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

City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

April 7, 2014


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


2.       Approve Agenda

Councilmember McGehee requested removal of 7.f, entitled, "Recreation Agreement with City of Lauderdale," from the Consent Agenda for a question or discussion.

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


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


3.       Public Comment

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


a.            Michael Larson, St. Paul Postmaster

Mr. Larson stated his purpose was to honor Mayor Roe for his ongoing support of the "Shop, Ship and Share" event held annually at the Rosedale Center, where the American legion gathers items and sponsors events with local schools to send items to members of the military serving oversees.  Mr. Larson recognized Mayor Roe's support and attendance at these events over the last three years, and thanked him for his involvement, by presenting him with a "St. Paul Stamp of Approval."


4.       Council Communications, Reports, and Announcements

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


Mayor Roe noted that various City of Roseville activities, events and local government information were now available via social media, including Facebook, Twitter or by linking to the City's website to keep up-to-date.


Mayor Roe announced an upcoming hearing on the Comcast cable franchise renewal at the Shoreview Community Center on April 17, 2014 at 6:30 p.m., for residents of the ten communities in the system, including Roseville residents, to provide their input on various aspects of the service in their communities, and their personal experience with Comcast customer service and other services.  Mayor Roe advised that Comcast would present their proposal at that hearing to compare it to the current local franchise agreement; and explain terms for rights-of-way, performance and rate regulations are proposed in the new franchise agreement.


         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; and additional information available at or by calling 651/792-7515.


          Mayor Roe announced a vacancy on the City's Human Rights Commission in May of 2014; with applications available for this term expiring in approximately one year, created by a current commissioner moving out of the city.  Mayor Roe advised that the application deadline was April 25; with information and applications available at City Hall in person or by calling 651/792-7001; or on the website at


5.         Recognitions, Donations and Communications


            a.      Human Rights Commission (HRC) Essay Winners

Mayor Roe and Councilmembers recognized 2014 Human Rights Essay Contest winners, as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated April 7, 2014; with the first, second and third place winners reading their essays.  HRC Commission Chair Wayne Groff and Ms. Kaying Thao, member of the HRC, as well as a member of the Roseville Area School Board introduced students.  Ms. Thao also recognized parents and teachers in the audience, as well as Principal Dr. Hoskins and School Board member Kitty Goggins.  Ms. Thao noted that the HRC received and read 100 essays this year, with nine students being recognized tonight for placing first, second (tied), third place, and a number of Honorable Mentions.


Ms. Thao introduced winners to read their essays: 3rd place - Olivia Ogwangi, 8th grader with teacher Ms. Crystal Archer; 2nd place tied for Ailsa Schmidt and Ashley Chavez, 8th graders and teacher Mr. Lee Thao; and First Place winner: Elijah Sailer-Haugland, an 8th grader with teachers Mr. Gary Schwingle and Mr. Jeff Bibeau.  Honorable Mentions were Hanna Bruns, Isabel Lieb, Teague Bogenhold, Katie Nguyen and Anne Bensen; each of whom were recognized and received a certificate for their participation.


Mayor Roe recognized and thanked each participant, students and parents; and thanked the HRC for their review of the essays.


Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 6:45 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 6:53 p.m.                  

            b.      May 2014 as Roseville Community Band Month

Mayor Roe read a proclamation declaring May 2014 as Roseville Community Band Month.


Laliberte moved, Etten seconded, proclaiming May 2014 as Roseville Community Band Month in the City of Roseville, recognizing their fiftieth year, sponsored by the City of Roseville as a function of the Parks and Recreation Department since 1964.

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


            c.      Arbor Day

Mayor Roe read a proclamation declaring April 25, 2014 Roseville Arbor Day.


Willmus moved, Etten seconded, proclaiming April 25, 2014 as Roseville Arbor Day, recognizing the importance of trees and promoting their proper care and planting of many additional appropriate tree species to replace the thousands lost over the years.

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


6.         Meeting Minutes


a.            Minutes of March 24, 2014 Meeting

Comments and corrections to draft minutes had been submitted by the City Council prior to tonight's meeting and those revisions were incorporated into the draft presented in the Council packet.


Etten moved, McGehee seconded, approval of Meeting Minutes of March 24, 2014 as amended.



·         Page 9, Line 13 (Roe)

As the five bench handouts referenced were part of public testimony, the text "attached hereto and made a part hereof," should remain intact.

·         Page 25, Lines 27 - 28 (Roe)

Remove "staff note"

·         Page 31, Line 2 (Roe)

Remove "staff note"

·         Page 38, Lines 21 - 22 (Roe)

As the two bench handouts referenced were part of public testimony, the text "attached hereto and made a part hereof," should remain intact.


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


8.            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.            Payments

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

ACH Payments







                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


b.            Business Licenses & Other Licenses & Permits

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



Type of License

Diane Murakami; Massage Xcape

1767 Lexington Avenue N

Massage Therapist

Eureka Recycling; 2828 Kennedy Street NE

Minneapolis, MN

Recycling Hauler

National Entertainment Network, LLC

325 Interlocken Parkway B; Broomfield, CO

Amusement Device

Lithuanian American Community; 1874 Shryer Avenue N

For an event to be held on May 17, 2014 at the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, 2561 Victoria Street N in Roseville

Temporary On-Sale

Liquor License

Children's Cancer Research Fund; 7301 Ohms Lane,

Suite 460; Minneapolis, MN

For a raffle to be held on May 3, 2014 during its annual Love Beer Hate Cancer fundraising event at B-Dale Club, 2100 N Dale Street in Roseville


Gambling Permit


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


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

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, 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 April 7, 2014; and Attachment A entitled, "2014 Capital Improvement Plan Summary - Updated 03/31/2014."







