View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
Council Meeting Minutes
September 24, 2012
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: Johnson; Willmus; McGehee; Pust; and Roe). City Attorney Mark Gaughan was
2. Approve Agenda
Mayor Roe noted that staff removed Item 12.f entitled,
“Community Development Department Request to Perform Abatement for Unresolved
Violations of City Code at 1991 Eldridge Avenue; as the issue had been
City Manager Malinen advised that staff requested deferral
of Item 7.e entitled “Award Contract for Engineering Services for the
Construction of Twin lakes Second Addition Public Improvements”
Councilmember McGehee requested removal of Consent Agenda
Item 7.d entitled, “Approve Request by Meritex Enterprises, Inc. for a
Preliminary Plat of the Land currently addressed as 2280 Walnut Street;” for
Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the agenda as amended.
Ayes: Johnson; Willmus; McGehee; Pust; and
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.
Council Communications, Reports, Announcements and Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Report
Mayor Roe announced several upcoming free educational forums
on the constitutional amendments proposed in MN on the November ballot. The
first forum was scheduled at the Maplewood City Hall on October 9, 2012, on the
voter identification question; and the second scheduled for October 23, 2012 at
the Maplewood Community Center on the proposed marriage amendment. Mayor Roe
advised that additional information on the forums was available by contacting
the Maplewood Human Rights Commission at 651/429-2000.
City Manager Malinen noted that the Roseville and Maplewood Human Rights Commissions
were co-sponsoring these educational forums.
Mayor Roe advised that he had been privileged to speak at a
kick-off event in support of Active Aging Week, sponsored by AEGIS Therapy,
parent company of the Golden Living Lakeridge facility earlier today.
5. Recognitions, Donations, Communications
Recognize Thelma McKenzie for Service on the Human Rights Commission
Mayor Roe publically recognized and presented a Certificate
of Appreciation to retiring Human Rights Commissioner Thelma McKenzie for her
service to the Roseville Human Rights Commission on and off over the years
since 1981; reluctantly accepting her resignation due to her move outside of the
City of Roseville.
Ms. McKenzie formally thanked the City of Roseville for the
wonderful learning opportunity provided to her through this Commission. Ms.
McKenzie reviewed some of the history of development of the annual student
Essay Contest, educational forums, and mediation services; and the current
neighborhood diversity efforts of the current Human Rights Commission.
Mayor Roe noted that he had also had the opportunity to
serve with Ms. McKenzie in 2003 on the Twin lakes Stakeholder Panel; and had
appreciated her service to the City in that capacity as well.
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.
Approve Minutes of September 17, 2012 Meeting
Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the minutes of
the September 17, 2012 meeting as amended.
Page 1, line 44 (Roe)
Delete “voting on minutes when not attending in person.” And
end sentence after “…affirmative.”
Page 11, line 18 (McGehee)
Correct “Environmental Impact Statement” (EIS) to read
“Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)”
Page 13, line 15 (McGehee)
After comma, change “were” to “as”
Page 15, line 39 (McGehee)
Change “other parties” to “third parties”
Page 16, line 8 (McGehee)
Councilmember McGehee’s reference to the newspaper article
should be corrected to be about firemen, not police officers, therefore correct
line 9 to read “… of and needing to be educated about some safety and appliance
Page 16, line 16 (McGehee)
Remove semi-colon before “while,” and place a period after
“community.” Then start a new sentence to read: “Everyone makes mistakes in
their lives and this should not deny them housing.
There were no additional changes to the Consent Agenda than
those previously noted. At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen briefly
reviewed those items being considered under the Consent Agenda.
Johnson moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the following
claims and payments as presented.
Approve General Purchases and Sale of Surplus Items in Excess of
Johnson moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the following
purchases and/or contracts for service:
Upper Cut Tree Services
Diseased and hazardous tree removal
Adopt a Resolution Approving the Vacation of all Roadway
Interests in the Areas Comprising Part of the Former Mount Ridge Road as well
as any Roadway Interest in a 4,643-suare foot area of land within the Twin
Lakes Second Addition Plat
Mayor Roe noted that, under cover of a September 24, 2012
memorandum from City Attorney Charles Bartholdi to staff, a revised resolution
and reference maps was provided as a bench handout, clarifying
the location of the proposed roadway and highway easement to be vacated.
Johnson moved, McGehee seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11011(Attachment
E) entitled, “A Resolution Approving the Vacation of Roadway and Highway
Easements (PF12-007);” as amended and a DRAFT provided as a bench handout,
Approve Request by Meritex Enterprises, Inc. for a Preliminary
Plat of the Land Currently addressed as 2280 Walnut Street
At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen reviewed
this request as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated
September 24, 2012.
Councilmember McGehee sought clarification that a small
portion not included in this proposed action was indeed not included as part of
the parcel, which was confirmed by City Manager Malinen.
McGehee moved, Johnson seconded, approval of the PRELIMINARY
PLAT of Outlot A of the Highcrest Park Second Addition Plat, based on the
comments and findings of Sections 4-6 and the recommendations of Section 7 of
the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated September 24, 2012.
Award Contract for Engineering Services for the Construction of
Twin Lakes Second Addition Public Improvements
As previously noted, this item was removed by staff from
Update from Ramsey County Sheriff
Mayor Roe welcomed Ramsey County Sheriff Matt Bostrom.
Sheriff Bostrom provided an annual update of the Sheriff’s
Department and reviewed its five (5) core service areas: detention services
(e.g. arrests and pre-sentence housing); management of courts (e.g. security
for criminal court and delivery of civil process documents); patrol services
for seven (7) communities of approximately sixty (60) miles; lakes, trails and
waterway management, a mandated function of the human safety side of waterway
management for eighty-two (82) lakes and eighteen (18) miles of the Mississippi
River; and administrative functions (e.g. criminal history and warrants) and
investigations working with local metropolitan communities within the county
and interagency cooperation.
Sheriff Bostrom reviewed some of the “behind the scenes”
operations of the department, including positive reinforcement of area youth to
“catch kids doing things right, and educating them on that good behavior.
Sheriff Bostrom noted that the department was seeking a renewed focus of its
mission, with each division having its own mission statement directly related
to the County’s mission statement, but specific to their areas, and as they
achieve that mission, to move their unit, the division and department forward
for the betterment of all. Sheriff Bostrom noted that the purpose was to make
sure they were focused properly on doing their job well.
Sheriff Bostrom referenced the Criminal Justice Coordinating
Council,” representing an agreement between all department heads associated
with criminal justice in Ramsey County from judges, city attorneys, chiefs of
police for the City of St. Paul and suburbs, prosecutors and public defenders.
Sheriff Bostrom advised that all parties had agreed to a monthly, ninety (90)
minute overview of all related data.
Sheriff Bostrom noted that ways the department was using to
better communicate, with a community concerns form available for citizens to
share their observations – either anonymously or by name – to allow better
access by the community to the Sheriff’s Department, allowing for improved
service. Sheriff Bostrom noted that quite often the form is used to compliment
deputies for a job well done.
Sheriff Bostrom attributed suburban police chiefs with an
idea for better service provide that provided cooperative sharing of a crime
investigation skills model, with an extra person added to the County crime lab
in an outfitted vehicle, with area police chiefs sending additional officers to
participate in that training. Sheriff Bostrom noted that the Roseville Police
Department was involved, and would attend the same crime scene education
opportunities, and work scenes alongside each other to support
cross-jurisdictional assistance. Sheriff Bostrom advised that this new
initiative was just being implemented, and training would occur soon.
In conclusion, Sheriff Bostrom noted the reformation of the
former Ramsey Sheriff’s Canine Foundation, renamed to eliminate the word
“canine” and as a 501-3.c corporation could accept donations of funds for
specific purpose to improve policing throughout the county. With the Ramsey
County Sheriff’s Foundation serving as an umbrella organization allowing for
various funding mechanisms, Sheriff Bostrom noted that this would replace the
other previously unstructured and multiplicity-hindered funding beyond the
General Fund. As an example, Sheriff Bostrom noted the upcoming “Fright Farm”
located at Frost and White Bear Avenues in Maplewood being held every weekend
during October, with funds from that event to support literacy programs
throughout Ramsey County as well as other volunteer efforts.
