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

City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

February 25, 2013


State of the City Address by Mayor Roe at 5:00 pm


  1. Roll Call

Mayor Roe called to order the Roseville City Council regular meeting at approximately 5:30 pm and welcomed everyone. Voting and Seating Order: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.  City Attorney Mark Gaughan was also present.


Closed Session at 5:30 pm

Mayor Roe noted that State Statutes Section 13d.05 permits city council meetings to be closed in order to discuss certain matters relating to prospective land purchases or sales, and that the City was considering a potential acquisition of land located at 934 Woodhill Drive in Roseville, Minnesota.


Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, to move to Closed Executive Session.


                        Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

Nays: None.


Mayor Roe convened the city council in closed executive session at approximately 5:35 pm for the purpose of discussing a potential acquisition of land located at 934 Woodhill Drive in Roseville, Minnesota. In addition to the city council members, others present included City Manager Malinen, Parks & Recreation Director Lonnie Brokke, Community Development Director Pat Trudgeon, and City Attorney Mark Gaughan.


Mayor Roe adjourned the closed executive session at approximately 6:05 pm.


Mayor Roe reconvened the city council in open session at approximately 6:13 pm.


2.         Approve Agenda

Councilmember Willmus requested removal of Item 13.e entitled, “Continue Discussion on Resident Survey.  At the request of Councilmember McGehee questioning this request, Councilmember Willmus stated that he felt this item should be put out for rebid prior to moving forward if it came up for discussion by the City Council at a later date.  Councilmember Willmus also opined that, as far as the budget process, even moving forward, he was unsure of a resident survey being required at this point for that process.


Mayor Roe noted that, if the item was removed from the agenda completely, there would be no action taken; and suggested that Councilmember Willmus may prefer to leave the item on tonight’s agenda, and consider subsequent action to reject all bids received to-date.


Councilmember Willmus concurred with Mayor Roe’s suggestion; and withdrew his request for removal of this item.


Councilmember Willmus requested removal of Consent Item 7.h, entitled, “Adopt Pilot Program for Appliance Recycling Printing Services RFP” for discussion and/or questions.


Councilmember McGehee requested removal of Consent Item 7.f entitled, “Accept Meadowlark Grant” for discussion and/or questions.


At the request of staff, Consent Item 7.e entitled, “Approve the Negotiated Settlement of Park Dedication Fees for the Sienna Green II Development;” was deferred to a later date.


McGehee moved, Etten seconded, approval of the agenda as amended.


                                                Roll Call

               Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

               Nays: None.


3.         Public Comment

Mayor Roe called for public comment by members of the audience on any non-agenda items. 


a.            Gary Grefenberg, 91 Mid Oaks Lane

Mr. Grefenberg brought to the City Council’s attention an issue and recent discussions between himself and City Manager Malinen outlining their differences of opinion regarding the role of advisory commission chairpersons.  Mr. Grefenberg advised that another issue he wished to bring forward concerned what he felt to be a significant fault in the City’s website redesign consultant selection process.  Mr. Grefenberg noted that his comments should be considered as those of a Roseville resident as well as in his role as Chair of the City Council’s Human Rights Commission (HRC).  Mr. Grefenberg clarified that he had not yet reviewed or commented on these remarks with other members of the HRC.


Mr. Grefenberg provided, as a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part hereof, a trail of correspondence related to his recent action as Chair of the HRC.  As part of that correspondence, Mr. Grefenberg discussed recent problems with a lack of audio during two HRC meetings and his problems resolving this problem with City Manager Malinen.  Mr. Grefenberg explained that Mr. Malinen had provided a response to those particular concerns just a few hours ago, and Mr. Grefenberg opined that City Manager Malinen provided an honest explanation of those problems and thought those audio issues could be resolved for future meetings.  However, Mr. Grefenberg expressed what he considered to be a reasonable disagreement between himself and Mr. Malinen on the role of an advisory commission chair and whether or not a chairperson could approach staff with requests for solving similar problems or seek an explanation of why a problem continues to occur.


Mr. Grefenberg, in referencing City Manager Malinen’s response of late this afternoon, and included in the bench handout, expressed his hope that the City Council’s subcommittee on commissions would review this issue as well.  While recognizing City Manager Malinen’s concern about proper authority, Mr. Grefenberg stated that he didn’t want to go through City Manager Malinen each and every time he needed to discuss a problem with staff.  Mr. Grefenberg stated that he was concerned with protecting the autonomy of advisory commissions who should only be responsible to themselves and the City Council.  In order for any commission to operate effectively, Mr. Grefenberg noted the need for active support of staff and confidence of the City Council and thought this issue should be vetted publically with final resolution by the City Council, since he and City Manager Malinen were in disagreement. 


Specifically, in noting the overall management of recording of meetings by Communications Specialist Tim Pratt as a City employee, Mr. Grefenberg advised that he was not asking Mr. Pratt to report directly to him, but seeking his response in resolving why the first 40 minutes of an HRC meeting was not available to the public.


Regarding another issue, while the selection process for a website redesign consultant was proceeding, Mr. Grefenberg noted a request in November 2012 for two (2) members of the Civic Engagement Task Force to be included in that group, with he and Megan Dushin volunteering.  Mr. Grefenberg advised that this allowed him an inside look at the selection process and stated that he had been pleased that the selection committee seemed to be in unanimous agreement with the final recommendations.  However, when he received the advance final report, Mr. Grefenberg noted that it contradicted the committee’s recommendation and referenced that similar concern was also expressed by City employee Jill Anfang, Assistant Parks and Recreation Director, who pointed out that same problem.  Mr. Grefenberg advised that several weeks ago he had alerted City Manager Malinen to this problem, asking that the committee be called back to discuss and resolve this apparent discrepancy, specifically that those recommendations be reviewed by the committee prior to their presentation to the City Council.  In his past experience on various task forces and groups, Mr. Grefenberg stated that such an opportunity had always been available for a final review prior to submission.  Mr. Grefenberg asked that the City Council provide that opportunity as well for this website redesign consultant recommendation.


Mr. Grefenberg expressed his concern with the closed nature of some discussions and that with no records were kept or data available on the selection, even though a ballot was taken for each vote.  Those ballots were apparently deleted by Mr. Pratt.  While recognizing Mr. Pratt’s considerable knowledge on this issue, Mr. Grefenberg spoke to the considerable knowledge of residents and users of the website as well and the value of their perspective in the decision-making process.  Mr. Grefenberg expressed his disappointment that those recommendations were not currently covered in the report prepared by Mr. Pratt for the February 11, 2013 City Council meeting.


Mr. Grefenberg opined that the best way to resolve issues is to talk about them and to honestly expose them to transparency.


Regarding the action item removed from tonight’s Consent Agenda, acceptance of the Meadowlark Grant, Mr. Grefenberg thanked those who prepared the actual grant application.  Mr. Grefenberg reviewed the process in pursuing this grant application in December of 2012, timing issues due to the holidays, and the discovery of and drafting of the actual application, facilitated by HRC member Megan Dushin.  Mr. Grefenberg admitted that it may have been his mistake in signing his name to the grant application; however, he defended that action based on his receipt of the application on Saturday, December 29, and the need to meet the year-end application deadline.  While in hindsight, Mr. Grefenberg admitted his regret in not seeking the signature of City Manager Malinen on the grant application, Mr. Grefenberg noted his repeated attempts prior to that deadline to provide information to Ms. Caroline Curti, City Administration staff liaison of the application process, in addition to seeking the advice of Finance Director Chris Miller on the application process and deadline issues.