City Hall

Sandstrom Land Management

Seasonal Maintenance




Paragon Solutions Group

Software Licenses for video security




Software House Int'l.

Microsoft Software Licenses




                                                            Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


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



Item / Description


Rescue boat & trailer - sale estimate pending


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


d.            July 4th Fireworks Display Agreement

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, approval of the agreement (Attachment A) with Pyrotechnic Display and the Roseville Fire Department to perform the 2014 Fireworks Display, in an amount not to exceed $13,000; and authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute the document.


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


e.            "No Parking" Resolutions ' Skillman Avenue, Old Highway 8, and Oakcrest Drive

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11139 entitled, "Resolution Prohibiting Parking on the North Side of Skillman Avenue West from Fairview Avenue N to West Snelling Drive."


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


McGehee moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11140 entitled, "Resolution Prohibiting Parking on Old Highway Eight from County Road C-2 West to County Road D West."


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


McGehee moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11141 entitled, "Resolution Prohibiting Parking on Oakcrest Avenue from Fry Street N to Snelling Avenue Service Road, and on Snelling Avenue Service Road from Oakcrest Avenue to Snelling Avenue N."


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


9.            Consider Items Removed from Consent


f.             Recreation Agreement with City of Lauderdale

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon summarized the request as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated April 7, 2014, noting that this was similar to past practice and the agreement had been reviewed by the City Attorney.


While expressing her full support of these joint programs, Councilmember McGehee sought additional information on how this joint program works and assurances that use by other cities were not supported by Roseville fees or taxpayer dollars.  For transparency purpose, Councilmember McGehee asked that staff provide an explanation to correct any misconceptions.


City Manager Trudgeon advised that fees charged pay for the bulk of costs for the program(s) and temporary employees to administer those programs, as well as for general administrative and back office support.  Mr. Trudgeon assured Councilmembers and the public that the City attempted to recover as much of the cost as possible, with other users fully reimbursing the City of Roseville for sign-ups at different rates, equipment use and use of the puppet wagon.  Mr. Trudgeon advised that the funding was subject to the number of people signing up and costs borne by, in this case, the City of Lauderdale or users of the program.


As the Parks & Recreation Department continued to expand offerings to adjacent communities, Councilmember McGehee asked that they provide the same transparency of shared programs as other departments were asked to do to ensure Roseville residents are not paying more.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Parks & Recreation Director Lonnie Brokke concurred with City Manager Trudgeon's explanation; clarifying that this Lauderdale program and agreement was paying for all costs in full; and paying the cost of non-resident fees per registrations, in addition to all costs for equipment and staffing.


McGehee moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of an agreement (Attachment A) between the City of Lauderdale and the City of Roseville Parks and Recreation Department for the provision of summer recreation programs between June 23, and August 15, 2014 as outlined in the RCA and attachment dated April 7, 2014.


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


12.         General Ordinances for Adoption


Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 7:08 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 7:09 p.m.


13.         Presentations


a.            Joint Meeting with Finance Commission

Mayor Roe welcomed the Finance Commission members and welcomed them to this joint meeting with the City Council.  With the exception of Commissioner Nagaraja Knoidena, absent due to a scheduling conflict, all commissioners present, including: John Bachhuber, Justin Rohloff, Peter Zeller, Ms. Robin Schroeder, Edwin Hodder, and Daniel Cartier.


At the request of Mayor Roe, individual Councilmembers provided their expectations of the Commission as follows.


Councilmember Etten, from an organizational standpoint, questioned whether the City Council preferred the Commission to meet for a few months to get up to speed and determine their individual strengths and weaknesses before choosing a Chair and Vice Chair and allowing staff to direct those initial meetings, or if they preferred to hold those elections immediately.  Councilmember Etten expressed his preference for them to work together for a few months before selecting their leadership.


Mayor Roe noted that, as discussed by the City Council at previous meetings, the thought was for the Commission to hold an informal retreat to make those determinations in a less formal setting; and if that point the chosen Chair decides not to continue serving in that role, they could reconsider their elections, as long as the Commission had someone willing to step forward in that role.


Councilmember Laliberte expressed her preference for the Commission to meet informally and select a Chair, but to let them pick their own leadership and get started, opining that this was not a staff commission.


Councilmembers Willmus and McGehee agreed with Councilmember Laliberte, that roles should be discussed among commissioners.


Member Bachhuber sought guidance from the City Council on the role of the Chair and how that person would work with the City Council.


Councilmember Etten responded, based on his personal experience chairing the Parks & Recreation Commission, noted that the Chair worked more directly with the staff liaison to direct the agenda and run meetings, and should be somewhat familiar with running a public meeting and directing those activities.  Councilmember Etten noted that, while some Chairpersons were more formal than others, the point person needed to be able to run the meeting, and be able to work with staff on agendas and directing questions from the body to staff.  While creating more work for that volunteer commissioner, Councilmember Etten opined that it was an exciting opportunity and could prove to be a great experience for people.


When the City Council drafted and revised the ordinance creating the Finance Commission, Councilmember Laliberte noted the considerable thought put into it; and reiterated some of her preferences, as well as other random thoughts for the Commission to consider as they begin their work.

1)    While interesting to discuss having a set calendar for the budgeting process; Councilmember Laliberte opined that since it changes from year to year, it was hard for residents to know that schedule, and suggested that a first step would be to set some of those things in regular practice; and sought the Commission's perception of that.

2)    Councilmember Laliberte sought input from the Commission on how to look at the budget once it's passed, noting that the Council was currently alerted when things are done at the fund level, but typically things within those funds did not come before the City Council, unless a specific recommendation was needed for a line item within the fund, or for various budget amendments throughout the year.