Sheriff Bostrom stated that he had underestimated how great
this job would be, and attributed it to the great personnel and great
government within Ramsey County.
Mayor Roe thanked Sheriff Bostrom for his comments.
Councilmember Johnson concurred, and sought additional
information on the Sheriff’s Department participation in park patrol for Ramsey
Sheriff Bostrom responded that the department worked closely with the County
Park staff; and for its contract cities the Sheriff’s Department provided more
direct patrol services. On a larger scale, Sheriff Bostrom noted that
Community Service Officers (CSO’s) and volunteers logging time served the
overall Ramsey County Park system as a supplement to the Sheriff’s Department,
working jointly and strategically, depending specific problem areas.
Councilmember McGehee sought additional information on youth
initiatives of the Department.
Sheriff Bostrom advised that the department provided
D.A.R.E. for White Bear Township, all school safety patrols other than the St.
Paul District, and was involved in literacy initiatives, particularly on the
east side. Sheriff Bostrom advised that it was the larger vision of the
department to be involved in youth activities beyond athletics, including
exposing youth to visual arts and music.
Councilmember McGehee expressed her personal appreciation
with the initiatives taken on to-date.
Councilmember Willmus sought additional information on the department’s
involvement with non-English speaking groups in the county.
Sheriff Bostrom advised that his department held quarterly meetings with
members of the Mexican Consulate on issues of education, business and crime
issues affecting that community, with the group serving as a problem-solving
and advocacy group. Sheriff Bostrom further advised that the department met
regularly with Council 18 of eighteen (18) families associated with
Southeastern Asian populations. Sheriff Bostrom noted that the Karen families
haven’t contacted his department as much as they were working with the St. Paul
Police Department; however, he noted that his department was reaching out to
the Somali community. As an example, Sheriff Bostrom noted the involvement and
outreach of former St. Paul Assistant Chief Dennis Jensen, who had been a key
leader in resolving the “traveler cases” for the Somali group, whose efforts
were recognized by the Department of Justice. Sheriff Bostrom noted that the
department was also involved with the tattoo removal program in St. Paul to
assist young people wishing to get out of gangs, and included teaching them
life skills and educational opportunities.
Councilmember McGehee noted Chief Mathwig’s involvement in
the Karen community through the volleyball programs; and encouraged the
Sheriff’s Department to get involved in those efforts.
In response, Sheriff Bostrom recognized Chief Mathwig’s success to-date in Roseville,
and not wishing to interfere with that success, advised that his department was
available to support his efforts in whatever ways Chief Mathwig requested that
City Manager Malinen thanked Sheriff Bostrom for his
willingness to work with suburban police departments, particularly on the
investigative units. City Manager Malinen also recognized the Sheriff’s
efforts and support in putting together the Fallen Officer’s Memorial in
Maplewood, with the ceremony scheduled to be held in Roseville in 2013.
Sheriff Bostrom noted that often families of fallen officers
felt forgotten, and it was his intent that they be aware that their loved one’s
legacy would continue and to emphasize the difference those officers had made
in their communities. Sheriff Bostrom noted that law enforcement had suffered
many losses, including Roseville, and that the efforts to honor those heroes
had support throughout the law enforcement community. Sheriff Bostrom noted
that it was the intent that the memorial recognition move from community to
community as well as his agency; and expressed his appreciation for Roseville’s
participation for this annual recognition on May 15 during Law Enforcement
Week. Sheriff Bostrom noted that attendance at the event proved to be a
rewarding experience for the family members and all attending.
Mayor Roe thanked Sheriff Bostrom again for his presentation
Hearing to Confirm Assessments for City Project P-ST-SW-11-02: Dale Street
Reconstruction between County Road C and South Owasso Boulevard
Mayor Roe recognized City Engineer Debra Bloom who provided
a description of the project, project financing and a discussion of typical
assessments for benefiting properties, as detailed in the RCA dated September
Ms. Bloom reviewed the special assessment rates based on actual
project costs at 25% of street reconstruction costs, excluding sidewalks, storm
sewers, water mains and sanitary sewers, and based on assessable frontage as
approved in the feasibility report. Ms. Bloom reviewed various lot size and
configuration calculations for those assessments, noting calculations for several
townhome and condominium developments located in the project area. Ms. Bloom
noted that the reconstruction project provided an opportunity for property
owners to have their sewer and/or water services at 100% cost to property owners,
with many doing so with this project. Ms. Bloom noted the opportunity for assessment
deferral for homesteaded property for owners aged 65 or older or retired by
virtue of a disability and proof of hardship, with additional information
available at City Hall.
Specific to this project, Ms. Bloom advised that the
assessments were over a fifteen (15) year term at 5.5% annual interest,
collectable by Ramsey County on tax statements. Ms. Bloom reviewed the
schedule for the assessment process, including tonight’s public hearing,
prepayment of assessments by October 26, 2012; and subsequent certification to
Ramsey County by November 1, 2012, of any unpaid assessments.
As noted in the staff report, Ms. Bloom noted that the total
project cost has been $1,070,844.34; with the total assessable cost at $594,070.65,
with assessable footage averaging $3,882.73, or a $38.25/foot assessment rate
at the 25% policy. Ms. Bloom noted that the engineer’s estimate provided in
the Feasibility Report had been $48.66, with the actual rate coming in at $38.25,
a difference of <21%> less than projected.
At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Ms. Bloom confirmed
that the park frontage was added into the entire project.
At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Ms. Bloom advised
that, while property owners typically did sanitary sewer replacement of their
private lines during a reconstruction project at a significant cost savings
rather than doing so independently, no one had new services installed as part
of this project.
At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Ms. Bloom reviewed
the payment schedule again; noting that prepayments needed to be completed as
specified to avoid additional interest applied for the next year by November
15, 2012, by Ramsey County.
With Ms. Bloom concurring, Mayor Roe noted that for
City-owned property along a reconstructed street, that property was included in
the total assessable frontage by which the cost is divided, therefore reducing
Mayor Roe called to order the Public Hearing at
approximately 6:58 p.m. for the purpose of confirming assessments for Dale
Street reconstruction between County Road C and South Owasso Boulevard (City
Project P-ST-SW-11-02) as per Attachment D to the RCA dated September 24, 2012.
City Manager Malinen provided confirmation of applicable
published and posted notices of the Public Hearings and dates accomplished for
No one appeared to speak for or against.
City Manager Malinen and Ms. Bloom both advised that the
City Office and/or Engineering Department had not received any appeals or
objections to assessments to-date.
Mayor Roe closed the Public Hearing at approximately 7:00
a. Adopt a Resolution Confirming Assessments for
City Project P-ST-SW-11-02: Dale Street Reconstruction between County Road C
and South Owasso Boulevard
Johnson moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of
Resolution No. 11012(Attachment B) entitled, “Resolution Adopting and Confirming
2012 Assessments for City Project P-ST-SW-11-02: Dale Street Reconstruction
between County Road C and South Owasso Boulevard.”
Mayor Roe expressed appreciation that the project
came in under budget.
11. b. Public Hearing to Consider
Authorizing the Sale of $17 Million in Bonds to Finance the Completion of a New
Fire Station and Continue Funding for the Park Renewal Program
Mayor Roe recognized Finance Director Chris Miller who summarized
the phasing of the bonds as detailed in the RCA dated September 24, 2012.
As noted in the report, Mr. Miller advised that the initial
phase of the bonding plan was conducted on December 12, 2012, with the sale of
$10 million in bonds; with this being the second phase. Mr. Miller noted that,
in October of 2011, the City Council committed that the successive bond issue
phases would provide opportunity for public comment, with tonight’s public
hearing intended to satisfy that commitment.
