City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

March 24, 2014

 

1.       Roll Call

Mayor Roe called the meeting to order at approximately 6:00 p.m.  Voting and Seating Order: Willmus; Etten; McGehee; Laliberte; and Roe. City Manager Pat Trudgeon and City Attorney Charles Bartholdi were also present.

 

2.         Approve Agenda

McGehee requested removal of Consent Items 7.c, d, e and g, respectively entitled, "Approve General Purchases and Sale of Surplus Items in Excess of $5,000;" "Approve Amendments to the 2013 Budget;" "Approve Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Clean Water Fund grant Agreement No. SG2014-002 for the Sewer Lateral Grant Program;" and "Request by University of Northwestern for Approval of Field Lighting for Renovated Outdoor Athletic Facilities as a Conditional Use at 3003 Snelling Avenue."

 

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

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

              

3.       Public Comment

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

 

4.       Council Communications, Reports, Announcements and Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Report

          Mayor Roe announced an upcoming Naturalization Ceremony at the Roseville Skating Center on April 16, 2014 at 3:30 p.m., and hosted by the State of MN, City of Roseville and its Human Rights Commission.  Additional information is available by calling 651-792-7023.

 

Mayor Roe announced an upcoming used book sale sponsored by the Friends of the Ramsey County Library, scheduled from April 23-27, 2014 at the Ramsey County Roseville Branch at 2180 Hamline Avenue.  Materials for sale will be available from all seven branches in the system; and proceeds will benefit the Ramsey County library system. Additional information is available by calling 651-486-2213.

 

          Mayor Roe announced the fundraiser for Roseville Law Enforcement Explorer Post #574 with flyers available at the back of the room for this effort by Roseville Chipotle at Rosedale Mall. 

 

         Mayor Roe announced opportunities for students in the ten member city consortium of the North Suburban Communication Commission to participate in that body's scholarship program, with an application deadline of April 11, 2014.  Additional information is available at CTVNorthSuburbs.or/nscc or by calling 651-792-7515.

 

Mayor Roe noted the 7^th annual display at City Hall of quilts and wall hangings by the Minnesota Contemporary Quilters Group, on display through mid-April 2014, with viewing during normal City Hall office hours.

 

On behalf of the community, Mayor Roe paid tribute to Roseville firefighters for their diligence at the recent apartment fire in Roseville; and expressed the community's appreciation to the caretaker of that building for his attempted rescue of the one victim in this tragedy.  Mayor Roe extended the community's sympathy to the family and friends of the fire victim.

 

5.         Recognitions, Donations and Communications

 

6.        Approve Minutes

Etten moved, McGehee seconded approval of Meeting Minutes of the February 20, 2014 Special Council Meeting as amended; February 24, 2014 Regular Meeting as amended; March 3, 2014 Regular Meeting as amended;  March 10, 2014 Regular Meeting as amended; and the March 13, 2014 Special Meeting as presented.

 

Corrections:

February 20

·         Page 2 and following pages (Roe)

Correct Header on pages two and forward to "Special" meeting rather than Regular meeting

February 24

·         Page 10, Line 9 (Etten)

Correct to read: "for [one-half of the bridge costs] the bridge in its entirety; creating"

·         Pages 11 and 14 (Roe)

By consensus, the body approved including the bench handouts related to these items as part of the packet of record rather than attached to the minutes.

          March 3, 2014

·         Page 2, Line 16 (Willmus)

Typographical correction: change "interrupted" to "uninterrupted"

          March 10, 2014

·         Page 12, Line 12 and Page 15, Line 4 (Etten)

Correct spelling of Mr. and Mrs. Denman to "Drennan" and Ms. Drennan's first name to "Sara."

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

7.            Approve Consent Agenda

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

 

a.            Approve Payments

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

ACH Payments	$945,197.03
73051-73179	471,453.36
Total	$1,416,650.39

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

b.            Approve Business Licenses & Other Licenses & Permits

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

                            

Applicant/Location	Type of License
Shen Jie Fu; New Dragon Acupressure Massage 320 Rosedale Center	Massage Therapist
Su Jun Guo; New Dragon Acupressure Massage 320 Rosedale Center	Massage Therapist

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

f.             Request by Peak Investments, LLC in conjunction with property owner Roseville Crossings, LLC for Approval of a Temporary Drive-through Coffee Kiosk as an INTERIM USE at 2154 Lexington Avenue

Mayor Roe clarified that approval of this item would be through adoption of a resolution.

 

City Attorney Charles Bartholdi further noted that in the resolution, page 2 of 4, line 51 (second "Be It Resolved"), the typographical correction from "commercial greenhouse activity" should be revised to read, "prior to the commencement of the INTERIM USE."

 

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11136 (Attachment F) entitled, "A Resolution Approving a Temporary Drive-through Facility as an INTERIM USE at 2154 Lexington Avenue (PF14-005);" as amended:

Page 2, Line 51 (second "Be It Resolved"): typographical correction from "commercial greenhouse activity" should be revised to read, "prior to the commencement of the INTERIM USE."

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

8.         Consider Items Removed from Consent

a.            Approve General Purchases and Sale of Surplus Items in Excess of $5,000

Purchases AND Surplus

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly summarized this request as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated March 24, 2014.

 

Councilmember McGehee questioned the necessity and frequency of use for this rescue boat and trailer, since the City contracted with Ramsey County for this service.

 

Fire Chief Tim O'Neill and Battalion Chiefs Dave Brosnahan and Greg Peterson

Chief O'Neill deferred to Battalion Chief Brosnahan and Peterson, as they worked closely with the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department on these types of responses.

 

Chief Brosnahan advised that the Roseville Fire Department was called on for this type of water emergency rescue from one to eight times annually; and noted that the request for this type of vessel had come at the recommendation of John St. Germain of the Ramsey County Sheriff.  Since the County did not staff this program 24/7 even though they were the jurisdictional agency, Chief Brosnahan advised that they relied on local departments to respond, typically arriving first on the scene due to logistics.  With County water rescue personnel, Chief Brosnahan advised that they would typically respond from their personal homes with boat storage in their garages; and other situations may also find them already launched on another lake and unable to immediately respond, creating that dependency on the local department.  With the availability of a boat with similar amenities as theirs, Chief Brosnahan advised that the County found that to better address overall operations.

 

Chief O'Neill advised that the current boat was fifteen years old and had been scheduled for replacement for some time, and continually deferred.  Even with limited use, the intent to "train for the worst and hope for the best," Chief O'Neill noted that the current blow-up boat was not designed for water rescue, and if up to the Roseville Department, would have been replaced some time ago, as it was not conducive to getting people out of the water, as it tended to flip if passengers were off-center, potentially costing firefighter injuries and/or unsuccessful rescues. 

 

Chief Brosnahan noted in the last Fire Department Report, the Roseville Department had performed joint rescue training with Ramsey County recently; and continued to interact and train with Ramsey County emergency personnel.

 

In terms of other entities within Ramsey County, Mayor Roe asked if other jurisdictions or municipalities had similar water rescue capabilities.

 

Chief O'Neill advised that Lake Johanna Fire Department had a boat similar to the current Roseville equipment, and the City of New Brighton also had water rescue capabilities, but he was unsure of any others;, since the City of Roseville was called upon to offer mutual aid assists for any larger water emergencies in the immediate area.

 

With that in mind, Mayor Roe opined that one boat may not be sufficient for those larger events, therefore making having additional boats available in the county more of a necessity.

 

McGehee moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of the submitted list of general purchases and contracts for services presented as follows; and as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated March 24, 2014; and Attachment A entitled, "2014 Capital Improvement Plan Summary - Updated 03/18/2014."

 

Department	Vendor	Description	Amount	Budget/ CIP
Fire	Milpro Marine LLC	Rescue boat & trailer	$24,820.00	CIP
Fire	Clarey's Safety Equipment	Ventilation Fans - 3	6,623.00	CIP
Fire	Interstate Power Systems	Transmission repair on Fire Vehicle	14,631.00	Budget
IT	Cities Digital	Laserfiche Software Upgrade	123,220.60	Budget
Storm Sewer	Ess Brothers	Storm Sewer Lining	49,630.61	CIP
Sanitary Sewer	Truck Utilities, Inc.	Replace Ford F350	33,934.00	CIP
City Hall	Sandstrom Land Management	Season Maintenance	5,124.00	Budget

 

                                                            Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

 McGehee moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of trade-in/sale of the following surplus item:

 

Department	Item / Description
Fire	Rescue boat & trailer - sale estimate pending

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

b.            Approve Amendments to the 2013 Budget

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly summarized this request as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated March 24, 2014.

 

Councilmember McGehee questioned where expenses stood for Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) treatment so far this year.

 

Mr. Trudgeon responded that he was not prepared to respond, but would seek an update from staff for the City Council at his earliest convenience.  Mr. Trudgeon noted that the extremely cold weather had been seen as a positive in delaying or eliminating this infestation. 

 

Mayor Roe noted that of the original $100,000 set aside for this treatment set aside two years ago, not all had been expended at that time. 

 

In response to Councilmember McGehee's request to clarify where the $16,000 in cash reserves was coming from as noted in the report, Mayor Roe stated that even though the money came from reserve funds, the budget would need to be amended accordingly.

 

As part of last year's budget and levy discussions, Councilmember Willmus noted the request to staff to provide a periodic update for carryover balances from prior years, and asked that the information be provided in the near future, which was duly noted by Mr. Trudgeon.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee related to Police Department wages and equipment in the amount of $212,000, Mr. Trudgeon advised that he would need to get that additional detail from staff and bring it forward to the City Council.  Mr. Trudgeon noted some of the items involved joint efforts and extra staffing requirements with other jurisdictions and agencies for special enforcement issues (e.g. drunk driving canvases and other types of operations), and would get that information from the Chief and provide it to the City Council at a later date.

 

Mayor Roe noted that forfeiture information had been provided by the Chief at a previous meeting, and was part of those joint efforts.

 

Regarding the Communications capital outlay of $50,000 for Council Chambers equipment and communications enhancements, Councilmember Laliberte asked if there were remaining concerns in the operation of the system.

 

Mr. Trudgeon responded that this expense was related to audio updates, and there still remained some audio playback issues, as Councilmember Willmus had alerted staff to, with diagnoses and fine-tuning still underway to address those remaining issues. 

 

Mayor Roe noted that, in his discussions with CTV technicians, the playback issues were not necessarily with the City's equipment, but interfacing between CTV and Comcast.  With the recent audio upgrades in the Council Chambers, Mayor Roe noted that those audio issues could be dealt with from the booth versus working through issues in a less efficient and effective manner.

