-in cost controls and to be used as a tool to accomplish the City’s goals.  Councilmember Willmus opined that the City Council would not have less control over such a budget process.


Councilmember Johnson concurred with the comments of Councilmembers Pust and Willmus, opining that it was a common form of budgeting, and allowed fixed items from year to year; and focus on items that could be impacted and within a shorter time frame.  Councilmember Johnson opined that it was the City Manager’s duty and job to present a budget, and that he was owed the courtesy to provide a type of budget from which to manage the day-to-day operations of the City; and if a biennial budget was the best tool for him to work with, that request should be accommodated.


Mayor Roe opined that a biennial budget was a good tool, allowing for a broader spending plan for allocation of resources over the next two (2) years; and that it would remain subject to annual review in accordance with statutory requirements and annual levy adoption.  Mayor Roe suggested that the City Council may wish to request more frequent financial reports of staff in monitoring the budget process.


Councilmember McGehee strongly advocated for monthly financial reports; opining that the City Council only had two (2) responsibilities as per State Statute: budget and long-range planning.  Councilmember McGehee asked that City Attorney Bartholdi review the legalities of the City adopting a biennial budget, given her research with the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) and their policy research.


City Attorney Bartholdi offered to perform that research and report back, at the direction of the City Council; but suggested that the question may be more appropriately addressed by the City’s auditor.


By consensus, the City Council directed City Attorney Bartholdi to provide a legal opinion on whether the City could meet statutory requirements if it adopted a biennial budget process.


Councilmember Pust clarified that she was not advocating that the City Council should not see an annual spending plan; and that a biennial budget would not reduce any information currently being provided to the City Council and public.


Johnson moved, Pust seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10889 (Attachment A) entitled, “Resolution Providing Concept Approval of a Two-Year Budget for the Fiscal Years of 2012 and 2013.”


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: McGehee.

Motion carried.


Public Comment on Budget Process in General

Dick Houck, 1131 Roselawn

Mr. Houck opined that each level of government was broke, whether federal, state or municipal; that government was funded through its citizens; and that the deficits needed to be addressed now.  Mr. Houck further opined that government was responsible for two things, and only two things: safety of its citizens and infrastructure needs, each of which were addressed through Police and Fire services, and Public Works activities; with the most important of those three the Police to keep citizens safe.  Mr. Houck opined that all other services and programs were on the table for adjustment or elimination.  Mr. Houck opined that handing off exercises to staff for recommended reductions or eliminations was the worst possible way to accomplish anything and only served to upset people.  Mr. Houck advised that citizens had elected the City Council, not staff, and it was their responsibility to accomplish the task at hand, similar to that done by Councilmember McGehee, whom he acknowledged for her efforts.  Mr. Houck opined that a ten percent (10%) reduction was not too much and was possible; and suggested that individual Councilmembers determine adjustments or cuts, and then collectively negotiate the final outcome for justification to the citizens.  Mr. Houck noted that staff could help, but it was the responsibility of the City Council to take those steps.


Gary Grefenberg, 91 Mid Oaks Lane

Mr. Grefenberg opined that, since so much of the budget involves personnel that relate to each program, the City Council’s schedule allow for a discussion on freezing salaries and step increases, as well as preparing for union negotiations; that could address potential cost savings.  Mr. Grefenberg further opined that most citizens were not looking at programs or services, but salaries as a significant part of reducing the City’s annual budget, similar to experiences in the private sector and being realized by many residents of Roseville.  Mr. Grefenberg strongly advocated for reduced or frozen salaries and step increases; and reduced out-of-state travel.  Mr. Grefenberg opined that what had been accomplished by the City Council tonight was a good start, and spoke in support of a biennial budget and using the various documents to determine community goals and visions.


Mayor Roe opined that additional personnel-related information was anticipated at the end of May; and that it was his personal assumption that a zero percent (0%) increase was indicated.


City Manager Malinen advised that part of the process was for the City Council to go through their prioritization and ranking, providing direction to staff on how to proceed based on those priorities.  Mr. Malinen advised that labor negotiations were in process, and sometimes could not be controlled depending on arbitration action; and subsequent impacts on the City’s financial assumptions.  Mr. Malinen advised that, upon receipt of the City Council’s direction, staff would prepare a Preliminary, Not-to-Exceed Levy and associated budget.  Mr. Malinen noted that, as part of those discussions and that direction, staff would present Councilmembers with industry trends related to salaries and job classifications.


At the request of Councilmember Pust, Mr. Miller responded that health care rate increase information would not be available until the end of September.


Mayor Roe advised that it was the City Council’s assumption and part of the City Manager’s job in managing the organization, to develop a budget based on the marketplace and with City Council input.


Mr. Grefenberg spoke in support of freezing salaries for any employees making $65,000 or more per year, based on his personal philosophy of fairness to those lowest paid.


Councilmember McGehee noted that her personal exercise called for voluntary furloughs by all employees versus eliminating staff or asking them to take on more out-of-pocket health care costs.


Mayor Roe expressed appreciation for public comments heard this evening, and advised that time was scheduled in July for additional public comment on actual proposed budget programs, services, and funding allocations.


Councilmember Willmus, in addressing Mr. Houck’s comments, noted the varying opinions from those having a background in Economics; and opined that there were other services and programs specific to and just as vital to the health and welfare of Roseville as the Fire and Police Departments; and having made the community what it was today.  Councilmember Willmus advised that he would personally be supporting those programs and services as well.

14.       City Manager Future Agenda Review

City Manager Malinen reviewed upcoming agenda items.

15.      Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings

Councilmember Willmus requested future discussion on City Council and Advisory Commission packet preparation and delivery for the general public on the City’s website and through distribution to get materials and information out in a timelier manner.


Councilmember Willmus requested a future policy discussion on where in the subdivision process the discussion occurred on park dedication; and whether that discussion needed to occur earlier in the process.


Councilmember McGehee, in a related request, noted the need to address green space and possible community gardens in residential developments.

16.      Adjourn

Pust moved, Johnson seconded, adjourning the meeting at approximately 9:23 pm.


Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Pust; Johnson; and Roe.

Nays: None.