While the original intent was to split the remaining $17
million into two (2) separate bond issues to minimize issuance costs and
underwriter fees on each issue, Mr. Miller advised that due to market changes
in the municipal bond market since that time, it now made more sense to proceed
with a single $17 million bond issue.
Mr. Miller noted that Ms. Terri Eaton of Springsted
Incorporated, was present at tonight’s meeting to respond to any questions or
comments of the City Council or public.
Mayor Roe noted inclusion with the meeting materials, at his
request, a DRAFT Parks and Recreation Renewal Program Timeframe (4-year plan)
revised as of 08/29/2012 and subject to adjustments based on community input
and guidance; as well as the original Proposed PIP Projects listed by park and
prepared by Jeff Evenson and dated August 28. 2006.
Mayor Roe opened the Public Hearing at approximately 7:07
p.m. and reviewed protocol for public comments.
Greg Ryan, Roseville Owasso Hills Resident (address not
Mr. Ryan stated that his property had been overtaxed since
living here; and expressed his frustration now with the City Council and Mayor
pushing forward this multi-million dollar agenda without it going to a ballot
for taxpayers to have the opportunity to shut it down. Mr. Ryan opined that it
was unfair that four City Councilmembers and the Mayor could single-handedly
elevate his property taxes at a time when the economy was weighed down, clearly
taking oxygen out of the room and moving money people didn’t have. Mr. Ryan
further opined that it should be illegal for them to endorse this effort, when
people were on the threshold of losing their homes and foreclosures being at an
all-time high. While the fire station had already been demolished, Mr. Ryan
took issue with the City Council coming to citizens for park improvements,
opining that it represented gross negligence on their part to impose this on
the City’s poor taxpayers. Mr. Ryan questioned why this hadn’t gone to a
referendum for taxpayer vote; noting that two (2) Councilmembers didn’t want to
endorse this cost to taxpayers. Mr. Ryan advised that he had only found out
about this in today’s newspaper; and asked Councilmembers supporting this to
John Torgerson, 337 South Owasso Blvd. W
While not seeking anyone’s resignation, Mr. Torgerson
encouraged Councilmembers to change their vote. Upon his first awareness of
this in today’s newspaper, Mr. Torgerson expressed how irate he was, as well as
others in Roseville who had no idea this was being considered and therefore had
not been sufficiently informed. Mr. Torgerson reviewed his perception of
potential increases to property taxes from this bond issue as well as City,
County and State property tax increases. Mr. Torgerson advised that he was currently
in the process of putting his home up for sale due to ever-increasing property
taxes over the last 3-4 years. Mr. Torgerson referenced the Vadnais Heights
Sports Center project bonding and current status of that project; and asked
that the City Council consider that in their thought process. Mr. Torgerson
asked that, now that costs are in, the specific allocation for the fire station
and parks; with a letter sent to each Roseville resident with those numbers and
new taxes created by a bond issue; and seeking their individual responses as to
whether they are interested in proceeding or not. Mr. Torgerson stated that
this would allow the entire community, not just a City Council majority, to
have a choice in the matter. Mr. Torgerson opined that another letter should
be sent the following year; and suggested that any bond sale be delayed. While
the fire station could have been delayed in the past as well, but was now being
pushed through, Mr. Torgerson questioned the need for such an elaborate fire
station rather than one that would be sufficient and show the City Council as
fiscally responsible. Mr. Torgerson referenced a current City Councilmember
who ran a campaign on fiscal responsibility, opining that this action did not
Robert Delao, 280 Minnesota Avenue
Mr. Delao referenced a letter from the City to residents
last year that stated, due to mismanagement of its water system and lack of
maintenance, residents would experience a 60% increase in their water bills to
correct that. Mr. Delao noted that, now the City says that due to
mismanagement of them, parks are deteriorating due to running out of money.
Mr. Delao questioned where that money had gone; and questioned how the City
intended to maintain new facilities and parks when it could not maintain the
current ones. Mr. Delao took issue with the City shoving the “Port Authority”
down taxpayers’ throats as an excuse to bypass public input; and took further
issue in pushing it ahead even sooner. Mr. Delao provided his perspective on
the impact of increased taxes and water rates, with his property value
continuing to drop. Mr. Delao opined that cities, counties, and states and the
entire country were in deep financial trouble, while the City Council continued
to spend money like drunken sailors. Mr. Delao suggested that the City dispose
of infrastructure if it couldn’t maintain it; and questioned if the intent of
the bond sale was for park maintenance or expansion. Mr. Delao opined that
people not responsible for maintenance or for doing their job should resign and
those responsible for spending this money needed to be fired.
Tim Callaghan, 3062 Shorewood Lane
Mr. Callaghan noted that the City used to have three (3)
fire stations with a rapid response time for the fire department. Mr.
Callaghan questioned the current response time; and opined that by now having
only one (1) luxury fire station, it would reduce response time; and opined
that this seemed unreasonable. Regarding the park system, Mr. Callaghan
referenced community surveys and resident support for trails; with the apparent
response of the City to rebuild buildings, add new fields and playground
equipment, which was not what the community supported. Mr. Callaghan provided
his perception of past discussions by Councilmember Johnson who didn’t want to
talk about increased taxes at that time, apparently stating that that was next
year. Subsequently, Mr. Callaghan alleged that residents experienced a 15%
increase for each of two (2) years. Mr. Callaghan questioned what the City
Council was doing, opining that it was not doing what it said it was going to
do; and rather than paying down Tax Increment Financing (TIF) was now giving it
away like candy. Mr. Callaghan questioned when we were going to get control
and ask Roseville residents what they wanted with a view of what it was going
to cost. Mr. Callaghan stated that the City Council had a tendency to tell
citizens to go away and not talk, since they had been elected and knew what
citizens wanted. Mr. Callaghan opined that the City Council did not represent
Roseville whatsoever; and strongly recommended that this bond sale not proceed,
in order to avoid another 15% increase over this year’s 15% increase as
indicated in the 2013 Preliminary Budget recently adopted. Mr. Callaghan
questioned why the City Council was spending money on things that Roseville
residents said they didn’t’ want.
Kathleen Deleo, (no relation to Robert Delao) 1246 W.
Ms. Deleo advised that she had been unaware of this increase
being pushed through until today. Ms. Deleo, having worked in both the public
and private sectors in her career, opined that the City was not being
accountable or responsible in today’s economy. Ms. Deleo further opined that
the City had been disrespectful of its citizens in using the Port Authority
when it had no port serving the City. Ms. Deleo opined that the City Council
was not serving the taxpayers, but rather it appeared that the taxpayers were
working for the City; and using Port Authority to get through what it wanted.
Ms. Deleo referenced current home and property values, necessitating property
sales, while taxes had increased by 20% at the same time her property value had
dropped by 50%, with nothing but frustration to show for it. Ms. Deleo opined
that it was time to give the power back to the City; and for those wanting to
put this through without respect for putting it to a public vote, they should
be ashamed of themselves and embarrassed.
Vivian Ramalingam, 2182 Acorn Road
Having grown up in New York City, a major Port Authority
City, specifically designated for its transportation maintenance and
development and other very specific services, Ms. Ramalingam questioned how the
City of Roseville could possibly use such a discretionary fund for other than
it was intended. Ms. Ramalingam opined that this was a shame and disgraceful.
As a matter of pure interest related to park development, Ms. Ramalingam asked
for information of any Councilmembers directly benefitting from development of
Charlie Sparks, 3040 Little Bay Road
Mr. Sparks expressed his disappointment in what the City
intended to do with park monies. Having moved to Roseville in 2002, and having
seen his property taxes rise from $5,600 to $10,000 during that time, Mr. Sparks
questioned what he was being asked to support through this action. While
liking parks, Mr. Sparks stated that he was not a big user of them other than
walking; however, he questioned the need for $17 million to make them better.
Mr. Sparks expressed his disappointment that the citizens didn’t get to vote in
this decision-making for use of its public monies.
