City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

June 18, 2012

 

Closed Executive Session

 

            Roll Call

Mayor Roe called the meeting to order at approximately 5:05 pm.

 

Roll Call included:  Johnson, Willmus, and Roe.

 

Johnson moved, Willmus seconded, going into closed executive session to discuss labor negotiations and also pending litigation, subject to attorney-client privilege, in accordance with MN Statutes section 13d.  The pending litigation case to be discussed was: City of Roseville v. Xtra Lease.

 

Roll call:

Ayes:  Johnson, Willmus, and Roe

Nays:  None

 

Councilmember McGehee arrived at approximately 5:10 pm. 

 

Mayor Roe convened the City Council in Closed Executive Session at approximately 5:10 pm.  The closed session included City Manager Malinen, City Attorney Mark Gaughan, and Attorney Eric Quiring of Ratwick, Roszak, and Maloney, representing the City in the Xtra Lease matter.

 

Councilmember Pust arrived during the closed session, at approximately 5:15 pm.

 

Johnson moved, McGehee seconded, adjourning the closed executive session and returning to open session at approximately 6:20 p.m.

 

Roll Call:

Ayes:  Pust, McGehee, Johnson, Willmus and Roe

Nays:  None

 

          Mayor Roe re-convened the City Council in Open Session at approximately 6:30 pm    and welcomed everyone. (Voting and Seating Order for June: Willmus; Johnson; Roe; Pust; and McGehee).  City Attorney Mark Gaughan was also present. 

 

1.         Roll Call

          Mayor Roe re-convened the City Council in Open Session at approximately 6:20 pm    and welcomed everyone. (Voting and Seating Order: Willmus; Johnson; Roe; Pust; and          McGehee).  City Attorney Mark Gaughan was also present. 

 

2.         Approve Agenda

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

                                   

Roll Call

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

            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, Announcements and Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Report

Councilmember Johnson advised that Northwest Youth and Family Services, for which he is the Roseville City Council Liaison, had recently entered into an agreement extending services for families and at-risk youth in the White Bear Lake area.

 

Mayor Roe reminded citizens of the upcoming RoseFest activities and encouraged them to find additional information through City Hall, the City’s website or local media covering the numerous events.

 

5.         Recognitions, Donations, Communications

 

6.         Approve Minutes

Comments 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.

 

a.            Approve Minutes of May 21, 2012 Meeting

Corrections:

Councilmember McGehee advised that she and Councilmember Willmus had consulted on her suggested revisions to the meeting minutes, and she had subsequently provided her personal clarifications; and would provide them to City Manager Malinen following tonight’s meeting.

 

Mayor Roe summarized those revisions to pages 14, 15, 17, 18, as well as to pages 25 and 40, with copies of the revisions from Councilmember McGehee provided as a bench handout

 

Mayor Roe reviewed grammatical revisions on page 9, returning the proposed change from “were indicated,” to “was indicated.”  While opining that the change indicated on page 10 was not necessary, since it was insignificant, Mayor Roe noted the revision could stand.  On page 15, line 7, Mayor Roe suggested changing the language from “break” or “jeopardize” to state that “…the proposed development [did not exceed impacts analyzed in] that document…”

 

Councilmember McGehee noted that on page 24, she had deleted lines 30-32.

 

Pust moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the minutes of the May 21, 2012 meeting as amended; and with the additions provided by Councilmember McGehee via her Memorandum dated June 18, 2012 as an addendum to the meeting minutes, attached hereto and made a part hereof.

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None. 

 

As a general comment regarding meeting minutes and their purpose, Mayor Roe noted that his philosophy was that the Recording Secretary provided a general record of the discussion, which may summarize individual comments, or include more specific references or remarks of individual comments to capture them.  Mayor Roe advised that, in his review of the draft meeting minutes, his goal, when taking that intent into consideration, was to look for inaccuracies and ensure that the minutes reflected the discussion.  Mayor Roe asked that individual Councilmembers take that into consideration in their review of future meeting minutes.

 

Councilmember McGehee advised that, after her discussions with Councilmember Willmus, she chose to include the clarifications she had made to her comments; and advised that she would submit them separately to the City Manager.

 

b.            Approve Minutes of June 11, 2012 Meeting

In his review of Councilmember McGehee’s comments, Mayor Roe advised that he concurred with her suggestions.