3)   Councilmember Laliberte expressed her initial frustrations when coming onto the City Council and expectations of program prioritization and ranking by importance and maintenance of those programs based on that ranking.  Councilmember Laliberte noted that numbers were included in the annual budget to be spent on those programs or services to maintain them; however, never did she find any of them dialed back to question current costs of a program or its specific budget.  Councilmember Laliberte suggested taking a look at each program to determine if there was a fresh way to deliver that service or program in a more cost-effective way versus simply continuing to fund it and rank it based on that new number.

4)  As she requested in the previous year's budget process, Councilmember Laliberte expressed her interest in the feasibility of having two budgets presented: one with no increase in property taxes versus the City Manager-recommended budget for a side-by-side comparison of what items would need to be reduced.  Councilmember Laliberte opined that she would find that helpful, and would be interested in the Commissions' thoughts on that potential.

5)    Councilmember Laliberte noted that the state legislature used a fiscal note policy providing a one or two page snapshot on projects.  While not interested in recreating the wheel to put it in practice, Councilmember Laliberte expressed her interest in looking at such a process for a specific project, initial costs, a timeline and expected costs in the future, providing a ten-year replacement cost.  Recognizing that in some cases, there may be no number available without additional data, with that particular form remaining blank, Councilmember Laliberte asked the Commission to consider such a process, using a new park building as an example from its construction, annual short- and long-term maintenance costs, additional costs needed for CIP in future years.


Councilmember Willmus expressed his curiosity as to where the group was currently at in their learning process, or what type of information had been provided to them since their appointment and tonight's meeting, noting that it had been a rapid timeline.


Finance Director Chris Miller advised that staff had not had the opportunity to meet with the Commission as of yet; and staff had been awaiting direction from the City Council at this joint meeting before doing so the City Council could set the stage moving forward.


Specific to the Commission's scope and duties/functions outlined in the ordinance, Councilmember Willmus noted that most of those had been clearly itemized based on how the process had evolved historically.  Councilmember Willmus advised that he was interested in the Commission determining if and how to do things better, or if there was a better way to disseminate information to citizens annually to enable them to be more involved in the process than in the past.  Councilmember Willmus advised that his focus was to have this Commission serve as the outreach in bringing citizens into the process.  While the perception is that people are not interested, Councilmember Willmus suggested a way could be found to encourage citizens to be part of the process.


Councilmember McGehee stated that she would like the Commission to bring other ideas to the City Council, opining that the City Council had been reactionary in the past, and the Commission could provide a fresh eye as members of the community having expertise in the financial field beyond that expertise at the City Council level.  Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of Councilmember Willmus interest in making the budget more accessible to the public, including ways to make it more interesting and exciting.  Councilmember McGehee expressed her preference for the Commission to come forward with ideas yet to be thought of or pursued.  Councilmember McGehee expressed her personal interest in hearing ideas from the Commission about the current budget process, specifically methods and techniques related to sustainability of the City's infrastructure and as part of the CIP as ideas or projects come forward, ensuring a long-range plan for maintenance and repairs.  Councilmember McGehee noted that had been an ongoing frustration of hers as the City Council approved things in a piecemeal fashion without an overall review of how those items would fit together and without a long-term impact evaluation.


          In recognizing the statutory requirements for the City to abide under, Mayor Roe noted that the City didn't entirely get to set its own agenda or budget rules, but were creatures of state government with limits, responsibilities and requirements.  Mayor Roe suggested the starting point for the Commission would be to learn about municipal government by becoming familiar with those statutory requirements and the specific sections on how city government works.  Mayor Roe suggested various resources, including the League of Minnesota Cities and staff, opining that a basic understanding of what could and could not be done at the local level in adopting an annual budget would be a good foundation, and the timing of that process for setting a Preliminary and Final Budget, and the requirements that went with that. 


          Mayor Roe also suggested that the Commission review how other cities pursued their budget process, and while not expecting the Commission to review all 800 cities in Minnesota within the next two weeks, he suggested they use those comparative resources as issues, ideas and questions came up, as a good way to vet things. 


          Regarding making the budget process accessible to the public, Mayor Roe suggested the Commission consider online tools, such as one that could allow a resident to plug into the finance section of the website and determine how a particular service or program would affect their personal tax bill and what it meant to them personally as well as to the City budget.  Mayor Roe opined that this could provide an interactive way to determine consequences of City Council actions, such as used in simplified format as a workbook on federal budgets; and allowing interesting ways to get the community involved and having a better understanding of municipal budgets and tools they could use to become more informed.


          For clarification purposes, Mayor Roe addressed the history of the creation of the twenty-year capital improvement program (CIP) created over several years by a subcommittee of staff and Councilmembers to address long-term CIP and infrastructure needs, with an initial report issued in 2011 and a subsequent report issued in 2012 providing the rest of the picture.  Mayor Roe noted that these documents were available from staff or online; and he offered to make his 2013 draft update available as well, as a former member of the subcommittee process. 


Mayor Roe advised that several of his personal interests for the Commission to consider were as follows:

1)      The City is required by the State Auditor to report depreciation in Enterprise Funds, as a standard accounting method, with the current practice to list that depreciation as an expense.  Mayor Roe questioned if there was a better way for the City to list that depreciation for the City and the State Auditor.

2)      Mayor Roe sought input from the Commission on how best to deal with the twenty-year CIP and annual expenditures, with the current practice to set spending to funding even though there may be spikes from year to year.  From a budget point of view, Mayor Roe sought ideas of how to handle that.


Input from Commissioners

Member Zeller noted that there was a good outline in the ordinance on the role of Chairperson internally; however, he asked the role of that person in presentations to the City Council or if that was done as a group effort, or how that interaction would work.