Mr. Grefenberg noted ongoing and persistent issues had been evident between the HRC, City Manager, and City Council going back a number of years, and expressed his interest in developing a more cooperative relationship.  While opining that staff was overburdened with their various responsibilities, Mr. Grefenberg opined that this should serve to allow advisory commissions to take some initiatives upon themselves.  However, in order to do so, Mr. Grefenberg opined that staff then needed to communicate applicable protocol prior to a deadline.  Mr. Grefenberg accepted the blame and his mistake in not pursuing a response from Ms. Curti, but reiterated the issues around the crowded holiday season and his impetus to get the application submitted prior to the deadline.  Mr. Grefenberg assured the City Council that his intent was in no way meant as a rogue advisory commission chair, but simply signing the application in his role as the HRC Chairperson.  In hindsight, Mr. Grefenberg realized that this was a mistake; however, he noted the only options were not to submit the application or not following procedure.


Based on his experience as an Executive Secretary to a State Commission, Mr. Grefenberg noted that he has had experience in this area before; and given his retirement, he has more time to pursue such areas.  Mr. Grefenberg asked that, while he at times may be picky or use the wrong words, the City Council subcommittee take a look into the autonomy issue and role of staff to advisory commissions.  Mr. Grefenberg recognized that he served at the pleasure of the City Council and that he could be asked to resign at any time.


Based on his most recent response, Mr. Grefenberg expressed his eagerness to work with City Manager Malinen.


Mayor Roe thanked Mr. Grefenberg for his comments, and for recognizing his shortcomings in the situation, noting the courage it took for Mr. Grefenberg to admit those. 


Mayor Roe asked that the website committee meet again prior to their recommendation coming before the City Council.


City Manager Malinen advised that such a meeting was planned.


Councilmember Willmus asked that Mr. Grefenberg make sure all Councilmembers received a copy of the e-mail correspondence referenced by him regarding the website issues.


Mayor Roe concurred, asking that Mr. Grefenberg copy all Councilmembers, and that the committee meet one more time before their recommendation came before the City Council.  A copy of that e-mail correspondence is attached hereto and made a part hereof.


Mayor Roe again thanked Mr. Grefenberg for his comments, and assured him that the advisory commission subcommittee would take his comments under advisement.


4.         Council Communications, Reports and Announcements

          Mayor Roe announced various upcoming community meetings to receive public input on the Parks and Recreation Renewal Program: Villa Park discussion on Tuesday, February 26, at 6:30 p.m. in the Public Works Maintenance Building; proposed B-2 trail discussion on Thursday, February 28, at 5:00 p.m. in the Oak Room at City Hall; discussion on the Harriet Alexander Nature Center (HANC) on Saturday, March 2 at 8:00 a.m. at HANC, 2520 Dale Street; and discussion on the Autumn Grove Park on Monday, March 4, at 7:00 p.m., at the Roseville Skating Center.  Mayor Roe encouraged the public to contact Mr. Brokke or Ms. Anfang at the Parks and Recreation Department for additional information on any of those meetings.


Councilmember Etten also noted that additional information was available on the City’s website, under the Parks and Recreation Renewal Program section.


On behalf of the City Council and community, Mayor Roe offered congratulations to the Roseville Raiders Girls Gymnastics Team, Section 2AState Champions; and expressed interest in public recognition of the Team at a future City Council meeting.  Mayor Roe noted that a lot of their training occurred at facilities jointly managed and maintained by the City and School District.


Mayor Roe announced an opportunity to raise funds for and support local military troops and their families, as part of the North Suburban Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Program, by purchase of $5.00 burgers/chips on the second Monday of each month at the White Bear Lake V.F.W. on Highways 96 and 61 in White Bear Lake.  Mayor Roe noted that the Roseville City Council would be serving on November 11, 2013, appropriately Veteran’ Day.


Mayor Roe reminded residents of vacancies on various City Council Advisory Commissions (Ethics Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Planning Commission), and encouraged citizens interested in applying to seek applications on the City’s website or through calling City Hall or via the City’s website; with the application deadline at 4:30 p.m. on February 28, 2013.  Mayor Roe noted that, while a number of applications had already been received, the City Council was always interested in hearing from all citizens interested in serving in Roseville.  Mayor Roe anticipated interviews would be held in early March, with appointment later that month, for service to begin April 1, 2013.


Councilmember McGehee provided an update on the Hotel Task Force she chairs and tentative plans of action drawn up at their last meeting that she would be transmitting to the City Council for their information.  Councilmember McGehee advised that the task force had been expanded to include trafficking of young people since this was a county and state-wide, issue.  Councilmember McGehee noted that they had contacted County Attorney John Choi’s office and area school districts. She mentioned to groups specifically Safe Harbor and “Minnesota Girls are NOT for Sale.”  Councilmember McGehee noted her personal observation during her review that young men were being overlooked and would include this issue as she continued to work behind the scenes at a county level and beyond to make a positive contribution to the community, county and state-wide efforts.


5.         Recognitions, Donations, Communications


a.            Proclaim March Women’s History Month

Mayor Roe read a proclamation declaring March 2013 as Women’s History Month in Roseville, honoring the contributions of women throughout history.


Etten moved, McGehee seconded proclamation of March 2013 as Women’s History Month.

                                    Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

Nays: None.


6.            Approve Minutes


a.            Approve Minutes of February 11, 2013 Meeting

McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, approval of the minutes of the February 11, 2013, meeting as presented.


                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


  1. Approve Consent Agenda

There were no additional changes to the Consent Agenda than those previously noted.  At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Bill Malinen briefly reviewed those items being considered under the Consent Agenda.


a.            Approve Payments

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

ACH Payments


69066 – 69198





                                                            Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


Councilmember Laliberte expressed appreciation to staff for the new formatting in organizing each report by fund as previously requested. 

Mayor Roe concurred with that recommendation, by City Manager Malinen.  Mayor Roe echoed appreciation for the report reformatting, and if possible, sought that it include funds and accounts if at all possible.


b.            Approve Business & Other Licenses & Permits

                                                             Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of business license applications for the period of one (1) year, for the following applicants:



Type of License

Germar Duo at Massage Envy Roseville

2480 Fairview Avenue, Suite 120

Massage Therapist

Elizabeth Boles at Massage Xcape

1767 North Lexington Avenue

Massage Therapist


                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


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

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







Rosenberg Firefighting

Fire truck retrofit


Parks & Recreation

Kromer Co. LLC

Multi-purpose field tractor


Parks & Recreation

MTI Distributing

Toro Groundmaster mower



Councilmember Laliberte asked that the category for approval of general purchased include a column defining whether the item was a budgeted or capital item, which was duly noted by City Manager Malinen.


                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


d.            Receive Summary Report of Police Forfeiture Funds

Willmus moved, Etten seconded, receipt of an annual summary (Attachment A) of information related to 2012 forfeiture account activities.


                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


Mayor Roe expressed his appreciation to staff for providing this previously-requested report as well.


At the request of Councilmember McGehee for staff including reference to state statute related to forfeiture funds, City Manager Malinen referred her to the additional report included by staff that linked to applicable state statute.


e.            Approve the Negotiated Settlement of Park Dedication Fees for the Sienna Green II Development

As previously noted, this item was deferred to a later date.


g.            Authorize Acceptance of Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Environmental Assistance Grant for Villa Park Wetland Restoration Project

                   Willmus moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11053  entitled, “Resolution Accepting Environmental Assistance Grant for the Villa Park Wetland Restoration Project; and designating the Public Works Director as the authorized representative for the project; with an award of $100,000.00 in grant funds.

                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


i.             Authorize Recycling Printing Services Request for Proposal

                   Willmus moved, Etten seconded, authorization for the City to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for printing services as outlined in Attachment A.


                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


8.         Consider Items Removed from Consent


f.             Accept Meadowlark Grant

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen briefly summarized this request as detailed in the RCA dated February 25, 2013.  Mr. Malinen advised that the HRC had been made aware of this grant to provide community forums to address interpersonal violence in a community, with the grant awarded as noted, with minimal reporting requirements for staff and recommended approval.