 

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, to approve the year-end amendments to the 2013 Budget as detailed in the RCA dated March 24, 2014.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

c.            Approve Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Clean Water Fund Grant Agreement No. SG2014-002 for the Sewer Lateral Grant Program

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly summarized this request as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated March 24, 2014.

 

Councilmember McGehee sought a clarification of where the Inflow and Infiltration (I & I) issues were located: whether mostly in the stub, or in the laterals.

 

Public Works Director Duane Schwartz advised that it was difficult to determine exactly where the I & I was coming from.  With the request for this program, Mr. Schwartz advised that it would address the main to the building, with that entire lateral system for homeowners in Roseville eligible for this grant program, which could involve a portion of the line or relining the entire system, on a case by case basis depending on the situation.

 

Councilmember McGehee questioned the average distance and cost involved for typical homeowners.

 

Mr. Schwartz advised that both distance and costs would vary; however, with a typical residential neighborhood and 30' setback, the distance was typically 60' from the foundation on average.  Mr. Schwartz further advised that costs could vary from a few thousand dollars to replace a portion to in excess of $10,000 to replace the entire length, depending on frost and tree conditions.

Councilmember McGehee referenced previous discussions on economies with a larger group of properties for lining in the same vicinity.

 

Mr. Schwartz concurred that most laterals within a given segment of the sewer line - or manhole to manhole - would reduce mobilization logistics, and therefore overall costs.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that this was something needing serious consideration to take advantage of, but not unless staff can organize such clusters and define a sufficient number of areas needing assistance.  Councilmember McGehee referenced the televising of most lines throughout the City, opining that this put them in a good position to target those areas having the most problems, or where issues kept coming up versus only a select few spread out among the community creating a huge expense for them and not efficient efforts on the City's part to address the problem or take advantage of this program.

 

Mr. Schwartz advised that staff was currently developing letters for properties having been identified with "root issues"  as part of the 2014 Pavement Management Program (PMP); with those residents receiving the letter based on past televising.  Mr. Schwartz clarified that the City only televised approximately 10% of the system annually, but could use that technology from recent years to provide that notice.  Mr. Schwartz advised that staff was currently working through the identification and mailing process over the next month or two as plans are finalized for the 2014 PMP.  Mr. Schwartz noted that residents would also be advised in general through the City's newsletter and other communication efforts to encourage them to apply for this program as long as funds remain available.  Mr. Schwartz advised that a number of inquiries about the program had been fielded by staff; with one additional frozen sewer line repair under a wider county road redirected to a different sewer on the same side of the road, also being eligible for this program.  Mr. Schwartz noted that staff continued to promote the program until funds are fully expended; and his most recent inquiry with the Metropolitan Council indicated that approximately one-half of those total county-wide funds remained available.

 

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, approval of Metropolitan Council Clean Water Fund Grant Agreement No. SG2014-002 monies for grants for homeowners for replacement of sanitary sewer services.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

g.            Request by University of Northwestern for Approval of Field Lighting for Renovated Outdoor Athletic Facilities as a CONDITIONAL USE at 3003 Snelling Avenue

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly summarized this request as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated March 24, 2014.  As noted on the attached Planning Commission meeting minutes, Mr. Trudgeon noted that as part of this improvement, the University was looking to upgrade its public address system, which would be much improved with the ability to provide direction sound adjustments. 

 

Five bench handouts, were included as part of this item, consisting of: an e-mail dated March 22, 2014 from Timothy Callaghan (3062 Shorewood Lane); an e-mail dated March 24, 2014 from Brian Humphries, Associate VP of Facility Operations and Planning at University of Northwestern forwarding an attached e-mail of the same date from Chris Nelson, Bethel University and resident (at 1678 Lydia Avenue W); a March 24, 2014 Letter from Richard R. Reynolds (resident at 3191 Shorewood Drive, Arden Hills, MN and property owner of 2746 Merrill Street Roseville, MN); an March 24, 2014 e-mail from Timothy Callaghan (3062 Shorewood Drive); and e-mail dated March 24, 2014 from John Huyett (3203 Shorewood Drive).

 

Councilmember McGehee, having received noise complaints over a number of years from residents adjacent to this campus, questioned why this was being considered as a Conditional Use rather than an Interim Use, which she would be more comfortable with, similar to the coffee kiosk approval granted earlier.  Councilmember McGehee opined that this would ensure that the public address system was actually updated in a way that it would be directed away from neighbors and onto the campus itself.  Specific to the Conditional Use request, Councilmember McGehee opined that the details on candle lights and decibel measurements did not provide her with a sufficient level of comfort; and while she was not opposed to the University having a public address system or lighted fields, she expressed her preference for a timeframe identified to address their location in this highly residential area and impacts to their neighbors.

 

Before responding to other issues raised by Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Trudgeon clarified that the requested Conditional Use was for approval of field lighting for renovated outdoor athletic facilities and not for the public address system, as the public address system was a legal, nonconforming use under City Code and covered under the campus's Planned Unit Development (PUD), last updated in 2007 under their 2003 Long-Range Campus Master Plan, at which time field lighting was among items listed for future implementation as budgets allowed; and therefore providing limited ability for the City to control at this point. 

 

With that clarification that this request is specific to the field lighting, a permitted use by Conditional Use under City Code provisions, Mr. Trudgeon questioned if it was even possible to rather suggest that as an Interim Use, since this was a substantial investment by the University and for fairly long-term use.  Mr. Trudgeon suggested other methods already available in City Code to deal with nuisance violations, with ultimate revocation of the Conditional Use if significant and ongoing violations were found.  Having worked with the University for a number of years, Mr. Trudgeon opined that he didn't see them being unresponsive to any issues brought forward and attempts to address them; and if the noise threshold was crossed, creating reported noise nuisance, which appeared to be sustained over time, they could be adequately addressed.  Mr. Trudgeon further opined that he thought the Conditional Use was totally justified.  Mr. Trudgeon recognized that there appeared to be dissatisfaction from some in the adjacent neighborhood, but he did not define that at the point of being a nuisance under the thresholds outlined by State law and City Code.  Mr. Trudgeon advised that staff would continue to monitor that and partner with the University to solve any such problems.  As an example, Mr. Trudgeon noted that, in the past music was played over the public address system immediately before games, and based on neighborhood complaints, the University had voluntarily stopped that practice.  Mr. Trudgeon reiterated that sufficient safeguards were in place to address those issues; and expressed confidence that any of them could be worked through cooperatively.

 

Councilmember McGehee offered to take City Manager Trudgeon's word on that issue; however, she opined that staff had not done sufficient due diligence to-date, and didn't even have adequate equipment to measure decibels.  Councilmember McGehee questioned how the City would properly measure and accurately monitor the situation if they didn't even have the equipment available to do so, or to do so accurately.  Councilmember McGehee opined that if the City invested in the proper equipment, it could address the issue more accurately.

 

Mayor Roe refocused discussion on the subject at hand, field lighting, not noise issues.

 

Councilmember McGehee reiterated that she would take Mr. Trudgeon's word on this, and if adequate equipment was in place to investigate complaints, she would be happy.

 

Laliberte moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11137 (Attachment E) entitled, "A Resolution Approving Outdoor Athletic facilities with Field Lighting as a Conditional Use at 3003 Snelling Avenue (PF14-003);"

 

                                                Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; Etten; Laliberte; and Roe.

Nays: None.

Abstentions: McGehee.

 

Councilmember Laliberte thanked neighbors for attending the Planning Commission meeting to speak; and thanked the Planning Commission and staff for their work as well.

 

For the record, Mayor Roe clarified that it had been suggested, but not confirmed, that staff did not have adequate equipment available to monitor and determine sound compliance issues.

 

12.         General Ordinances for Adoption

 

a.            Adopt an Ordinance Amending Table 1004-5 of the Zoning Ordinance Specific to the Medium Density Residential District

City Planner Thomas Paschke reviewed this request as detailed in the RCA dated March 24, 2014.  Mr. Paschke noted one revision to the Table 1004-5 included in the meeting packet, and a potential conflict with the City's Subdivision Ordinance, as part of the regulating plan and map previously adopted by the City Council, and the need for further clarification as the separation for minimum periphery alley setbacks related to distance.  While the initial goal of staff was to clarify that, since there was no current established setback for that use, Mr. Paschke advised that until further review and analysis was performed by staff, the proposed Table 1004-5 be revised to delete that final line on the table.

 

Mr. Paschke began his review with specifics for row homes and the nature of their design.

 

Mayor Roe spoke specifically to the row homes in the Greater Metropolitan Housing Corporation's (GMHC) proposal along Dale Street, verifying that their proposed front yard setback is actually larger than this action would require.

 

Mr. Paschke confirmed that they were proposing a larger setback than this would require; and that, as noted in the Table (page 5 of the RCA), that setback was based on the type of street as detailed in the footnotes immediately following the Table.

 

Mr. Paschke further addressed the intent in setback revisions to address open areas and front porches, and town homes, using the GMHC proposal as an example along Cope Avenue and periphery setbacks.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Paschke confirmed that staff was recommending changes for code city-wide, not specific to the Dale Street Project itself.

 

Since the Dale Street Project was special and experimental in Roseville for this type of housing, Councilmember McGehee questioned the wisdom of changing code beyond this project, and whether it may create problems in other single-family neighborhoods, not just with the surrounding neighbors for this development.

 

Mr. Paschke clarified that, currently there is no way available to limit those setbacks under City Code, and that this requested action would provide that protection for existing adjacent single-family properties.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Paschke confirmed that changes for this specific GMHC project could have been accomplished under a PUD; he questioned if it would address problem areas in City Code that had become evident in reviewing this first-ever proposal for such a development from GMHC.  If similar developments were to occur elsewhere in Roseville, Mr. Paschke opined that it would prompt necessary modifications at that time as well.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that she agreed with the row home setbacks; however, she questioned if changes were needed for other potential pocket neighborhoods, based on potential impacts to other neighborhoods.  Councilmember McGehee expressed her support for this GMHC development and the entire process; however, she was not happy in taking things needed for this very well-designed project and spread it throughout the community.