 

McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, approval of the minutes of the June 11, 2012 meeting as presented.

 

            Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

                                

7.            Approve Consent Agenda

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Bill Malinen briefly reviewed those items being considered under the Consent Agenda.

 

a.            Approve Payments

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the following claims and payments as presented.    

ACH Payments	$936,383.84
66371 – 66599	179,493.83
Total	$1,115,877.67

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

b.            Approve Business Licenses

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of license applications for the following applicants:

                            

Applicant/Location	Type of License
Mind, Body & Soul Wellness; 2201 Lexington Avenue N	Massage Therapist Establishment
Rainbow Roods; 1201 Larpenteur Avenue W	Cigarette/Tobacco Products
Amarose Convenience Store; 1585 Highway 36W, #245	Cigarette/Tobacco Products
Al’s Billiards; 1319 W Larpenteur Avenue	Pool/Billiards
Petco; 2575 N Fairview Avenue	Veterinarian Exam & Inoculation Center
Al’s Billiards; 1319 W Larpenteur Avenue	Amusement Device

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

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

None.

 

d.            Authorize Acceptance of Cost-Share Funds for Fairview Area Drainage Improvements Project

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, acceptance of cost-share funds from the Rice Creek Watershed District in the amount of $48,756 for the Fairview Area Drainage Improvements Project.

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

Councilmember McGehee thanked staff for their work in resolving some of these storm water issues throughout the community.

 

 Mayor Roe noted that the drainage problems in this area had been brought to the City’s attention by residents, and expressed his appreciation that a solution was being pursued, even if it was unfortunately a bit late in light of last year’s major rain event.

e.            Approve Cobalt Settlement

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approve the Cobalt REIT II, et al Settlement Agreement (Exhibit B) as presented; amended by City Attorney Gaughan to authorize the City Attorney’s Office to execute and process the agreement.

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

8.            Consider Items Removed from Consent

 

12.         General Ordinances for Adoption

 

a.            Approve Amendments to Sign Ordinance

City Planner Thomas Paschke briefly summarized the additional revisions and formatting changes since the City Council’s last review at their May 14, 2012 meeting, as detailed in the Request for City Council Action (RCA) dated June 18, 2012. 

 

Councilmember Willmus sought input on signs worn by individuals dressed to advertise specific businesses, particularly when at intersections, and whether there was any way to address or dissuade those types of advertisements based on potential traffic distraction concerns.

 

Mr. Paschke advised that this ordinance would not address those types of signage, since they would be covered elsewhere in City Ordinance (e.g. nuisances) rather than under provisions of this ordinance.

 

Councilmember McGehee questioned whether there were time restrictions for “Homes for Sale” (e.g. the Pulte development Lake Josephine Woods) and questioned whether that particular sign was legally correct.

 

Mr. Paschke advised that the Pulte sign was legally conforming to City Code; and typically those signs remained until the last lot was sold and/or construction completed, in an effort to help the development be successful.

 

Councilmember McGehee sought the definition of “perpetual violation;” with Mayor Roe pointing out that the definition, for the purpose of this Code, was defined in lines 283-384 of the draft ordinance.  At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Paschke advised that this was indeed a problem experienced in the community.

 

Regarding Councilmember McGehee’s questions related to election signs and their timing (page 13), Mr. Paschke advised that the proposed language for this City Ordinance referenced and mirrored the language of State Statute.

 

Mayor Roe noted one additional revision by staff based on previous discussions with the City Council included page 5, “General Conditions,” (originally page 6, item 8) addressing “permitted,” versus “prohibited” stricken and moved to Item 2, page 5, Item b.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Paschke confirmed that the reference to “light bulb (singular), under items permitted should be changed to plural or, at Mayor Roe’s suggestion to “light strings.”  Mr. Paschke concurred; and further advised that the clean copy, once all revisions are accepted, would be renumbered and reformatted as appropriate.

 

Pust moved, Johnson seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1425 (Attachment A) entitled, “An Ordinance Amending Title 10 of the  City Code, Specifically Section 1010 Sign Regulations; as amended to change from “light bulb” to “light bulb strings” (page 5, Section 1010.03 General Provisions, Item B.2).”