Councilmember McGehee, in referencing Mr. Grefenberg’s earlier comments, spoke in support of autonomy for advisory commissions, citing this as an excellent example of the HRC being made aware of the grant for a good purpose specifically related to their work; and further supported their initiative of the application and subsequent award.  Councilmember McGehee expressed her personal congratulations to the HRC for their work on this.


McGehee moved, Etten seconded, acceptance of a $2,500 grant from Meadowlark Institute (Attachment A) for the City’s Human Rights Commission for the purpose of hosting two (2) community dialogues to address community violence and how the community can work together to prevent violence.


                        Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


h.            Adopt Pilot Program for Appliance Recycling Printing Services Request for Proposal (RFP)

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen briefly summarized this request as detailed in the RCA dated February 25, 2013.  City Manager Malinen advised that staff saw this as an alternate for appliance recycling in Roseville.


Mayor Roe clarified, and City Manager Malinen confirmed, that this would be for curbside recycling of those appliances.


Councilmember Willmus asked that his questions be addressed to Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon, with Mayor Roe recognizing Mr. Trudgeon.


At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Trudgeon noted that Roseville had approximately 15,000 households, and from a code enforcement perspective, staff dealt with approximately one dozen outside storage of appliance complaints annually out of 400-500 code enforcement complaints.


Councilmember Willmus referenced comments in the staff report that alluded that a result of this pilot program could be a future implementation of a full-fledged program and additional $10 fee annually per household. 

City Manager Malinen clarified that this was not the intent, and those comments were specifically related to how one community was currently addressing their problem, and was not intended as a staff recommendation for the City of Roseville to follow.


Councilmember Willmus noted that, if such a program were implemented, it would cost $150,000 annually for residents.


Mayor Roe noted, if such a program were ever implemented, the $10 per household fee was charged by another community, but a per resident fee in Roseville could be different.


Councilmember Willmus opined that there was currently ample opportunity for appliance recycling through trash haulers, who were legally prohibited from depositing those appliances at landfills and requiring that they be recycled.  Councilmember Willmus further opined that this seemed to be a redundant service and appeared to be sufficiently handled in the private sector.


Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, not to authorize acceptance of Ramsey County Public Entity Innovation Grant funds, nor approval of any agreement between Ramsey County and the City of Roseville (Attachment A) for an appliance recycling pilot program; nor approval of any proposed contract with Better Futures Enterprise (Attachment B) for those services.


Councilmember McGehee concurred with Councilmember Willmus that this program was not necessary; and as a Ramsey County taxpayer, opined that it was a waste of county tax monies as well.  Councilmember McGehee further opined that there was no need for staff to expend forty (40) hours of their time or equipment use; and if items were stored outside in people’s yards, they would eventually be caught by code enforcement inspections, and eventually need to be disposed of properly or the City would do so for them.  However, Councilmember McGehee opined that she didn’t see that the problem rose to such a level that a grant was necessary, nor any expenditure of staff time.


Mayor Roe and Councilmember Laliberte concurred with the makers of the motion.

                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


9.            General Ordinances for Adoption


10.         Presentations


a.            Northwest Youth & Family Services Annual Update of Activities

Mayor Roe introduced Jerry Hromatka, President and CEO of Northwest Youth & Family Services (NYFS) who provided a summary of programs offered by NYFS to area residents of partnering municipalities.  Mr. Hromatka’s presentation included a history of how the NYFS was initially developed thirty-six (36) years ago as a cooperative venture, focusing on three (3) program areas: mental health, youth development, and day treatment with services available at clinic, homes or schools.  Mr. Hromatka noted the importance of working with youth by looking at their family life and in the context of the community and available resources. 


Mr. Hromatka reviewed several programs of focus by NYFS, including Diversion programs, for youth with low offences and efforts to help them say “no” to bad choices, and “yes” to and connect them with something positive.  Mr. Hromatka noted that involved education of the entire family, screening for problems, and involving them in interactive, intergenerational community service efforts allowing them to develop a long-term outlook for their future lives.  Mr. Hromatka noted that this involved addressing opportunity gaps as a youth community-based organization and defining the role of NYFS in facilitating that positive behavior, such as experience with schools and business that developed interest in future goals, careers and training opportunities through exposure to those positives.


Mr. Hromatka also focused on the Senior Chore Program, with forty-five (45) youth currently matched with approximately one hundred-fifty (150) seniors across the service area, and coaching efforts among those seniors and their youth beyond lawn mowing, but allowing youth to become young entrepreneurs paid directly, while allowing seniors to remain independent in their homes longer.  Mr. Hromatka noted the relationships and connections developed between the generations, creating another adult outside the family structure showing interest in those youth.


Mr. Hromatka addressed NYFS’s day treatment program for those experiencing mental health issues, and collaboration of therapeutic programs offered by NYFS and schools for education and intervention, allowing youth to work with their peers creating a powerful relationship.


Mr. Hromatka revised what Roseville’s support of the NYFS bought, providing services to all residents of partner municipalities, with nine (9) of the ten (10) original municipalities still part of the NYFS.  Mr. Hromatka reviewed some of the benefits for residents and member communities to provide an effective work force and citizenship beyond just voting, but encouraging good neighbors, friends, and classmates, basically emotional intelligence. Mr. Hromatka opined that this eventually reduced public costs by providing a social return on their investment through this early intervention.  Mr. Hromatka noted that member community partnerships also allowed the NYFS to leverage other resources through matching grant funds by using some of the funds received from municipalities.


Mr. Hromatka provided a service summary for 2011 and 2012 broken down by program: counseling, diversion, youth employment, and the senior chore program.


At the previous request of City Manager Malinen, Mr. Hromatka highlighted the NYFS’s recent merger with the White Bear Lake Area Community Counseling Center, and how it was proving to be a good move, not because bigger is better, but through additional resources and spreading overhead costs, allowing expansion of services through five main school districts and fifteen partner municipalities.  Given the expanded area, Mr. Hromatka advised that an upcoming name change was being discussed to represent a more metro-area agency.


Mr. Hromatka noted that corporate partnerships were a great advantage for the NYFS program, and provided several examples of commitments of some of those partnerships and impacts to youth in providing information and career information to assist with that long-term outlook and potential opportunities.


Mr. Hromatka noted that social media was providing additional contribution opportunities.


Mr. Hromatka addressed the continual changes made and ever-evolving considerations made to ensure that NYFS remained vital and current and to ensure financial sustainability of the NYFS, with 55% of its funding needs coming from contracts, 15% from municipalities, and the remainder through grants and other sources. 


At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Hromatka addressed her concerns for students expelled from school and banned from school property, and how they may find themselves in negative situations and on the streets. Mr. Hromatka noted numerous programs available and specific to those youth.


Councilmember Etten, as an employee at Irondale School, personally thanked Mr. Hromatka and the NYFS Board for their services provided to students and families, opining that their work definitely made a difference.


Councilmember Laliberte thanked Mr. Hromatka for his presentation and asked that a copy be provided to them.


Mayor Roe thanked Mr. Hromatka for his presentation, with additional information available at


12.         Business Items (Action Items)


a.            Accept NYFS Agreement

McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, approval of an agreement between the City of Roseville and Northwest Youth and Family Services (Attachment A).


Councilmember Laliberte, as a point of information, noted that Item d.2 of the agreement referred to Exhibit A, which she did not find in the packet.


City Manager Malinen advised that this was a description of programs, and duly noted that it would be attached and provided to Councilmembers for their reference.

                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


Mayor Roe noted that, and expressed his privilege in doing so, he served as the City of Roseville’s representative on the NYFS Board as a municipal partner.