Eugene Bahnemann, 2656 N Lexington Avenue
Mr. Bahnemann stated that, living across from City Hall, he
laughed at how this City was run, whether contracting out grass cutting and
lights on continuously all night. Mr. Bahnemann opined that Councilmember
Johnson wanted to spend money like it was coming out of his ears; however, he
questioned those on fixed incomes. While the City Manager received a raise
every year, Mr. Bahnemann opined that he would be satisfied with just his
perks. While continually bringing up his issues with the weeds at City Hall
directly across the street from him, Mr. Bahnemann advised that it had yet to
come to a head. Mr. Bahnemann opined that the way the City treated its people
and neighbors was completely outrageous. Mr. Bahnemann, as a former fire
fighter for over twenty-five (25) years, stated that he had voice his
preference in the past for a nice, functional fire station across from his
home; however, he was very disappointed in the “Taj Mahal” being built. Mr. Bahnemann
noted his presence at the site today in the picket line for use of non-union
workers; and opined that this was a terrible situation when it happened in your
own yard; and further opined that it was time for housecleaning at City Hall
from the top on down.
With no one else appearing to speak for or against, Mayor
Roe closed the Public Hearing at approximately 7:31 pm.
b. Authorize the Sale of $17 Million in Bonds to
Finance the Completion of a New First Station and Continue Funding the Park
Mayor Roe sought to respond to those questions raised during
Regarding the split in bond funds intended for the fire
station and parks, Mr. Miller advised Mayor Roe that there were no
reallocations proposed unless staff was so directed by the City Council.
In response to park expansion versus park maintenance, Mayor
Roe clarified that the vast majority of what was listed represented a backlog
in upkeep of park facilities; with replacement of buildings needing replacement,
or playground facilities and/or equipment, basically a rehabilitation of
facilities. Mayor Roe noted that, of the several new park properties shown on
the list of facilities, those were new fields or facilities, but the vast
majority was intended as a rehabilitation of existing facilities. Mayor Roe
clarified that $2 million of the funds allocated for the parks portion of the
bond issue had been designated for pathways to improve connections in the
community, including the long-needed area along County Road B-2.
Regarding difference in response times for one (1) versus
three (3) fire stations, Mayor Roe advised that information on those response
times had been provided at the beginning of the fire station project through
the Facility Study Group.
As a member of that Study Group, Councilmember Johnson
concurred that the City originally had three (3) fire stations, but that it was
during a time when the City was served by a volunteer fire staff; with
volunteer time to respond to incidents double the current response time of only
one (1) station, which had been successfully proven with operation of Station
#3 as the sole station serving the entire community over the last few times and
response time cut well in half.
Mayor Roe noted that the faster response service was
facilitated by on-site shift staffing versus volunteer response time from their
individual homes; as well as the Fire Department researching the best routes to
incidents throughout the community to avoid congested areas or higher traffic
volumes. While no one appeared to be available from the Fire Department
tonight, Mayor Roe advised that they could provide information to the public
after the meeting.
Mayor Roe resumed responding to those questions brought
forward by the public during tonight’s public comment on the bond issue.
In response to the perception of an additional 15% increase
to taxpayers, Mayor Roe clarified that the City’s 2013 Preliminary Levy adopted
earlier this month, provided for a 15.8% levy increase over 2012, with the
final round of bond debt service not coming through until 2014; but certainly
not representing an additional 15% on top of the previous 15%.
Mayor Roe clarified the City’s Port Authority, noting that
Roseville did not have a Port Authority, but had been granted the ability to
use Port Authority powers, delineated by State Statute, for the specific
purpose of redevelopment or economic development and only under those certain
established powers adopted in the 1980’s. Mayor Roe noted that this was
significantly different than the Port Authority granted New York City, which
was under an entirely different set of rules.
Mayor Roe asked individual Councilmembers to respond to
allegations that they would be benefiting from any park improvements; and to
specify their location to parks in their immediate vicinity.
Councilmember Johnson advised that he resided approximately
¾ block from Lexington Park.
Councilmember Willmus advised that Cottontail Park was at
the rear of his residence.
Mayor Roe advised that he lived approximately 2/10 of a mile
from Reservoir Woods Park.
Councilmember McGehee, residing in Southwest Roseville,
advised that they had no City park, and she was a regular user of the parks in
the Cities of Lauderdale and Falcon Heights, near Cleveland and Roselawn.
Councilmember Pust advised that she resided approximately
2.5 blocks from Villa Park.
Councilmember McGehee sought to provide her personal
clarification of several public questions. Councilmember McGehee opined that
it was her understanding that the proposed increase was actually 15.8% because
the preliminary budget passed included an additional $185,000 moving from 4.8%
to 15.8%; together with the HRA Levy increase, providing a total levy increase
of 17.6%. Having had discussions with Finance Director Miller, Councilmember
McGehee opined that she understood that this would carry forward into 2014 so
there would be a piece of this going forward, $1,375,000, carrying forward as
part of the $17 million bonding if passed tonight, representing a substantial
increase next year.
At the request of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miller
responded that the 2012 Levy had included no debt service amounts related to
the first phase of the bond issue, nor this subsequent issue yet to be approved.
Mr. Miller confirmed that, in 2013 between the two (2) bond issues,
approximately $1.6 million in debt service would come onto the books representing
approximately 11% of the 2012 levy. Mr. Miller confirmed that an estimated
2014 final portion of the bonding for $560,000 of debt service going forward
represented 3.7% of the 2013 Levy if ultimately approved as indicated for the
Preliminary Levy. Mr. Miller confirmed that the total debt service would be
$2.2 million per year over the term of fifteen (15) years; and at the end would
paid off, if not paid off earlier, and the levy would then be reduced by that
Mayor Roe clarified that this was based on assumptions
available today, and subject to any changes a future City Council may choose to
At the request of Councilmember Pust, Mr. Miller clarified
that the $830,000 debt service in 2013 was based on the bonds issued in 2011;
and any additional would be the result of action taken tonight.
At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Miller
clarified that if the $17 million bond issue action did not proceed, the
proposed 2013 levy increase would be approximately 5.6% based on current
Councilmember McGehee sought to clarify that the HRA Levy
had to be included in the total, since it affected everyone; and while a total HRA
Levy of 2.3% increase exclusive of the water fee increase was not great, it was
better than the proposed 17.6% increase with the additional bond sale.
Mayor Roe clarified that, in adding the percent increase on
the HRA levy to the property tax levy, there were relative dollar impacts to
Councilmember McGehee clarified that she was using dollar
amounts based on that principle; but was trying to be clear for the listening
Mayor Roe apologized to the public for any confusion caused
from the many numbers floating around, recognizing that it was hard to keep up
On that point, Councilmember Pust admitted she was also
unable to follow most of the previous discussion; and recognized this was
probably similar to that experienced by the audience and media in the room.
For the record, Councilmember Pust referenced and read for the record, an
e-mail provided earlier today from Finance Director Miller to the City Council
in response to questions of Councilmember McGehee and breaking down the bond
At the request of Mayor Roe, a copy of this e-mail dated
September 24, 2012, was provided to the public.
Mayor Roe thanked Councilmember Pust.
Finance Director Miller recognized that the many different
numbers were difficult to follow, and having anticipated that, when the City
Council adopted their Preliminary 2013 Budget on September 10, 2012, staff had
laid all of those numbers out. Mr. Miller noted that breakdowns had also been
provided as early as October of 2011 for all phases of the bond issue when the
City Council had first considered the first phase; along with having been
publicized in the local newspaper. Mr. Miller opined that staff had done their
best to get the information to the public; and hoped that this additional
e-mail information served as a complimentary piece to keep the City’s budget as
public and transparent as possible.
At the request of Mayor Roe regarding clarifying General
Obligation bonds, Mr. Miller advised that they were not issued under the State
capital improvement Statute.
At the request of Mayor Roe, and recognizing Councilmember
McGehee’s previous question regarding General Obligation Capital Improvement
Bonds, and a potential view that maintenance versus capital improvement was
blurred, Ms. Terri Eaton of Springsted provided a response.
