City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

December 8, 2014

 

1.      Roll Call

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

 

2.       Approve Agenda

Laliberte moved, McGehee seconded, removal of Item 13.d from tonight's agenda for separate consideration and as part of a broader discussion of the Twin Lakes redevelopment Area that the City Council had previously promised residents.

 

Councilmember Willmus spoke in opposition to the motion, stating that he wanted to allow discussion of that item this evening.

 

Mayor Roe spoke in opposition to the motion, stating that this was a different topic, with previous discussions regarding input from residents more related to uses and zoning.

 

Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte and McGehee. 

Nays: Willmus, Etten, and Roe.

Motion failed.

 

Laliberte moved, Willmus seconded, moving Business Action Items 1, d and d before Item 12 Budget Items on tonight's agenda.

 

Councilmember Laliberte also requested moving Business Action Item to approve or deny expanded hours for on-sale brewer taproom establishments immediately following the public hearing.  Councilmember Laliberte advised that her rationale in these agenda adjustments was based on residents in the audience who may wish to speak to these items without having to stay too late and not having any comment on the budget discussion that may be lengthier.

 

Councilmember Willmus spoke in opposition to the motion.

 

Councilmember Etten spoke in opposition to the motion, noting the estimated times listed on the public agenda, with changes possibly  making things more confusion or having that item occur prior to a resident's arrival to speak to a specific
item, basing their arrival on projected times.

 

Mayor Roe noted that often the City Council took action on an item immediately following the public hearing without formally adjusting the agenda.

 

Since it appeared that the motion would fail and was not supported by the seconder of the motion, Councilmember Laliberte withdrew her motion.

 

Councilmember McGehee requested removal of Items 7.f and 7.j from the Consent Agenda for separate consideration.

 

Councilmember Etten requested removal of Item 7.g from the Consent Agenda for separate consideration.

 

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

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

3.      Public Comment

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

 

4.      Council Communications, Reports, and Announcements

Mayor Roe announced previews of new park buildings on December 16 (Lexington Park Shelter) and December 17 (Sandcastle Park at 3060 Patton Road) from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. with light refreshments served.

 

Mayor Roe announced the upcoming Minnesota Wild practice at the OVAL on December 12 from 9:00 a.m. to Noon, with the Wild on the ice at 11:00 a.m.; with family activities planned during those hours, including free skating with skate rentals.

 

Mayor Roe announced donation opportunities for winter clothing sponsored by the Roseville Visitors Association in conjunction with OVALumination events; with donations accepted throughout the winter months and drop boxes located in various areas of the OVAL.

 

5.       Recognitions, Donations and Communications

Finance Director Chris Miller introduced the City's new Assistant Finance Director Jason Shirmacher to Councilmembers and the public.

 

6.       Approve Minutes

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

 

a.            Approve Minutes of November 10, 2014 Meeting

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, approval of the Meeting Minutes of December 1, 2014 as amended.

 

Corrections:

·         Page 2, Lines 11 - 12 (Laliberte)

Correct to read: ".... be hosting the March of 2015 meeting at the Roseville Fire Station in the training room[.]  ,at which time [T]he [January] agenda [will] would include meeting with state legislators"

·         Page 25, Line 19 (McGehee)

Typographical correction: " to"

·         Page 26, Line 1 (Willmus)

Typographical correction: add "Willmus" after Councilmember...

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

7.       Approve Consent Agenda

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

 

a.            Approve Payments

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the following claims and payments as presented and detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated December 8, 2014, and attached check register.

         

ACH Payments	$405,289.59
75903 - 75996	199,859.92
TOTAL	$605,149.51

                       

                                                            Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

b.            Approve Business Licenses & Other Licenses & Permits

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of business license applications for the period of one (1) year, unless otherwise noted, for applicants as listed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014.

                            

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

c.            Approve Resolution Awarding Bid for 2015 Sanitary Sewer Main Lining

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11192 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution Awarding Bids for 2015 Sanitary Sewer Main Lining;" to Insituform Technologies USA, LLC in the amount of $856,787.00.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

d.            Consider not Waiving Statutory Liability Limits for 2015

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of a motion to NOT waive the Statutory Liability Limits for 2015.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

e.            Consider Approving a Three-Year Audit Services Agreement with kern DeWenter Viere (KDV)

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, authorizing staff to enter into a three-year agreement for audit services with KDV as presented and detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

h.            Consider Approving a Premises Permit to Destination Education & Scholarship Foundation to Conduct Lawful Gambling Activities at 1754 Lexington Avenue (Ol' Mexico Restaurant)

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11199 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution Approving a Lawful Gambling Premise Permit to Destination Education, A Scholarship Foundation;" granting a premises permit to conduct lawful gambling activities at 1754 N Lexington Avenue (Ol' Mexico Restaurant)
by DESF, a new non-profit organization formerly operating under the name of the
North Suburban youth Foundation (NSYF).

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

i.             Centennial lakes Police IT Shared Services Agreement

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded,, approval of a Shared Services Agreement (Attachment A) with Centennial Lakes Police for the purpose of providing Information Technology Support Services.

 

k.            Fire Department & Allina Health Emergency Medical Services Medical Direction and Oversight Contract Extension Agreement

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, authorizing the Fire Department to enter into a contract extension (Attachment A) with Allina Health Emergency Medical Services for medical oversight and education for a period of ninety days.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

12.   Consider Items Removed from Consent

 

f.             Fire Department & Northeast Metro Intermediate District 916 Medical Training Program Agreement

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Patrick Trudgeon briefly reviewed this item being considered as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014, for student ride-along opportunities with Roseville Fire EMT's.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Fire Chief Tim O'Neill confirmed that this item had been brought forward for consideration by the City Council in June of 2014.  However, Mr. O'Neill advised that students were just starting spring
break, so the program had been delayed, and was just now being initiated. 
Chief O'Neill further advised that two changes to the document had been incorporated
at the previous request of City Council, and therefore was being submitted to
the City Council for their approval and authorization.

 

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement (Attachment A) with Northeast Metro Intermediate District 916 for teaching assistance for their Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) Program.

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

g.            Consider Approval and Support of Special Legislation Regarding the Composition of the Roseville Fire Relief Association Board of Trustees

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Patrick Trudgeon briefly reviewed this item being considered as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014; and deferred to Relief Association President Breen for further detail.

 

Dave Breen, President of the Roseville Firefighter's Relief Association

Mr. Breen concurred with the summary by City Manager Trudgeon, and as detailed in the RCA; advising that the legislation was intended to allow continued local governance of the relief fund.  Mr. Breen advised that this also opened the door for the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) to govern the fund, while funds would remain under the City's control via PERA's administration and
segregated from other PERA funds.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon advised that the general concept had been approved by the City Council earlier in 2014, and legislative staff was asking for formal City Council approval of the specific proposed legislation before moving forward.

 

Councilmember Etten, in his removal of this item from the Consent Agenda, noted this opened up legislative options never talked about; and while he trusted President Breen and the Relief Association Board, he asked that Mr. Breen address the benefits of such legislation and the PERA option specific to the annuity and how legislation may or may not affect the fund.

 

Annuity

Mr. Breen advised that there were fifty-two retired firefighters, in addition to beneficiaries of other retirees, who remained in the Relief Association, in addition to approximately forty active firefighters.

 

Councilmember Etten clarified that he fully supported that portion of the legislation and this request; however, he was seeking additional information on the PERA portion.

 

Mr. Breen noted that, with the number of people still involved, it would be extremely expensive to set an annuity for that many, with the financial need exceeding the value of the fund, and no longer an option in today's economy.

 

PERA

Mr. Breen advised that the PERA option provided a solution if and when the current Relief Board could no longer be staffed; with the legislative commission intending to set it up long-term, and not just for a ten-year stretch, but to assure the viability of the fund's administration long-term.  Mr. Breen noted that at some
point in the future, due to lack of interest, age of members, or other issues,
the fiduciary responsibilities of the board will need to be addressed if that
governance was no longer available.  Mr. Breen noted that the City Council
could not serve in that capacity, and therefore someone needed to be available
to handle those administrative duties, such as making monthly payments and
taking care of the fund.  Mr. Breen noted that PERA could administratively
handle lump fund payouts as well as monthly benefits, and perhaps down the road
may be able to manage the fund at a reasonable cost, which was currently under
discussion at the PERA level.

 

City Manager Trudgeon clarified that, for that action to happen, both the Relief Board and City Council would need to jointly approve whether or not PERA was brought in to govern the fund.

 

Mayor Roe, with confirmation by Mr. Breen, noted that at any point active members voted by majority to allow dissolution of the Relief Board at the prompting of the Board, that issue would subsequently be brought to the City Council for action.  Mayor Roe noted that there were a number of choices as to how the Association could dissolve in the future, but clarified that such dissolution would involve decisions of the Association membership and City Council.

