View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
Council Meeting Minutes
April 7, 2014
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
McGehee requested removal of 7.f, entitled, "Recreation Agreement with City of
Lauderdale," from the Consent Agenda for a question or discussion.
McGehee seconded approval of the agenda as amended.
Willmus; Etten; Laliberte; and Roe
3. Public Comment
Mayor Roe called
for public comment by members of the audience on any non-agenda items.
Michael Larson, St. Paul Postmaster
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."
Communications, Reports, and Announcements
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
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.
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
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 CTVNorthSuburbs.org/nscc or by calling
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
Donations and Communications
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.
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.
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.
2014 as Roseville Community Band Month
Mayor Roe read
a proclamation declaring May 2014 as Roseville Community Band Month.
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
McGehee; Willmus; Etten; Laliberte; and Roe
Mayor Roe read
a proclamation declaring April 25, 2014 Roseville Arbor Day.
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.
6. Meeting Minutes
Minutes of March 24, 2014 Meeting
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.
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)
Page 31, Line 2 (Roe)
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.
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
Etten seconded, approval of the following claims and payments as presented.
McGehee; Willmus; Etten; Laliberte; and Roe
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
Eureka Recycling; 2828 Kennedy Street NE
National Entertainment Network, LLC
325 Interlocken Parkway B; Broomfield, CO
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
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
General Purchases and Sale of Surplus Items in Excess of $5,000
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."
Sandstrom Land Management
Paragon Solutions Group
Software Licenses for video security
Software House Int'l.
Microsoft Software Licenses
Etten seconded, approval of trade-in/sale of the following surplus item:
Rescue boat & trailer - sale estimate pending
July 4th Fireworks Display Agreement
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.
"No Parking" Resolutions ' Skillman Avenue, Old Highway 8, and
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."
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."
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."
Consider Items Removed from Consent
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.
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.
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.
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.
General Ordinances for Adoption
Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at
approximately 7:08 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 7:09 p.m.
Joint Meeting with Finance Commission
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
At the request
of Mayor Roe, individual Councilmembers provided their expectations of the
Commission as follows.
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
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.
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.
Willmus and McGehee agreed with Councilmember Laliberte, that roles should be
discussed among commissioners.
Bachhuber sought guidance from the City Council on the role of the Chair and
how that person would work with the City Council.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
Willmus opined that this should be up to the Commission as part of their
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.
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).
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.
Laliberte expressed her appreciation to the members appointed to serve on this
Commission and for their time.
concurred, and wished the Commission good luck, and expressed his interest in
their future recommendations.
Annual Reports for Community Development's Land Use Code Enforcement and Business Property Enhancement Program Activities in 2013
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.
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.
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.
McGehee questioned whether consideration had been given to a reasonable end
date for projects as part of the permit and construction process.
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.
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
At the request
of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Munson addressed interior and exterior
inspections and how that would be addressed with the Rental Licensing Program
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
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.
expressed appreciation to and recognized staff performing this day-to-day work,
and their great customer relations work.
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.
Business Items (Action Items)
Fire Department Staffing Model Transition from a Paid-On-Call
Model to a Combination Full-Time/Part-Tim Model
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 was provided through the RCA dated April 7, 2014 and related
McGehee requested additional calculations on whether a short- or long-term
transition was the most cost-effective to move into this model.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
expressed appreciation for the presentation; and staff was directed to proceed
as evidenced by Council consensus.
Business Items - Presentations/Discussions
Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area Ordinance
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).
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
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.
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.
Trudgeon concurred, noting that this was referenced on page 7, line 105 of the
RCA, and reflected existing code.
modification was approved by Council consensus for residential standards.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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
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.
advised that most sidewalks and trails were already in place west of Fairview
Avenue other than from Twin Lakes Parkway to Fairview Avenue.
suggested language that the width would be determined by the use within; with
the City Council agreeing by consensus.
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.
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.
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.
Etten spoke in support of reducing that percentage to 80%.
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.
opined that public input and the Planning Commission discussions should help to
inform that subsequent decision.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Willmus also agreed with staff's comments; deferring to a considerable number
of years of discussion regarding that mission.
Laliberte questioned how underground parking had been addressed for High
Density Residential (HDR) zones.
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
Mayor Roe noted
that it was included in several areas as a goal of the Comprehensive Plan.
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.
advised that current standards do not preclude that option, and staff would
At the request of Mayor Roe, he
sought consensus from Councilmembers if there was any objection to them
proceeding to the next step.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
opined that such testimony may come forward at the public hearing.
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.
Frozen Water Lines
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Mr. Schwartz estimated that the average cost to thaw a line was
between $400 to $500.
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.
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.
clarified that this was an extreme weather situation, and typically annual
budgets were not based on worst case scenarios.
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
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.
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.
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.
Etten concurred with Mayor Roe's comments.
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.
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.
McGehee questioned if Councilmember Willmus would be more receptive to an
optional or volunteer assessment program.
Willmus responded that a voluntary program would address his equity concerns,
since a number of participants may not be able to provide funding.
McGehee suggested that staff come back with a plan for how such a program could
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.
Etten questioned the viability of such a program and potential pool of money if
there was only a limited number signing up.
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
McGehee; Willmus; Etten; and Laliberte.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
agreed that this seemed a reasonable approach, and served as a parallel to
driveway reconstruction options.
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
City Manager Future Agenda Review
Trudgeon reviewed upcoming agenda items.
Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings
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
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.
McGehee seconded adjournment of the meeting at approximately 10:01 p.m.