Councilmember Etten opined that it would be some combination of that, typically with a joint meeting set by the Mayor and Commission Chair, or open floor at a meeting, with a written report by the Chairperson.  From his perspective, if the City Council wanted to see the commission it would want to see the entire body.


Mayor Roe opined that if the Commission was looking at a specific issue, they could also create a subcommittee to work on that issue at which time they would be the Commission's face before the City Council.


At the request of Member Schroeder, Mayor Roe advised that the staff who would primarily be working with the Commission would be City Manager Trudgeon and Finance Director Miller, or their support staff designees; with Mr. Miller serving as their main staff liaison.


With the 2014 budget in place, and the Commission tasked with looking at the 2015 budget initially, Member Cartier opined that the Commission would need to look at both the operating budget and the capital budget.  Member Cartier questioned if a sinking fund was currently set aside from annual tax receipts for big ticket items (e.g. new fire station, fire truck or other items) and if there was a process in place to address those expenditures, or if a mathematical number was built into the CIP.


Mayor Roe affirmed that assumption, advising that it was not as typical for buildings as they would be more often handled through bonding, but that replacement of systems (e.g. HVAC) would be allotted for in the CIP.


Member Cartier opined that he saw one of the functions of this Commission to review bonding opportunities versus a day-to-day budget presentation to the City Council.


Mayor Roe advised that the City Council was looking for policy guidance from the Commission rather than specific number crunching in any great detail; and for suggestions from the Commission on how things could be done differently or how to set aside more funds if trends indicated such measures.


Member Cartier stated that he saw the Commission's focus on major dollars versus operating budgets; with more concern about CIP and big ticket items, and with the assistance of Finance Director Miller, to determine what was required for new elements and current capital and bonding leverage; and providing an adequate cash flow for those expenditures.


Mayor Roe noted that the CIP subcommittee documents he previously referenced included each category and annual updates accordingly, which would address Member Cartier's consideration of those items that may be over or under-funded, and whether or not more or less bonding was indicated.  Mayor Roe note that the CIP was basically set up to break even except for new buildings and other major categories of capital spending that remain unfunded.


Councilmember McGehee noted that for a number of years, there was no annual funding set aside to address infrastructure needs or those new buildings coming on board, causing everything to be underfunded and the City unable to meet its responsibilities.  Over the last four years, Councilmember McGehee noted that the City Council had attempted to address that situation; and referenced the asset management software program being put in place to track those items needing repair and maintenance and to plan accordingly for those items.  Councilmember McGehee opined that the City of Roseville had an issue specifically with the installation of new pathways, that were strongly supported by residents and taxpayers, but without any plan in place to their long-term maintenance, repair and replacement whether within or outside parks.  With 75 miles of pathways in the City, and an estimate of $5,000 maintenance required for every mile, Councilmember McGehee stated that such funding had not been set aside, opining that this was one of the things of interest to her.  Noting the preferences expressed by Councilmember Laliberte for a set calendar, Councilmember McGehee also expressed her preference for a method to be set to fund capital and maintenance costs; and whether that source should be bonding or use of reserves; or whether a further policy discussion was needed.  In her efforts to familiarize herself with budgets, Councilmember McGehee advised that she had personally reviewed online budgets and CIP's for other cities; and had found very interesting alternatives and other software packages uses, some more accessible and some worse than the City's current one, but all proving interesting and useful.


Member Cartier opined that the Commission would be able to provide the City Council with suggestions for the various points brought up.


Mayor Roe, in rebuttal to Councilmember McGehee's comments, clarified that approximately $250,000 had now been set aside annually for CIP maintenance; but the need was to adjust that amount to account for new pathways.


As a new Commission in the process of forming, Member Bachhuber asked how the City Council wanted to be kept informed of the Commission's work plan and kept informed of priorities for the coming year as they began to deliver on their initial work.


Mayor Roe suggested regular feedback through reports, not weekly unless things were happening that quickly; but by working with City Manager Trudgeon and Finance Director Miller on how to fit the Commission into the process and into City Council agendas.  Mayor Roe suggested using e-mail updates to keep the City Council informed in between.


Councilmember Willmus opined that this should be up to the Commission as part of their organizing discussions.


Mayor Roe noted that the Commission meetings would be televised, with formal meeting minutes recorded, and video of the meetings, all part of that process.  Mayor Roe further reviewed restrictions for Commissions, subject to Minnesota Open Meeting Laws, addressing quorums, official meeting notice, and other restrictions that the Commission would need to work out administratively with staff, for monthly meetings and meetings of any greater frequency, with formal action to set those meetings and staff providing that administrative function to ensure they are sufficiently advertised and posted accordingly.  Mayor Roe noted that the upcoming Ethics Training and orientation would cover many of these details.


Member Hodder, referencing online tools available as mentioned by Mayor Roe, noted the challenge in providing that information and how it would be funded, based on his experience with similar challenges in his work with the Department of Education and Economic Development (DEED).  


Councilmembers agreed that such a recommendation to the City Council for that information would need to be part of the Commission's role.  Mayor Roe noted that the Commission's budget was "zero" at this time.


Councilmember Laliberte expressed her appreciation to the members appointed to serve on this Commission and for their time.


Mayor Roe concurred, and wished the Commission good luck, and expressed his interest in their future recommendations.


b.            Annual Reports for Community Development's Land Use Code Enforcement and Business Property Enhancement Program Activities in 2013

Codes Coordinator Don Munson provided an update on two separate programs of the Community Development Department: Land Use Code Enforcement and the Business Property Enhancement Program (BPEP); and staff involved in each program. 