Ms. Eaton responded that General Obligation bonds were
intended for major efforts needed to repair existing assets, with that value
added to those assets considered capital.
In response to Mayor Roe, Ms. Eaton responded that parks are
considered assets and any major refurbishment to bring them back to their value
was considered a capital expense, and not limited to new capital.
In response to Councilmember Pust, Ms. Eaton advised that it
was critical that the bond funds be used for that purpose versus general
operations and maintenance; and further advised that their office and the
City’s bond attorneys had reviewed everything included on the list for
inclusion and had approved them for this type of bond issue.
At the request of Councilmember Pust, Ms. Eaton confirmed
that this bond issue was required to be used for that purpose (e.g. capital
improvements) and that purpose only, and not for general operational
At the request of Councilmember Pust, Ms. Eaton reiterated
that those capital improvements were defined for use on existing assets and was
different than general maintenance and operations.
Mayor Roe noted that the City had a policy that restricted
borrowing for general operating and maintenance, with Finance Director Miller
responding that he was unaware of any restrictions beyond that policy other
than those prescribed by State law.
Councilmember Pust referenced meeting packet materials
provided and color coded, and thanked staff for including that update. In the
four-year plan provided by staff, Councilmember Pust noted that it had been
updated as of 08/29/2012 with a total amount of $4.1 million for year two (2);
with $1.6 million of that indicated for acquisition or new purchases at two (2)
different designated sites, and representing approximately 40% of that $4.1
million. Councilmember Pust questioned if that was still part of the plan.
Mr. Miller deferred a response to Parks and Recreation
Director Lonnie Brokke, who clarified that the information contained in the
meeting materials remained a work in progress, and included moving 2012
projects due to missing the construction season.
Regarding the $1.6 million included in the 2012 acquisition
proposals highlighted by Councilmember Pust, Mr. Brokke advised that staff was
currently in discussion with landowners to determine their interest in
negotiating a land sale; but clarified that no offers had been made to-date;
and that no appraisals had been solicited until interest of property owners had
been determined. Mr. Brokke specified that the two (2) acquisition sites
included the former Mounds View School District site and the Press Gym property
adjacent to an existing Roseville Park. Mr. Brokke advised that, if and when
the property owner indicated their interest in proceeding, appraisal would then
At the request of Councilmember Pust as to any intent to
close either or both of those sales in 2012, Mr. Brokke advised that staff
anticipated being able to do so, but at this time nothing was definite; and
confirmed that the 2011 approved bonding had been allocated for those
Mr. Miller advised that it had been staff’s intent to
proceed with those discussions earlier, but they had been prevented from doing
so over a 7-8 month period or spending of any of those proceeds due to pending
litigation, further delaying discussions with land owners.
Councilmember Pust clarified that she was not implying that
staff was not doing anything; but noted that not all of the bond proceeds would
be for maintenance, with 40% for land acquisition or new purchases.
Mayor Roe clarified that those acquisition funds had been
designated in the Phase 1 bond issue.
Councilmember Pust noted that, while it was part of the
dollar figure already approved, it was asked to move up with the rest of the
proposed $17 million phase before the City Council tonight.
Mayor Roe noted that the original plan was to approve $10
million in May of 2012 and the final $7 million in December of 2012.
Councilmember Pust recognized this intent and that the
proposal was to now do all approvals at once.
In order to get financing secured, provide the fire station
with the remainder of funding needed to complete construction, and the Parks
Department more confidence to schedule park and pathway improvements, all
representing a significant endeavor, Finance Director Miller advised that the
proposed action would provide staff confidence to strategize and stage
logistics for those various projects.
Councilmember Pust opined that it also provided confidence
to the City that whatever happens in the November election, the total amount of
bonds would already have been issued.
Finance Director Miller clarified that staff was bringing
this item before the City Council because they had asked staff to do so.
Councilmember McGehee noted that it looked like the Parks
and Recreation Department had spent $100,000 in 2012 for this project (e.g.
initial project planning total).
Mr. Brokke advised that staff was still on hold, with the
only expenditure proposed at this time was for an agreement for best value
contracting request for proposals (RFP) with Arizona State for the next
contract for the Park Renewal Program, and scheduled to come before the City
Council at their October 8, 2012 regular business meeting for consideration.
Councilmember McGehee noted that the first bond issue of $10
million allocated $8 million for the fire station, leaving $2 million for
parks; and if this proposed bond issue did not go forward, it still left $2
million for parks and enough to complete the fire station; with no need to bond
Mayor Roe clarified that the original $10 million bond issue
had been reallocated by the Council majority at $5 million for the fire station
and $5 million for parks respectively; and unless the City Council took action
to change that, the previous action stood. Therefore, Mayor Roe advised that
the City would need to find an additional $3 million for the fire station if
that allocation was not changed. Mayor Roe further clarified that the proposed
land acquisition represented $2.1 million out of a total $19 million; with
proposed pathway projects over a four (4) year period allocated $2 million.
Mayor Roe indicated that the remaining $15 million for park projects was
proposed for facilities and fields, whether for replacements or upgrades as
To the best of her knowledge, Councilmember McGehee stated
that there was no maintenance allotted in 2013 or 2014, or any plans submitted
to the City Council to-date for maintenance of existing parks or improvements
of those existing parks going forward (e.g. new buildings to be constructed due
to failure to maintain current facilities or no plan submitted for staffing or
maintenance of those existing structures).
Mr. Brokke advised that staff had provided an estimate of
what they projected those costs to be for future budgets, but concurred that
there were no dollars in the current budget at this point. Mr. Brokke
clarified that the state of disrepair of many of the buildings was not all due
to lack of maintenance, but due to the age of the buildings, many built in the
1960’s or 1970’s.
In using the age of her personal residence as an example of
ongoing maintenance required, Councilmember McGehee indicated that those
structures slotted for replacement were not being used for any purpose; and the
alternative was available to demolish them and wait to build new buildings in
the future, but not all at one time.
Mr. Brokke noted that this was the City Council’s choice to
make and thereby direct staff accordingly.
At the request of Mayor Roe on whether the buildings were
being used of not, Mr. Brokke responded that most were warming houses at
skating rinks, and some were being taken out of service due to their conditions
and safety concerns. During 2008, 2009 and 2010 as the Park Master Plan was
being updated, Mr. Brokke noted that community discussions included varying
uses of those facilities in the future, with the intent to set up the park
system moving into the next 20-40 years as the community had previously done in
the 1960’s for its current park system.
Councilmember Pust sought clarification of an earlier
statement by Mr. Brokke regarding maintaining the new buildings, recognizing
that those built in the 1960’s had served their life expectancy and needed
replacement, but that no money had been provided in the current budget for
maintenance of buildings.
Mr. Brokke advised that the intent was to budget that
maintenance as part of the 2014 budget process as any facilities came on line.
Councilmember Pust further clarified that staff intended in
2013, to request additional monies starting in 2014 dedicated to Park and
Recreation Department maintenance of buildings to be constructed now.
Mr. Brokke concurred, with the caveat that construction was
begun and completed in 2013.
Councilmember Pust noted that this would be a line item in
the 2014 budget for maintenance, another ongoing increase in public taxes.
With concurrence by Mr. Brokke, Mayor Roe noted that
day-to-day maintenance and operations would be minimal in the first few years,
with the 20-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) updated every other year and
anticipating set-aside beginning in 2014 as a down payment on eventual needs
20-30 years down the road.
Councilmember McGehee questioned HVAC services in buildings
intended for replacement; status of running water or bathroom facilities; and
average use of those facilities.
Mr. Brokke responded that the buildings were heated, but not
cooled; most had bathroom facilities with the exception of two (2); rinks were
still flooded annually; and average use varied by season depending on their
location, with some housing recreation programs as applicable.
At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Brokke advised
that the current intent was that new buildings would be furnished if intended
for use as community gathering places, with their exact design and furnishings
yet to be determined as work continued with the community and specific
Councilmember McGehee opined that furnishings would create
the need for a substantial upgrade for maintenance, as well as needing more
staff on site.