10.        Presentations (Continued)


b.            Flammable Liquid Response & Mitigation Enhancement

Fire Chief Tim O’Neill introduced Battalion Chief of Operations David Brosnahan for a review of a proposed change in the department’s vehicle replacement schedule, as detailed in the RCA dated February 25, 2013.


Chief Brosnahan provided an overview of the Department’s flammable liquid response and mitigation; awareness of a known eighty-three (83) million gallons of stored flammable liquids in storage facilities; identification of pipelines operating throughout the city; and awareness of in excess of 300 fuel transport vehicles transiting the city on a daily basis, represented by businesses to be applicable to a slow day.


Chief Brosnahan reviewed the City’s existing fleet and equipment, specifically Engine 21, and that of a 1990 basic utility vehicle, both past their projected replacement dates.  Chief Brosnahan reviewed proposed replacement vehicles and equipment that would address the need for a practical form response, via a foam trailer and utility vehicle, along with towing capacity and room for five personnel, compartments for interior equipment storage, and serving as a back-up medical response vehicle as needed.


As detailed in the presentation and staff report, Chief Brosnahan advised that in the overall fleet evaluation, staff was recommending replacement of this equipment as outlined, and creating significant savings in the Department’s projected capital and operational budgets.  Chief Brosnahan noted discussion to-date with LubeTech, Magellan, and NuStar in pursuit of a public/private partnership in this equipment purchase for those businesses primarily using the equipment, with LubeTech offering $5,000.00 toward the purchase, and staff hoping for similar interest of the other two firms.  Chief Brosnahan advised that this would also address space savings in the new fire station, and hopefully serve to encourage further public/private partnerships in the community.


Councilmember McGehee expressed her appreciation to staff for their presentation and the work they’d done; as well as appreciation to LubeTech for  their signing on and staff’s work with them.  Councilmember McGehee noted that, similar to the NYFS presentation, this set a nice tenor in recognizing that everyone was part of the community and services were provided collaboratively.


At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Chief Brosnahan anticipated more money for resale of the existing equipment through auction versus sale, speculating that $8,000 - $10,000 for the pick-up and $40,000 - $60,000 for the engine if marketed to a rural department based on its large water tank capacity, may be realized.


Councilmember Etten expressed his appreciation to staff and the Department for thinking outside the box, while addressing a better and less expensive safety solution.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Fire Chief O’Neill addressed impacts to the existing CIP and previous discussions for an $800,000 allowance for replacement of engine 21, with no real financial difference other than maintenance savings from a faster schedule of replacement and reduced annual maintenance to keep existing equipment up and running.  Chief O’Neill noted that this proposal was part of that approved CIP plan previously approved by the City Council.


Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, authorizing the Fire Department to purchase a new utility truck and foam trailer as part of its apparatus replacement schedule, in an amount not to exceed $108,490.49, with bids as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated February 25, 2013; and further authorized the Department to sell the existing twenty-three (23) year old engine and 1990 pick-up truck.

                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


Mayor Roe expressed appreciation for the well-done presentation and thoughtfulness by staff in achieving this cost savings.


11.      Public Hearings


a.    Discuss Lake Owasso Water Ski Course and Jump

Mayor Roe recognized Police Lt. Lorne Rosand, who provided a brief summary of the purpose of this public hearing to hear public comment.  Lt. Rosand advised that mailed notice of this hearing was provided to all residents on Lake Owasso; and staff contact with the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Department Water Patrol Commander had indicated that they had not yet ever experienced any complaints or issues with the water ski course or ski jump on Lake Owasso.


While representatives of the Lake Owasso Safe Boating Association were present in the audience, when recognized by Mayor Roe, they offered no additional comment beyond that of staff.


Mayor Roe opened and closed the Public Hearing at approximately 8:45 p.m., with no one appearing for or against.


12.      Business Items (Action Items)


b.    Approve Lake Owasso Water Ski Course and Jump

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the Lake Owasso Safe Boating Association’s request for a permit from the Ramsey County Sheriff for a water ski course and jump on Lake Owasso for the 2013 season.


                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


11.         Public Hearings (Continued)


b.        Construction of Public Improvements at 3040 Hamline Avenue

Councilmember Willmus recused himself during discussion of this item, noting that it pertained to a property owned by his father, and he wanted to avoid any perception of a conflict of interest.


City Engineer Debra Bloom summarized the request by petition for public improvements, as detailed in the RCA dated February 25, 2013.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Ms. Bloom identified and clarified specific utilities proposed on the site plan.


Ms. Bloom reviewed the project estimate, with 100% of the costs borne by the property owner/petitioner; and upon advice of the City Attorney, Ms. Bloom advised that the City would request a waiver from the petitioner to any future rights of appeal.  Ms. Bloom advised there would be no assessment hearing, but that only the actual cost of construction would be assessed versus the engineer’s estimate; and proposals would be solicited versus public bid over the next few months.


Ms. Bloom reviewed the projected work schedule, with final plans completed in March, proposals solicited in April and May, and a construction start proposed in June with completion in July of 2013.  Ms. Bloom advised that staff would return to the City Council with an agreement with the property owner, and seeking contract award.  Ms. Bloom anticipated that the entire project would be completed within a 2-3 week timeframe.


At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Ms. Bloom addressed City Code regarding protection of mature trees; however, she noted that a twenty-foot wide swath would be required for a utility trench, with utilities 10-15 feet deep.


At the request of Mayor Roe, City Attorney Gaughan advised that the proposed process was appropriate from a Chapter 429 assessment process, based on a request for proposals applicable due to a total project cost less than $100,000.00; allowing the City to seek a minimum of two (2) quotes versus a more formal bid process, in accordance with state statute. 


Mayor Roe opened and closed the Public Hearing at approximately 8:43 p.m., with no one appearing for or against.


McGehee  moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11054 entitled, “Resolution Ordering the Improvement and Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Utility Construction at 3040 Hamline Avenue.”


                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


            Councilmember Willmus returned to dais at this time.


12.         Business Items (Action Items)


c.        Receive Performance Measures Report

For clarification purposes, Mayor Roe clarified that the purpose of this item is for information and discussion purpose only, and that no formal action was anticipated at tonight’s meeting.


Upon recognition by Mayor Roe, Finance Director Chris Miller provided an overview of the 2012 Performance Measurement Results (Attachment A), and as detailed in the RCA dated February 25, 2013.


Councilmember McGehee opined that a great number of the items shown didn’t show much movement and didn’t seem to anticipate any movement.  She  questioned if the possible establishment of a time period during which if there was no perceptible or significant change in a particular benchmark, that such a benchmark could be eliminated or placed on hiatus status.

Finance Director Miller reviewed how benchmarks were originally derived at, and noted even with no obvious change it didn’t negate their importance, and served to analyze trends of all indices over a sustained period of time.  Mr. Miller noted that Department Heads continued to periodically refine those measurements and their sustainability with or without additional staff resources.  Mr. Miller noted that the significance of measurements and measurement of trends was very important from a staff perspective.


On page 9 of Attachment A, Councilmember McGehee noted the nominal citizen complaints for every 1,000 service calls, and impacts of neighborhoods active in neighborhood watch programs, and asked if Department Heads had recently reviewed those numbers based on current data.


Mr. Miller advised that current data, since last year’s analysis of trends and staff review of measures in place, had not been updated; noting that this information was ‘hot off the press” to the City Council and would be reviewed by Department Heads over the next few weeks for further analysis.  As always, Mr. Miller offered future comment of individual departments to address specific areas at the request of the City Council.


Councilmember Laliberte questioned the rationale for comparison of Roseville with the City of Woodbury as a benchmark, since they were three times the size of Roseville’s population.