At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Breen advised that he would need to confirm which two legislative committees this was being addressed by for drafting a proposed bill for special legislation, and would disseminate that information to the City Council via City Manager Trudgeon.  In referencing the outline letter included in the agenda packet, Mr. Breen noted the detail required for the process; and advised that the committees didn't see any issues with the legislation proceeding with little delay.  Mr. Breen noted that the Relief Association had attempted this legislation last year, but had not realized the number of steps required and therefore didn't meet necessary legislative timelines.

 

Mayor Roe also requested information from Mr. Breen or Mr. Trudgeon on any opportunities for Councilmembers to lobby in support of this bill.

 

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, approval and support by the City Council for the Roseville Firefighters Relief Association to pursue special legislation regarding Fire Relief Association Board membership as presented in Attachment A dated October 2, 2014.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

j.             Confirm Citizen Advisory Commission Reappointment/ Appointment Schedule

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Patrick Trudgeon briefly reviewed this item being considered as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014.

 

Councilmember McGehee noted that she had learned immediately prior to the meeting that Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commissioner Duane Seigler did wish to be considered for reappointment. 

Councilmember McGehee also requested that, at the City Council's January 5, 2015 organizational meeting, the agenda include discussion of the City Council's policy for determining who to interview.  Councilmember McGehee
stated that she would prefer those interviews to not take time from the January
12, 2015 City Council Worksession.

 

McGehee moved, Laliberte seconded, confirmation of the citizen advisory commission reappointment/appointment process as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014.

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

13.   General Ordinances for Adoption

 

Recess

Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 6:40 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 6:41 p.m.

 

14.         Presentations

 

a.            Community Engagement Commission (CEG) Joint Meeting

Mayor Roe welcomed members of the CEG to this second joint meeting.

 

Chair Gary Grefenberg and Members Michelle Manke, Theresa Gardella; Scot Becker; Jonathan Miller; Desiree Mueller were present and introduced themselves.

 

As detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014, Chair Grefenberg noted 2015 priority Work Plan items as identified, seeking City Council feedback on those recommended policies and strategies going forward.  Chair Grefenberg advised that all recommendations were approved by a consensus or majority vote of the CEG.

 

Work Plan Priority Items for 2015

Assist and Encourage the Formation of Roseville Neighborhood Associations

Chair Grefenberg noted that this was a continuation of community discussions in 2007 and as part of the Imagine Roseville 2025 visioning process.

 

Host a Conference on Community Engagement in Roseville

Member Gardella noted that the priority items were developed through the CEG dividing into 4-5 workgroups to develop them, and then presented to the full CEG for discussion and approval.  Ms. Gardella advised that the process took seven months to accomplish, but served to make the process more manageable.

 

Form a Joint Task Force with the Planning Commission to Study Notification Issues and Formats

Chair Grefenberg noted the ongoing interest in getting information out to the public; and while he found those attempts better than they were eight years ago, there was still room for improvement.  Chair Grefenberg suggested that items coming forward for land use or zoning consideration that were of a more significant environmental nature (e.g. asphalt plant) should receive a wider notice distribution than typically used for zoning notices.  Chair Grefenberg noted that this recommendation had also been provided to the Council by the Community Engagement Task Force.  Mr. Grefenberg advised that he presented this idea to the Planning Commission at their October 2014 meeting, and he was surprised and pleased to receive positive feedback from all Planning Commissioners and their agreement to work toward that goal.  Chair Grefenberg referenced items found under zoning notification in the RCA; and sought authorization to move forward with those suggestions.

 

Recommend an Online Civic Engagement Module for New City Website

Member Becker noted the need to implement and dovetail broader themes into the structure for projects that would reap long-term benefits and drive community engagement.  Mr. Becker advised that the CEG had been consulting with three vendors and hoped to make a recommendation to the City Council on a chosen vendor to proceed at the January 15, 2015 CEG meeting.

 

City Council Priorities and Emerging Opportunity

Chair Grefenberg used this opportunity to hear feedback from individual City Councilmembers.

 

Councilmember Willmus thanked members for report and for serving the community; and expressed his excitement and encouraged the CEG to continue working on creating neighborhood associations.  Councilmember Willmus opined that the CEG was the perfect conduit to help facilitate that effort.

 

Councilmember Etten concurred with the comments of Councilmember Willmus, and also thanked the CEG for their work to-date.  Councilmember Etten opined that neighborhood associations were great and helped bring people together to work together and could use some of the expertise from their group to affect decisions at the City Council level.  Councilmember Etten referenced page 7 of the CEG report related to engaging Roseville renters and non-single family homeowners (e.g. condominiums and co-ops) and expressed his interest and the need to engage that more.  As a piece of that, Councilmember Etten noted the need to examine how those residents were approached and their specific situations where electronic methods may not work and how to engage them otherwise.   Councilmember Etten noted that each apartment building or complex and unit or renter may approach this differently, and therefore a multi-modal approach was necessary.

 

Chair Grefenberg noted the intent that a joint Planning Commission and CEG effort would work to get that information out for leased properties.  As an example, Chair Grefenberg noted that information on or notice about the pawn shop issue currently before the City Council had not been received by residents of the adjacent apartment building.  Chair Grefenberg expressed his interest in the Planning Commission's willingness to work with the CEG on those communication efforts.

 

Councilmember Laliberte also expressed her appreciation of the hard work by the CEG in getting a new commission up and running and dealing with different personalities; and expressed her excitement about the great work yet to come forward.  Referencing the Task Force report, Councilmember Laliberte noted how cumbersome it would have been for the entire CEG to address the many issues brought forward; and expressed her support for the recommendations brought forward to-date and as detailed in the RCA.  Councilmember Laliberte advised that she shared the logistical concerns raised by Councilmember Etten, and noted the challenge in implementing the recommendations in getting information to those renters and residents in condominiums or co-ops that may inadvertently be excluded from current communication efforts.  Councilmember Laliberte noted her personal interest in this area, and advised that she would be following the efforts of the CEG closely as they moved forward.

 

Chair Grefenberg suggested one way to accomplish that communication effort could be through formation of a task force to advise the CEG on how best to implement some of those items.  Chair Grefenberg pointed out that some policies and strategies as detailed in the RCA didn't require a lot of work, but simply City
Council approval and their subsequent direction to staff.

 

Regarding hosting a conference on community engagement in Roseville, Councilmember Laliberte asked for more information on proposed speakers and format of such a conference; as well as seeking additional information on how and what had been done to-date regarding the referenced request for proposals (RFP's).

 

Member Gardella advised that details were not in place yet, but the intent of the working group was to map out a structure, then come back as a full CEG to make the recommendations, targeting the fall of 2015 for holding a conference.  Member Gardella opined that the first conference probably wouldn't be too large; and
suggested some potential agenda items could include happenings in other communities
with similar commissions to the CEG to talk about their experiences, successes,
and lessons learned; inviting different cultural groups in Roseville to talk
about their personal experiences and areas needing attention; and those
multi-family rental building owners and/or managers who have successfully
engaged renters in the past; as well as hearing from the City Council on
specific areas of community engagement of interest to them.

 

Member Becker advised that regarding the CEG's RFP module and process to-date had been
creation of criteria by the committee, evaluation of vendors, and delivery of a
Request for Information on those vendors to Communications Manager Garry
Bowman.  Member Becker noted that one of three vendors was the current vendor
for the City's website update, and their work would come with the website
package.  Member Becker noted that part of the criteria in selecting a vendor
would be cost; but opined that it would prove a relatively low investment compared
to other city costs and investments.

 

Councilmember Laliberte sought information on her previous request for information on where the former "Roseville University" was at; and expressed her interest in continuing that process of engaging and education residents.  Councilmember Laliberte expressed her disappointment that the course had not been offered for over a year, since she considered it so effective.

 

Member Gardella advised that "Roseville U" came up in task force recommendations a lot and had been considered a successful structure for community engagement.  However, Member Gardella stated that she understood that the City was rethinking or tweaking it and therefore, the CEG didn't pursue it much at this time.

 

Chair Grefenberg noted that, in the CEG report, they recommended resumption of "Roseville U."

 

Member Gardella further noted that the CEG had some specific recommendations as part of reformatting "Roseville U."

 

Councilmember Laliberte opined that she would like to see it reinstated sooner rather than later.

 

Councilmember Willmus concurred that "Roseville U" was a great program and offered his support in bringing it back.  However, Councilmember Willmus advised that one critique he'd heard was the length of time or number of sessions required to finish it; with many residents unable to make that long of a commitment.  Councilmember Willmus suggested tightening up that schedule to avoid fallout from the current program.

 

Member Becker noted that a "Mini Roseville U" had been one consideration of the CEG.

 

Regarding neighborhood associations, Councilmember McGehee suggested there may be different views of them depending on the personalities involved or the way they came to be.  Councilmember McGehee questioned if the role of the CEG was to assist the process other than in facilitating the neighborhoods self-identifying themselves and coming forward to express their interest in forming.  Councilmember McGehee noted that, efforts from various neighborhood associations had been somewhat thwarted in the past when they came forward seeking neighborhood signage to identify themselves, and previous City Councils had rejected those requests.