Mr. Brokke clarified that it was not intended to staff them
on a regular basis, unless a recreation program was housed in those facilities,
with supervisors then on site.
At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Brokke
clarified that it was not intended that the facilities all remain open and
available to the public unless pre-arranged, or requested by the neighborhood
for use or for rentals; and would be operated similar to the Nature Center.
Councilmember Johnson noted that the intended replacement
and/or repurposing of warming houses was to facilitate their use as more than
just a warming house. Councilmember Johnson asked Mr. Brokke for his opinion
on what value there would be to the community in drawing others to the parks
and these facilities, both to the broader community as well as hubs used by a
broader scope of the community.
Mr. Brokke, from his perspective, opined that during the
Master Plan updating process, it had been the intent to respond to community
requests to provide gathering places. Mr. Brokke noted that those parks where
facilities were proposed were already heavily used, and he saw that continuing
or being further enhanced as a result of the buildings.
At the request of Councilmember Johnson, Mr. Brokke
confirmed that the proposed facilities were thoroughly vetted out by during the
Master Planning process by the community and its citizens since 2009 through a
variety of communication efforts, as well as the 28-member citizen advisory
team guiding the Master Plan update. During the 1.5 year process begun before
Master Plan adoption by the City Council in November of 2010, Mr. Brokke
advised that ongoing references had been made to the anticipated future use by
the community of those buildings, parks and their respective improvements.
Councilmember Johnson concurred and opined that as the
facilities were improved and their scopes broadened, the intended purpose to
expand their uses and opportunities for the community would be achieved.
Johnson moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11013
(Attachment A) entitled, “Resolution Providing for the Competitive Negotiated
Sale of $17 Million General Obligation Bonds, Series 2012A;” to finance the completion
of a new fire station and continue funding the Park Renewal Program.
Mayor Roe suggested that it would be appropriate at this
time for any individual Councilmember to offer amendments by motion at their
Councilmember Pust opined that tonight’s discussion
had already been made several times. As a councilmember elected to make
decisions for the entire community, including financial decisions in general,
Councilmember Pust noted that she was charged with making those ongoing
financial decisions of how to use citizen tax dollars and how much to set the
levies to ensure core services were accomplished for those citizens.
Councilmember Pust noted that the community trusted those five (5) elected
people to tinker with that annually, as part of the day-to-day work of running
Separate from that, Councilmember Pust indicated there was
another category of spending money: the debt service work done, and generally
speaking, the City Council went to the voters to seek their opinion for
long-term investments, such as over a period of twenty (20) years to seek
direction beyond the five (5) elected officials. Councilmember Pust noted that
this was typical for the City as well as the State for major capital expenditures
to go to referendum and ask the community their preference on long-term
Councilmember Pust noted that, in this case, the City chose
not to do so; and even though the court stated that that option was fine to do,
the questioned remained as to whether it was the right thing to do or not.
Councilmember Pust noted that she had voted against this the first time; and
while this was for capital work, not general tinkering, it still represented
big dollar amounts and the voters should have been asked. However,
Councilmember Pust noted that she was not among the Council majority on that
vote, and had lost that argument. Now today, Councilmember Pust noted that a
lot of things had happened, and the timeframe had been held up, and that the
proposed action was not simply to make up that time, but to accelerate the whole
thing. Councilmember Pust opined that for those asking her to support this
proposal as it was a capital expense, she noted that that was not what she had
heard from bond counsel earlier tonight.
Based on Finance Director Miller’s previous discussions with
the City Council and staff recommendations to split the bond issue into smaller
chunks to ensure that the bonds were bank qualified, Councilmember Pust noted
that while it made sense to the City Council majority and was an important
issue, Mr. Miller’s e-mail dated today and previously referenced indicated that
this hadn’t worked out and was no longer a good deal; and staff now recommended
that the remaining bond issue phases be done all at once.
In her review of the information provided, and from her
perception, Councilmember Pust opined that the real reason this was being
pushed now was due to the upcoming November election, and with two (2)
incumbents not running and risking the two (2) new Councilmembers being unknown
quantities, they were being asked to make the decision tonight.
While anticipating that the Council majority would proceed
with the bond sale, Councilmember Pust stated that she continued to have
concerns with the process itself. Recognizing that the Park Master Plan was a
great process allowing for significant public input, Councilmember Pust opined
that it still was not a substitute for all citizens exercising their individual
votes. Based on the dollar amounts at stake, 1/3 of Roseville’s population
being senior citizens, and the percentage of Roseville families receiving free
or reduced lunches in the School system, Councilmember Pust advised that she
could not in good conscience support the motion. In addition, as it related to
the question of democracy, Councilmember Pust opined that five (5) elected
people should not make the decision for those portions of Roseville’s
population previously referenced for a twenty (20) year period.
Recognizing that he appeared to be the unpopular individual
in the house tonight, Councilmember Johnson stated that was part of
serving as an elected official; and expressed his appreciation for those who
respectfully provided their testimony to the City Council. Noting that it was
difficult to be in disagreement with some giving public testimony,
Councilmember Johnson assured them that they had been heard, and he agreed to
respectfully disagree with those speakers.
Councilmember Johnson stated that it was his belief that the
bulk of what was now required, the reason the fire stations and parks systems
were in such disrepair, and the need to now fully fund capital improvements to
correct that infrastructure, was due to the neglect of past City Councils in
deferring those expenditures and needed maintenance. Councilmember Johnson
noted that the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Task Force, upon which both he
and Mayor Roe had participated, had identified the need for many dollars to
move the City’s CIP program forward and address the $100 million deficit
required to simply maintain the City’s infrastructure as “average.” While
these actions will make the City better, Councilmember Johnson reiterated that
the current needs were directly related to the flat out neglect in the past.
Councilmember Johnson referenced the abhorrent condition of the existing fire
stations, opining that City staff deserved a state-of-the-art fire station; and
the Parks and Recreation Department staff and citizens and families of
Roseville deserved a comparable park system that parents and their grandparents
had grown up with. While other City Fathers may have chosen not to maintain
those facilities, Councilmember Johnson opined that it was his duty to do so,
and to ensure that the City’s fire and police departments and the OVAL facility
have a roof and maintenance sufficient to maintain existing facilities that the
City has taken a stake in.
Councilmember Johnson stated that, if the taxpayers chose to
pursue a referendum for a community center that was fine as it represented
something new. However, Councilmember Johnson opined that the City had a stake
in everything proposed in this funding, and he believed that his feet were
firmly planted in the City and he would vote to support the motion.
Councilmember Willmus stated that, years ago, as a
junior member of the City’s Parks and Recreation Commission, the Commission met
jointly with the City Council advising them that they were not adequately
funding the City’s existing facilities; and suggested that the City either
invest in those assets or liquidate some of them. Councilmember Willmus noted
that the decision had been made by those City Councils not to liquid assets,
but to retain them. When talking about fiscal responsibility, Councilmember
Willmus opined that it was not fiscally responsible to let capital assets rot
and deteriorate over the years.
While this is a huge chunk of money, Councilmember Willmus
opined that this City Council and its taxpayers were faced with the situation
due to the deferral of previous City Councils to future budget cycles or
deferral of other capital improvements. Councilmember Willmus stated that it
is a fact that the infrastructure and facilities identified are in disrepair,
and this City Council, or a majority of them, have stepped up and said they
were going to reinvest in the community and bring it back to the position in
which it should be. Councilmember Willmus noted that this brings the community
to tonight’s proposed action; and contrary to Councilmember Pust’s opinion that
the Parks Master Plan process was not representative of the entire community he
believed that it was incredibly inclusive and well-done. While having been a
resident of Roseville his entire life, Councilmember Willmus opined that he had
never seen a process to parallel it; and had no reservations about voting in
support of the motion.
For the record, Councilmember Johnson clarified that
Councilmember Pust had abstained from the original bond sale vote, and had not
voted against it
Councilmember stated that she seconded everything
said by Councilmember Pust. Councilmember McGehee advised that she had
originally run for this job believing in civic engagement; and under the belief
that the City Council should improve the revenue stream for the community.