City Manager Malinen responded that it was unfortunate that performance measurement was virtually non-existent to-date in Minnesota cities, with the City of Woodbury available as a comparable metropolitan community, with only ten (10) measures applicable, but still allowing a comparison to another like entity and identifying differences and opportunities to communicate differences.


Councilmember Etten suggested that some areas, such as police or fire department response times, was probably tracked by every municipality, and that a regional benchmark with neighboring cities (e.g. Shoreview, New Brighton) may be available and allow for comparables with a broader range of cities that were similar in demographics to that of Roseville.  In a similar effort for comparables, Councilmember Etten suggested that park and recreation departments measured their percentage of fees to expenditures in addressing public policy discussions.  Councilmember Etten suggested that those other adjacent communities be solicited for data to provide a better understanding of comparables.


Councilmember Willmus noted that the Woodbury/Roseville comparison came up every year; and he concurred with Councilmember Etten that some measures were already in place with other communities that should be explored and would allow for a better understanding.


On page 4 of 18, Councilmember Laliberte questioned the apparent increase in turnover rates for employees, and asked for additional background information from staff to determine if this was representative of employees reaching retirement age or if something else was causing that increase.  Councilmember Laliberte clarified that she was commenting only on Roseville employee numbers and not Woodbury comparables.


Mayor Roe concurred that it made sense to have information on non-retirement turnover, based on job satisfaction versus life changes.


On page 4, Councilmember McGehee noted that only 10.5% of employee reviews were completed within thirty (30) days, opining that if this was the case it needed improvement.


City Manager Malinen advised that this was what it indicated, and concurred that it had room for improvement.


Mayor Roe noted that the target levels were not listed for every category, and as a management effort by the organization it was good to set a goal, and measure itself against that goal.  Mayor Roe suggested that a standard may not be a higher percentage, simply an acknowledgement; and opined that based on his experience, this wasn’t much different from other employee trends.


As referenced in previous staff reports, Mayor Roe noted current efforts by the State Auditor and other state-wide groups seeking local government standards.  Mayor Roe suggested staff review the last reports of the auditor’s working group as referenced in the League of MN Cities publication, and see if any ideas were available; and further suggested that many more cities would be obtaining data based on those state-wide initiatives.


For the benefit of the public and newly-elected Councilmembers Laliberte and Etten, Mayor Roe recognized the work of City Manager Malinen and Department Heads over the last few years to link performance measures to community aspirations outlined earlier this evening, and adopted by the City Council mid-year 2012; and what was trying to be achieved for the benefit of Roseville residents.  To the extent those aspirations could be linked to performance measurements, Mayor Roe opined that from his perspective, it provided helpful information to him as a mayor and the City Council, as well as from a staff perspective.  Mayor Roe spoke in support of continuing to allow the process to evolve moving forward.


Councilmember Laliberte opined that she had found the information valuable and useful, providing the ability to gather more information from other communities.


Mayor Roe suggested that Councilmember Laliberte, as the City Council’s liaison for the Ramsey County League of Local Governments, suggest this as a topic of discussion and comparison of performance measurements with other entities.


Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 8:05 p.m. to transition into work session format; reconvening at approximately 8:15 p.m.


13.         Business Items – Presentations/Discussions


a.    Review the City’s Comprehensive Performance Management Program

At the request of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Chris Miller provided an overview of the City’s Comprehensive Performance Management Program (CPMP) as detailed in the RCA and Attachment A, dated February 25, 2013.  Mr. Miller noted the commitments and obligations entered into by the City Council last year, its importance to the operation, and how various initiatives undertaken over the past several years were designed to improve the effectiveness and sustainability of daily operations while meeting long-term goals.


Mr. Miller’s presentation included adoption of the program by City Council resolution in May of 2012; the purpose of the program to provide consistency in delivery of programs/services and recognize the importance of having a comprehensive approach to improving results through systematic processes and continuous evaluation.   Mr. Miller noted that this would allow the City Council to commit to effective decision-making by aligning resources with established priorities and desired outcomes for a planned approach over a two-year cycle.


Mr. Miller emphasized that past efforts had been found historically to repeatedly fail to produce a sustainable programs and services, such as could be found in the current infrastructure needs and inadequate funding for capital replacements, causing repeated cuts in annual operating budgets.  Mr. Miller recognized that this current process had caused for tough decisions of previous City Council, but was valid for continued sustainability for the City.  Mr. Miller reviewed some of the negatives of past decision-making over the last ten years on operating budgets and prior to budget priorities and rankings, with across-the-board cuts department-wide as the norm.  While possibly easier than other approaches, Mr. Miller questioned if that was what the City wanted to achieve rather than a more transparent process for the public to better understand.  Mr. Miller noted that by integrating city initiatives it would ensure that each measure taken by the City complemented the next in a critical, sequential order.


Mr. Miller reviewed ideas gleaned from leading industry organizations who understood successful government, providing for a subset of typical behaviors and ideas that were developed into seven (7) principles of performance for the City of Roseville.  While many of these things had been done for many years, Mr. Miller credited City Manager Malinen with getting the groundwork in place in 2006-2007 and to develop the culture at a staff level and their commitment to demonstrate those attributes to the community.


Mr. Miller reviewed the specifics of the Roseville Performance Measurement Program as follows:

·         Community Vision based on the Imagine Roseville 2025 community visioning process, periodically revisited;

·         Community and Park surveys, hopefully to be continued in the future as important and effective tools along with other outreach methods and tools;

·         City Council Goal-setting annually or as indicated, and based on additional feedback to individual Councilmembers from citizens

·         Strategic Planning, most recently done in 2012, and producing action plans to achieve outlined initiatives

·         Financial Policies and Community/City Council commitment to those policies (e.g. balanced budgets; appropriate cash reserves for contingencies and asset replacement) and made part of budget calendar process

·         Capital Improvement Program

·         Budget and program priorities

·         Biennial budgeting process for more optimal decision-making

·         Performance Measurement – trending

·         Quarterly financial review by staff to City Council and an annual external auditor review


Mr. Miller addressed how individual components related to each other on a broader sense and drove City Council goals through those biennial budget, strategic plan, and financial policy relationships.  As an example, Mr. Miller noted how the strategic plan drove the CIP, developed budgets and program priorities, with an annual performance measurement and financial review to determine trends and revise the budget as indicated, and further refine the process.


From that conceptual level, Mr. Miller moved to the realities for Roseville over the last two-year cycle, with 2012 being year two of that cycle.  Mr. Miller reviewed components at this time beginning with review of the 2011 CPMP, an annual financial review by the external auditors as well as quarterly financial updates to the City Council by staff, the mid-term review and correction and priorities shifted in 2012 as well as addressing new costs needing adjustment and subsequent revised 2013 budget as approved by the City Council in December of 2012. 


With the City Council’s formal adoption in May of 2012 of the CPMP, Mr. Miller advised that Department Head based their strategic plans on those City Council goals and vision, presented to the City Council in August of 2012, identifying action plans to achieve those goals; now projected in 2013 as part of their department program components.



Since the strategic plan was done, Mr. Miller suggested that in real life, the next step was how to build on it, which would drive an update of the CIP, set budget and program priorities by the City Council in March or April of 2013, and affirm and refine financial policies.  Once that was done, Mr. Miller advised that development of the next biennial budget could occur.  Mr. Miller noted that tremendous staff resources went into that process, but that when City Manager Malinen presented his City Manager-recommended biennial budget in June or July of 2013, it represented the 100 to 1000 hours collectively put in by staff.  Mr. Miller noted that the commitment of time needed by the City Council would also be time-consuming and continue into the second year of the cycle. 


City Manager Malinen noted that staff continued to look forward beyond a 2014/2015 biennial budget to future biennial budgets in order to provide that long-term, sustainable decision-making.


Councilmember McGehee opined that, since the Strategic Plan was already done by the previous Council, the new City Council members should be  allowed to weigh in.  .