 

Chair Grefenberg noted that signage was included in the CEG report.

 

Councilmember McGehee questioned how the CEG saw its role in assisting and creating neighborhood associations versus those neighborhoods self-identifying and coming to the City for assistance; with one of those efforts top down and the other bottom up.

 

Chair Grefenberg stated that he supported the bottom up method; and if the City Council approved the CEG moving forward, they had already held preliminary discussions with three neighborhood associations who had experienced working solo to-date.  Chair Grefenberg suggested that a task force could bring back suggestions to the full commission; and offered his interest in coming back to the City Council with those recommendations for how the City Council could support neighborhood associations.  Chair Grefenberg noted the excellent track record of the Cities of Edina and St. Louis Park in encouraging the formation of neighborhood associations.

 

While neighborhood associations served as an excellent resource in communication between the City and those neighborhoods, Mayor Roe noted other aspects that had nothing to do with the City.  Mayor Roe advised that his number one reason for supporting the neighborhood association concept was to connect residents with each other in a smaller geographic area, and secondary to that first priority in their creation was to foster communication and receive their feedback from a city perspective.  Mayor Roe opined that it made sense that the associations develop bottom up and self-identify; but noted the challenges and past experiences in attempting to get them going.  Mayor Roe suggested that the role of the CEG may be to develop a list of best practices or to draft up options available as organizational documents that interested residents could tap into to create a neighborhood association.  Mayor Roe stated that such a role was what he was interested in seeing; as well as ways to connect rental communities while recognizing some of the challenges with a more transient resident versus long-term residents.  However, Mayor Roe suggested those long-term residents could serve as the core group for such an association. 

 

Mayor Roe stated that he wholeheartedly endorsed "Roseville U" and had heard nothing but positive things in the past; and suggested that it remain an option available to residents.  Mayor Roe stated that he was fine with keeping the course as delivered in the past, or tweaking it, but either way to move forward with it.

 

In conclusion, Mayor Roe noted that he heard no objections from individual City Councilmembers in the CEG moving forward with their identified priorities; and highlighted the City Council's expressed feedback and interest in pursuing and engaging renter
residents and reinstating "Roseville U."

 

Chair Grefenberg thanked the City Council for their feedback.

 

Chair Grefenberg noted the recommendations provided by the CEG regarding filling commission vacancies, and encouraged the City Council to review them before they got further into the mechanics.

 

Mayor Roe thanked the CEG for their work to-date; opining that they were progressing nicely.

Recess

Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 7:09 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 7:10 p.m.

 

15.   Public Hearings

 

a.            Public Hearing to Consider Amending City Code, Chapter 302, to Allow for Expanded Hours of Operation for On-Sale Brewer Taproom Establishments

Finance Director Chris Miller summarized the request as detailed in the RCA, with this entity serving as the sole on- and off-sale brewer taproom establishment in the City under these restrictions of City Code, Chapter 302.  Mr. Miller noted the two requests: one for expanded hours of operation for any on-sale brewer taproom establishment; and waiving the hours of operation limitation for the upcoming New Year's Eve date.

 

Discussion ensued regarding this specific taproom; revisions to the city-wide ordinance for hours of operation; and requirements under Minnesota State Statute as well as under City Code.

 

Councilmember Willmus offered his support of amending current City Code to allow such an establishment, including this applicant, to remain open until 1:00 a.m.

 

Applicant Bartley Blume, Bent Brewstillery

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, the Mr. Blume advised that ideally he would like the flexibility of remaining open until 1:00 a.m. to accommodate any special events or applicable holidays, and without coming before the City Council for each of those opportunities.  Mr. Blume advised that, in the future, they may choose to be open another day during the week based on the interest of their patrons, and/or as demand indicates, and would like that flexibility built in the ordinance as well.  Mr. Blume noted the growing interest in taprooms, with many open six days/week.

 

Mr. Blume reviewed the changes in the operation since the original license to this establishment, formerly issued to Pour Decisions Brewery before the merger, with that owner bound by family commitments and restrictions.  However, the Mr. Blume noted that this was his employment commitment, and that he worked with his wife in the establishment, and didn't have similar family restrictions.  Mr. Blume noted the large number of taprooms opening over the last 2.5 years in Roseville, as well as approximately 10-15 more opening in the metropolitan areas.  Mr. Blume noted that the business's track record should speak for itself, with no issues during their 2.5 years of operation; with well-behaved patrons. 

 

From a legal or law enforcement perspective for consideration by the City, Councilmember Etten asked Mr. Blume how he would differentiate his operation from other liquor licenses in the City who paid a much higher license fee and were able to operate for longer hours (e.g. bars).  Councilmember Etten expressed concern with the City setting a precedent, even though the establishment made its own product, and questioned if that would provide enough distinction.

 

Mr. Blume responded that their establishment was not a bar that would be much more established, with bars serving less expensive beverages in higher volume, in addition to the luxury of extra revenue they received from the restaurant side.  Mr. Blume noted the difference in their establishment, serving a minimum number of beers, no more than ten, and making its own high quality and more expensive product with care and passion, such as a bakery establishment would do for their particular product, and serving a much different clientele.  Mr. Blume opined that the distinction was already clearly stated in the limitations placed on such operations by the State of Minnesota.

 

Mayor Roe opened the public hearing at approximately 7:23 p.m.

 

Public Comment

Joey White, 430 Glenwood Avenue

Mr. White lent his voice of support for extended hours of operation for this type of establishment.

 

John Heier, 1435 Albany, Richfield, MN

As a partner in another taproom in Minneapolis, just across Hennepin Avenue, Mr. Heier advised that they could be open until 1:00 a.m.  By not extending the hours in Roseville for this type of operation, Mr. Heier opined that a patron could stay at the Roseville taproom until they closed, and then move their business out of Roseville to another suburb.  Mr. Heier opined that it would be a good thing for Roseville to extend hours of operation for this type of establishment.

 

With no one else appearing to speak for or against, Mayor Roe closed the public hearing at approximately 7:25 p.m.

13.         Business/Action Items

 

a.            Approve/Deny Amending City Code, Chapter 302 to Allow for Expanded Hours of Operation for On-Sale Brewer Taproom Establishments

Laliberte moved, Willmus seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1475 (Attachment A) entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Title 3, Section 302, Liquor Control;" to allow for expanded hours of operations for on-sale brewer taproom establishments as presented with hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Sunday through Saturday.

 

Individual Councilmembers expressed their support for the motion; and Mayor Roe wished the applicant the best of luck in his future business endeavors.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

16.         Budget Items

Finance Director Miller and City Manager Trudgeon both briefly provided their final comments and recommendations, as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014, lines 45-63, noting some savings from the last presentation and revised projections.

 

a.            Approve 2015 Levy & Budget

Councilmember Willmus noted the additional $2,000 request of the Human Rights Commission (HRC), noted on lines 57 - 59 of the RCA; and questioned if the Commission had any other options to free up those funds.

 

City Manager Trudgeon advised that the HRC currently had $2,000 in their budget, which included outsourcing their meeting minutes and for funding a variety of events they hosted.  If their request for funding civility training was included in that budget, Mr. Trudgeon advised that they would have to reduce that spending in some other way.

 

Mayor Roe noted that this money would come from the General Fund, with only two commissions having a specific budget.

 

At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, City Manager Trudgeon advised that, if the City Council chose to fund that civility training request, he would recommend the funds be taken from the Communications Fund, which would affect the budget but not the levy.  Mr. Trudgeon clarified that the HRC was still pursuing grant funding for the $3,000 program, and had received a $1,000 commitment and location by the Ramsey County Library - Roseville Branch.  Mr. Trudgeon noted that, if the HRC did not realize any other funding or grant opportunities, it would need to be funded by the City Council if they approved the expense.

 

Councilmember McGehee stated that she considered that civility training feel under the purview of communications; and would not be opposed to having the training become part of the City's periodic ethics training.  Councilmember McGehee noted that, whether additional funds or grants became available, the HRC was facing a deadline to confirm the library location for the training.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miller clarified that the projected $10,000 budget reduction for fuel was on the tax-supported side, with the vast majority of fuel usage for the Police and Fire Departments, and street vehicles.  Mr. Miller advised that there may be some savings on the non-tax-supported side, but it would be minimal.

 

Mayor Roe made a proposal, displayed for his colleagues and the public, and attached hereto and made a part hereof, as his recommendation to deal with the proposed levy by using some reserves to provide additional funding for the tax levy.  Mayor Roe reviewed his proposal for use of unrestricted reserves, as  well as reserves target range from the License Center Fund, and addressed policies in place that related to target fund balances for each.  Mayor Roe opined that his proposal provided a conservative approach to retain a midpoint level for those reserves by splitting the reserve in half, to be considered as a revenue source to reduce the 2015 levy increase. 