In his presentation on the residential Neighborhood Enhancement Program (NEP), Mr. Munson noted the downward trends in violations from 2012 to 2013, as detailed in the RCA; with the program successfully working as designed.


Mr. Munson noted that 2013 was the first year in expanding the NEP from residential to commercial and multi-family rental properties; and was found to be very well-received by property owners and the public.  Mr. Munson advised that the intent was to continue the residential NEP for years one and two of a three year cycle, with the third year used for the BPEP program for commercial areas.


At the request of Councilmember Willmus in recognizing the thirty-six violations for snow, Mr. Munson advised that violations were typically snow plowed and piled inadvertently on sidewalks, or business not shoveling sidewalks.  Mr. Munson advised that this was usually due to a new manager of the property not realizing their responsibility to shovel their property; with most found pretty cooperative, and while not necessarily in agreement with it, agreeing to comply.


At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Munson reviewed the BPEP and the soon-to-be-implemented Rental Licensing Program for multi-family buildings of five or more units, being finalized at this time.  Mr. Munson advised that those initial inspections were anticipated to begin this May, and that program would take the place of any BPEP and/or NEP inspections this first year.


Councilmember McGehee questioned whether consideration had been given to a reasonable end date for projects as part of the permit and construction process.


Mr. Munson noted that, technically, a building permit is valid as long as there was work continuing on a project; however, under the City's Public Nuisance Code, the City could require that many property maintenance issues be addressed within a certain deadline before abatement was pursued.


Further discussion ensued related to time limits for building permits at six months if no activity is evident, with state building code regulations trumping any city restrictions.


At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Munson addressed interior and exterior inspections and how that would be addressed with the Rental Licensing Program inspections.


City Manager Trudgeon noted that with the overwhelming number of inspections in this first year of the Rental Licensing Program, and the same personal doing those inspections, the three year cycle for residential and commercial inspections would be deferred for one year, other than for following-up on complaint based issues.


Mayor Roe advised that his feedback from the community was that they liked staff's approach to code enforcement in general, and appreciate having a program with some teeth to bring items forward for resolution at the City Council level or before they reached that point by volunteer compliance by the property owner.  Mayor Roe expressed the City Council's and community's appreciation for staff's role in the process. 


Mr. Munson expressed appreciation to and recognized staff performing this day-to-day work, and their great customer relations work.


Mayor Roe thanked Mr. Munson for his report and the work done by staff in these efforts.


Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 8:09 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 8:14 p.m.


10.         Public Hearings


11.         Budget Items


12.         Business Items (Action Items)


a.            Fire Department Staffing Model Transition from a Paid-On-Call Model to a Combination Full-Time/Part-Tim Model

Mayor Roe clarified that this was an item seeking City Council guidance rather than action at this time.  Fire Chief Tim O'Neill; Fire Marshal John Loftus, and Battalion Chiefs Dave Brosnahan and Greg Peterson were available for this presentation.


The presentation was provided through the RCA dated April 7, 2014 and related materials.


Councilmember McGehee requested additional calculations on whether a short- or long-term transition was the most cost-effective to move into this model.


Discussion ensued between Councilmember McGehee and Chief O'Neill on specifics of the proposed model, including the number of supervisor  shifts and rotations; ultimate goal for full- and part-time firefighters and total number of employees in the department between implementation of this model and ten years from now, with further evaluation needed as the department and their roles changed with new technologies and regulations and to meet training and equipment costs associated with hiring; and whether it would be better to make 2015 the transition year by eliminating part-time firefighters and go with a fully-trained full-time staff.


Mayor Roe agreed that it made sense, as part of the 2015 budget as a status quo and then to reasonably project out a few years.  However, Mayor Roe opined that the challenge would be to predict that staged approach for transition while not knowing who planned to leave for whatever reason.  Mayor Roe opined that the other extreme alternative would be to move to full-time in 2015 at year one; and advised that he would want to know year one costs and those costs in outlying years to help him make an informed decision as part of the budget process.


Councilmember Willmus expressed his appreciation for the approach suggested by the department; and as requested by Councilmember McGehee he wanted to see budget implications going forward.  Councilmember Willmus agreed with Mayor Roe, opining that overall he liked the thought process behind the suggestion and direction the department was moving, but he wanted to see those cost projections.


At the request of Mayor Roe as to whether there was any objection for staff moving forward with this model as part of the 2015 budget, Councilmembers Laliberte, Etten and Willmus and Mayor Roe expressed their support.


Councilmember McGehee apologized if her previous comments seemed harsh; and clarified that the longer a firefighter was involved in the community the better it was for the community; and offered her support of that approach.  However, Councilmember McGehee advised that she wanted to see if a longer transition was of better benefit for the City.


Mayor Roe expressed appreciation for the presentation; and staff was directed to proceed as evidenced by Council consensus.


13.         Business Items - Presentations/Discussions


a.            Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area Ordinance

City Planner Thomas Paschke reviewed past discussions and proposed amendments by staff to Table 1005-01 and suggested next steps, as detailed in the RCA dated April 7, 2014.  Staff sought comments related to changes detailed in red in the table and types of uses allowed in Community Mixed Use (CMU) Districts; particularly as they related to drive-throughs and retail components over 40,000 tied to a Conditional Use as discussed at the February 20, 2014 meeting for those types of larger retail uses proposed adjacent to park areas (pages 2 - 5).


As a second component, Mr. Paschke reviewed proposed changes in design standards as the City Council sought to eliminate the Regulating plan as the design requirement document for Twin lakes and directed staff to develop something more consistent with other similar commercial districts throughout the City (pages 5 - 9). 