City Manager Malinen advised that discussions were underway to determine how best to accommodate council membership changes due to elections.


Councilmember McGehee opined that given changing economics over the course of a year, the Strategic Plan needed revisiting anyway.


City Manager Malinen advised that a mid-biennial reviewed allowed such an opportunity to determine what if any budget adjustments were needed, similar to the process followed in 2012 for the current year 2013.


Mayor Roe reminded Councilmembers that the City Council’s Strategic Plan looked out into the next two (2) bienniums, and noted that the years being considered for development of a strategic plan were with 2013 as year 1, or technically speaking in 2012, with the current City Council doing goal setting and strategic plans for 2014 – 2017.  From the point of view of a strategic plan that was not meant to be written in stone, Mayor Roe opined that it made sense for new City Councilmembers to reaffirm prior Council actions early in that first year, as well as revisiting them when looking at the next biennium.  Mayor Roe suggested the addition of an additional “bubble” on the CPMP Chart to accomplish that.


Mr. Miller confirmed staff’s receptiveness to the process evolving, noting that it was envisioned in the budget calendar and due to come before the City Council in March.


Councilmember Willmus opined that terminology was vital for transparency and public understanding if the biennial budget was to continue; suggesting that the annual budget for year one be called that, with year two called a “forecast,” to better establish what was actually being done.


Mayor Roe suggested a “Biennial Budget Plan,” with annual budget adoption as statutorily required; however, he opined that “forecast” sounded too unofficial.


Councilmember Willmus opined that, for the public’s benefit, which distinction needed to be drawn and the obligation for adoption of an annual budget needed to remain clear to the public.


Mayor Roe noted the need for the City Council to make a commitment to a two-year plan, not just call year two a “forecast,” since previous efforts at an annual budget were found to be unsustainable, as noted by Mr. Miller.


Mayor Roe cautioned that the City Council not get stuck on terminology, opining that a budget was essentially a plan.


City Manager Malinen advised that, subsequent to the last City Council meeting, Department Heads had discussed that, and their conclusion was not to change the years, but to develop a particular mechanism in this year recognizing elections and how to accommodate that input, with a final recommendation pending from staff’s perspective, but at least on the radar, in an effort to provide a window of opportunity within the budget cycle to allow newly-elected Councilmembers to amend the strategic plan and drive a budget.


Councilmember Laliberte concurred that the City Council was getting stuck on terminology; however, she opined that words do matter and this needed to be fleshed out and a decision made and documented, whether an annual or biennial budget was followed, and regardless of election cycles, bur providing a mechanism for that oddity.


Mayor Roe suggested further contemplation on an appropriate term; however, he spoke in opposition to the term “forecast.”


Mr. Miller reiterated his cautions and previous rationale provided by staff last year in the failure of an annual budget and decisions made today for only one year without further advanced planning, allowing for a different decision-making culture over time.  Mr. Miller opined that the Council would begin to act differently in its decision-making as it moved from short-term to long-term planning, and further opined that the decision-making by the body would eventually evolve into a different level of commitment in that long-term planning versus the failures of an annual budget process.


Councilmember Etten suggested, from the strategic plan perspective, a longer term view for four (4) years seemed possible in achieving goals.


Mayor Roe cautioned that the strategic plan is not written in stone, and many of the goals may never find their way into a budget; and suggested care be taking in not over-generalizing the strategic plan as a long-term budget, while still allowing that long-term look.


Councilmember Laliberte opined that she thought everyone would agree to look forward, with improvements put in place beyond an annual budget process; and using that foundation, an annual budget may not fail as it had in the past.


Mayor Roe reiterated statutory requirements for the City Council to adopt an annual budget.


Mr. Miller noted previous budget priorities and rankings over the last few years, and reviewed how individual and composite scores were developed and reviewed, allowing for multiple iterations and a very transparent process and budget allocation based on those priorities.


Noting the lack of a citizen composite rank on materials provided, Councilmember Laliberte questioned staff’s rationale for not including it.


Mr. Miller advised that the materials presented tonight were just a small portion of the entire CPMP and were only representative, with the citizen composite rank provided with the next view.


Councilmember McGehee opined that she thought a lot of this was stupid last year and still did since it was straightforward to rank basic services (e.g. emergency medical, police, fire, and debt service) those did  not requiring any rankings.


Mr. Miller noted that Councilmember McGehee’s comments served to underscore the ranking process, with previous budget cutting processes done across the board, or with staff coming before the City Council with programs and/or services offered that they thought may not be basic, or core services from their perspective, but those actually being of vital importance to the City Council or residents of the community.  Mr. Miller noted that the results of that process often were not indicative of community sentiment.


At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Miller advised that the list would be forthcoming.


Councilmember Willmus stated that this highlighted a good point, using ranking ice rinks as an example, and how personnel staffing those rinks may have other job responsibilities, and the assignment of full-time equivalent (FTE) hours could create some problems with the singular ranking.


Mayor Roe opined that the process was more refined than whether to keep or eliminate certain programs or services, and allocations were adjusted accordingly for other programs and services.  Mayor Roe noted that the whole point of the ranking exercise was to provide staff with information to return to the City Council with FTE and function information in order that the City Council didn’t need to get into the “whom” of effects, but to provide general direction to staff.


Mr. Miller noted financial policies that will come before the City Council for review: operating budget; capital improvement program; debt policy; revenue diversification; capital replacement policy; and operating fund reserve policy.  Mr. Miller noted that the information provided through that review process would address the bigger picture with smaller specifics then addressed by Department Heads for recommendation.


Mayor Roe noted review would also include the total aggregate non-tax supported budget (e.g. enterprise funds) and aggregate tax supported funds; along with a fund by fund review, since statutorily that was how the City Council approved an annual budget at the fund level; and then the ranking of programs for the City Council and public to see the actual numbers to track.


At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Miller advised that staff would break down how funds ranked with programs.


Mayor Roe noted that a majority of the fund structures would be found in the General Fund, using the Parks and Recreation Program Fund and Maintenance Fund as an example, along with Vehicle Replacement on the capital side.


Councilmember McGehee addressed some of her difficulties in the budget process, specific to personnel as the City’s greatest cost, when personnel were used in a variety of capacities and enterprise funds, some funds included those expenses and some did not.  Councilmember McGehee asked that staff clarify what was being supported in terms of personnel in enterprise funds, and what expenditures or revenues were or were not actually directed to them (e.g. water for the golf course, Public Works staff doing projects for other departments but not showing as a Public Works Department expenditure); and how to identify those internal trading of personnel and equipment in order to make the process more clear.


Mr. Miller volunteered to attempt that level of information.


Mayor Roe suggested the City Council’s Budget Subcommittee could work with staff on that measure.


Mayor Roe noted that the past process and information didn’t have consistent or complete descriptions for everything on the list; and suggested staff review existing descriptions as well to ensure they were clear and avoided redundancy as part of the continuing improvement process, and prior to coming back to the City Council for consideration.


City Manager Malinen duly noted this request.


Mayor Roe further requested that City Manager Malinen and Finance Director Miller confirm that everyone throughout the organization support and buy-in to the seven (7) principles of the CPMP from Department Heads on down the chain of command to ensure it was a worthwhile pursuit and help the organization to work better.


City Manager Malinen confirmed, and Finance Director Miller concurred, that he was confident in that support, based on Department Head meeting discussions and collectively recognizing the strength of looking forward long-term and the vetting process at the staff level; with most of the staff work being done at the end of a budget cycle, and allowing more stability for departments.  Mr. Malinen noted that over the years the pieces were evolving and had provided a learning curve with areas for improvement.  However, Mr. Malinen noted that as City Council decisions were moved forward to their next step, it provided for a certain stability and sequential decision-making process for all parties.