 

By proportionally using $355,000 from the License Center Fund and  $155,000 from General Fund unrestricted reserves, along with approximately half of the $200,000 projected by staff for 2014 operational savings, or $110,000, Mayor Roe noted that this would reduce the tax levy increase from 2014 to 2015 at $280,000.

 

Councilmember McGehee noted that this did not pay back the full amount taken from reserves in the past that the City Council had agreed to pay back.  Based on her calculations and these recommendations, Councilmember McGehee opined that only $175,000 would be paid back when it was already short.  To clarify the reserves in the License Center Fund that some may choose to characterize as "hoarding," Councilmember McGehee noted that those funds were intended to be used to construct a building for the License Center versus continuing to lease space at $60,000 annually. 

 

While agreeing in principle with mayor Roe's proposal for the General Operating Fund, Councilmember McGehee opined that the City should be looking during the year for operational savings that could be found citywide, such as through outsourcing or contracting out some services, providing savings and not requiring these drastic measures.  As an example, Councilmember McGehee questioned if the City of Roseville needed its own SWAT team; or if it could raise fees going forward to achieve major savings rather than continuing to use reserves that were intended to other purposes.

 

Excluding the License Center reserves, Councilmember Willmus noted, in large part, the reserves represented taxes paid in advance by Roseville taxpayers.  Based on his review of Finance Commission recommendations, Councilmember Willmus noted that reserves remained $1 million to $1.5 million above the target goal; therefore making it very much within the City Council's purview to use those
monies to offset the levy, in particular given the restructuring by Ramsey
County of residential and commercial property values for 2015.  If the City Council
used the numbers proposed by Mayor Roe, Councilmember Willmus noted that this
would get the levy increase for 2015 to be consistent with the rate of inflation
over the past year.  Councilmember Willmus opined that this would not limit the
City moving forward and would be a prudent step that he could support.

 

Councilmember Etten stated that he was not a big supporter of using one-time money to patch together a budget.  However, Councilmember Etten stated that he was somewhat amenable to the proposal by Mayor Roe this year given the severe shift of property values from commercial businesses to residential family homes, which was hitting homeowners significantly hard for 2015.  Councilmember Etten noted that the use of those reserves as proposed was significant and put the City at a $540,000 hole before talking about anything for 2016.  While comfortable using some reserves, Councilmember Etten opined that that number was a large hole to dig out of, and at some point would hit the City hard and limit future decision-making.  Speaking specifically to the comments about meeting Consumer Price Index (CPI) percentages as part of the additional $220,000 for capital needs outside operating increases, Councilmember Etten stated that he was more comfortable with the $280,000 as part of that, but adding in the remainder to bring the total 2015 levy increase to just over 2% in an effort to acknowledge the City Council's attempt to keep things down for residents while not limiting the City's future.

 

Mayor Roe clarified the intent of Councilmember Etten to reduce the increase suggested by staff from $655,329 to $400,000; with Councilmember Etten agreeing by using $220,000 to the CIP, bringing the levy increase to a little over 2%.  Mayor Roe clarified that he did not subtract the CIP.

 

Councilmember McGehee concurred with the comments of Councilmember Etten, stating that she had the same reservations stated by him.  Councilmember McGehee expressed her dislike to continuing to do this at year-end without addressing some of the fundamental issues and making recommendations to reduce spending.  Councilmember McGehee opined that $540,000 was a huge amount, and she supported retaining the CIP amount.

 

Councilmember Laliberte noted that she had long advocated for reduced spending, and after another year's budget process, that had yet to be achieved.  While respecting
the recommendation of the Finance Commission for options available where
reserves are over reserve targets, and those two funds specifically proposed to
be used by Mayor Roe, Councilmember Laliberte expressed her opposition to using
reserves to fund recurring expenses.  While not having a problem using them or an
investment for 2015, and recognizing that it was taxpayer money that should be
used for refunded and not stockpiled, Councilmember Laliberte expressed concern
is borrowing from reserves and then needing to repay them.  Depending on how it
was considered, Councilmember Laliberte questioned if it needed to be repaid if
it represented excess money sitting in reserves if the Council chose to utilize
it for funding operations of capital expenditures.

 

Councilmember Etten stated that he believed that the City was not actually paying back reserves, but filling in with levy dollars paid with one-time dollars.  By filling in that budget amount previously agreed to versus one-time money, Councilmember Etten opined that there were no additional monies going into the reserves.

 

Councilmember McGehee concurred with Councilmember Etten's comments.  However, when thinking of a way to pay reserves back, Councilmember McGehee noted the amount of time to build up some of those reserves; and if the City considered building a License Center at some point, it would need the money, either from reserves or by bonding.  Councilmember McGehee stated that she strongly supported a "rainy day" fund; and opined that the City wasn't paying the funds back, but they needed to be available to avoid terrible fluctuations, such as being experienced in 2015.  While the City was lucky those reserves were available, Councilmember McGehee opined that if they continued to be used as a general policy, the City Council would not have them available in the future to help taxpayers, and suggested caution.  Councilmember McGehee stated that she was less hesitant to use the reserves this year due to increased property valuations; and expressed her hope that there were programs that could be cut, some significantly, in the future, including utility rates with increases laid entirely on residents, and requiring further review in the future compared to commercial utility rates.

 

Mayor Roe clarified that the utility rate increase was to the base fees and applied to all utility customers, whether commercial or residential, with commercial properties affected according to their meter size.

 

In response to the preference to not use reserves for ongoing expenses, Mayor Roe suggested one way to look at it as proposed for 2015 (referencing page 3 in the RCA), under budget additions, such as additional CIP replacements, if it created more comfort, the reserves could be used to pay $500,000 of those proposed $723,570 additional 2015 capital replacements, and not considered to be used for ongoing expenses.  While not being able to remember the proposed 2016 capital needs and whether or not it was sustainable, Mayor Roe noted that it fluctuated annually, as evidenced with this 2015 CIP including a $700,000 increase. 

 

Specific to saving for a new License Center, Mayor Roe noted that the discussion had been held earlier in 2014, and it was not actually a City Council policy per se, it was certainly worth having a conversation about.  However, Mayor Roe further noted that his proposal did not completely eliminate those reserves, but it would set them back, but still allowed that conversation to move forward while still  using funds to provide relief for Roseville taxpayers at this time.

 

Original Motion

Etten moved, McGehee seconded, a 2% levy increase at $373,181 through the use of General Fund reserves, covering the remaining $100,000 needed through using from expected 2014 carryover monies, with the remaining $182,000 through use of License Center Fund reserves.

 

At the request of Councilmember Laliberte as to why he was opposed to using all of the reserves as proposed by Mayor Roe, Councilmember Etten noted that his motion used a chunk of reserves, but preferred not to use all of it until further discussions could take place, and more information available over the next six months.

 

Councilmember Laliberte noted that the City didn't start out at a zero budget each year, but built on the previous year's base, with padding and carryover included each year.  With staff stating that $200,000 was easily available now, Councilmember Laliberte opined that, based on previous years' carryover, there should be no concern in applying the full $200,000 now.

 

Laliberte Amendment

Laliberte moved, Roe seconded, using the full 2014 carryover amount of $200,000; and $282,000 in License Center Fund reserves.

 

Mayor Roe estimated that this would reduce the 2015 levy increase to approximately 1.46%.

 

Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of the amendment, opining that the original motion and the amendment represented responsible steps in the current environment and were consistent with inflation rates over the last year.

 

Councilmember Etten spoke in opposition to the amendment for the same reasons, opining that it dumped more and more onto future Councils and did not represent a great way to budget monies.

 

Councilmember McGehee concurred, speaking in opposition to the amendment, opining that it was a guess and not prudent.

Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of the amendment, and while respecting and understanding that this may place a burden on future City Council's, she
noted that it would be the individuals currently at the table for the next few
years, and she was willing to take on that burden, while at the same time
looking at cutting spending wherever and however possible while continuing to replace capital needs and infrastructure. Councilmember Laliberte noted that this would be an ongoing debate.

 

Councilmember Etten noted that the City Council had an opportunity to do so earlier in 2014 and didn't take action, but now seemed willing to pass the dollar on, which he found troubling.   Councilmember Etten stated that he was okay in considering a partial use of reserves, but opined that this got the City in too deep of a hole.

 

Roe Amendment to Laliberte Amendment to the Original Motion

Mayor Roe suggested a slight modification to Councilmember Laliberte's amendment, that if the 2014 savings proved less than $200,000, that the remainder come from General Fund reserves, which would fall under the intent expressed in Councilmember Etten's original motion.

 

Councilmember Laliberte accepted Mayor Roe's amendment to her motion.

 

Mayor Roe noted that he was fully aware that the 2015 budget was not approached through spending cuts, but opined that there were a number of things the City Council obviously found important to continue or needed to enhance or improve the City as discovered during previous discussions.  Mayor Roe opined that it was not the City Council's role to continually cut spending, but to be good stewards of taxpayer monies and continue to strive to do a better job from year to year or become more efficient in delivery of services and programs.  Mayor Roe stated that he was also very aware of the impact on taxpayers, and expressed his confidence that the economy would continue to recover, and that development would continue in Roseville, so that the City wouldn't be facing the same issues in the near future.  Mayor Roe suggested that, in order to use the levy in the future to recover reserves, and having it available for tax relief as needed, the City Council needed to seriously look at those reserve funds on a continuing basis.