 

          Mayor Roe thanked staff and the Planning Commission for their work on this revised ordinance

 

          At the request of Councilmember McGehee for a solution to cut off the allowable time for construction signs in residential areas, Mayor Roe suggested that, unless Councilmember McGehee was prepared at this time to offer an amendment to the motion currently on the table, she bring that suggestion forward for discussion at a separate time in the future.

 

Councilmember McGehee suggested an amendment for construction signs in residential areas to be removed once 2/3 of the property was under contract.

 

Mr. Paschke advised that he was unaware, in the land use area and as an industry standard, of any developments where signs were restricted or to be removed prior to the development being completed and all lots sold.  Mr. Paschke noted that this provided information for residents as well as those traveling in the area attempting to locate the development, developer or contact information.  Mr. Paschke advised that he was unaware, from a staff level, or any complaints received to-date on the Pulte sign.

 

Councilmember McGehee advised that it had been brought to her attention.

 

Councilmember Willmus advised that he was aware of a concern previously raised about the location of the Pulte sign; however, Pulte had moved the sign back further in response to that resident concern.

 

Mayor Roe reiterated that the additional concern could be brought forward at a later date if there was sufficient interest of the City Council majority.

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

Pust moved, Johnson seconded, enactment of Ordinance Summary No. 1425 (Attachment A) entitled, “An Ordinance Amending Title 10, Zoning Ordinance of the City Code, Eliminating and/or Replacing in its Entirety Section 1010 Sign Regulations.”

 

Roll Call (Super Majority)

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

            Nays: None.

 

b.            Adopt Amendments to Rental Registration Ordinance – Group Homes

Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon briefly reviewed a minor amendment suggested to the City’s Rental Registration Ordinance as detailed in the RCA dated June 18, 2012, and specific to group homes.

 

Councilmember McGehee questioned if there was any consideration given to an exception in the annual fee for those in the community taking academic sabbaticals, and thus renting out their property for brief time only.

 

Mr. Trudgeon advised that this was not given consideration since it was a relative unknown situation to staff.  However, Mr. Trudgeon noted that this would become obvious during attempts to verify, confirm, and/or update the database.

 

McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1426 (Attachment A) entitled, “An Ordinance Amending Title 9 by Amending Chapter 970 of Roseville City Code Regarding Registration of Residential Rental Property of 1-4 Units;” exempting group homes from rental registration requirements and additional clarification regarding such exemptions.

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

Recess

Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 7:30 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 7:35p.m.

 

13.         Presentations

 

a.            Parks and Recreation Commission Joint Meeting with the City Council

Mayor Roe welcomed and Commission Members were seated at the table with the City Council for this joint discussion; with Commission Members introducing themselves.

 

Chair Jason Etten noted that individual Commission members would take turns detailing those agenda items and areas for discussion listed in the RCA dated June 18, 2012.  Those items included a review of the past year, with Master Plan implementation; review of and increased park dedication; Emerald Ash Borer and tree inventory status and potential for a future tree master plan.

 

Chair Etten reviewed involvement of Arizona State University in the Best Value Procurement process as the Implementation Plan moved forward indicating future discussions specific to that.

 

Addition topics moving forward in 2012/2013 included ongoing efforts for a pool of community volunteers; collaborative efforts of the Commission with the Public Works, Environment, and Transportation Commission regarding the Pathway Master Plan and other efforts.

 

At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Commissioner Doneen clarified that the Commission considered pathways as belonging to the community, not under the auspices of the Public Works and/or Parks realm.  Commissioner Doneen noted that management of those trails and natural resources was an ongoing effort of the two commissions.  As an example, Chair Etten noted the safety concerns and interest of citizens with the County Road B-2 pathway corridor and connections to other pathways and trails to address those concerns.

 

Additional discussion included, highlighting grants and partnerships pursued by the Commission over the last year and their purpose; and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) versus Park Improvement Program (PIP) budget items and their specificity moving forward.

 

Further discussion included the continued partnership of the Commission as neighbors with regional watershed management groups, including incorporating those items in future work plans. 