Mayor Roe asked that staff, in their program ranking, tie in new initiatives and areas of the strategic plan and how they compared to programs and prioritization.


In response to Councilmember Etten on how strategic plan goals and initiatives fit in, Mayor Roe noted the upcoming strategic plan and program outline followed by the prioritization exercise and how strategic plan items are affected by updated and evolving rankings and priorities.


Councilmember McGehee requested that the next version of the list provide different colors or some designation of related strategic initiatives if related or impacting programs.


Mr. Miller again displayed just such a strategic plan document and its formatting intended to be lifted and included with everything the City Council needed to know about for its next budget program ranking.  Mr. Miller noted that this was done at a staff level, and he expressed hope that it would be done at the City Council level, with the City Manager-recommended budget having that listing included, indicating that if the City Council wanted it to happen it needed to be ranked accordingly.


Mayor Roe thanked Mr. Miller for pointing that out; and suggested a homework assignment for individual Councilmembers prior to March 18 when the strategic plan would come back before them, would be to use those packet materials to determine which of their initiatives were included.


Mayor Roe asked staff to provide a program listing from the last time in conjunction with that; as well as enhancing the budget section or CPMP area of the City’s website for the public to access those documents as well.


b.    Consider Adopting a 2014/2015 Budget Calendar

Councilmember Laliberte requested that the proposed budget calendar include an affirmation by new Councilmembers of previously-adopted strategic plan goals.


City Manager Malinen opined that such a calendar item could be part of accommodating newly-elected officials in affirming the strategic plan.


Mr. Miller noted that review of the strategic plan and City Council goals was intended for the March 11, 2013 meeting; and Councilmember Laliberte requested that they be broken down into two (2) meetings, March 11 and March 18, 2013.


City Manager Malinen suggested that “strategic directives”  rather than “goals”  be added to the March 11 meeting and budget calendar.


McGehee moved, Willmus  seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11055; as amended to include 2012 strategic directives for affirmation by the City Council body at the March 11, 2013 meeting.


                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


c.    Snow and Ice Policy Level of Service Discussion

Public Works Director Duane Schwartz provided a summary presentation on snow and ice service levels to-date in this season, as detailed in the RCA dated February 25, 2013.  Mr. Schwartz reviewed various ice control materials, equipment, and new technologies over the last ten (10) years. 


Mr. Schwartz reviewed impacts of any potential increased level of service for snow and ice operations; including increased staff hours and materials for anti-icing applications, additional equipment to apply anti-icing material, significantly higher material use and cost, additional environmental impacts, and additional administrative and supervisory costs.  Due to environmental concerns, Mr. Schwartz noted that future restrictions of watershed districts would probably dictate the annual amount of materials available for use by jurisdictions.


Mr. Schwartz advised that the City’s snow and ice control budget has remained flat or diminished, with applicable adjustments for materials price increases, over the last ten (10) years.  If a “bare pavement” policy was implemented, representing a higher level of service, it would increase the budgetary needs substantially, estimated at approximately a 30%-35%  increase annually, or approximately $59-$55,000 annual budget implications, as well as potential impacts on other programs..  Mr. Schwartz noted that the average total cost over the last six (6) years for snow and ice removal is $170,000.


Councilmember McGehee noted specific areas of town adjacent to the Metropolitan Council’s stormwater system that may require more specialized treatment other than salt where runoff goes directly into a lake or wetland.


Mr. Schwartz advised that staff was open to City Council directive; however, impacts would be realized for additional equipment, purchase and application of multiple products, and additional storage of those materials.   Mr. Schwartz advised that the City currently uses different materials on different routes; however, non-salt-based materials were significantly higher in cost.


Councilmember McGehee observed that she had received more concerns from residents this winter on pathway safety versus streets.


Councilmember Laliberte referenced complaints on on roads and pathways.


Councilmember Willmus thanked Mr. Schwartz for the job done by crews; and overall felt they did a good job, and recognized that the December events were each challenging.  Councilmember Willmus advised that the feedback he’d received from residents was based on follow-up after the events and their inability to navigate major intersections due to traffic stacking; and noted this was his primary concern in seeking this discussion, from a public safety perspective.  In his discussion with Police Chief Mathwig, Councilmember Willmus noted that he was not concerned; and from a Fire Department perspective, their only concern was if they were unable to navigate routes that were plugged due to traffic stacking.  Councilmember Willmus opined that a city-wide dry pavement policy was not practical; however, he was seeking a practice where and when possible to shift focus to heavily traveled areas and key intersections to reduce impacts in those areas.


Mayor Roe clarified that this would impact only those roadways under the City’s jurisdiction, not those under other jurisdictions (e.g. Ramsey County and/or State of MN).

Mr. Schwartz advised that such a distinction and practice was possible; however, he noted that when such conditions occurred, it was hard to get back on track from a time perspective.  Mr. Schwartz admitted that in that event, there was no question that dangerous conditions were evident; and noted that the Police and Fire Departments and all staff were helping move people through intersections.  Mr. Schwartz noted that many areas of concern were on County roads; however, from an operational standpoint and at City Council direction, staff could focus on those identified intersections and roadways by changing their operational policy to step up resources as directed.


Mayor Roe noted that this would require apparatus being pulled off minor roads and shifted to those intersections.


Councilmember Willmus noted the shift in the last few years to reduce use of road salt due to increased environmental awareness; however, he noted the need to trade-off public safety concerns when major intersections needed that focus.


Mr. Schwartz noted that more extreme conditions were being found over the last few years, such as more winter rain events, creating additional challenges.


Councilmember Laliberte questioned what could be done about sidewalks, since trails and pathways were so important to residents.


Mr. Schwartz admitted that rain events were hard to address on pathways, as once plowed with snow piled on either side, the rain flows through the snow and collects on that plowed area, acting as a reservoir and making movement difficult.  Once the ice is there, Mr. Schwartz noted that it became difficult to address without creating significant chemical impacts for adjacent lawns.


Parks and Recreation Director Lonnie Brokke came forward and concurred with Mr. Schwartz; and too responsibility for pathway conditions, with a total of seventy (70) miles total, and forty (40) off-road miles.  Mr. Brokke reviewed the typical process for clearing pathways several hours after City/County street plows, followed by follow-up.  However, Mr. Brokke noted when the rain froze in place, it made it difficult for the equipment to make any difference, and often required warm weather for blade use.  Mr. Brokke sought patience from residents on popular trails as staff dealt with various snow/ice events and conditions, reiterating that warm weather helped them address the situation.  Mr. Brokke advised that they typically didn’t use sand or salt other than in identified areas (e.g. hills); and a sand/salt box was due to be replaced on one pick-up truck now with use of it in sporadic places, but not on all trails.


At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Brokke noted the different techniques used (brooming, blading, blowing, plowing) to address the trails. 


Councilmember McGehee referenced a crushed cinder material, not sand, she observed used at Presbyterian Homes this season that didn’t melt but provided good traction.


Mr. Brokke asked that residents contact City Hall with areas of particular concern so they can be addressed as soon as possible, in addition to the typical areas needing more attention.


Councilmember Willmus noted the County Road C-2 sidewalk as one particular area of concern.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Schwartz addressed applications used on sidewalks around City Hall would not be practical for other areas of the City due to staffing and budgetary impacts for material and staffing.


At the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Schwartz addressed various practicalities with pathways secondary to initial application, once melting and refreezing occurred and difficulties in addressing those areas until thawed and then application of those materials.


Mr. Brokke concurred, noting the difficulty of maneuvering machines once a thaw and refreeze occurred.


Further discussion included typical construction of pathways and whether that could be changed to address winter conditions; and current practice for widening of snow piles as time allows.


Councilmember Willmus asked that a trial run for focusing resources on intersections when these events occurred would be his suggestion without incurring further expense.