 

Councilmember McGehee stated that she hoped, over the course of the year in 2015, that the City didn't attempt to cut existing programs, opining that there were changes that could be made to the City's tax base or steps to facilitate development that could enhance the tax base and improve the community in that way.  However, Councilmember McGehee stated the need to make sure those steps were fair and the things supported by the City Council were what the residents wanted and supported, by giving the residents options and having open discussions with the public by providing full and transparent information to residents and letting them make the decisions. Councilmember McGehee stated that she was not in favor of making cuts in line items as done in the past.

 

Laliberte/Roe Amendment Restated

Laliberte moved, Roe seconded, using the full 2014 carryover amount of $200,000; $282,000 in License Center Fund reserves; and if 2014 savings prove less than $200,000, the remainder come from General Fund reserves.

 

                        Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte, Willmus, and Roe. 

Nays: Etten and McGehee.

Motion carried.

 

Original Motion Restated as Amended

Etten moved, McGehee seconded, a 1.5% levy increase at $273,181 through the use of General Fund reserves; use of $282,000 from License Center Fund reserves; and using the full 2014 carryover amount of $200,000, and if 2014 savings prove less than $200,000, the remainder come from General Fund reserves.

Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte, Willmus, and Roe. 

Nays: Etten and McGehee.

Motion carried.

                       

At the request of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miller provided updated numbers for the draft resolution (Attachment A-page 5 of the RCA) as shown below.

 

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11193  entitled, "Resolution Submitting the Final Property Tax Levy on Real Estate to the Ramsey County Auditor for the Fiscal Year of 2015;" as amended with $14,796,902 for programs and services; debt service remaining at $3,480,000; and total 2015 tax levy at $18,276,902.

 

                                                Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte, Willmus, and Roe. 

Nays: Etten and McGehee.

Motion carried.

 

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11194 (Attachment B) entitled, "Resolution Directing the County Auditor to Adjust the Approved Tax Levy for 2015 Bonded Debt;" as presented, and increasing the amount from 2014 by  the amount of $139,900.95.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

Etten moved, McGehee seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11195 (Attachment C) entitled, "Resolution Adopting the Final 2015 Annual Budget for the City of Roseville;" in the amount of $52,045,290, of which $26,055,340 is designated for the property-tax-supported programs.

 

Councilmember Laliberte noted that an upcoming agenda item tonight would include discussion on new positions, but asked for a better understanding and discussion on the proposed full-time forestry position now before voting on the 2015 budget.  Councilmember Laliberte sought clarification on how the position would be used, under which department would it be located, whether hiring would be at the beginning of 2015 or mid-year, and whether or not the budget could be adjusted accordingly, similar to the Volunteer Coordinator hiring mid-year.

 

City Manager Trudgeon advised that staff's preference would be to get the position up and running as soon as possible if funded in the 2015 budget, especially with emphasis on development projects already underway and those anticipated in the spring of 2015.  While still under his review, Mr. Trudgeon advised that he anticipated the full-time forestry position as a shared position with the initial thought to have it housed in the Parks and Recreation Department as is the current part-time position and based on their institutional knowledge.  Mr. Trudgeon advised that the current position helped with the park system and street trees as well; and he saw that role expanded to work on development projects.  Mr. Trudgeon clarified that there would be a lot of coordinated needed between the Parks & Recreation, Community Development, and Public Works/Engineering Departments as well as with new landscaping projects.  Mr. Trudgeon expressed his and staff's disappointment, along with that of the public and City Council, with
past projects; and opined that a full-time position would help address those
issues.

 

At this point, Councilmember McGehee questioned whether she would support the full-time forestry position at all, unless it was properly managed.  Councilmember McGehee stated that she had not been happy with the past program, not because it was only a part-time position, but based on her interpretation of what was needed for a forester to address, such as natural areas in the community rather than exclusive use for park renewal program-related issues.  Councilmember McGehee further opined that the City's Public Works Department could not and should not be asked to maintain street trees when not properly planted or maintained; however, she did think the forester position should be available to assist the Public Works Department in storm water ponds and drainage issues as related to trees, since trees were a big part of that as well as the development piece.  As part of the consideration, Councilmember McGehee noted that portions of the position could be charged to developers, but consideration also was needed to make sure storm water was kept on properties versus roads.  Councilmember McGehee noted that this would require uniform management among three different groups from three different directions; and stated that she would reserve judgment on whether or not to support a full-time forester position or use of a contract service as needed.

 

City Manager Trudgeon reminded the City Council that the full-time forester position is proposed for funding from the Parks & Recreation Department and 50% from the Community Development Department; but would be subject to change if found different during practical use.  Mr. Trudgeon further noted that the position may need adjusting further to make sure the position and funds realized as part of development or redevelopment funds were in accordance with state law for the Community Development Department's use.  Mr. Trudgeon advised that these adjustments
would come forward in future budget cycles.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that, while the Community Development Department could capture the cost of the position from developer fees, the Public Works Department, where she thought the strongest need was, didn't have much voice in the matter.

 

Mayor Roe noted that, with the exception of the CIP, most expenses remained fairly flat from 2014 to 2015, with the budget for water operations actually going down, and sanitary sewer and storm drainage going up.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None. 

 

b.            Adopt the 2015 Final HRA Tax Levy

Finance Director Miller noted that the HRA had revised their 2015 levy request to the same as 2014, for a zero levy increase for 2015, as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014.

 

Willmus moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11196 (Attachment A) entitled, "A Resolution Submitting the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, in and for the City of Roseville, Special Property Tax Levy on Real Estate to the Ramsey County Auditor for the Fiscal Year of 2015, in the amount of $703,579, a zero percent increase from 2014."

 

Councilmember Laliberte thanked the HRA members and staff and Council Representative Etten for their work in revising their levy request for a flat levy.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

c.            Consider the 2015 Utility Rate Adjustments

Finance Director Miller, in referencing the RCA dated December 8, 2014, advised that there were no updates since the public hearing information presented at last week's meeting, and previous discussions held in November with the City Council.

 

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11197 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution Establishing the 2015 Utility Rates:" as presented and detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

Recess

Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 8:20 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 8:28 p.m.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miller provided updated impacts for Roseville residents, based on the flat levy request by the HRA, and tax levy reductions made tonight for the average taxpayer.  Mr. Miller reported that the average increase to a typical, median-valued home in Roseville had been projected for 2015 at $6.54, and with tonight's actions had been reduced to $4.98, or a
savings of $1.69 per month.

 

Mayor Roe noted that the average single-family home in Roseville was looking at an 11% increase in its market value, and with tonight's actions, residents could assume an
approximate $7.5% increase from 2014 property taxes.

 

Mayor Roe noted his previous request that late in the year, the Finance Department publish an official budget document providing results of tonight's actions and present
that budget document to the council in early 2015; duly noted by City Manager
Trudgeon.

 

13.         Business Items (Action Items)

 

b.            Consider Approval of Pawn America Minnesota, LLC's 2015 Pawn Shop and Precious Metals Dealer License Renewal

Finance Director Miller referenced the RCA dated December 8, 2014, noting that there were no changes since the presentation at the previous meeting, with the exception of the requested additional land use information provided by the Community Development Department staff in the RCA, lines 11 through 55.  Regarding City requirements, Mr. Miller advised the City Council that Pawn America had met all requirements, and therefore, from staff's perspective, they saw no reason to deny the requested license renewal.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Attorney Gaughan pointed out that, under City Code, licenses were subject to renewal unless there was a violation of licensing provisions of relevant state or local laws; and unless one or more of those conditions exist, renewal would be appropriate per City Code.

 

Based on the submitted pictures provided by residents at last week's meeting, Councilmember McGehee advised that she drove the area today, and the refuse and condition of the easement area immediately adjacent to people's back yards was terrible, with the hill and area full of tires, bed frames, trash and other junk. Councilmember McGehee stated that it was her understanding that the property actually belonged to the apartment building, and in her opinion, certainly represented a code violation.  Councilmember McGehee expressed her confidence that Community Development Director Bilotta would alert the City's code enforcement team to remedy the situation; and also suggested a review by the City's Police
Department and other Community Development staff.  Councilmember McGehee opined
that it seemed to be a very unfortunate situation back there, and looked
ramshackle, and unsafe.  Councilmember McGehee opined that the area looked like
a frequently used pathway to area businesses, and suggested that the City
encourage beautification of the area, or even suggested that the City beautify the
area itself if it was easement property.  Since the area was side enough to
drive a car through, Councilmember McGehee noted that obviously provided clear
access with kids using the hill for sledding.  Councilmember McGehee further
opined that there were some real opportunities for the City to get together
with constituents to put something nice together back there and make it safer
than it appeared today.  Councilmember McGehee expressed her appreciation of previous
public comments; and opined that a lot of the responsibility belonged to the
City of Roseville since the easement area belonged to the City; and obviously
the Pawn Shop was not the biggest contributor to the mess.