 

City Manager Trudgeon recognized that a combination of several different medium density land uses within one development was unique; however, he noted that this revision would apply city-wide and was a direct result of a more fine-tuned analysis by staff as it reviewed the GMHC proposal and whether City Code adequately addressed those issues in other areas of the community as well.  Mr. Trudgeon noted that, while the 2010 Code provided illustrations and possible ideas, it couldn't adequately address each and every concern.  While the City may never have another development with a similar mixture, Mr. Trudgeon asked that the City Council carefully consider each housing type - whether row homes, attached homes, or courtyard housing - separately, and outside the Dale Street Project.  Mr. Trudgeon opined that staff was recommending what they felt were better standards for use throughout the City of Roseville.

 

Councilmember Willmus noted that Councilmember McGehee raised a good point, whether the City Council was comfortable with these changes city-wide for Medium Density Residential (MDR) housing.

 

Based on the proposed increase from 30' to 45' for rear yard setbacks for everything other than multi-family housing, Councilmember Willmus requested background from staff in recommending this increase.

 

Mr. Paschke advised that part of the concern was raised a couple of years ago by Mayor Roe for areas where residential uses were moving from higher to lower density.  Mr. Paschke stated that it was staff's opinion that a greater setback should be in place for a massed apartment complex versus a less dense application (row homes or townhomes) in an MDR District.  While the proposed 45' was not a huge increase, Mr. Paschke opined that it would serve to greatly reduce potential impacts for a multi-family building's mass from other properties, and would be more appropriate for that type of application rather than for the smaller, less impact housing units of townhomes, which should be sufficient at 30', and was consistent with what was currently in place and not much different from single-family, townhome designs in smaller developments city-wide.

 

Councilmember Willmus questioned whether that increased footage was supported by the Planning Commission as well, with Mr. Trudgeon referencing the Planning Commission meeting minutes of March 5, 2013 (Attachment B) and the friendly amendment to the motion addressing that issue.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, staff and Mayor Roe clarified that unless indicated on Table 1004-5 and footnotes, setbacks didn't apply beyond the courtyard development proposal, and based on any combination or type of housing unit in each development proposal coming forward.

 

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1464 (Attachment C) entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Selected Text of Title 10, Zoning Ordinance of the Roseville City Code;" as amended to strike the last line of Table 1004-5 for "Minimum periphery alley setbacks at 10'."

 

Councilmember Willmus thanked City Manager Trudgeon and City Planner Paschke for removing the alley issue at this point for further analysis.

 

                                                            Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

City Attorney Bartholdi reminded Councilmembers that a Super Majority vote was required to authorize publication of Ordinance Summaries.

 

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1464 (Attachment D) entitled, "An Ordinance Summary Amending Table 1004-5 of Title 10, Zoning Ordinance of the Roseville City Code."

 

                                                            Roll Call (Super Majority)

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

Nays: None.

 

b.            Adopt a Resolution Changing the Comprehensive Land Use Map Designation; Adopt an Ordinance Amending Zoning Map Classification; 657, 661, 667, and 675 Cope Avenue and 2325 and 2335 Dale Street; and Regarding a Request by the Roseville Housing and Redevelopment Authority (RHRA) and the Greater Metropolitan Housing Corporation (GMHC)

City Planner Paschke briefly reviewed this request as detailed in the RCA dated March 24, 2014.

 

Councilmember McGehee noted discrepancies in the map included in this material and that of this item; with Mayor Roe responding that the maps were included for general informational purposes only, with this action not considering any actual layout of buildings, as it remained a concept plan at this point.

 

Laliberte moved, McGehee seconded, adoption of Resolution No.11138 (Attachment F) entitled, "A Resolution Approving an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map Designation from Low Density Residential (LDR), High Density Residential (HDR), and Institutional (IN) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) for Property located at 657, 661, 667, and 675 Cope Avenue, and 2325 and 2335 Dale Street (PF14-004)."

 

                                                            Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

McGehee moved, Laliberte seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1465 (Attachment G) entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Title 10 of the City Code, Changing Certain Real Property located at 657, 661, 667, and 675 Cope Avenue, and 2325 and 2335 Dale Street from Low Density Residential-1 District (LDR-1), High Density Residential-1 District (HDR-1), and Institutional District (INST) to Medium Density Residential District (MDR).

 

                                                            Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

13.       Presentations

 

a.            Receive and Approve the Recommended Pathway master Plan Build-Out Plan from the Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commission

Public Works Director Duane Schwartz provided the recommendation from the City's Public Works, Environment, and Transportation Commission (PWETC) on their charge from the City Council and as a joint goal of the bodies to develop a Pathway Master Plan Build-out Plan for priority pathway segments included in the 2008 Pathway Master Plan, first developed in 1975 and updated periodically over the last 38 years, most recently in 2008.  Mr. Schwartz clarified that the PWETC understood their charge was to focus on the financial aspects of a build-out plan as a basis for their work and ultimate priority ranking.

Mr. Schwartz advised that the PWETC had completed their review and provided final recommendation at their October and November 2013 meetings; resulting in the subsequent table listing segments in priority order with scores ranked from 1 to 5, with one the highest and 5 the lowest priority; and a map included with the location of each of those segments.  Mr. Schwartz noted that as part of the PWEC's recommendation, the City Council Master Plan Build-out should be guided over the next twelve years for funding those segments listed at 3.4 or higher as the highest priorities. Mr. Schwartz also noted that their recommendation suggested that the City Council give priority to any reconstruction or pavement projects for Ramsey County rights-of-way; and that the City Council give consideration to consider moving segments within the Plan as they may coincide with City pavement projects as well.  Mr. Schwartz noted that the PWETC asked that staff specifically advise the City Council that their recommendation did not include County Road B-2 as a priority, based on their understanding that County Road B-2, which would have been a top priority, was already in process as part of the Parks Master Plan Implementation and currently in bid evaluation.

 

Mr. Schwartz noted that, throughout the process, the PWETC was challenged to define a set of criteria for that build-out recommendation, including previous work done in 2008 and documentation; all evidenced in their final ranking recommendation and discussion detailed in their Commission meeting minutes; and including several opportunities for public comment throughout their deliberations.

 

Mr. Schwartz clarified that the intent of this presentation tonight was for the City Council to receive the recommendations of the PWEC; with no further action intended at this time. 

 

Mayor Roe asked that staff provide the City Council a copy of the bullet points used as part of their presentation; with Mr. Schwartz duly noting that request, and clarifying that they consisted of the final motion taken by the PWETC from their meeting minutes.

 

Discussion among staff and Councilmembers included past, current and future Ramsey County cost-share policies, currently at 50% participation for construction hard costs, and potential negotiations for rights-of-way and other project-specific issues and amenities; continued requirement for city responsibility for rights-of-way acquisition, depending on the availability of federal funds and the extent of impacts to those adjacent properties; and lack of interest to-date from Ramsey County in their pursuit of pathways on their roadways, all outside their most recent 5-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) with cities remaining responsible for those amenities even along roads under the county's jurisdiction.

 

Mr. Schwartz advised that staff had just received the most recent updated Ramsey County CIP that showed them participating financially in the County Road B-2 and Victoria Street improvements slated for Roseville. Mr. Schwartz opined that this indicated that the county had heard the city and were incorporating those items in their plans.  Mr. Schwartz noted that this cost share policy was new to Ramsey County, and therefore, the City may need to expend funds upfront and wait for reimbursement, since they list this particular project in 2015, but the City plans to build it in 2014.

 

Councilmember Etten-requested a copy of that CIP from Ramsey County for Councilmembers to determine where their list interacted with Roseville's CIP and Pathway Master Plan and Build-out Update and where those priorities meshed; with staff duly noting that request.

 

Mayor Roe suggested that all the items (e.g. PWETC recommendations, Ramsey County Updated CIP; and City criteria) be included in the draft implementation plan coming before the City Council as an action item in the future.

 

At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Schwartz opined that the 2008 Pathway Master Plan Update remained valid, as it provided a much broader review than that given by the PWETC, and was based on safety and connectivity considerations.  Councilmember Willmus suggested that the PWETC revisit their scoring and ranking of these segments to ensure consistent criteria from member to member.  Mr. Schwartz responded that they could do so; however, he asked that the City Council as a body provide a much clearer definition of that charge, noting that as the criteria changed, it may draw in a much broader portion of the community to weigh in on that priority ranking.

 

Councilmember Willmus opined that the PWETC process was much narrower, and when these efforts are expended in the future, he would prefer to have much broader community input rather than having one neighborhood group and their vocal concerns take precedence over and perhaps providing for a broader document.

 

Mayor Roe opined that, until a different ranking was officially adopted by the City Council, the 2008 Pathway Master Plan remained as the official document.  Mayor Roe expressed his appreciation for having the cost estimates broken out for each segment, opining that it further informed the process; and suggested that those costs be incorporated into the 2008 Plan as the official document.  Mayor Roe also expressed his interest in having timeframes identified for Ramsey County projects to the greatest extent possible to allow that projected timing be incorporated in the City's CIP, programming pathway funds into it to define a fixed annual amount.  Mayor Roe suggested a closer look for the twelve year period to determine how the PWETC recommendations tie into the current CIP projections and how that may or may not impact funding and projects.

 

At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Schwartz confirmed that Ramsey County provided an annual update of their 5-year CIP.  Councilmember Laliberte suggested that the PWETC may also want to do an annual review accordingly to determine any significant changes.

 

Mayor Roe opined that the bullet points and recommendations of the PWETC were sensible; and they fully met his intent based on the City Council's charge to the PWETC; to not provide a ranking as much as a skeleton of a plan, which could be further refined as levy funding and other resources were identified or became available.  Mayor Roe expressed his appreciation for their work and useful recommendations.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mayor Roe confirmed that he didn't see this priority ranking taking the place of the 2008 Pathway Master Plan, especially until the City Council took formal action and revisited the ranking as a broader process at the discretion of the City Council.

 

Councilmember Laliberte opined that it was important for the City to review other documents, including the Ramsey County 5-year CIP and determine priorities from a logistics point as well as using the 2008 Pathway Master Plan ranking.  If the PWETC wished to spend more time on this issue, Councilmember Laliberte opined that the rankings include those 2008 rankings as well and open up the public comment process to a larger group of residents; opining that it didn't appear to her that all pieces and plans were in place yet.

 

Councilmember Etten noted that the proposed survey, up for discussion later tonight, included several questions on pathways and how much of an investment was needed and where there may be areas of need yet.  Councilmember Etten questioned if the PWETC should be tasked with spending more time figuring out priorities, since the survey information may determine that before any further work was indicated.

 

Mayor Roe suggested, with consensus of the body that this Build-Out Plan come back before them mid-summer.