Councilmember McGehee expressed her extreme disappointment that, so far during
her tenure on the City Council, and from her perspective, the record for civic
engagement and lack of additional things done to further revenue on the bottom
had further jeopardized future revenue streams.
Councilmember McGehee noted that she had consistently voted
against the bond issues; and agreed with comments about the fire station’s
amenities beyond a necessary, functional facility, including space to house
SWAT equipment. Councilmember McGehee suggested that SWAT members from the
five (5) communities should share in that extra cost rather than asking
Roseville residents to carry the full load. Councilmember McGehee opined that,
according to her research with a third party, the department had more equipment
than needed, and whether those things were needed during this implementation
phase are unknown since the community was not asked. When taxpayers were
seeing consistent pay increases, Councilmember McGehee opined that the
community supported a world class park system, even though the community
already had the best system in the metropolitan area already. While not
proposing to sell it off, Councilmember McGehee opined that, based on the
City’s current population demographics this was not the time to seek additional
improvements for existing parks or to acquire additional land.
Councilmember McGehee stated that, based on results of the
survey paid for with $21,000 in taxpayer monies and its results, and her
travels around the metropolitan area, the Roseville park system was spoken of
highly as they currently exist.
Councilmember McGehee opined that everyone was in the midst
of figuring out the new normal; and her discussions with taxpayers included
those on fixed incomes, those out of work, and those moving out of their
long-term Roseville housing for various economic reasons. Councilmember
McGehee opined that now is not the time for this approach; and without
including a conservation component, the City had already started to improve its
water infrastructure by increasing the base rate by 63%, as well as improving
the enterprise funds for other utilities (e.g. sewer, storm water) and improved
Referencing the Cobalt Survey on what Roseville citizens
valued, Councilmember McGehee noted that they valued fire and police protection
services, and water/sewer services, and they liked the parks in Roseville.
However, Councilmember McGehee opined that it was necessary to have priorities,
and that the taxpayers should be allowed – through a referendum – to determine
their priorities as a majority. Councilmember McGehee stated that while she
loved the City’s parks, she also loved having water and sewer service better;
and this was a reality that Roseville needed to address. Councilmember McGehee
opined that building a community center for everyone to use made more sense
than building, maintaining and attempting to staff facilities in pocket
neighborhoods; however, she noted that this would have most certainly required
On the topic of a referendum, Councilmember McGehee noted
that she had looked at the original proposal for the Parks Master Plan
completed prior to 2010, and it specifically spoke of a referendum, with
memoranda from Mr. Brokke outline a schedule and deadlines to get things on the
ballot for a referendum. While educating the public appeared to be the
original intent, Councilmember McGehee opined that out of nowhere, the idea to
not educate or involve the public appeared and this was rammed down everyone’s
throats; and she thought it was wrong. Over her 1.5 year tenure on the City
Council, Councilmember McGehee opined that nothing had been done to increase
the revenue stream; and as pointed out by Councilmember Pust with 42-45% of
students receiving free or reduced cost lunches, how were those families
supposed to support all of the amenities the City Council majority thought were
needed or wanted while not increasing that revenue stream. Councilmember
McGehee opined that this didn’t make sense to her; and questioned if the City
was really committed to moving forward and maintaining parks in the future the
way they should be, by mowing the grass, keeping ball fields maintained, and
staying quiet without a major expansion program at this time.
With the upcoming election, and the court not actually
hearing any argument to base their opinion on, Councilmember McGehee noted the
court’s suggestion to simply throw the bums out, noting that this was the
current City Council, which may not be bad advice with new people running for
the City Council. Councilmember McGehee opined that this was a huge thing, and
the options were to authorize a referendum right now or simply wait until a new
City Council was elected and have a referendum on this entire idea, rather than
saddling a new City Council with that the responsibility for that debt.
Mayor Roe stated that, as he originally said
last October, generally speaking a referendum made sense when spending
significant capital money in the community.
However, Mayor Roe clarified that the action that addressed
infrastructure funding and increased utility rates was for the purpose of
eliminating that problem going forward and not just to reduce the deficit from
$66 million to $44 million over a twenty (20)-year period. Mayor Roe noted
that that particular action was voted on without public referendum. Mayor Roe noted
that during that same timeframe, the proposed bond issue would be paid off,
actually with a projected term of fifteen (15) years, and that same $40 million
annually in future Roseville budgets would be sought from Roseville taxpayers
without a referendum, adding up to a total of $600 million. While having a
policy in place to prevent the City Council from spending significant monies
without a referendum was a good policy to have, Mayor Roe noted that given the
backlog of things not sufficiently maintained, as pointed out in 2006 by staff
and representing a $15 million deficit at that time, had remained deferred.
Mayor Roe questioned if the City Council could continue to not get those things
done and leave it for the next City Council, as had been done in the past.
While this City Council could make that choice as well, Mayor Roe noted that
the majority had chosen not to do so, and while it was painful in the
short-term, in the long-term it would leave the City better off in addressing
those issues and other replacement needed could be taken care of adequately.
Mayor Roe noted that, in order to implement the CIP funding,
significant cuts had been made to the operating fund on a day-to-day basis to
address that deficit over that twenty (20) year program; and opined that this
fell in that same category. Mayor Roe opined that the City Council had a
choice of going projects at a $2 million basis annually, or to do so on a
faster track and fund it through bonding at current low interest rates and
lower construction costs; to get the projects off the books and moving forward,
similar to the process of home owners for home improvements through use of
financing over time and accepting a major impact during the initial short
Mayor Roe admitted that this was not, nor had it been an
easy decision to make, and recognized that the numbers were big; however,
ultimately when looking back twenty (20) years from now, he thought they would
prove to be the right decision and put the City in a stronger place, without
spikes in annual levies. Mayor Roe advised that this was his rationale to
support the motion, as it had been in 2011, and continued to be.
In terms of property tax funding and those on fixed incomes,
Mayor Roe noted that everyone on the City Council was well aware of that.
Mayor Roe opined that the current system of financing government was a terrible
system, but financing government with property taxes was unfortunately the only
one available. Mayor Roe opined that the issue to be addressed was the
unfairness of property tax funding, dependent on state legislative action; but
reiterated that this was the only funding mechanism available.
Mayor Roe advised that, when he ran for election, he had not
intended to be a property tax raiser; however, he could not be irresponsible
with taxpayer funds, and was charged with leaving the community better off than
he found it, as it behooved each Councilmember to do.
At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mayor Roe and
Finance Director Miller reviewed the CIP to get the unfunded utility balances
zeroed out over that twenty (20) year period; and the phase in of those base
rates over a two year period, initiated in 2012, and the second phase scheduled
for 2013. Mayor Roe noted that the CIP was to be reviewed annually and funds
adjusted as needed.
While agreeing to this discussion in principle,
Councilmember McGehee advised that there were other ways to phase improvements
and not implement them as outlined here; and based on her discussion with the
Park consultant, she understood that the proposed implementation plan was not
that generally supported by the entire group.
Willmus, seconded by Johnson, moved to call the question.
Ayes: Johnson; Willmus; Pust; and Roe.
Roll Call (Original Motion)
Ayes: Johnson; Willmus and Roe.
Nays: McGehee and Pust.
c. Award Contract for Classification and
Mayor Roe recognized Human Resources Manager Eldona Bacon
who summarized the request as detailed in the RCA dated September 24, 2012.
Discussion included potential changes in criteria that could
affect the proposed cost of the study that was based on a future City Council
determination to use Springsted’s proprietary system not currently recommended
by staff; 2013 budget impacts from this study, with any proposed
reclassification and/or compensation data relevant upon receipt rather than
deferring it until it was outdated.