 

Mayor Roe asked for an update from neighbors on the progress between them and Pawn America representatives since the last meeting.

 

Councilmember Etten concurred, asking neighbors to speak about where they were at with those discussions.

 

                                          Public Comment

 

Sherry Sanders - 363 S McCarrons Blvd.

As Chair of the McCarron's Neighborhood Association, Ms. Sanders displayed a map of property
owners in the immediate area.

 

Other Board Members from the Neighborhood Association appearing included Jim Moncour, 294 N McCarrons Blvd.; Diane Hilden, 466 Bayview, and Ricky Sanders, 166 S. McCarrons Blvd., owner of the property directly affected by the Pawn America remodel.

 

Ms. Sanders thanked the City Council for the ability to speak to this issue.  Ms. Sanders reported on the Board meeting with Pawn America representative, Chuck Armstrong, noting his sincere desire to assist the neighborhood with the noise, trash and light issues, and offered to make an appeal to the McCarron's Hill
Shopping Center for installation of a fence. 

 

However, during the meeting with Mr. Armstrong, Ms. Sanders advised that a problem beyond that of concerns with Pawn America was discovered, on the whole easement used by foot traffic separating homes from the shopping center and from the apartments located behind Larpenteur, Woodbridge and Marion.  Ms. Sanders noted that the chain link fence had apparently been "altered" to create shortcuts to businesses across Rice Street. 

 

With that new issue brought to light, Ms. Sanders advised that the Association wanted to continue discussions, seeking resolution and cooperation by the owners of the shopping center, G & G Management LLC, owners of fourteen buildings in this area running along that easement.  As part of that ongoing discussion, Ms. Sanders advised that the Association was requesting a site plan review and for staff to enforce City Code, but not limited to building regulations, but also code, sanitation and zoning to address this matter. 

 

Due to Pawn America's willingness to assist the Association and address problems specific to their operation and relocation of their door, Ms. Sanders stated that they saw no reason to delay the renewal of their license.

 

Jim Moncour, 294 N McCarrons Blvd.

Mr. Moncour clarified that the Association had no intent to create a problem, and they had actually approached, with Community Development Director Bilotta, entities responsible for the apartment building and had so far met with favorable support.  Mr. Moncour further clarified that Mr. Armstrong with Pawn America had been nothing but positive; and were proving very cooperative.

 

Even though the extent of the problem had yet to be identified and who the responsible parties are for the area in general, Mr. Moncour sought and welcomed any help available from the City in coordinating this function and dealing with this geographical area and these entities.  Mr. Moncour opined that it was the consensus of the Association that the fence required by Pawn America from their location at the top of the hill to block headlights and other distractions from adjacent residential properties 50' lower would be a great step in the right direction. 

 

Mr. Moncour advised that the Association did not wish to put any condition on the Pawn America license renewal approval, opining that it would only serve to taint discussions and the process already happening, even though they were not ready to make an articulated statement on what resolution or legal resolution may be needed.  However, Mr. Moncour agreed that the Association found no problem in the City Council renewing this license now that their concerns are part of the record with Pawn America and its location in relation to this and the property.

 

Mr. Moncour expressed the Association's hopes that the gun shots and armed hold up were an isolated incident at Pawn America, and in summation, expressed their support of renewal of the Pawn America license at this point, and looked forward to the continued cooperation of this business in resolving some of the workable problems.

 

Mayor Roe expressed the City Council's appreciation for the Associations comments and
update; and especially their contact with the apartment building owner.

 

Councilmember Willmus thanked both parties for getting together to talk things through; and while understanding that this is just as start, he asked that they keep individual Councilmembers updated as things move forward.

 

Mayor Roe concurred, asking for a progress report, whether positive or negative.

 

Diane Hilden, 466 Bayview

Ms. Hilden opined that this was a great example of an association getting together; and noted the many different facets of this problem requiring a many-pronged approach.  Ms. Hilden stated that the resolution would not happen overnight, but expressed appreciation to the City Council providing a spotlight on that corner and opening up the door to increasing and improving amenities in that area.  Ms. Hilden stated that the Association was seeking a long-term resolution with G & G Management.

 

Mayor Roe expressed hope that solutions could also be found with tenants in the individual buildings as well through these efforts.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that she would like to see pathways for foot traffic in that area, further opining that it would be a shame to block that entire area off, and would like to see it cleaned up for a nice pathway to enhance the community, as long as the Public Works Department could still access their sewer lines.

 

Ms. Hilden concurred, opining that the Association continued to seek elimination of the "ICO" station; and their slogan had become "ICO has got to go." Ms. Hilden offered that the Association would do their part if the City of Maplewood would do theirs.

 

Ricky Sanders, 166 S. McCarrons Blvd., owner of the property directly affected by the Pawn America remodel

Mr. Sanders noted that the meeting had been held at his home, and thanked Councilmember Etten and Mr. Armstrong for attending and observing the problem from their point of view.  Mr. Sanders expressed hope that the apartment building owners and G & G Management's zoning could be reviewed.

However, Mr. Sanders opined that the Pawn America license renewal should not be delayed.

 

Laliberte moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the 2015 Pawn Shop and Precious Metals Dealer License renewal for Pawn America Minnesota, LLC, d/b/a Pawn America, located at 1715 N Rice Street; pending completion of successful background checks.

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

c.            Consider Approval of Newly Created Positions in the 2015 City Budget

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly reviewed the new positions, as approved in the 2015 City Budget just adopted, as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014, and sought official City Council approval of those new positions.  Mr. Trudgeon advised that the positions would be funded through existing non-tax levy revenue sources with the exception of the Firefighters, with that net cost estimated at $68,000 to be funded from levy funds.

 

Councilmember McGehee noted that, according to previous presentation by Fire Chief O'Neill, this left forty firefighters still covered in the Relief Association pension fund. Councilmember McGehee reiterated her ongoing support to fast track this additional liability and implement the restructuring plan sooner.

 

Councilmember McGehee requested additional information on the Right-of-Way Coordinator position.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Public Works Director Duane Schwartz provided an overview of duties intended to be performed more efficiently by one position versus those same duties being performed by a number of current staff members in the Public Works and Engineering Departments.  Mr. Schwartz noted that those duties included numerous permit approvals, monitoring and inspections, Gopher State one-call locates, review and coordination of private utility problems when new fiber installations occur, and whether or not City, Ramsey County, or State of Minnesota rights-of-way may be in conflict with existing City utilities.  Mr. Schwartz noted that often there may be multiple staff members currently visiting the same sites, and this new position was intended to streamline management of those efforts.  Mr. Schwartz noted that other details of the position were summarized in the RCA, pending completion of a job description.

 

Councilmember McGehee stated that she was not happy with the proposed Forester position, at least as the current part-time position exists, opining that the City didn't do
a very good job of keeping trees alive in streetscapes.  Councilmember McGehee
noted that the Public Works Department performed maintenance along the streets,
but she had observed an amazing amount of maintenance of those streetscapes
that she deemed unnecessary, a lot of which was related to trees. 
Councilmember McGehee noted that the Department was also responsible for trees
around wetlands and lift stations.

 

Mr. Schwartz clarified that all departments had a role in tree maintenance, and admitted that streetscape trees and vegetation were challenging due to the tough environments for those trees.  However, Mr. Schwartz noted that staff continued to learn over the years through research and recommendations for stormwater management how to do a better job in planting and maintaining those trees in parking lots and along streets.   Going forward, Mr. Schwartz noted that staff would be looking at different species and management techniques for them to become even more successful, much related to stormwater management and getting appropriate planting materials.  Mr. Schwartz further clarified that this didn't limit those same best practices for other development and park
concerns.

 

Councilmember McGehee questioned how Mr. Schwartz would see contract services serving in this role.

 

Mr. Schwartz responded that there may still be more expertise needed from outside sources for design services, tree boxes or stormwater design.  However, Mr. Schwartz noted that those services were different than typical maintenance, trimming and disease monitoring, and could be different people used for different functions.

 

Specific to the six new Firefighter positions as they proceeded with implementation, Councilmember Willmus stated that he would be seeking additional discussion and information from Fire Chief O'Neill of how callback rates and auto aid
agreements would work.

 

From her perspective and from information provided to-date, Councilmember McGehee reiterated that she would prefer departments to use contract services for a Forester position and as needed.

 

Councilmember Etten opined that the very reasons Councilmember McGehee brought up provided sufficient reasoning relevant to why the City needed a full-time forester for planning and coordination purposes to better streamline and manage that citywide.

 

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, approval of the newly-created positions as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014; and authorizing staff to begin the process of recruiting and filling those positions as presented by staff and outlined in the RCA.