 

Discussion ensued regarding options, as outlined in the 2011 City Council Work Plan, related to statutory issues for development of a Park Board or Park District; as well as whether to pursue the Local Option Sales Tax, with the Council supporting continued exploration, discussion and various interpretations of such a taxing authority, and a clear understanding of that authority, the decision-making and responsibilities of such an option, and trade-offs impacting the community negatively or positively.    It was noted that a Park District required legislative action; and further consideration was necessary related to the multi-jurisdictional nature of some issues.

 

Chair Etten advised that the Commission would continue to research each item and provide the City Council with that information and their recommendation as applicable.

 

Commissioner Ristow expressed his frustration in ongoing legal expenses experienced by the City from a few “squeaky wheels” unhappy with the decision-making for the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area.  Commissioner Ristow opined that the public monies expended to defend that litigation would pay for a number of needed improvements.  Commissioner Ristow expressed his personal support for a mandatory organized trash collection as another option to save taxpayer monies.  Commissioner Ristow encouraged the City Council, as elected officials representing the community, to work together on broader goals to keep Roseville a “number one” community.

 

Councilmember Pust, with all due respect to Commissioner Ristow, defended her position specific to not voting for the park improvements based on her philosophy about the lack of a referendum, not due to any lack of support on her part for the actual park improvements.  Based on that premise, Councilmember Pust clarified that she fully supported moving forward with those park improvements as outlined and prioritized. 

 

Councilmember Pust asked what adjustments the Commission had made to reprioritize items with the delay caused by the litigation, and questioned if dealing some of those items originally prioritized would allow pathways to move higher up in priority.  Councilmember Pust noted the significant support throughout the community for development of the pathway system.

While supporting the adjustment of some items, Chair Etten noted the Commission’s caution to ensure that community engagement continues as it was developed throughout the Master Plan process and into this Implementation phase.  Chair Etten noted that this would provide some additional opportunities, but noted the Commission’s delay in moving some items forward to ensure that goal to engage neighbors and the community in all projects will continue, and therefore, may take more time and obviously indicated.  Chair Etten advised that this may require seeking a consensus of those items more easily moved forward, with the Commission and staff continuing to look at a variety of scenarios and routine items that could be moved forward throughout the four—year implementation program schedule.

 

Parks and Recreation Director Brokke advised that it was the intent of the Commission to continue to educate and engage the community, whether land acquisition efforts or in building community support for pathway segments and connections.

 

Councilmember McGehee expressed her support of moving forward, and defended her advocacy in seeking a referendum; clarifying that her vote to not support previous City Council action was not specific to the parks portion of the funding and the Master Plan Implementation itself, but specific to not having a referendum for large expenditures of money.  Councilmember McGehee stated that she would continue to support those ordinances and policies in place, such as the one related to a limit on City Council spending at a maximum limit without a voter referendum.  Councilmember McGehee expressed her resentment in characterizing her as holding obstructionist viewpoints.

 

Further discussion ensued regarding challenges in moving forward with the Implementation Plan with portions dependent on future community engagement and further research and planning required before their implementation, as well as defining or being ensured of funding. 

 

Councilmember Pust suggested that a “Plan B” be put into place once litigation has been determined one way or the other.

 

Mayor Roe noted the need for the Commission to begin organizing long- and short-term capital and maintenance items for reallocation of them from capital to maintenance or vice versa.

 

Councilmember Johnson concurred, noting that the CIP Task Force was patiently waiting for word from Mr. Brokke and staff on those specifics in order to allow the Task Force to make their recommendations to the City Council.  Through processing that information to the Task Force, Councilmember Johnson opined that it would allow them to better identify items for each category, since it had not yet been done due to the Master Plan process.  Councilmember Johnson expressed his personal anticipation of getting that information and moving forward accordingly.

 

At the request of Councilmember Willmus and further clarification sought by Councilmember McGehee, Chair Etten and Mr. Brokke reviewed the PIP carryover dollars from year to year; and those items included in the PIP versus the Park and Recreation Renewal Program (PRRP).

 

In conclusion, Chair Etten announced upcoming RoseFest activities and events.

 

Mayor Roe thanked Commissioners for their service and their attendance and discussion at tonight’s meeting.

Recess

Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 8:00 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 8:05 p.m.

 

14.         Public Hearings

 

15.         Business Items (Action Items)

 

a.            Designate City Representative to Beyond the Yellow Ribbon of Suburban Ramsey County

Councilmember Pust noted the City Council’s previous decision to become involved with the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon (BYR) organization to support local military members and their families, and her role to-date with that organization as the City Council’s Liaison.