 

14.         Public Hearings

 

a.            Public Hearing to Consider Off-Sale 3.2% Malt Liquor License for Walmart Stores, Inc., d/b/a Walmart Store #3404 located at 1960 Twin Lakes Parkway

City Manager Trudgeon briefly reviewed this request as detailed in the RCA dated March 24, 2014; noting that there were currently eight 3.2 Off-Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor Licenses in the City; with no limitation under State Statute or City Code at this time.

 

Mayor Roe clarified that this request was for 3.2 beer, not for strong beer or other alcohol products.

 

Mayor Roe opened and closed the Public Hearing at approximately 7:34 p.m. for the purpose of hearing public comment, with no one appearing for or against.

 

15.         Budget Items

 

16.         Business Items (Action Items)

 

a.            Approve/Deny an Off-sale 3.2% Malt Liquor License for Walmart Stores, Inc., d/b/a Walmart Store #3404 located at 1960 Twin Lakes Parkway

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, approval of the request by Walmart Stores, Inc., d/b/a Walmart Store #3404 located at 1960 Twin Lakes Parkway, for an Off-Sale 3.2% Malt Liquor License, expiring December 31, 2014.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

b.            Finalize Draft Survey and Budget for Resident Community Survey

Communications Manager Garry Bowman summarized the request for finalization by the City Council of the Resident Community Survey, as detailed in the RCA dated March 24, 2014, and related Attachment A. 

 

Mr. Bowman noted several additional points added by staff: referring to Questions 34-35 seeking information on Emergency Medical Service (EMS) in addition to the Police and Fire Service; and the question immediately following needing additional wordsmithing to make it more relevant.  Mr. Bowman also noted input via e-mail from Councilmember Etten.

 

City Council Feedback on Draft Survey (Attachment A)

At the request of Mayor Roe, Councilmember Etten reviewed his recommended revisions, including:

 

Question 22

A minor text amendment to ensure consistency

 

Questions 75 - 76

Noting that these questions had already been asked in the survey in different ways, and supported previous discussions on pathway, suggesting that the survey could be shortened through deletion of these questions, since they had already been asked in the questions related to Parks and Open Spaces, and may be redundant, especially with market rate townhomes and condos.

 

Questions 79-81

Again, these questions only seem to extend the survey by repeating questions already asked

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Councilmember Etten advised that he had no preference for one approach versus another, but actually preferred the questions asked earlier in the survey, opining that they would provide more clarity since they were asked earlier in the process.  Councilmember Etten opined that he could see no value in asking questions to determine if and when a resident planned to move away.

 

Councilmember Willmus advised that he also had no preference one way or the other and didn't feel strongly one way or the other about it.  Specific to the length of the survey, Councilmember Willmus noted that other communities contracting with this vendor, including the City of Shoreview with 212 questions on their survey, did not seem to be too concerned with the survey length.

 

Councilmember McGehee concurred with Councilmember Etten's comments, opining that there seemed to be a lot of overlap in questions, particularly those of a broad, general nature.  Councilmember McGehee opined that she had been hoping for more meaty questions on the topics at hand.  As Councilmember Willmus had pointed out, Councilmember McGehee agreed that this survey was quite short, and there were a number of questions about how well a resident liked the community, how long they'd lived here, etc.  If those questions remain in the survey, Councilmember McGehee expressed her interest in asking them with a more in-depth nature to provide direction.

 

In terms of survey technique, Mayor Roe opined, and Mr. Bowman confirmed, that it was typical to ask the same questions in different ways to determine consistency from respondents.  Mayor Roe opined that he personally had no problem in leaving additional questions or in the length of the survey.

 

Question 103.D

Councilmember Laliberte noted a typographical error, advising that it should be "or no children."

 

Mr. Bowman noted that the intent was to define which households had children at home or living away from home now.

 

With Councilmember McGehee supporting that distinction, and whether the household may have raised children in the community and taken advantage of services or programs, Mayor Roe opined that while it may be a different category of those never having children or those no longer in the home, he questioned if there was enough of a distinction provided in the survey.

 

Question 106

Councilmember Laliberte, in noting the question regarding the region of the city in which the respondent was located, questioned if there should be options provided.

 

Question 82

Councilmember Laliberte opined that this question had been discussed at length at the February 10, 2014 City Council meeting, with the intent being not to educate people on the survey (e.g. organized hauling versus the current open method) versus simply asking the question.  Therefore, Councilmember Laliberte expressed her surprise to see it still included, suggesting additional discussion may be indicated.

 

Councilmember Etten opined that the extensive education pieces had been removed, but that the question still provided a basic understanding for the public, while the objectionable portion had been removed (e.g. unified system), serving to get rid of those persuasive portions and providing three options of how a program could be set up and which would be most preferred by the respondent, and providing sufficient information for them to make an informed decision.

 

Councilmember Willmus opined that he was looking for the question to be worded similarly to other communities (e.g. surveys for the Cities of Shoreview or Fridley) to allow a comparison.  Councilmember Willmus further opined that he had no problem with the lead-in as long as it was accurate, but he didn't feel Question 82 was accurate, since communities don't have one of three systems under current law, only two options (Open or Municipally-organized systems).  If the question proceeds, Councilmember Willmus opined that there were many other options for municipal collection, included that used by the City of Minneapolis where they didn't contract for the service but provided it themselves. Councilmember Willmus clarified that, from his perspective, the question should be, "Do you want an open or municipal collection system'" and then that would provide consistency with the surveys of Fridley and Shoreview.

 

Councilmember McGehee stated that she didn't agree with that, since no consideration had ever been given for a municipal system similar to that of the City of Minneapolis.

 

Councilmember Willmus duly noted that; however, he noted that the statement indicating that there are three systems available, as stated and without providing other variables, was inaccurate, and the City was choosing to highlight only two of them under the municipally controlled side.

 

Mayor Roe opined that the question, as written, simplifies things, while giving them something to choose from.

 

Councilmember Willmus opined that the core question for the resident was whether they wanted to remain on the open system or have the city organize collections.

 

Mayor Roe questioned if a more refined way to address the question would be for one of two systems: an organized system for a single hauler or multiple haulers throughout the City, or the current system.  Mayor Roe opined that this would get the information from the community and define the difference between the two, while addressing the issues of Councilmembers Etten and Willmus.

 

Councilmember Etten spoke in support of that language proposed by Mayor Roe.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that she was fine with that process, with a different question; but noted that the question had been turned over to the survey makers, based on their expertise, and resulting in a reasonable question as drafted.  Councilmember McGehee questioned if the City Council wanted to pretend that they were qualified survey makers; opining that it was not reasonable that they should re-write the survey.

 

Councilmember Laliberte opined that the language on the draft survey provided on February 10^th was simpler than this language; and included could be used; and with simply adding options (e.g. "strongly approve, approve, disapprove, strongly disapprove, don't know/refused") it would address the other issues brought up tonight.  Councilmember Laliberte opined that the language in tonight's draft opened up more grey areas.

 

Mayor Roe noted that Councilmember Etten had steered the City Council in that direction based on his comments tonight; and opined that the original language did more accurately address the information being sought.

 

Councilmember Etten advised that he was comfortable with draft language in the agenda packet tonight, but also with the language read by Councilmember Laliberte, with the exception of the follow-up question, which he would like to see 1-2 reasons versus broader information, and if the February 10^th draft language could have minor revisions to address concerns expressed by Councilmember Willmus, he would be fine with that language as long as it mentions various zoned in accordance with current law.  Councilmember Etten opined that adding Councilmember Laliberte's suggested options would address that for him.

 

Councilmember Willmus opined that he was fine with the Laliberte draft as read.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that she preferred to retain classifications

 

Laliberte moved, Willmus seconded, language as agreed to on February 10, revised as follows (Question 82):

Introduction

Leave as is

Question

Would you favor or oppose the City of Roseville changing from the current system in which residents may choose from several different haulers to a system where the City chooses a specific hauler for the whole community?

STRIKE: "Do you feel strongly that way?  What if it saved you money?"

ADD:   Strongly Approve-1

Approve-2

Disapprove-3

Strongly disapprove-4

Don't know/refused-5

Question 83

Leave as is

 

Councilmember McGehee expressed her preference for "favor" versus "oppose" and offered a friendly amendment to have graduated choices.

Councilmember Laliberte advised that she did not accept that as a friendly amendment, as it creates confusion.

 

Councilmember Etten noted it created more of a middle level of the grey area.

 

Councilmember Laliberte reiterated her preference to define changing from the current system.

 

Councilmember Etten opined that this may not matter at all, and questioned if the semantics would really change the real information being sought or the decision-making process the City Council would subsequently be engaged in, opining that it would not.

 

Councilmember Laliberte stated that her intent was to avoid confusion for the questioner and respondent as to the meaning of organized versus non-organized collection.

 

Mayor Roe spoke in support of "in favor" or "opposed" to define how strongly they felt if that nuance was needed.

 

Councilmember Etten opined that the nuance didn't matter.

 

Councilmember Etten opined that similar surveys in other communities used "strongly favor" and "oppose."

 

Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of the motion as stated.

 

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, a FRIENDLY AMENDMENT to add at the end of the question the following language: "[or for designated zones within the City]."

 

                                    Roll Call (Friendly Amendment)

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

Nays: None.

              

                                    Roll Call (Motion as Amended)

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

Nays: None.

 

Question 65

Given the problems experience this year, Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of a question for residents to indicate whether they considered water and sanitary sewer services to be an essential service, similar to that provided by the Police and Fire Departments.

 

Councilmember Etten noted that Question 35 already asked for a rating on the quality of water and sewer services.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that she wanted the question to allow the resident to give direction to the City as to whether it should be the City's responsibility at some level to provide those services.

Mayor Roe opined that this was a confusing question, since the City already provided those services.

 

Mayor Roe noted that there appeared to be no evident consensus to add that question.

 

Questions 86 and 87

Councilmember Etten questioned whether the sources listed in Question 87 should be included in Question 86 as a reference.

 

Mr. Bowman advised that his only concern was that he wanted to hear from respondents any other sources they might use primarily on their own rather than using the list provided by the City.

 

Councilmember Etten supported that rationale.

Laliberte moved, Willmus seconded, final approval of the Morris Leatherman survey draft, as amended.

 

Question 106

Councilmember Laliberte questioned how to address that information or provide choices for respondents.

 

Mr. Bowman opined that it was a self-identification question for the resident; but advised that the survey takers could be directed to provide regions at the City Council's discretion.

 

Mayor Roe opined that it was fairly meaningless in its current formation.

 

Councilmember Etten opined that a choice of quadrants should be provided.