Mr. Schwartz noted that that particular December event used 20% of the City’s annual application of salt; and with subsequent events, approximately 100% of the seasonal allotment was used.


Councilmember Laliberte noted the need for residents to be educated and aware that it was against City ordinance to blow snow into the streets; and questioned if there was recourse to address those violations.


Mr. Schwartz noted that state law provided such recourse; however, he noted the need to actually observe them violating the law.


Councilmember McGehee suggested that such educational information be included when utility bills go monthly since a lot of people may not be aware of that ordinance.


Mayor Roe noted that aware or not, many using a plow service for their driveways may be reluctant to inform them or the ordinance.  Mayor Roe noted that there were practical enforcement limits, but supported ongoing educational efforts.


d.    Discuss Legislative Agenda with League of MN Cities and Metro Cities

City Manager Malinen provided a bench handout highlighting areas of importance to Roseville over the last few years and how those items compared to the policies of the League of Minnesota Cities and Metro Cities; and whether or not to incorporate them in legislative initiatives and lobbying efforts of those groups.


Discussion included specific areas (e.g. public data; local option sales tax; Housing Improvement Areas); Rep. Scalze bill currently pending; legal obligations from a recent example versus subsequent use of that information and ensuing frustrations; and whether staff should be formally directed by the City Council to lend support to those initiatives.


Councilmember Willmus expressed his disagreement with extending use of Housing Improvement Areas (HIA’s), opining that he had a problem with local governments bailing out private homeowner associations. 


Councilmember Laliberte noted that several cities involved in the RCLLG (Shoreview and Little Canada) were lobbying heavily to continue HIA.


Mayor Roe noted the need for clear definition in individual Councilmembers or staff speaking to the legislature or elsewhere to indicate that such a policy or initiative is supported by the City Council as a body.  Even when speaking as individuals, Mayor Roe cautioned that perceptions may not be clear that comments are those of an individual and not the full body. 


Councilmembers McGehee and Willmus requested additional time to review the information distributed by City Manager Malinen and that any action be deferred.


Mayor Roe asked that Councilmembers review the overall policies for Metro Cities and the LMC on their specific websites; with City Manager Malinen offering to provide that link to individual Councilmembers.


e.    Continue Discussion on Resident Survey

Mayor Roe reviewed the proposed action of the RCA dated February 25, 2013.


Councilmember Willmus expressed his original concerns in moving forward with a survey at this late date, questioning its value to the budget process.


Councilmember Willmus reviewed his personal contact with Ms. Diane Traxler of Decision Resources and her comments regarding the City’s bid process; with those comments having been submitted to City Manager Malinen for his response; and asked that he publically respond to them. Councilmember Willmus advised that it was his understanding from his conversation with Ms. Traxler that the RFP was not made available to their firm in the timeframe presented; and further that it had been suggested to her that the City had already selected a vendor.  Councilmember Willmus sought an explanation of those two comments.


City Manager Malinen responded that he did contact Ms. Traxler after the last City Council meeting as directed by the City Council as to why Decision Resources had not submitted a proposal. 


Relative to the RFP, Mr. Malinen advised that all applicable vendors were notified of the RFP; however, due to a typographical error, which was subsequently corrected, there was an apparent problem in all vendors’ ability to access the RFP online.  Upon correction, Mr. Malinen advised that five (5) vendors got the right link to find the RFP and were able to generate questions to staff; with receipt of three (3) bids. 


Regarding the communication by Councilmember Willmus with Ms. Traxler, Mr. Malinen advised that he was unable to agree with her perception of the bid process itself or his conveyance to her that any decision had been made.  Mr. Malinen advised that he did not convey such a comment and apologized if Ms. Traxler mistook any of their conversation to indicate such a situation, other than noting that the process remained closed until the City Council made some other decision.


Councilmember McGehee stated that she had a problem with the process, similar to what she expressed during the initial process with the fire station and problems with the City’s website design.  Councilmember McGehee opined that this was just another example of this type of RFP and distinct impressions that a particular vendor had been pre-selected causing concern for her.  Also, Councilmember McGehee opined that City Manager Malinen’s statement at the previous meeting that Decision Resources’ cost was 2.5 times higher than others was simply not accurate.  Councilmember McGehee advised that she spent considerable time randomly polling clients of Decision Resources in other cities, finding costs for those services ranging from $13,000 to $25,000, and while costs were based on particular formats used, the statement Mr. Malinen made related to cost was blatantly false.


Mayor Roe clarified, in City Manager Malinen’s defense, that the reference to the cost for Decision Resources was based on the last time it was reviewed, not this particular bid process.


City Manager Malinen, without getting into more minutia, advised that the cost for the Cobalt survey was $10-12,000, and while not randomly calling fourteen (14) different cities, the cost for the City of Shoreview’s survey was in the neighborhood of $20,000.


Mayor Roe noted that Decision Resources didn’t even bid this time, so their price was unknown and of no fruition to this discussion.


With previous comments heard during public comment earlier tonight, Councilmember Willmus expressed his concern in repeat concerns heard from vendors who were of the opinion that Roseville’s bidding process is skewed.


Upon the advice of City Attorney Gaughan as to form, McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, to reject all bids for conducting a community survey at this time.


Councilmember McGehee supplemented her motion  opining that no rebid for a community survey occur at this time. She stated she saw no value to do so this far into the budget process and expressed her disappointment that a survey was not done in a timely fashion.  Councilmember McGehee opined that the budget process move forward utilizing a previous survey and the Strategic Plan.


Councilmember Willmus concurred; opining that the survey data from the last Cobalt survey could continue to be used.  If the City continued to use this type of budget process, Councilmember Willmus opined that a survey component would be of value; however, he noted the vital need for an honest and transparent bid process for all vendors.


Councilmember Laliberte expressed her disappointment that a survey would not be available; however she concurred with the motion to reject bids and move forward.  Councilmember Laliberte asked that the future budget calendar have a built-in process allowing for a citizen survey.  Councilmember Laliberte advised that she would continue listening sessions with residents as she did during her campaign; and invited other City Councilmembers to join her at their discretion.


Mayor Roe noted that it was actually the fault of the City Council that the survey was not completed last fall, since the issue of survey questions came up and continued to be tabled and deferred to a date uncertain without further follow-up.


Further discussion included timing for a survey for results to be pertinent to the budget process.


City Manager Malinen, from timing perspective, advised that the survey was proposed no later than September to allow input from migrating snowbirds; with staff having brought it forward to the City Council in August of 2012.  Using a similar time frame, City Manager Malinen opined that it should work into the budget calendar to allow informative decision-making for strategic planning and goal setting.


Having been involved in surveys in the past, Councilmember Laliberte suggested involving input from the community in determining questions for a good and proper survey that would meet the needs of all parties; including the number of questions to include, and whether to accomplish it by mail or phone. If such a process was followed, Councilmember Laliberte opined that it could provide consistent annual results.


Councilmember McGehee concurred that the same questions should be used from year to year to provide a consistent comparison; noting her desire for a transparent process, and easy to use format; and a well-done survey.  However, Councilmember McGehee opined that an annual survey was not necessary.


                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

                        Nays: None.


Mayor Roe cautioned that Councilmembers be open to seeing both sides of this type of discussion, and recognizing that opinions varied until factually proven.  If accusations are made, Mayor Roe cautioned everyone that they be proven accurate; and that the ultimate focus be on what was trying to be accomplished.


In relaying comments heard from a vendor, Councilmember Willmus opined that such comments were equally valuable.


Mayor Roe noted that everyone was prone to misinterpret things in a different way.


16.         Adjourn

Willmus moved, Etten seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 10:06 pm.

                                  Roll Call

               Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Roe.

               Nays: None.