 

Mayor Roe sought a volunteer Councilmember to take on this elected leadership role for Roseville, and after discussion, consensus was that the item be brought forward at a later meeting.  Councilmember Willmus expressed some interest in serving upon review of his schedule in more detail.

 

McGehee moved, Johnson seconded, TABLING action on the appointment of a City Councilmember to serve as Liaison to the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon (BYR) of Suburban Ramsey County until the next regular business meeting.

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

b.            Approve PIK Agreement

Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon briefly summarized the settlement agreement as detailed in the RCA dated June 18, 2012, for final resolution through this agreement consisting of completing purchase of the land for infrastructure and demolition of the abandoned buildings on the PIK site.  Mr. Trudgeon advised that staff recommended that the City Council enter into the agreement.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Trudgeon provided assurances from staff that the demolition process would adhere to appropriate and safe disposal of any hazardous materials.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Trudgeon confirmed that a portion or portions of the buildings were located in the City’s right-of-way, and were a negative impact on the area.

 

Johnson moved, Pust seconded, approval of a Settlement Agreement (Attachment C) between the City of Roseville and PIK Terminal Company and Pikovsky Management LLC regarding the purchase of land for roads and utilities in the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area; and authorizing execution of the Agreement by the Mayor and City Manager.

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

c.            Request Rejection and Seek Rebid Approval for Four Contracts within Package #2

Fire Chief Tim O’Neill, with some members of the Fire Station Design Team, provided information on the impacts of the delay in resolution of the pending litigation.  Chief O’Neill advised that they were not recommending award of any contracts associated with Bid Package #2 at this time.  Chief O’Neill further advised that they were requesting that the City formally reject four of the contracts and authorization to rebid four of the contracts since engineering and material changes had been made to reduce the overall estimated amount of the contracts.

 

Discussion among Councilmembers and the Construction/Design Team included potential return on investment for mechanical systems; projected annual energy costs and/or savings and conservation efforts; the geothermal system and contract in relationship to the plumbing/heating piping and whether consideration should be given to allocation of the costs more specifically between the fire station and other portions of the campus; efficiencies or inefficiencies in the current geothermal system; challenges and more expenses for a stand-alone geothermal system for the fire station, due to the lack of space on that site for additional wells; and options based on attempting to achieve the LEED silver standard through immediate or future connections.

 

Further discussion included impacts to contractual obligations in following recommendations in the staff report to accept and/or rebid portions of the Bid Package; a review of Alternative Ten (10) detailed options; and direction to staff to pursue an alternate action on the geothermal portion of the project at this time through this requested action.

 

Fire Chief O’Neill advised that the team would attempt to break out the bids more and review those challenges in doing so, providing further detail to the City Council at a future date.

 

Councilmember Pust opined that, if the City couldn’t afford to connect the entire campus with a geothermal system at this time, it was realistic to consider that it wouldn’t be feasible in the future either.

 

Mayor Roe requested City Manager Malinen and Finance Director Miller to research and provide additional information to the City Council in the near future on any alternative financing options that may be available for additional geothermal costs not specific to the fire station, given the limitations of the fire station’s construction budget.

 

Johnson moved, Pust seconded, rejection of all bids associated with the four (4) contracts for bid package #2 for the construction of a new fire station; and authorizing the Fire Department to conduct a competitive re-bid process for those contracts as listed and detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated June 18, 2012: Contract #2200 (Plumbing/Heating piping), Contract #2300 (HVAC/Air Distribution), Contract #2500 (Temperature Controls), and Contract #2600 (Electrical/Communication/Security/Technology).

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

d.            Approve Xtra Lease Settlement

Mayor Roe noted that this action item was a result of the Closed Executive Session held earlier tonight.

 

Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon briefly reviewed the Settlement Agreement, provided as a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 

 

Mr. Trudgeon provided a background over the last few years on this property; reviewed past discussions and negotiations; and remaining pending litigation potential.  Mr. Trudgeon reviewed the specific of the Agreement for the City’s potential purchase of the property in 2015 in the amount of $1.9 million if not sold by the property owner by then; and stipulations for the owner’s continued use and marketing of the property; and payment at this time by the City of $100,000 based on the owner’s issues with past City Council actions.  Based on these discussions, negotiations, and the advice of the City’s legal counsel, staff recommended that the City Council proceed with approving this Agreement.