 

Councilmember Laliberte stated that she wouldn't mind eliminating the question entirely, unless it was beneficial to hear if one particular area had significant issues.

 

Discussion ensued how best to define regions (e.g. voting precincts, neighborhood groups or constellations, or natural dividing lines); with consensus that the community be divided in quarters, providing definition similar to that used in the Parks & Recreation Master Plan map; with staff so directed to do so.

 

Public Comment

Dick Houck, 1131 Roselawn Avenue

Related to Item #82 in the draft survey, Mr. Houck expressed his disappointment with the City Council not being upfront and asking the real question.  While having no real problem in their explaining the three available options, Mr. Houck opined that the real question was: "Do you want to choose who you do business with at your house or have the City mandate who you do business with?"  If residents are to understand this issue, Mr. Houck opined that unless that question was asked, the City Council would not receive a real answer.  Mr. Houck referenced his own personal survey of 100 residents that he had previously presented to the City council, and 92% of those choosing to continue making that decision on their own.  Mr. Houck opined that this was not about services provided, but about being able to have the freedom to choose who you do business with at your own home, and he would personally like to see that question answered.

 

Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

                     Size of Survey/Budget

Mr. Bowman noted the current survey was constructed of 106 questions, with a cost of $17,500, which was $2,500 over the allotted $15,000 budget unless respondents were reduced to 300 at a total charge of $14,500, which would also alter the margin of error to some degree.  Mr. Bowman sought consensus as to whether the City Council preferred to maintain the survey level of 400 residents and increase the budgeted amount, or reduce the number of respondents.

As she stated in February, Councilmember Laliberte expressed her preference to retain the larger respondent pool at 400.

 

Laliberte moved, McGehee seconded, retaining the larger sampling pool, and increasing the budget by $2,500 accordingly, for a total of cost of $17,500 with 400 respondents.

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Bowman responded that he anticipated getting the survey finalized later this week, and calls to begin within two weeks with results back within one month.

Recess

Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 8:03 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 8:10 p.m.

c.            Appoint Members to Ethics; Human Rights; Parks and Recreation; Public Works, Environment, and Transportation; Finance; and Community Engagement Commissions

 

Mayor Roe suggested a process to be followed in appointments to various commissions,  including several policy discussions as part of this action tonight related to length of terms for new commissions and the expanded PWETC appointments, and how those appointees would be deemed eligible for additional full terms. 

 

Discussion ensued, with subsequent action by consensus according to the Mayor's suggested process.

 

Ethics Commission

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, appointment of Quick-Lindberg to the Ethics Commission for a term ending March 31, 2017.

 

Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

Parks & Recreation Commission

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, appointment of Newby to the Parks & Recreation Commission for a term ending March 31, 2017.

Without diminishing the qualifications of Newby, Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of appointment of Bole and the ability for his representation of an age group that would provide another element of the community, and bring pathway connections back into focus.

 

Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of those comments as well, opining that she felt strongly in appointing Bole for those reasons: his age, interest in pathways/trails, and to provide a different voice on the Parks & Recreation Commission.

 

Councilmember Etten expressed appreciation for those comments, and opined if Bole was appointed, he could support that.  However, Councilmember Etten opined that other candidates also provided other perspectives; and with the Parks & Recreation Commission intensely focused on updating the Pathway Master Plan, seeing it as critical, he didn't find the distinction in appointing Bole to be as significant.  Councilmember Etten opined that both candidates Newby and Bole were deeply connected to the community, and either could provide new ideas and a highly energized, and different perspective to the Commission.

 

Mayor Roe reiterated his comments made during previous appointment opportunities, that the applicant pool was very strong, and he appreciated the enthusiasm and interest of all six applicants for this one position on the Commission, making the choice difficult without intending to slight any of those applicants.

 

Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; Etten; Laliberte; and Roe.

Nays: None.

Abstentions: McGehee.

Motion carried.

 

Policy Discussion on Potential Joint Service of applicants on the Human Rights Commission (HRC) and Community Engagement Commission (CEC)

Councilmember Willmus advised that he typically would not support applicants serving jointly on more than one commission; however, in this case and as he spoke to when originally discussing this issue when adopting the ordinance, there was the potential to provide continuity from applicants who had served on the Civic Engagement Task Force and the work of the Community Engagement Commission going forward, which he found an important aspect.  Therefore, Councilmember Willmus advised that he was open to having individuals serve concurrently on the HRC and CEC for a limited period of time.

 

Councilmember Etten advised that he was also supportive of joint service in this specific situation for those having previously served on the Task Force and to allow limited service on the Commission.

 

Councilmember McGehee advised that she would not support this as a policy, since the commissions were designed to offer a broad background and the broadest range possible to represent residents.  Councilmember McGehee opined that to open up two positions to serve for even a limited time, was not necessary; and since those two individuals in question for this appointment had been intimately involved in the Task Force, the document created by that group can be reviewed by new applicants and stand as written.  Councilmember McGehee opined that those applicants currently serving on the HRC could have resigned that HRC role to be considered on the CEC; and recognized the importance of the current leadership role provided on the HRC, also an important consideration.

 

Councilmember Laliberte concurred with the comments of Councilmembers Etten and Willmus.  While normally preferring to extend vacancy opportunities to the broader community, Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of those individuals serving in a dual role, as long as it was for a limited period, based on their technical background, which could prove above and beyond what the prepared document may actually provide.  On this specific policy, Councilmember Laliberte advised that she would support dual service on the HRC and CEC for a limited time.

 

Related to this, Mayor Roe noted the resignation of HRC Commissioner Grefenberg, announced during interviews and supported by his written resignation received earlier today.  Mayor Roe suggested another option would be to re-advertise that vacancy on the HRC and defer any appointments on the HRC until additional applications had been received.  In talking to Mr. Grefenberg, Mayor Roe advised that Mr. Grefenberg had expressed his willingness to finish his present term on the HRC, while his preference remained to focus on the CEC.  Mayor Roe noted that the terms of HRC Commissioners Grefenberg and Becker both expire on March 31, 2015.

 

Councilmember Willmus noted the receipt of two very good applicants to the HRC who should not have their appointment delayed; and expressed his preference to proceed with their appointments.  However, specific to this third position, Councilmember Willmus suggested that be considered as a stand-alone issue.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mayor Roe clarified that HRC Commissioner Brisbois's term expired, and resignations had been received from HRC Commissioners Courneya and Grefenberg.

 

Regarding the appointments of one three year term and one remaining term to expire March 31, 2015, Mayor Roe sought Council consensus.

 

Councilmember Etten suggested completion of this discussion before considering any appointments, as originally suggested by Mayor Roe, since it affected other commissions.

 

Specific to replacing commissioners, Councilmember Laliberte clarified, and Mayor Roe confirmed, that the person filling the one year vacancy for former HRC Commissioner Courneya should be eligible for two additional three-year terms, for a total of seven years at their discretion.  Under this scenario, Councilmember Laliberte observed that the person appointed could serve longer than other vacancies.

 

Under the current policy on Commission appointments, Mayor Roe noted that if a candidate was appointed to fill a partial firm to fill a vacancy, they were eligible for appointment of an additional two full terms, all under action by the City Council.  Mayor Roe questioned if that differed from appointments for partial terms to stagger terms on commissions; or only for this time and not in future appointments; or if issues should be considered as they arise.

 

Councilmember Willmus opined that those applying to vacancies on a new commission, with some terms for 1 or 2 years in duration, should have the potential for serving longer; but at the end of the first term, there should be a check-in at the City Council level, especially when someone may be serving on concurrent commissions.  Councilmember Willmus opined that this should be a check given by the Council whether on that first year or at the end of three years.

 

From a policy standpoint, Mayor Roe sought consensus that a person may be eligible for service for up to seven or eight years as they begin a term on a new commission.  No objections were stated.

 

Councilmember Laliberte advised that her only objection would be that it may be a long time before another interested party may have the potential for appointment.

Mayor Roe opined that this was usually taken care of through turnover on commissions for one reason or another (e.g. moving, losing interest, or busy lifestyles) and tended to be a problem that eventually solved itself.

 

Mayor Roe clarified that the consensus was that, if a candidate was appointed to serve a one or two year partial initial term, the policy was that they could subsequently serve up to two additional terms.

 

Human Rights Commission

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, appointment of Bachhuber to serve a one year term ending March 31, 2015 (Grefenberg vacancy); to appoint Slade for a three year term ending March 31, 2017 on the Human Rights Commission; and to not accept HRC Commissioner Courneya's resignation from the HRC until the time of her move at the end of May, 2014 in accordance with her e-mail correspondence; therefore allowing time to re-open the application process for new candidates.

Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commission

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, appointment of Brodt-Lenz for a three year term ending March 31, 2017; to appoint Wozniak for a two year term ending March 31, 2016; and to appoint Seigler for a one year term ending March 31, 2016 to the to the PWETC.

                                       Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

For the remaining three year vacancy on the expanded PWETC, McGehee moved, Etten seconded, appointment of Cihacek to the PWETC for a three year term ending March 31, 2017.

 

Councilmember Laliberte noted the extensive knowledge of Candidate Storkamp to the material, and opined that he would have been a great benefit to the PWETC.

 

Councilmember Etten concurred with Councilmember Laliberte's comments, especially with his broader perspective and expertise in materials (e.g. pipes).

 

Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

Community Engagement Commission

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, with subsequent friendly amendment by Laliberte, and accepted by the makers of the motion, the appointment for one year of Becker for a term ending March 31, 2015 (concurrent with the HRC); appointment of Grefenberg to a one year term ; appointment respectively of Mueller and Miller to two year terms ending March 31, 2016; and appointment of Gardella, Manke and Ramundt respectively to three year terms ending March 31, 2017 on the CEC Commission; amended to appoint Gardella to a two year term and appoint Mueller to a three year term.

 

Councilmember Laliberte opined that Gardella offered huge expertise in this area and would like to see the motion amended to increase her term to two years.

 

Since she differs in her policy beliefs, Councilmember McGehee advised that she would abstain from the motion; as she preferred a broader motion; and her listing of people was made for the purpose of seeking names from a broader community base of residents that had not come forward on a regular basis, yet fully engaged in the community.

 

Councilmember Laliberte noted that she did not originally list Mueller, but concurred that all were great choices, and she had also included Klick and Simon in her tally of choices based on their interest in the business community.  Councilmember Laliberte, being unsure how far the Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HRA) had yet to reach out to the business community and how to delegate that responsibility to the CEC, expressed her interest in the CEC keeping that group in the forefront, especially in light of those two candidates with that business interest not being appointed.