Mr. Paschke advised that the next steps as outlined would be considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing scheduled for April 10, 2014, prior to the proposed text amendment process if so directed by the City Council tonight for their review of the revised "Statement of Purpose" and Comprehensive Plan definitions.


Mr. Paschke further reviewed nuances previously discussed for refining the former Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) requirements (pages 6 - 9) to bring the CMU into alignment with current development activities.


Mr. Paschke advised that he and City Manager Trudgeon had met earlier today to address questions brought forward by the Mayor and addressed in the bench handout, and entitled "Chapter 1005. Commercial and Mixed Use - 1005.02 Design Standards."  Mr. Paschke noted that this addressed residential buffering areas.  As a direct result of that discussion, Mr. Paschke advised that footnote "a" on Table 1005-4 (page 8), needed further modification and should be included on the top line on the referenced table section, allowing the Community Development Department staff to determine whether or not buffer strips are appropriate in certain areas. 


City Manager Trudgeon concurred, noting that this was referenced on page 7, line 105 of the RCA, and reflected existing code.


This modification was approved by Council consensus for residential standards.


Councilmember Willmus addressed the three changes for permitted uses under a Conditional Use for limited production and process, and limited manufacturing and production uses under 40,000 square feet, and questioned their practical application if adjacent to or across the road from a park. 


In response, Mr. Paschke  advised that, specific to the CMU District in Twin Lakes, there were no roads separating adjacency, but uses could be right next door and touching, with property across the street not necessarily seemed as impactful (e.g. Terrace Drive, Twin Lakes Parkway, or Mount Ridge Road).  Mr. Paschke opined that trail connections and mitigation of certain other items, and tree preservation would address those issues; and his recollection of previous discussions with the City Council had been based on regulatory requirements.  Mr. Paschke further opined that as uses moved further away from a park, whether by feet or by blocks, they would have less of an impact on parks, in this case specifically Langton Lake Park and Oasis Park.


Mr. Trudgeon agreed, opining that adjacency is self-evident with the exception of one property in Twin Lakes known as the "PIK" properties, with seven different legal parcels included in that development area and the need to account for that potential development and impact on adjacent parcels.  Mr. Trudgeon opined that the definition of "adjacency" itself was one criteria, with the demarcation of the road a good separation, and a certain distance from the park as long as not bisected by a road; with the ultimate goal that land adjacent to a park should be treated differently than properties across the street.  However, Mr. Trudgeon cautioned that the PIK property was one parcel that may have some unintended consequences if not properly addressed by this provision.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Trudgeon clarified that several filters would be put in place with these modifications: adjacency, a certain amount of feet unless bisected by a road, and other considerations as staff developed those standards.


By consensus, the City Council agreed with this recommendation of staff.


At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Paschke clarified standards for nighttime activities (page 8, lines 146-147) specific to loading off- or on-street within a certain proximity to residential districts; noting that these standards were currently included in the Regional Business District (RBD), but with Councilmember Willmus seeking the rational for those regulations.


Councilmember McGehee questioned home occupations as a permitted use in the CMU; with Mr. Paschke advising that there were standards and criteria in place as defined in zoning code that needed to be met in residential areas (e.g. in apartments).


Councilmember McGehee further requested a 20' buffer versus a 10' buffer due to the watershed for the park and need to filter water through plantings or other options (page 7, lines 101 - 104, Item C); as well as determining whether a 6' or 8' path was necessary, opining that 8' was too large in some areas, and would prefer a variation between the two depending on where it is: a sidewalk versus a bike path connection.  Councilmember McGehee questioned if, in more high density areas in a CMU District, were 8' wide concrete sidewalks preferable to 8' wide bituminous pathways.


Mr. Trudgeon clarified that the pathways included in that portion were for connections outside a park that would carry a lot of traffic, and not within the park itself.


Mr. Paschke advised that most sidewalks and trails were already in place west of Fairview Avenue other than from Twin Lakes Parkway to Fairview Avenue.


Mr. Trudgeon suggested language that the width would be determined by the use within; with the City Council agreeing by consensus.


Regarding Surface Parking (page 8, lines 139-142, Item K), Councilmember McGehee noted previous presentations regarding ribbon curbing to drain into an area to feed vegetation as part of a landscape plan, and expressed her interest in having that provision included.


Mayor Roe noted that the City's landscape standards in another area of City Code would be a better place to address that provision.


Mr. Paschke advised that this was a Best Management Practice (BMP) under stormwater management regulations, and was separate and distinct from these standards. Mr. Paschke suggested not mandating it in this area, as there may be areas in the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area that are not appropriate for infiltration without granting variances; and opining that most people liked to incorporate such provisions into their plans to avoid additional irrigation needs and costs.


Councilmember McGehee stated that she was not opposed to cutting back from the 85% impervious surface coverage, but would prefer that it be further reduced to 80% given the significant infiltration issues in this area in particular.


Councilmember Etten spoke in support of reducing that percentage to 80%.


Councilmember Willmus opined that he wasn't sure at this point whether he would be in favor of dropping that percentage to 80% until it was put into practice more before being compelled to go in that direction.


Mayor Roe opined that public input and the Planning Commission discussions should help to inform that subsequent decision.


Regarding Design Requirements, Councilmember Etten referenced Table 1005-1 (page 3) and the series of permitted uses, including outdoor storage and roofing materials; and questioned if the possibility of  retailer such as Lowe's or the existing Walmart Garden Center would be impacted.


Mr. Paschke advised that they would need to meet the requirements by enclosing those areas; with certain allowances provided in other sections of Code for which they could make application.  Mr. Paschke noted that some of the outdoor requirements had previously been revised, but he wasn't sure how they may impact the two examples given by Councilmember Etten, as typically business districts have not supported outside storage without screening.