 

Councilmember McGehee reiterated her opinion that a full-time forester didn't have sufficient
expertise; and would prefer to continue with a part-time forester position and
using the remaining funds to hire outside expertise as needed versus spending
the money on a single individual.

 

Councilmember Laliberte recognized the positions expressed by both of her colleagues, and while looking forward to see how this worked out logistically in practice, she spoke in support of a less fractured approach to forestry-related issues citywide rather than what could be accomplished through periodic outside contracting services.  Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of the continued goal to centralize needs and to look holistically at the overall picture to streamline staff and financial resources.

 

Mayor Roe spoke in support of the motion and this position based on the need for balance and limitations in the contracting approach versus an approach with more continuity.  In previous discussions, Mayor Roe noted that the rationale in seeking to expand this position was based on recognizing the deficiencies with the current part-time position.  Mayor Roe suggested this was a similar expansion as done when revising the former Recycling Coordinator position to an Environmental Coordinator position several years ago; and as with that position, if further outside help is needed it can be requested as appropriate. 

 

                                    Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte, Willmus, Etten, and Roe. 

Nays: McGehee.

Motion carried.

 

d.            Twin Lakes Parkway Phase Three Design Services Contract

Two bench handouts were provided, consisting of e-mails dated December 8, 2014 from David Miliotis, 1128 County Road C-2 and Karen Milton, 2939 Mildred Drive, both requesting a delay in any decision regarding design of Twin Lakes Parkway.

 

City Engineer Marc Culver reviewed this request as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014; noting that the City had now acquired all rights-of-way to accomplish this alignment and corridor, with the exception of temporary construction rights-of-way that may be needed; and was in ownership of all property needed for the proposed expansion.  Mr. Culver displayed a map of the proposed route for the Parkway; and sought authorization for SRF Consulting Group to be hired for design of the Parkway, Phase III, since they were also working on several other elements and under contract for other projects as noted in the RCA. 

 

Councilmember Willmus questioned whether approval of this tonight would limit the City Council's ability to update the traffic study.

 

Mr. Culver responded that it would not, and since SRF has been working on the feasibility study, and did the traffic study for the original AUAR, they could update this portion as well for area intersections.

 

At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mr. Culver advised that a timeframe to accomplish that update could be available in mid-February, after accumulating additional data and reviewing a complete model of this area.  Mr. Culver clarified that the traffic study update would not be done during the holiday season as it would skew the results and make them artificially high.

 

Councilmember McGehee observed that the proposed Parkway appeared on the map to cut through existing Langton Lake parkland.

 

Mr. Culver confirmed that at least portions of the right-of-way would involve that parkland, but was unsure of official park boundaries.  Mr. Culver noted that the water feature in that area of the park had been constructed some time ago for stormwater purposes; but assured Councilmembers and the public that further design review would include defining areas north and south of that area for stormwater management.  However, Mr. Culver anticipated that there would be some impact, but the design would be intended to create the least amount of impact in the area.  With updated designs, Mr. Culver advised that water treatment and stormwater best management practices would hopefully improve those measures beyond what is there today.

 

Councilmember McGehee noted that the existing pond was built to improve stormwater management, and opined that now staff was looking to cut it in half and further pollute; and stated that she was not supportive of that portion of the roadway.  Councilmember McGehee stated that this was not a free road, but would cost $120,000 for design purposes for a road estimated to cost $1.3 million.

 

Mr. Culver corrected that figure to indicate that the cost of the roadway was estimated at $1.5 million total.

 

Councilmember McGehee stated that this was taxpayer money, not a free road, and taxpayers had already paid for infrastructure in that area; questioning why taxpayers should be required to pay additional money for a road the City would need to maintain and with no reason for the community to support.  Councilmember McGehee opined that the roadway could be designed differently to avoid the park and water feature.

 

Mr. Culver reviewed the intended design and AUAR studies to-date that aligned the Parkway to intersect with Terrace Drive for a four-way intersection to create the most advantageous collector street and as the best option for moving traffic.  While the design of that intersection could be offset as suggested by Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Culver advised that it would not then move traffic east and west of Fairview Avenue more efficiently or in a more convenient way as a function of a more comprehensive road network as envisioned for the community through studies completed to-date.

 

Councilmember McGehee questioned if Mr. Culver concurred with this assumption to provide the stop where it was proposed at the end of Arthur Street, or continuing all the way through as viable options.

 

From his professional perspective as an Engineer, Mr. Culver questioned from what perspective "viable" was being determined.  Mr. Culver advised that his recommendation would be to provide a choice for through-movements in this area; opining that the citywide and area transportation network would be detrimentally affected if the design were to disconnect from Twin Lakes Parkway and significantly and negatively impact traffic to other areas in the community.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that Mr. Culver was looking at the situation only from a transportation network only, and not taking into consideration environmental concerns and concerns of adjacent neighbors.

 

Mayor Roe questioned if the pond was recently constructed in the narrow space where the Parkway was intended to be extended.  Mayor Roe further asked Mr. Culver if he anticipated that the road could be built without polluting the pond.

 

Mr. Culver advised that he was unsure of the original intent; but anticipated the road could be built without significant impact to the existing pond.  Mr. Culver noted that the map showed the entire road and right-of-way corridor through there, but clarified that the roadway would not be that wide.  Mr. Culver advised that, as the design proceeds, a more detailed review would be undertaken to see if there was a way to pipe stormwater underneath the roadway to reduce impacts to the overall system as it is today.

 

Mayor Roe opened discussion to public comment.

 

Public Comment

Timothy Callaghan, 3062 Shorewood Lane

Mr. Callaghan stated that he saw no way to build a roadway with wastewater, sand and salt coming off it that would not pollute Langton Lake.  Mr. Callaghan questioned the idea of minimizing that impact, opining that it would flow into the lake as it had no place else to go.  Mr. Callaghan opined that this design was done thirteen years ago, and questioned its validity today; opining that it wasn't a very favorable design back then, only marginal, and what was being
proposed would have a major effect on the residential area.  Mr. Callaghan
further opined that traffic would not continue along Terrace Drive; and the
intersection of County Road C and Snelling Avenue was already heavily
overloaded, and this would dump traffic on Fairview Avenue where it was already
overloaded. 

 

Mr. Callaghan opined that this fantastic traffic management plan took none of that into account; and there were no indications of a change from the AUAR traffic plan with changes already made to the Twin Lakes area (e.g. WalMart).  Mr. Callaghan stated that residents were told two years ago that a report would be forthcoming on the effects of the WalMart development on traffic on Fairview; however, it was not yet included, and opined that he had been told a falsehood, since that information was not included in the engineer's report.  Since this is a development plan from years ago, Mr. Callaghan questioned whether it was still appropriate; and opined that more discussion was needed to determine if this was the best design for the road, or whether there were ways to change it or at a minimum reconfirm that design in today's world rather than following a plan many years
old.

 

Mr. Callaghan opined that many developments in the city don't follow plans, and suggested postponing this until a detailed discussion of what was best in Twin Lake now before more expenses.  Mr. Callaghan stated that he didn't expect to see any benefit to this whole development area within his lifetime; since over the last 27 years the City was still holding tax increment financing money while residents were paying for all the support services that area received (e.g. snowplowing, and police/fire protection) and they weren't paying for anything.  Mr. Callaghan opined that the City would end up with two local WalMarts, since they initially indicated this was going to be a local store, but shortly after they had closed one in an adjacent community.  Mr. Callaghan questioned how long this one would stay open, opining that WalMart's reputation was use the best tax advantages available.  Mr. Callaghan stated that the City needed to look at what they were doing before spending any more money; and
personally saw no reason to do a lot of things that were being done.

 

Jerry Stoner, 2866 Merrill Street

Mr. Stoner advised that, during his discussion with Mr. Brokke during tonight's meeting, he had received answers to most of his questions.  However, Mr. Stoner opined that the arc shown between Prior Avenue and Arthur Street was a disaster, and questioned what it would look like in ten years.  Based on his conversation with Mr. Brokke, Mr. Stoner opined that the stormwater retention area was not actually on park land.  At first glance, Mr. Stoner opined that the road didn't look like a good thing for the park, but if proper buffering was done with Langton Lake, Mr. Stoner questioned if this could become a blueprint for buffering on other sides of Langton Lake when developed.  Mr. Stoner opined that it would be nice to see a good job done now to provide for that blueprint later on.

 

Brook Tosi , 1766 Millwood Avenue

Ms. Tosi expressed concern about more traffic being funneled to County Road C and Terrace Avenue, with traffic at the stoplight on County Road C already backed up.  Ms. Tosi asked that further consideration be given to safety concerns, as well as echoing concerns raised by a previous speaker regarding the pond and runoff issues.

 

Lisa McCormack, Wheeler Street

Ms. McCormack expressed appreciation for other speakers' comments tonight.  However, Ms. McCormack advised that her comments were with respect to the draft contract as presented, initially understanding that its purpose was to get confirmation of things moving forward.  However, after further reviewing it tonight, Ms. McCormack opined that it didn't seem to be the case, and she suggested a more staged approach than presented in the draft agreement to obtain preliminary data and then bring it back for an update for residents and those currently living in the area and still getting up to speed on plans from many years ago that they may or may not have been privy to.  Ms. McCormack opined that this stepped approach could foster better information and understanding in the long-run and offer more transparency.