 

Councilmember Etten expressed appreciation for that perspective, opining that Mueller would push the envelope well for the CEC with a track record of getting people organized and engaged; and with one year terms, and some perhaps renewed for whatever reason at that time, he encouraged Klick to reapply at that time.

 

Mayor Roe recognized Councilmember McGehee's perspective in attempting to get new people involved, but also noted an advantage and benefit of the task force was getting Gardella involved.  Mayor Roe opined that he would hate to eliminate participation in that situation and by having shorter terms for some heavily involved in the task force, it was up to the City Council to make that determination at the end of those terms.

 

Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; Etten; Laliberte; and Roe.

Nays: None.

Abstentions: McGehee

Motion carried.

 

          Finance Commission

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, respective appointment of Bachhuber and Zeller to two year terms expiring March 31, 2016 and appoint Konidena and Schroeder to 1 year terms ending March 31, 2015; with subsequent friendly amendment by Laliberte, and accepted by the makers of the motion, to appoint Schroeder to a two year term ending March 31, 2016; and to appoint Zeller to a one year term ending March 31, 2015 for longer term gender representation on the Finance Commission.

 

Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

Etten moved to appoint Cartier, Hodder and Cunningham to three year terms ending March 31, 2017 on the Finance Commission.  The motion was ruled failed for lack of a second.

 

McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, appointment of Cartier, Hodder and Strawser to three year terms ending March 31, 2017 to the Finance Commission.

 

Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of Rohloff for a three-year appointment, specific to his bringing a younger perspective Laliberte and with the goal of inviting young people to become involved in the community.    

 

Roe moved, Laliberte seconded amendment to the motion to substitute Rohloff for Hodder for a three year term on the Finance Commission.

 

Councilmember Etten noted that he had also listed Rohloff on his choices and concurred with the reasons outlined by Councilmember Laliberte; however, he opined that Hodder was not the right person to remove, based on the great experience with government budgets and providing information to the public.  Councilmember Etten asked that Hodder not be the one to switch out and suggested Strawser since there was not as much experience with government budgets.

Councilmember Willmus concurred with Councilmember Etten.

 

Mayor Roe offered to accept that substitution as the maker of the motion.

 

In that case, Councilmember Laliberte asked that the switch be made to remove Cartier and retain Strawser based on risk management experience.

 

Mayor Roe concurred with swapping Rohloff for Hodder.

 

Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte and Roe.

Nays: Willmus; Etten; McGehee.

Motion failed.

 

Laliberte moved amendment for appointment of Rohloff and removal of Cartier from the Finance Commission for a three year term ending March 31, 2017. The motion failed for lack of a second.

 

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, a substitute to the original McGehee/Willmus motion and to appoint Rohloff to the Finance Commission for a three year term ending March 31, 2017.

 

Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

Willmus moved, Etten seconded, to appoint Hodder to the Finance Commission for a three year term ending March 31, 2017.

 

Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; Etten; McGehee; and Roe.

Nays: Laliberte.

Motion carried.

 

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, to appoint Cartier to the Finance Commission for a three year term ending March 31, 2017.

 

Councilmember McGehee expressed her favorable impression with Cartier's knowledge of budgets.

 

Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of the motion, noting how pleased with all the applicants and the position it placed the City Council in with making these difficult choices.

 

Councilmember Etten concurred with the comments of Councilmembers McGehee and Etten, opining that he liked Cartier's experience with local government budgets and banking business regulators.

 

Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of the motion, but expressed her interest in the qualifications of Strawser and hoped he'd find a way to engage in the future.

Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

For the record, Mayor Roe noted that, due to the substitute motion by Willmus, the original motion by McGehee had become moot.

 

Mayor Roe congratulated all appointees; and advised that joint meetings of the City Council and the two new Commissions: Community Engagement and Finance, would be scheduled in the near future.

 

17.         Business Items - Presentations/Discussions

 

a.            Discuss Winter Weather Impacts on Utility Service Laterals

Public Works Director Duane Schwartz provided a brief update to-date on winter weather impacts on utility service laterals, as detailed in the RCA dated March 24, 2014. 

 

Further updates since printing of the RCA indicate a total of 127 properties with frozen water services, and up to 48 that may remain without water service based on whether or not they have provided feedback to staff on their status.  Mr. Schwartz noted that 27 of those freeze-ups had been thawed by staff using the hot water method, and 40 known to be thawed by private contractors, primarily through the electric method, with at least 10 of those unsuccessful, and 5 known to be hooked up to neighbors outside hose bib.

 

Mr. Schwartz advised that some of the "snowbirds" experiencing ongoing freeze-ups planned to stay south longer until lines thawed naturally.  Mr. Schwartz estimated that staff had expended over $50,000 in staff time and equipment to-date, with costs per line ranging from $300 to well over $1,000.  Mr. Schwartz reported that there had been a significant reduction in reported freeze-ups over the past week, even though spring weather moderation had been slow to come, the last reported freeze-up was taken by staff last Friday.

 

Mr. Schwartz requested feedback and identified several discussion points for Council consideration.

 

Water Credits

Mr. Schwartz estimated the average cost per household at $20 per month for running a continuous stream of water, upon notification of the City to receive any credit on their utility bills.  For those using neighbor to neighbor water connections during this time, Mr. Schwartz advised that credits would be based on the historical averages for those homes; and that homes having experienced freeze-ups this winter would be placed on a supplemental "extreme weather conditions freeze-up list" and staff would recommend installation of devices to monitor water temperatures and avoid future freeze-ups.

 

Mr. Schwartz advised that staff recommended retaining the historical freeze-up account list, while also preparing a list of those extreme weather freeze-ups, and monitor weather conditions and only ask those services be  notified  once significant extreme weather conditions are experienced.  Mr. Schwartz suggested that, at this point, everyone step back and consider that this particular winter season is not the new norm based on historical averages, and advised that staff did not expect to return to this number of freeze-ups on a regular basis, even though trends would support or not support that theory.

 

Mayor Roe summarized staff's recommendation for Council consideration: that a $20 credit per household be available for those households notifying the City of their status in running water; whether a similar credit would be applied for neighbor to neighbor connections; and whether to support to support financial assistance for installation of water devices.

 

At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Schwartz advised that the neighbor to neighbor connection would receive a combined credit, depending on whether they had notified the City, with the receiving home obviously having to run a continuous stream of water; with both homes potentially receiving a credit; and the receiving house and providing house credited for the amount of water the neighbor was using as well.

 

Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of the $20 per month credit and for the neighbor to neighbor hook-ups as well.  At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Schwartz confirmed that staff was working with neighbors to broker these options as applicable.

 

Councilmember Etten spoke in support of the credits, opining that it was only common sense to care for residents.

 

Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of the first two requests by staff; and sought additional information on the third request of staff.

 

Mr. Schwartz clarified that the City typically and historically had under 100 properties on its annual freeze-up list, many that had been listed for a number of years and often based on past road projects that may have altered roadway grade elevations or experienced some other change that affected occasional freezing in colder winters.  Given the extent of new freeze-ups this winter, Mr. Schwartz advised that staff was recommending a supplemental list for extreme winters, separate from the historical freeze-up list; and only notify that group to start running water when the frost is typically in the 5' range or lower, with those on the historical list notified when frosts are at the 3' range.

 

Consensus was agreement with all three of staff's recommendations as presented.

 

Mitigation of Known Freeze Account Issues

Mr. Schwartz reviewed mitigation efforts by staff from the historical freeze-up list to insulate pipes when roadways were resurfaced as part of a PMP project, at which time the homes were removed from the list.

 

With the new list, Mr. Schwartz recommended continued monitoring for future extreme winter weather conditions for potential notification; and to pursue system design considerations for replacement of water mains, especially on wider rights-of-way as snow cover is lessened and for those experiencing freeze-ups.  Mr. Schwartz noted other issues with expense for service laterals under County roads; and including such projects in the CIP, along with other tools (e.g. double main right-of-way if Ramsey County was not anticipation reconstruction in the near future) and other ways to find cost-effective solutions versus digging up the water service connections, with a smaller supplemental water main beyond the fire service line on the other side and installed through soil borings.  Mr. Schwartz advised that mitigation efforts could be explored as opportunities arose in the future.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Schwartz confirmed that some design consideration needed to be given for materials to be used and methods for installation.

 

By consensus, Councilmembers spoke in support of staff's recommendation subject to individual projects.

 

Financial Participation

Mr. Schwartz sought further discussion and reconsideration as a carryover to initial discussions from the February 24, 2014 City Council discussion regarding financial assistance.  As noted previously, Mr. Schwartz reported that costs varied widely on a case by case basis and based on the amount of staff time and equipment and how difficult the lines were to reach.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Schwartz estimated the cost for digging up a line to thaw it could range from $2,000 to $3,000.

 

At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Schwartz reported that in surveying other communities related to this issue, they were all over the board, and since staff's last report to the City Council, he had spoken with other communities; and they ranged from no financial participation by the city to partial reimbursement by the city, to the City taking full responsibility by hiring private contractors or renting equipment (e.g. welders). 

 

Mayor Roe reported that the City of Shoreview had established a reimbursement for private welders, but were not performing the work, and only reimbursing a nominal cost.

 

Councilmember McGehee provided anecdotal information she'd received from a former City of St. Paul resident regarding them regularly and frequently thawing water lines; and now as a resident of the City of Roseville was frustrated when calling and being provided only one private contractor who found the line frozen in the right-of-way, and after several hours of work and a $1,300 charge, they still couldn't open the line, and the resident still had no water service.  Councilmember McGehee related that she was aware of a number of people who had attempted a fix, but to no avail, and remaining without water.  Councilmember McGehee referenced a document as part of another discussion indicating that when the system was installed, ownership of laterals was defined differently than the current interpretation and situation with the City not taking any responsibility for laterals.

 

Mayor Roe agreed that this was part of a later discussion and refocused discussion on this area of potential financial participation.

 

Councilmember Willmus expressed his interest in seeing specific and hard data from neighboring communities before making any decision on this.

 

Mr. Schwartz reported that the City of White Bear Lake was proving a $250 reimbursement.

 

Mayor Roe suggested on option beyond cities providing names of contractors and were more active in thawing methods, perhaps residents could be required to sign a waiver of liability similar or parallel to that used with sanitary sewer back-ups and clean-ups performed by City staff in some situations, in exchange for assistance by City staff beyond the current method.

 

Councilmember Willmus expressed concern in the potential chain of liability if the homeowner didn't give up that right, and with involvement of a third party, he was concerned the City may end up in the middle.