Councilmember Etten questioned why drive-throughs were not permitted if a fast food enterprise would show future interest in locating adjacent to Walmart, but not permitted when it was already permitted across the street where it created a dangerous access scenario.


Mr. Paschke advised that, from his historical understanding when the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area was created, the community had no interest in allowing drive-through restaurants in the area, but preferred fast casual or sit-down restaurants; thus their status as unpermitted uses.  If this City Council was inclined to change that, Mr. Paschke suggested that they could do so, but it may change the complexion of who may infiltrate that area, and questioned if that was the overall community desire for the Twin Lakes area.


Councilmember McGehee agreed with staff's understanding; opining that the City didn't have too many sit-down restaurants; and from a traffic or residential point of view, the decision had been made to encourage more fast casual or sit-down dining options versus more fast food enterprises.


Councilmember Willmus also agreed with staff's comments; deferring to a considerable number of years of discussion regarding that mission.


Councilmember Laliberte questioned how underground parking had been addressed for High Density Residential (HDR) zones.


Mr. Trudgeon and Mr. Paschke agreed that it was permitted, but that there were no standards in place to address it.  Mr. Paschke advised that staff would encourage underground parking to reduce paved surfaces and allow for more green space; however, he noted that there is a significant cost to do so, but it was not precluded from any development process and staff would encourage structured or underground parking.


Mayor Roe noted that it was included in several areas as a goal of the Comprehensive Plan.


Councilmember McGehee noted that one type of parking not evidenced in Roseville was for parking similar to that at the Galleria in Edina; and sought to ensure that it was not precluded as an option.


Mr. Trudgeon advised that current standards do not preclude that option, and staff would support it.


At the request of Mayor Roe, he sought consensus from Councilmembers if there was any objection to them proceeding to the next step.


Mr. Paschke noted that food trucks and several other items would become permitted uses under the proposed text amendment and standards for uses over 40,000 square feet based on previous City Council direction, and would be brought before the Planning Commission at their June 2014 meeting.


Mr. Trudgeon recapped the proposed text amendments requiring a Conditional Use for any retail use larger than 40,000 square feet adjacent to a park or single-family residential, as more clearly defined; with other uses depending on best practices that require buffers of a certain amount of feet, limiting the height of the building, and other restrictions unless it went through the Conditional Use process.


Councilmember McGehee expressed her strong issues with the PIK Terminal site and how it hugs such a large portion of Langton Lake Park; opining that it should have a considerable buffer to protect the park environmentally and its purpose being.


Depending on what was done with the setback, Councilmember Willmus opined that the lake acted as a natural buffer, and should provide the ultimate footage desired, whether additional controls were required or not; and from his perspective it diminished the need for those additional controls to some extent.


Mayor Roe agreed that the increased setback covered the notion of a buffer and landscape standards, along with the area's characteristics and stormwater management requirements provided additional buffers.  If individual Councilmembers felt additional specifics were needed, Mayor Roe suggested they feed that input into the public hearing process.


Councilmember Willmus expressed his interest in hearing more input about a reduced impervious surface of 80% to retain 20% green space; and whether or not it had any impact on market values in the area.


Mayor Roe opined that such testimony may come forward at the public hearing.


Mr. Paschke reviewed the area with a displayed map and how adjacent residential properties interacted with developable parcels and buffers provided based on certain uses allowed under a Conditional Use for retail uses over 40,000 square feet, and otherwise permitted.  Councilmembers offered no objection to that scenario.


b.            Frozen Water Lines

Public Works Director Duane Schwartz updated Councilmembers since previous discussions as detailed in the RCA dated April 7, 2014, with one additional survey addition from the City of Bloomington and their experience this winter with 184 water line freeze-ups out of 25,000 services, and similar ownership responsibilities to that of Roseville.   Mr. Schwartz advised that the City of Bloomington was thawing everything with city forces, with a welder and another rental welder provided to their customers.  Based on the information provided, Mr. Schwartz advised that it appears many cities are covering the cost of thawing lines if their policy establishes ownership to the property line, with three exceptions as outlined, and others providing help as detailed in the survey.


Reimbursement for Thawing

Councilmember Etten noted that other cities appeared to offer up to a $500 reimbursement for welding services, which would cover the majority of property owners, and offered his support for a similar reimbursement in Roseville.  Councilmember Etten spoke in support of a further base rate credit for those without water for over two weeks, and questioned how the City could charge a base rate if their customer was not getting water services.


Mayor Roe clarified that intent of Councilmember Etten to prorate annual costs based on the amount of time without service.


Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of a base rate credit, agreeing completely that it was unfair to ask a customer to pay for service when those services were not available during the time the line was frozen.


As discussion ensued about usage, base rates and documentation of those lines frozen and how long they were froze to enable prorating credits, Mr. Schwartz clarified that staff may not have accurate information on when the lines were frozen and when they were thawed, unless the customer was able to provide an invoice for reimbursement of welding services.


Further discussion ensued regarding the time period to reimburse customers; estimated $40 per quarter water base rate for a typical single-family home; and comparisons with the Cities of Little Canada and Shoreview.


Councilmember McGehee agreed with the public testimony previously heard, that water service was a basic service the City should provide; and recognized her knowledge of at least two homeowners in Roseville having paid in excess of $10,000 for water line repair.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Schwartz estimated that the average cost to thaw a line was between $400 to $500.


Further discussion ensued regarding lining in sewer lines versus water lines; how this played out in the future for typical freeze-ups and extreme winter freeze-ups and how to alert residents before then on how to avoid issues; and current tracking done by staff to notify property owners determined to be at risk to start running water. 