 

Mayor Roe clarified that the exhibit attached to the RCA included an Escrow Agreement (Attachment D) currently in draft form, and subject to finalization.

 

Johnson moved, Willmus seconded, approval of a Settlement Agreement between the City of Roseville and Xtra Lease Inc. regarding the purchase of land for $1.9 million in the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area; amended to make approval contingent upon successful and completion of the Escrow Agreement (Attachment D); and authorizing execution of the Agreement by the Mayor and City Manager.

 

At the request of Councilmember Johnson, Mr. Trudgeon reviewed the substance of the Xtra Lease legal action against the City alleging that the City disrupted the owner’s potential sale and/or development of their private property.  Mr. Trudgeon noted that this dispute, some from as early as 2000 and continuing to-date, created the potential for additional potential damages by the City, in addition to legal fees and staff time.  Mr. Trudgeon advised that this Settlement Agreement will protect the City from any further costs.

 

Councilmember McGehee expressed her concern, absent City interest in acquiring more property beyond this parcel, in the environmental condition of the property; opining that while this may serve as the City’s way to hedge their bets by spending money now, it was unfortunate and further opined that she was not happy with this choice.

 

Mr. Trudgeon noted that the purchase would be funded through tax increment financing (TIF) dollars; and regarding the environmental status of the property, advised that a Phase II study had been performed in 2006 indicating little if any contamination.  Mr. Trudgeon highlighted portions of that report; and advised that any development or redevelopment of the property would be under scrutiny and monitoring by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) through a Response Action Plan (RAP).

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Trudgeon reviewed details outlined in the Settlement Agreement defining responsibilities and options for the owner and the City; and the flexibility allowed for the City as the best course of action in seeing that the property was developed.

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

16.         Business Items – Presentations/Discussions

 

a.            Consider Setting a Public Hearing to Amend City Code, Chapter 302 to Establish an On-Sale Brewer Taproom License Category and Discuss the Off-Sale License Quantity Limit

Mayor Roe advised that this discussion would be divided. The first issue would be for the request of Pour Decisions Brewery for a new category of on-sale liquor license to accommodate the unique retailing venue of brewers/brew pubs called a “taproom license” in Roseville, allowing consumption of product on their premises.  Mayor Roe noted the second issue would be to consider whether the City was interested in increasing the number of available off-sale liquor licenses in Roseville.

 

Finance Director Chris Miller briefly reviewed the request as detailed in the RCA dated June 18, 2012.  Mr. Miller noted the differences in recently approved legislation (Attachment C) and current City Code.  Mr. Miller advised that representatives of Pour Decisions Brewery were present to speak.

 

Pour Decisions Brewery Representatives

Mr. Haun reviewed issues for this request specific to their brewery establishment and future operations at 1744 Terrace Drive.

 

Mr. Haun reiterated their objectives in seeking this City Code revision and future business model for their establishment.

 

Discussion among Councilmembers and representatives of Pour Decision Brewery included preferred hours of operation and limitation of those hours, with representatives seeking hours for growler sales and tour times, with more hours on weekends versus weekdays (e.g. 4:00 – 10:00 p.m.); intent of the facility to not serve as a sports bar; and seating and parking  capacity based on City Code.

 

Willmus moved, Johnson seconded, approving a motion to schedule a Public Hearing for July 16, 2012 at 6:00 p.m., to consider amending City Code, Chapter 302 to establish an on-sale brewer taproom liquor license category.

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

Regarding the second area of discussion to consider the number of off-sale licenses in Roseville, Councilmember Johnson apologized that he had not yet been able to complete his due diligence, and was therefore not prepared to provide a presentation tonight.

 

Mayor Roe invited public comment specific to the number of off-sale licenses in Roseville.