 

Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of the City taking care of these problems as their obligation.

 

Based on Council consensus, Mayor Roe directed staff to provide additional comparison information for the April 7, 2014 meeting to continue this discussion.

 

Water Main Materials Discussion

Over the years, Mr. Schwartz noted the changed in materials available and improved technologies.  Mr. Schwartz noted that the City's original system was constructed using cast iron mains and copper service lines, but in the mid-1970s had changed to ductile iron, and then to PVC and HDPE plastic piping as it became available in the 1990s and 2000s, at a lower cost and obtaining better pressure with plastics, with these non-corrosive materials in some soils, and improved construction methods and reduced costs based on the lighter weight materials and easier handling.  However, Mr. Schwartz advised that this also made freeze-ups more prevalent than in the past, and fewer private contractors (e.g. welders) were willing to perform the work based on their potential liability and upon advice of their insurance companies, reducing the service available from the past norm.

 

Mr. Schwartz advised that water main materials could be installed in a variety of ways, including directional boring, pipe bursting, open cut, lining; bury depth-used with plastic piping; open cut found in more recent projects, with other methods substantially cheaper unless total reconstruction of street.

 

Mr. Schwartz advised that staff recommends continuing to find other ways to mitigate these issues, with additional surveys as indicated and investigation of water main depth based on old and new freeze-ups; and look at those specific areas when rehabbing or replacing water mains, using the most appropriate method available and indicated, and as previously discussed, but continuing to use the full slate of approved products under given criteria.  Mr. Schwartz noted that the standard bury depth was at 7.5' and suggested consideration be given in the future to increasing that depth to 8' - 9' in future installations, with nominal increased costs if directional boring methods were available.

 

Mayor Roe summarized staff's recommendation to stay with using plastic materials, but look at a different depth is so indicated.  Mr. Schwartz concurred, noting that ductile iron was not that different in cost for a full reconstruction project, and asked that the full slate of available materials be considered as appropriate and for obvious reasons.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Schwartz clarified that copper, is typically used for laterals versus plastics, give its long life; and staff did not see the need to use plastics, with reconnections as currently done if directional boring was used, but providing an additional installation if the service seemed to be rising as it approached the property from the roadway.  As an example, Mr. Schwartz reviewed the 2006 project northeast of City Hall, with old mains located in the back yard, and additional boring done in the boulevard with a new service line installed to the back of those homes and reconnected with existing services.  Mr. Schwartz advised that this was one occasion that was found beneficial, and he anticipated continuing to use copper unless other beneficial properties similar to that example were found.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Schwartz advised that homeowners may have an option for copper or plastic, but the City's standard had always been copper up until now for lateral lines.

 

Mayor Roe concurred, noting that City ordinance stated the City needed to approve those installations, and they would have given that approval only if using copper.

 

Councilmember Willmus opined that bury depth is the critical thing, and it made sense to use copper; with Mr. Schwartz speaking in support of achieving additional depths where possible to eliminate potential freeze situations.

 

By consensus, Councilmembers supported using the best approach and materials on a case by case basis for each specific area.

 

Service Lateral Ownership

Discussion on this area was initiated; however, given the time constraints and additional agenda items not yet addressed this evening, Councilmember Etten suggested this discussion be deferred to a later date.

 

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, TABLING this portion of the discussion to a date uncertain.

Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus; Etten; Laliberte; and Roe.

Nays: McGehee.

Motion carried.

 

Mayor Roe thanked Mr. Schwartz for his flexibility in delaying this discussion.

 

b.            Discuss Updating City Code Chapter 311, Business Regulation, Pawn Brokers and Precious Metal Dealers

Two bench handouts from the public related to this item were provided, consisting of a letter dated March 24, 2014 from The Truman Companies, Rare Coins & Precious Metals Dealer, Roger Westerling, Owner; and a letter dated March 22, 2014 from Music Go Round, 1722 Lexington Avenue N by Francis & Terri Tilotta, and Ben Bantam, owners.

 

Three additional handouts from staff, and provided as supplements to the RCA were also provided, consisting of a list of Roseville businesses invited to a March 5, 2014 information meeting on this issue; a list of questions raised at the APS meeting on that date; and comparison research of Pawn, Second Hand, and Precious Metals Ordinances metro-wide and their respective annual license fees and transaction fees with a map of those locations.

 

Police Chief Rick Mathwig, and Investigations Lt. Erika Schneider

In an effort to pursue the Department's goal, Chief Mathwig advised that the department participates in "Problem Oriented Policing," an approach based on responses to community problems that are more equitable and effective for the community than those currently in use.  Within the realm of that goal, Chief Mathwig reviewed the Automated Property System (APS) database in use since 1997, originally geared toward the pawn industry and now being expanded to second hand goods and precious metals dealers.  As detailed in the RCA dated March 24, 2014, Chief Mathwig reviewed the 2011 City Code Chapter 311 and proposed expansion of that code, as drafted in Attachment A to the RCA.

 

Chief Mathwig referenced discussions with the City Attorney with the City of Bloomington, MN's ordinance used as a model; and some of those excluded items from the proposed revised ordinance.  Chief Mathwig noted that the City of Roseville experiences more arrests and issues from those from outside those residing in the City; and without additional provisions in place, it was difficult to address a majority of sales, tracking and recoveries of stolen goods.

 

As detailed in the RCA, Chief Mathwig advised that the intent of the additional fees would be to cover the costs for an additional officer dedicated to these efforts.  Chief Mathwig sought initial feedback from the City Council in their consideration of this recommendation.

 

Councilmember Willmus requested sample ordinances from surrounding communities who have implemented the APS in order to compare the proposed ordinance from staff with those cities already using this tool.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Chief Mathwig advised that he anticipated the fees to fully cover the wages and benefits for an office; with Mayor Roe requesting subsequent information regarding aggregate and minor transaction fee comparisons to the chart, as well as comparison information on the number of days allowed for holding items, and also transactions.

 

Discussion ensued regarding annual license fees, proposed to be reduced, and transaction fees still being reviewed, but anticipated per transaction, excluding those under $10.00 but still recorded.

 

At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Chief Mathwig advised that the initial implementation and number of transactions and their fees in comparison to the cost of an officer, would be a "learn as we go" process until more established data was available.  At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Chief Mathwig advised that the impetus to pursue this was part of the department's goals and ongoing special training for officers in crime scene investigation; and the obvious need found for more documentation than was currently available to fulfill the problem solving policing through partnering with societal efforts, not just those efforts of the Police Department itself.  At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Chief Mathwig advised that this proposed officer was separate from the previously-discussed commercial patrol officer, and identified as a new need.

 

Councilmember McGehee questioned if a $10,000 surety bond was adequate; and requested additional information from other communities on that amount as well; opining that the transaction fee triggering the surety bond was too low and created a lot of extra work when the minimal fee was waived and could not compensate the business owner and be too onerous to process the paperwork and enter the data into the computer network.

 

At the request of Councilmember Etten, Lt. Schneider spoke to how the proposed APS system would be more effective than the current business by business tracking process; and provided example cases.

 

With Councilmember Etten observing that individual dealers making available stolen property lists to other dealers, Chief Mathwig advised that the current system was difficult to pursue, especially with burglaries; referencing the 2013 stolen or lost material list versus the 10% actually recovered and returned to victims, as displayed on graphs.  Chief Mathwig advised that the goal was to get that recovery percentage higher; and that the APS was helpful in tracking people, including family members, cleaning people and others victims knew and getting that information into the system by name so notification was processed as soon as that name hit the system.  Chief Mathwig advised that the preferred method was to track those people and potential stolen material versus the inefficiencies in the department getting that information out to the public.

 

Councilmember Etten noted the concerns expressed by Music Go Round and lack of high probability for stolen music instruments; and questioned how those types of businesses may or may not be part of this proposed code revision.

 

Lt. Schneider reviewed past cases of stolen property and recover, including theft reports, and based their recommendation on that experience, opining that it was beneficial to track those types of transactions and businesses as well.

 

Chief Mathwig concurred, but noted that the most frequently stolen material was what could be put in a pocket, with larger items not as frequent.

 

Chief Mathwig referenced a Minneapolis Star Tribune article dated November 15, 2013 addressing Richfield Police arresting a pair involved in musical instrument thefts, noting that one of the stores in Roseville unknowingly and innocently purchased an instrument as information was not available that it was stolen; in addition to a related check fraud issue, causing the victim to be out $600 from that one transaction.  Chief Mathwig noted that police officers were also fooled, and he didn't expect businesses to have a higher threshold than them, but his goal was for everyone to see stolen property for what it was.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Chief Mathwig reviewed potential funding for an officer dedicated to this APS, and potential funding gaps; recommending that a part-time Community Services Officer (CSO) be assigned to investigate and process the APS items, and after proceeding cautiously, a fee schedule could be included in the annual review and reduced or increased accordingly as with other citywide fees,  If too much money was recouped, Chief Mathwig noted that then the transaction fees could be reduced accordingly.  Chief Mathwig clarified that the intent of this program was not to make money, but to have a level fee to support the cost of a dedicated officer.

 

At approximately 9:58 p.m., McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, extending the meeting curfew to hear public comment related to this issue from audience members.

Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

Public Comment

Tim Roche, Twin Cities North Chamber of Commerce, 525 Main Street, New Brighton, MN

Mr.  Roche advised that he was speaking as a representative of a portion of the Roseville business community; noting that they understood the need to track goods across the board, and recognized that the APS provided a good central database.  However, Mr.  Roche asked that the City Council consider three opportunities to address the concerns of those businesses:

1)    A clear and precise implementation procedure addressed as a marketing piece versus the actual ordinance that many found difficult to understand;

2)    A specific goods survey provided to each business defining transactions and exemptions, and other businesses included in ordinance requirements; and

3)    Identification of alternatives for the licensing fee through a partnership of the Police Department and businesses to avoid the need for an additional officer when this system should make the job easier and more efficient versus more cumbersome.

Mr.  Roche noted that 99.9% of businesses didn't want to buy stolen goods and would prefer a partnership versus putting additional burdens on those businesses.  Mr.  Roche offered his personal help as well as that of the Chamber of Commerce in achieving that partnership.

 

                     Nick Post, Source Comics and Games, 2057 Snelling Avenue W

Mr. Post complimented Mayor Roe and the City Council for the civil process they followed in conducting their meetings, especially in today's world of politics.