Mr. Schwartz addressed future mitigation efforts as projects worked through the Pavement Management Plan (PMP) to insulate lines as part of construction projects and other options to alleviate these areas.


At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Schwartz estimated a cost of approximately $65,000 to $70,000 to provide $500 per affected household freeze-up and a quarterly credit as proposed by Councilmember Etten; proposing it be funded this year out of reserves for the most part, with future rates calculated and adjusted annually to address this as it impacted the CIP.


Mayor Roe clarified that this was an extreme weather situation, and typically annual budgets were not based on worst case scenarios.


Discussion ensued, at the prompting of Councilmember McGehee, regarding a potential voluntary insurance program for assessing homes for an annual fee (e.g., $25 per year) to generate funds to maintain a reserve to address future problems,  and make repairs to these laterals, to ensure quality water service to residents.


Councilmember Willmus opined that he could not personally agree to requiring an additional $25 fee, when efforts could be made when lines are installed that would avoid such issues; and questioned how equity would be addressed for those making the efforts versus those choosing to not make those efforts.


Further discussion ensued regarding location of freeze-ups in public rights-of-way and those not within that right-of-way depending on the contractor and actual development and its timing.


Mayor Roe opined that he would find it difficult to implement another $25 annual fee, representing a 15% increase over the base water rate, after residents had experienced a 60% increase over the last few years.  Mayor Roe advised that he could not support such a mandate to address 1.5% of the city's properties.


Councilmember Etten concurred with Mayor Roe's comments.


Etten moved, Willmus seconded, credit up to $500 for homes with frozen water lines and associated costs for those properties hiring a private vendor and work not performed by City staff; and applying a credit of one quarter base rate for those affected homes.


Mr. Schwartz clarified that the credit of up to $500 was strictly based on the costs associated with thawing, noting that some may have been successful in using a hot water method versus a welding method.


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


Councilmember McGehee questioned if Councilmember Willmus would be more receptive to an optional or volunteer assessment program.


Councilmember Willmus responded that a voluntary program would address his equity concerns, since a number of participants may not be able to provide funding.


Councilmember McGehee suggested that staff come back with a plan for how such a program could be implemented.


McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, directing staff to review an optional volunteer insurance program at a fee of $25 or $50 per year for water service lines; with a friendly amendment accepted to provide this information by mid-summer.


Councilmember Etten questioned the viability of such a program and potential pool of money if there was only a limited number signing up.


Councilmember Willmus clarified that the intent of the motion was for staff to research such a program, and return to the City Council, with nothing set in place at this point.

                                                Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Laliberte.

Nays: Roe.

Motion carried.


Service Lateral Ownership

Mr. Schwartz reviewed the survey information, with a two to one ration of city- owned rights-of-way; and other survey information indicating ownership situations similar to that of Roseville.  While staff sent the request to the majority of metropolitan cities, only those listed on the survey responded.


Mr. Schwartz cautioned that if the City Council changed their current policy, those property owners having experienced this cost privately may seek compensation from the City Council for reimbursement of their personal investment without recognizing that this is s new policy impacting their rates.  Mr. Schwartz reviewed short- and long-term financial impacts to the CIP funding if the current policy is changes, anticipating a combined liability over a 50 year period for a large-scale project of between $30 million and $50 million; or a cost for a piecemeal approach between $5,000 and $10,000 per lateral, culminating in a $60 million to $100,000 million liability.


Mr. Schwartz noted that sewer laterals in Roseville had a more immediate cost implication than water lines, even considering the freeze-up issues, as most of those copper lines were constructed 50-60 years ago, and had a longer term life, but if a problem came up, its exact location was not always identifiable.


At this point, given financial considerations and related issues, Mr. Schwartz advised that staff was not making a recommendation, but seeking direction from the City Council as to their preference for more study and research or to leave the current policy alone; or providing direction as to where staff should focus their energies.


Discussion ensued, at the prompting of Councilmember McGehee, regarding communication efforts with residents by the City for sanitary sewer service lateral options in conjunction with major construction projects and if roots or blockages are in evidence through televising of those lines; private property versus public rights-of-way and related issues; equipment limitations in determining issues with laterals; impacts to homeowners who may not be aware of their responsibilities until a problem occurs; and specific examples.


At the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Schwartz advised that sewer lining projects, as well as water lining projects, could provide a future option for viewing laterals; however. He noted that the cameras would have to be inserted in the lines from the house itself.


Councilmember Etten opined that the point made by Councilmember McGehee is valid that the City could attempt to tie in construction projects with communication to residents for their private laterals allowing residents to make a choice at that point whether to pursue corrective measures.


Mayor Roe agreed that this seemed a reasonable approach, and served as a parallel to driveway reconstruction options.


McGehee moved to ask staff to bring more information about impact of service lateral ownership and how handled in other communities; with the  Mayor declaring the motion failed for lack of a second


14.         City Manager Future Agenda Review

City Manager Trudgeon reviewed upcoming agenda items.


15.         Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings

Councilmember Etten asked that individual Councilmembers provide feedback to City Manager Trudgeon for relaying them to City Manager Review Subcommittee members Etten and Willmus to facilitate discussion and to provide updated goals and performance review information for the entire body.


At the prompting of Mayor Roe, Councilmembers were asked to provide that information within one week.


Councilmember McGehee suggested that the Subcommittee use evaluation tools from the League of Minnesota Cities website.


At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, City Manager Trudgeon advised that, with only one response for suggested ordinance language changes related to standing commissions received from Chairs of those commissions, he needed to discuss next steps with her before proceeding further.


16.         Adjourn

Etten moved, McGehee seconded adjournment of the meeting at approximately 10:01 p.m.


                             Roll Call

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

Nays: None.