 

Public Comment

Steve Burwell, Fairview Wine and Spirits, 2579 Fairview

As a proprietor of the establishment for twenty-seven (27) years, Mr. Burwell expressed his lack of understanding in why this issue was coming forward.  While unsure of the right number, Mr. Burwell opined that the established ten (10) licenses had served the City well so far, and should continue to do so.  Mr. Burwell cautioned that any increase in that number would cause financial hardship to existing stores and their market share in a community with an older demographic.  Mr. Burwell stated that people didn’t frequent liquor stores now as they did in the past; and given the number of restrictions placed on liquor stores by state and local government (e.g. what can and cannot be sold in conjunction with liquor sales), Mr. Burwell asked that any consideration of increasing the number of available licenses be based on definite rationale.  Mr. Burwell questioned the public good in increasing liquor licenses; and personally as well as from a business perspective stated that he was opposed to increasing the number of licenses available in the community.

 

Discussion among Councilmembers and Mr. Burwell included those existing license holders consisting of a larger chain or with multiple locations versus those independently owned; potential with available licenses becoming a commodity and a premium placed on them with larger companies approaching existing license holders to purchase and hold the license. 

 

Further discussion included how to retain the intent or spirit of the limited number of license through an open policy for consideration of all requests versus less favorable tactics.

 

Mr. Burwell compared Roseville with 31,000 in population and ten (10) licenses with his review of other communities in the metropolitan area with twenty-five (25) stores within that area serving a population of over 300,000 people; and questioned why this wouldn’t indicate that Roseville already had a glut of available liquor licenses.

 

Johnson moved, Pust seconded, TABLING this discussion to a future date uncertain.

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.

 

b.            Preliminary Plats and Use Considerations – Legal Review

Mayor Roe referenced the City Attorney’s written opinion as a follow-up to previous City Council discussions regarding the Wal-Mart subdivision plat. 

 

Councilmember Pust thanked City Attorney Gaughan for providing their analysis.

 

Councilmember McGehee asked the City Attorney to explain his perception of where the Wal-Mart process was going.

 

City Attorney Gaughan provided his opinion on how the process may evolve, anticipating that a Roseville property owner may request an appeal of the administrative process and how that would proceed.

 

Councilmember McGehee had numerous questions on that process which City Attorney Gaughan responded to; with Councilmember McGehee opining that the City Council had delegated too much authority to its staff, removing the opportunity for more options on specific issues such as this.

 

Mayor Roe clarified that City Attorney Gaughan was basing his analysis on State Statute as well as Roseville City Code, to which Mr. Gaughan responded affirmatively.

 

City Attorney Gaughan noted that past rationale in developing the Code was based on delegating such land use items to the expertise of its staff.

 

Discussion ensued regarding process; past examples (e.g. asphalt plat); the appeal process itself; and limitations of instances where an appeal of an administrative decision was applicable.

 

Councilmember McGehee reiterated her opinion that the City Council had delegated more responsibility to staff than they should have; and expressed her interest in being able to take action prior to requiring a citizen to appeal something already decided.

 

Mayor Roe advised that the City’s current Subdivision Ordinance is due to be updated as part of this year’s work plan, and revisions should be addressed as part of future discussions at that time.  Mayor Roe noted that, specific to preliminary plats, state statutes allowed local government limited discretion, even though there was some difference of opinion on how that discretion functioned, such as having surfaced in this case.

 

c.            Discuss E-Government/E-Commerce Efforts

City Manager Malinen initiated discussions as detailed in the RCA dated June 18, 2012 and efforts for e-commerce and e-government solutions for City staff and residents, based on previous discussions to satisfy goals in maximizing electronic and/or communication efforts.  Mr. Malinen further addressed the potential future use of electronic Council meeting packets.  Several various options and software packages were reviewed.

 

Discussion included how to justify costs and how to ensure the software and hardware could be integrated with existing systems; opportunities available through website redesign and basing work items on service level priorities and response times for problems reported electronically by the public; and potential hardware options to pursue electronic City Council meeting packets.

 

            Mayor Roe expressed his preference for an alternate supplier for the web site update, based on information in the RCA, including pricing.

 

14.       City Manager Future Agenda Review

City Manager Malinen reviewed upcoming agenda items.

 

At the request of Councilmember Johnson, City Attorney Gaughan reviewed the upcoming process and protocol for the Board of Appeals.

 

i.                Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings

Councilmember Pust requested that the City Council consider the Human Rights Commission’s resolution on the marriage amendment.

 

 

ii.                Adjourn

McGehee moved, Roe seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 10:05 pm.

 

Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.