 

Mr. Post opined that he was not at all enamored with this proposed process, and reviewed the typical transactions for his business, and the age of some of those items not conducive to computerized tracking purposes.  Mr. Post advised that they already typically make copies of driver's licenses and provide a bill of sale for all transactions.

 

Mr. Post cautioned that many businesses were not noticed or aware of this proposed ordinance revisions, and opined that since this was a radioactive issue with many unintended consequences, and currently open to interpretation as to who and what was exempted or not, notices should be sent to every licensed business in Roseville before the process moved any further.

 

Mr. Post stated that he was resentful that someone in a civil service position would be deciding this, and wondered who would pay for his additional staff member to enter this data.  Mr. Post opined that it would send a shock wave around the business community, and that not all small businesses would survive this additional requirement and expense.  Mr. Post noted that there were all kinds of businesses buying used materials, including the Roseville Library who recently purchased four used book carts from a traveling sales person; and questioned if they would also fall into this area.  Mr. Post opined that his best advice was that everyone was better when working together, and while recognizing the legitimate concerns of Police Chief Mathwig, and supported the goal to increase the current 10% return of recovered goods, he suggested it could be accomplished without "killing the patient."  Mr. Post suggested the need for more ideas from the business owner's perspective to find creative solutions, and if the objective is to reduce crime from the pawn situation, everyone could work together to achieve that goal.

 

Mr. Post invited anyone from the City Council and/or Police Department to visit their store and review their process; opining that while it wasn't perfect it was not cavalier either; and having been in the business as long as they had been, he was fully aware that it wasn't good business to buy stolen things; and hopefully their process, based on interaction with their customers, was effective. 

 

Roger Westerling, Owner of The Truman Company, Rare Coins & Previous Metals, 2585 Hamline Avenue N

As previously noted, Mr. Westerling had provided written comments.

 

Mr. Westerling advised that their surety bond was a minimum of $25,000 as a coin or precious metals dealer.  Also, Mr. Westerling addressed the difficulties in his business for holding time, based on market risk and huge cash flow problems.  Mr. Westerling noted that the City of Bloomington waived the holding period if a $50,000 surety bond was in place, and the holding period was for a maximum of 24 hours.  Since the City was using the Bloomington ordinance as its model, Mr. Westerling requested that it be reviewed in more detail, including fees, and exemptions from holding periods.

 

Jesse B. Johnson, Customer of many Roseville businesses that may be impacted, 7580  Knollwood Drive, Mounds View MN

As a long-term customer of many of these Roseville businesses, and a purchaser of rare stamps and coins, Mr. Johnson questioned if this law would be the best thing for business efficiency.  Mr. Johnson referenced an October 3, 2013 Star Tribune article about a pawn shop in the City of Fridley, and quotes from their Chief of Police on the number of transactions from the two pawn stores, value of recovered items, and transaction fees.  Based on the information in that article, Mr. Johnson opined that the APS fees were excessive compared to actual recover of stolen goods, with businesses not receiving much benefit from their significant investment in the system.  Mr. Johnson opined that the City of Roseville needed to bifurcate between second hand good stores, coin dealers, and pawn stores before proceeding.

 

Paul Buchkosky, 695 Rosedale, Buchkosky Jewelers, Rosedale Center

As a licensed precious metals dealer licensee for 4-5 years, Mr. Buchkosky reviewed the percentage of that business within is long-term customer base and history with those using that service, representing approximately 95% of that businesses based on their trust in his jewelry business.  Mr. Buchkosky opined that honest people would be hurt by this law, since they would not be able to as readily turn to him for that service, due to the connotations of licensee fees, photos, etc.  Mr. Buchkosky also opined that the minimum value for exemption needed to be higher; as he could not perform his other business responsibilities and serve his customer base if he had to spend additional time tracking minimal purchases and entering the information in the computer, which would prove very cost-inefficient.  Another factor affecting his business was fluctuations in gold prices affecting volume periodically.  While he currently had customers coming him to sell family items based on their long-term relationship, Mr. Buchkosky advised that those customers may not wish to do so but could be forced to pawn items rather than sell to him if he needed to base his prices on additional costs of business created from implementation of this law.

 

Ben Bantam, Owner of Music Go Round Roseville, 5429 Pillsbury Avenue, Minneapolis, MN

As previously noted, Mr. Bantam had provided written comment.

 

Mr. Bantam reviewed their business model related to musical instruments and related items not among the ten most stolen items in a list of 40 different categories, insurance industry statistics, and based on their own experience.  Given the minimal percentage of stolen goods for their type of business, Mr. Bantam opined that the proposed ordinance would prove excessive for the end results; and while the APS had been used for twenty years, there was no data shown for recovery results, other than the City of Minneapolis stating that people should "trust us" while not providing supporting data; in addition to little data to support the proposal offered by the Roseville Police Department. 

 

Mr. Bantam advised that they videotaped all transactions, and obtained a copy of their driver's license as well as having the customer sign a form stating that they were the owners of the items.  Obviously, Mr. Bantam opined that they found this process successful from their perspective; and further opined that a much more effective system would be to have real-time information available to apprehend criminals on the spot. 

 

Mr. Bantam advised that this proposal had significant consequences for his business, especially at the fees proposed, and with an average of 90 transactions per month, the fee would prove problematic for their store.  Mr. Bantam advised that their average transaction ten minutes each, including the paperwork, even though they tracked these items now without being required to do so.  Mr. Bantam advised that their store did not have a dedicated area available for storage to hold items, and they would need to displace their lesson program to store items, including purchasing additional software and a separate computer system, as their current system was networked and would not accept the software.

 

Eric Johnston, Local Baseball Card Shop Owner (with business partner Dan McKinnon), 2825 Hamline Avenue N

Mr. Johnston concurred with comments already made; opining that such an ordinance based on the Bloomington model should provide a $100 minimum purchase price for second hand items rather than a $10 minimum, since only about 25% of their transactions were over $100 and anything below that would require them to virtually record every transaction.  Mr. Johnston advised that most of their purchases are new, and questioned if the City was even aware of their small business before considering this ordinance, as theirs was a tight knit niche-type business and not a big franchise store.  Mr. Johnston reviewed the nature of their inventory, most coming from an attic, or off the street from members of the community that they'd known for years even before opening their business six years ago, but familiar faces to them. 

 

Mr. Johnston advised that they didn't feel they needed to be part of the proposed ordinance.  Mr. Johnston stated that often, a customer will make a purchase off the shelf in their store, and if not what they need, will turn around and resell it or trade it back to them; and with ownership changing possession that quickly, how would they track an item that quickly from a sealed box presented back as a second hand good; opining that such transactions further supported the need to have such purchases exempted.

 

Brian Banf, Play It Again Sports

Having been in operation for several decades, and forced to close his Coon Rapids operation of 15 years as a direct result of that city's adoption of an APS and relocating to Roseville, Mr. Banf spoke in opposition to including second hand goods in the ordinance. 

 

Elizabeth Elkins, Half Price Books, 2481 Fairview Avenue

Ms. Elkins provided written comments as a bench handout at tonight's meeting.

Ms. Elkins noted the operation of this store featuring family-owned books in Roseville since 2007, with many small items exchanging hand there.  Ms. Elkins advised that neither the referenced letter sent out by Chief Mathwig to businesses in February of 2014, nor a notice of the meeting in March of 2014, had been received by her.

If this ordinance is adopted, Ms. Elkins advised that the costs and repercussions would be astronomical for any number of reasons (e.g. investigation fee for license holders, license application submission, annual fee in addition to the $10,000 bond, transaction fee, leased space, digital camera purchase, high speed internet connection, computer equipment, and additional labor).  Ms. Elkins reviewed various sections of the proposed ordinance to support her concerns and as it related specifically to used books, video games, and other items they carried.  Ms. Elkins stated that she found the proposal offensive, since they already recorded driver's license numbers, to which the Police Department should have access to acquire needed information. 

 

Ms. Elkins also expressed concern in the perception of attempting to over-regulate business through restriction of store hours, license restrictions if property taxes went unpaid and impacts for business owners leasing their store space, cash transactions or store credits to exchange for merchandise, and holding times.

 

If this ordinance is adopted, Ms. Elkins suggested at a minimum a sunset provision for the police department to review in six months to determine if the APS claim for recovery of stolen property has worked.

 

Frank Tilotta, Owner Music Go Round Roseville

Mr. Tilotta referenced a newspaper article from the March 5, 2014 business meeting providing crime and delinquency statistics, and the conclusion of that article.  Mr. Tilotta opined that underlying research and statistics and tracked transactions had proven minimal.

 

Specific to his business, Mr. Tilotta opined that he would look to be exempt, as the proposed fee for his type of business didn't warrant the recovery rate, since there was no existing initial problem with stolen musical instruments.

 

Richard Schwinden, Mr. Zeros in Roseville, 1744 Lexington Avenue

Mr. Schwinden advised that he was the one who notified Half Price Books and others when his business received information and they did not, including other of his peers who were not contacted.  Mr. Schwinden questioned why some businesses had been excluded and not others.   Mr. Schwinden advised that they had opened in Roseville specifically due to there being no used goods law in place, because in looking at other communities, they would not be able to operate and afford the fees, making it not feasible in the long-run.  Having opened five years ago, Mr. Schwinden reviewed their typical business, including records, CD's, VHS tapes, posters and memorabilia, most without a skew or serial number available to record; and the majority of those transactions very minor in nature. 

 

Mr. Schwinden agreed with the comments already expressed that this would grossly affect their business, and be tortuous interference; with their business ultimately not succeeding if adopted.

 

With no one else coming forward to speak, Mayor Roe thanked the audience for their public comment; and noted that this item is not being considered for action at this time, with staff asked to return with additional information as previously addressed and after the City Council has had time to consider the issue and verbal and written comments received from the public.  Mayor Roe advised that staff would attempt to keep people informed of when this item may be back before the City Council for consideration and further discussion.

 

18.         City Manager Future Agenda Review

City Manager Trudgeon reviewed upcoming agenda items.

 

19.         Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings

Councilmember Laliberte requested that the Public Works and Police Departments monitor southbound traffic on Hamline Avenue, and turning movements, directly in front of the Ramsey County Library - Roseville branch to reduce safety issues due to improper turns; or to work with Ramsey County on "No Turning" signs as applicable.

 

Mayor Roe noted that the interrupted discussion on ownership responsibilities for lateral water lines was anticipated to be continued at the April 7, 2014 meeting.

 

20.         Adjourn

Willmus moved, Etten seconded adjournment of the meeting at approximately 10:37 p.m.

 

                                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.