Pust moved, Johnson seconded authorizing City staff to hire
Springsted to immediately begin a classification and compensation study as
proposed in their bid document in an amount not to exceed $16,500, as
previously negotiated by staff.
d. Approve Wal-Mart Security Plan
Mayor Roe recognized Police Chief Rick Mathwig who
summarized the requested action and draft security agreement for Wal-Mart, as
detailed in the RCA dated September 24, 2012. Chief Mathwig noted that the
original Wal-Mart Preliminary Plat approval by the City Council included a
condition that a security plan be drawn up by Wal-Mart and approved by the
Roseville Police Department. Chief Mathwig thanked Ms. Sue Steinwall, Wal-Mart
attorney, for her cooperative efforts and productive consultation with his
department in developing the agreement.
Chief Mathwig advised that the proposed agreement
(Attachment A) has the approval of his department as well as that of Wal-Mart’s
management staff, including the law enforcement cost-sharing. In reviewing
that particular provision, Chief Mathwig advised that, even though personnel
costs represented 87% of his department’s annual budget, the Post Board
required certain stipulations; and outlined the options available for funding
increased public safety costs in redevelopment or commercial areas, as reviewed
by the City Attorney, and detailed on page 2 of the staff report.
Councilmember McGehee questioned what other options were
discussed with the City Attorney beyond this form of cost-sharing; and
questioned why a cost-share to fund another officer could not be achieved.
Chief Mathwig advised that, while this may be possible, he
had not gotten a sense from the City Council that they would authorize half of
that cost; nor had he ever heard Wal-Mart representatives agree to such an
option from the outset.
Councilmember McGehee opined that this appeared to be a
lovely agreement for Wal-Mart’s benefit, but a poor one for the citizens of
Roseville, given minimum hours Wal-Mart would pay for 3.5 hours per day, when
the store would operate 24/7. Councilmember McGehee provided her research of
other Wal-Mart stores in the immediate metropolitan area, their hours of
operation and questioned why the City of Roseville should be required to offer
24-hour service and settle for only reimbursement of 3.5 hours per day.
Councilmember McGehee opined that this was a poor contract, with stipulations
for computer equipment at a not-to-exceed amount, and only requiring Wal-Mart’s
best efforts to preserve digital imagery.
Chief Mathwig responded that the security plan remained
fluid as operations changed at Wal-Mart and would be based on their future
theft and loss history; and was currently based on three (3), 8-hour days per
week as observed and provided by the Roseville Police Department for prime
shoplifting calls currently received by the Department.
Councilmember McGehee opined that she didn’t see the
fluidity, even with the early termination clause.
Chief Mathwig responded that, since this was the first
installment in the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area requiring accelerated public
safety needs, it may be determined that the actual need may be small or
adequate; and thus an early-out was included for Wal-Mart if the City Council
authorized the Police Department to hire a commercial patrol officer in the
future, who would spend their time among all commercial areas in Roseville
(e.g. Target, Wal-Mart, Har Mar Mall, and Rosedale) and provide increased
public safety services in those areas. Chief Mathwig advised that the
not-to-exceed levels had been provided to Wal-Mart by Roseville City
Information Technology (IT) staff based on their expertise, and noted that
Wal-Mart had chosen to actually further inflate them to make for a better fit.
Chief Mathwig clarified that, as outlined in the RCA, he and the City Attorney
had only discussed those three (3) available options, and the recommendation
was based on those other two (2) options were not on the playing field at this
Councilmember Pust questioned why Wal-Mart had more security
at their University store than they thought was needed in Roseville.
Chief Mathwig suggested that this was based on the
University store being an inner-city store and dealing with more police matters
than in a first-ring suburb such as Roseville. Chief Mathwig advised that he
had spoken directly with a detective and officers about organized crime
potential, creating current policing levels at that store. Chief Mathwig noted
that the Roseville store was only the second Wal-Mart store to have off-duty
officers working on site, with St. Paul being the other location. Chief
Mathwig advised that the West St. Paul Wal-Mart had private, security guards,
manned by off-duty officers.
Councilmember Pust questioned if this was an add on to their
own security before we asked them to do anything, or if they used this
agreement to reduce their own previous plan.
Chief Mathwig advised that this would serve in addition to
their original plan and there was no back out.
Councilmember Johnson, from his recollection, noted that the
City Council had put their faith in Chief Mathwig to go forth and negotiate an
agreement; and expressed his personal confidence in working this out for the
benefit of the community above and beyond his normal call of duty.
Johnson moved, Willmus seconded, authorizing the City
Manager, Mayor and Chief of Police to enter into an agreement entitled
(Security Plan for the Roseville Wal-Mart Store (Attachment A) between the City
of Roseville and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. as presented.
Councilmember McGehee clarified that her comments were meant
in no way to be a reflection on Chief Mathwig.
Mayor Roe duly noted Councilmember McGehee’s clarification.
Mayor Roe opined that it made sense to have the engagement
between the Chief and Wal-Mart; and was pleased to see a provision for
quarterly meetings and an ability to renegotiate as applicable.
Councilmember McGehee spoke in opposition to the motion for
the reasons previous stated.
Councilmember Pust expressed her hope that Wal-Mart would
consider the City of Roseville’s well-trained staff for off-duty security.
At the request of Councilmember Johnson, Chief Mathwig
reviewed the practice for off-duty Roseville officers choosing to serve as
private security when off-duty as private contractors; with nothing funded
through the City as overtime, but still authorized to wear their uniforms and
be armed. At the request of Councilmember Johnson, Chief Mathwig noted the
differences in the practice of the City of Bloomington in their practice to
fund their off-duty officers working private security at overtime rates through
the City’s system, with an added finance charge above that overtime rate.
Chief Mathwig noted that this practice is considered too costly for most
cities, and was not recommending it. Chief Mathwig advised that many off-duty
Roseville police officers currently are working in similar capacities at other
retailers throughout the community; and it provided additional public safety
for the entire community.
e. Community Development Department Request to
Declare the Vacant Accessory Structure located at 2609 Snelling Curve as a
hazardous Building and to Order its Repair or Removal
Permit Coordinator Don Munson summarized the request to
declare the vacant accessory structure at 2609 Snelling Curve as a hazardous
building and order its repair, removal or razing; as detailed in the RCA dated
September 24, 2012. Mr. Munson reviewed previous consideration of this issue
by the City Council this year, and request of the owner to defer the original abatement
request as they were in the process of selling the property. With nothing
further having happened, staff was now recommending this action to ensure
follow-through by the property owner, Olta Holdings, LLC.
Mr. Munson noted that the property owner was not present.
At the request of Councilmember Pust, Mr. Munson advised
that this process and State Statute had also been used on the former Cattle
Company Restaurant property.
Councilmember Pust sought clarification on how this building
was deemed a hazard to health, if it was currently boarded up.
Mr. Munson advised that the statute stated conditions that
constitute public safety and/or public health concerns; and noted that his
inspection earlier today indicated the boards had been removed allowing access
by children or others to this unsafe structure.
McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11014
entitled, “Declaring the Accessory Structure located at 2609 Snelling Curve a
Hazardous Building and Requiring its Repair or Razing.”
f. Community Development Department Request to
Perform an Abatement for Unresolved Violations of City Code at 1991 Eldridge
As previously noted, this item was removed by staff as it
had been resolved.
13. Business Items – Presentations / Discussions
14. City Manager Future Agenda Review
City Manager Malinen reviewed upcoming agenda items.
Discussion included potential cancellation of the November
26, 2012, meeting due to the holidays if no quorum was available, or agenda
items could be rescheduled to another meeting; potential of November 5, 2012,
as a meeting date if needed and recognition of November 12, 2012 as the
Veteran’s Day holiday; City Manager Malinen advising that he would be
unavailable for the October 8, 2012, meeting; and potential rescheduling of the
HRA joint meeting with the City Council to facilitate City Manager Malinen’s
attendance for budget discussions on October 15, 2012.
Councilmember Johnson requested that budget discussions be
scheduled earlier on the agenda rather than later, as previously requested.
Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings
Willmus moved, Johnson seconded, adjournment of the meeting
at approximately 9:28 pm.