 

Cathleen Erickson, Centennial Drive

While not being an engineer, but living one block from this proposed roadway, Ms. Erickson stated that she knew her neighborhood having lived there for thirty years.  When this came up in August of this year, Ms. Erickson noted that the neighborhood has asked for a traffic study, since there was so much development proposed for that area now, and it was difficult not to feel threatened or under attack.  While recognizing that this was a "hot" corridor, Ms. Erickson stated that the neighbors didn't want to be reactionary and expected development or redevelopment, but didn't think enough discussion of thought had gone into that development.  Ms. Erickson referenced current difficulties on Lincoln Drive to get around the corner to Snelling Avenue, often taking three signal light cycles or twenty minutes. 

 

Ms. Erickson also referenced the ongoing growth and student enrollment increases of Bethel University and the University of Northwestern, as well as the additional property purchases off those campuses by those institutions, as well as increasing student rental housing.  Ms. Erickson noted one example of a single-family home with thirteen vehicles repeatedly parked there, with parking issues along Lydia Avenue. 

 

Ms. Erickson also expressed concern with construction of another main road from Fairview, and even with a signal light, was concerned that they wouldn't be able to get off Centennial Drive and traffic would be slowed even further, since there was already a huge congestion point there.  With a proposal to add a development for 200 new households on Twin Lakes Parkway and Fairview Avenue, Ms. Erickson asked that more time be given to thinking about the consequences; and even with the addition of Bus Rapid Transit, opined that there would be a huge increase in traffic.

Ms. Erickson stated that they loved their neighborhood and while not wishing to be negative, opined that development would affect the neighborhood, including additional school bus traffic.  Most of all, Ms. Erickson stated that the neighbors didn't want to see their neighborhood cut off from the rest of Roseville with development surrounding them.

 

Lacy Kapaun, 1840 West County Road C-2

Ms. Kapaun stated that she was surprised to see this on tonight's agenda; and expressed her interest in the City Council taking more time to think about the effects of this proposal, even though a lot of thought had probably already gone into it, but that was a long time ago.  With new information available, and the possibility of adding more traffic in front of their home, Ms. Kapaun expressed concern with safety for her family, opining that any more congestion resulting in more accidents was beyond what she could imagine.

 

Ms. Kapaun noted that the lake was beautiful and it was a favorite spot for her family; however, she echoed the comments of Mr. Stoner about making a buffer to protect Langton Lake, but expressed a need for residents to see those plans before they happen.  Ms. Kapaun opined that it was making the neighborhood "crazy" to see these things happening in this area without having more information and the City keeping its promises to talk about things before the neighbors found them listed on meeting agendas, which made neighbors feel overwhelmed.  Ms. Kapaun asked for understanding on the City Council's part and providing the neighbors more time to allow more participation in discussions on new development in this area.

 

Mayor Roe closed public comment at this time, and asked City Engineer Culver to respond to several questions raised during those comments.

 

Regarding rights-of-way acquisition, Mr. Culver reviewed the area for the existing alignment as proposed, west of Fairview Avenue leading to Langton Lake Park; with a federal grant award for acquisition of that additional right-of-way along this Parkway alignment from the park and Prior Avenue.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Culver reviewed the process moving forward with an engineering study and future end product.  Mr. Culver advised that the contract itself would still need to go through final design for the roadway, including all aspects of stormwater management, geometric alignment and included within that contract with SRF as proposed, one public meeting was included to present that final design to the public to receive their feedback.  Mr. Culver noted that this would provide an opportunity for the public to present their concerns about any environmental issues, after the information and facts had been compiled, and also include another opportunity as staff presented that final design - and those public comments - to the City Council for their consideration and comment on that final design.  Mr. Culver note that the process would be for several months, and then staff would prepare for the construction project beyond that, and after approval by the City Council.

 

Mayor Roe noted that between this contract before the City Council tonight and the actual construction, the City Council would still need to take action to order bids.

 

Mr. Culver concurred, noting that in addition, funding options would still need to be finalized, with staff returning with that information as part of a feasibility study, with any ordering of the project beyond that, and subsequent action of the City Council for funding and ordering the project.

 

Councilmember Willmus advised that, before he could support construction of a roadway, he would want an updated traffic study, and asked for more discussion on how and where that fit into this process.

 

Mr. Culver advised that staff had sought updated numbers that were generated in early November as part of the feasibility study working with SRF for other Twin Lakes area improvements, including updated numbers on Fairview Avenue and County Road D to answer questions since WalMart had opened.  Mr. Culver displayed and reviewed how to interpret those preliminary numbers, noting that some additional updating would be required on some roadways immediately adjacent to this Phase II of Twin Lakes Parkway.  Those preliminary numbers as displayed are made a part of the RCA, Traffic counts were for the existing road(s), 2030 projected traffic projections not based on the full model but with current traffic volumes and land use development to-date, including the proposed apartment buildings and with consideration given to improvements programmed on I-694 and likely improvements for the I-35W managed lane occurring along this area.  Mr. Culver clarified that there were other factors driving traffic in this area that were beyond the Walmart development.

 

Taking all that into consideration, Mr. Culver reviewed Fairview Avenue as an example of current traffic volumes, projected volume in 2030 and increases or decreases projected, and how that minor County arterial roadway would manage traffic with further development in the area.  Mr. Culver further reviewed impacts to County Road D.  Overall, Mr. Culver highlighted where ADT's were actually lower in some cases for 2030 than originally projected in the 2007 AUAR.

 

Councilmember Willmus questioned whether there would be other infrastructure improvements indicated along Fairview Avenue with an updated traffic study and modeling.

 

Mr. Culver responded that there would be, noting that the 2007 AUAR had already identified them, clarifying that even though the document had expired, it was still used for informational purposes in helping to determine needed improvements (e.g. traffic signals) as the area builds out.  Mr. Culver advised that this included coordinating with Ramsey County and other agencies to fund those improvements as well.

 

Councilmember McGehee reiterated her previous comments; and opined that whether or not Parks & Recreation Director Brokke chose to call that area parkland or not, more than any other Councilmember at the bench, she had spent more time at Langton Lake than anyone.  Councilmember McGehee further opined that the City had not been a good park steward to-date, and at the initiation of the Ramsey County Watershed District eight years ago, she had participated with water testing under their direction; and had observed considerable parking lot drainage into the lake without any buffering.  While recognizing that some buffering had now been installed, Councilmember McGehee noted that the parking lots still sloped directly to the lake. 

 

As an example, Councilmember McGehee referenced Como Lake, which is considered dead; but Langton Lake wasn't, thanks in large part to the infiltration pond at the request of the Watershed District, with water quality actually having improved and now at level "c."   Councilmember McGehee noted that Langton Lake was extremely shallow and therefore very sensitive in that regard; and opined that the City could not adequately manage roadway runoff and traffic without further damaging the lake and its ecosystem.  When talking about natural areas, which have been requested by residents, Councilmember McGehee opined that there was a lovely pathway around Langton Lake that met that need, with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service also recognizing the area as a flyway for migratory birds.  Councilmember McGehee noted that this property belonged to everyone, including the residents surrounding the Lake; and opined that this proposed roadway design was an unnecessary threat to this beautiful addition to the community.

 

Councilmember McGehee stated that she had been a big opponent of WalMart being allowed to develop, but with development of WalMart, the Metro Transit Park & Ride, and two proposed hotels, she was observing that traffic from that area seemed to effectively be going the other way.  While recognizing the City Council's penchant for building things, Councilmember McGehee questioned why there was a need to do so, and "if it's not broken, don't try to fix it."  Councilmember McGehee opined that this would be exactly what would happen, that Langton Lake and Langton Lake Park and its natural environment would be broken, which would not be good for the park or the neighborhood. 

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that the City Council had made a commitment to the community north of there that the City would engage them in the planning process, with this proposed road being a very important piece of that.  Councilmember McGehee noted that, when the originally planning for it had taken place in 1983, it was intended to hook up with Terrace Drive and go directly to Snelling Avenue.  However, Councilmember McGehee noted that this could and would not take place, nor was access for development of the former PIK parcel, originally landlocked, needed any longer with the City's completion of Mount Ridge Road and access off roundabouts on Prior Avenue and Arthur Street.  Therefore, Councilmember McGehee opined that the two major goals of the Parkway connection were gone.  When discussing the development of the regulating plan and map for this area several years ago with consultant Michael Lamb, Councilmember McGehee stated that he had told her that he was told from the outset that he was not to discuss or consider extension of the Parkway in his planning, thus circumventing his options. 

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that traffic plans had changed, and while lots of modeling had been done, she further opined that she was not a big fan of modeling.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that the impact of the University of Northwestern had been huge: traffic, parking and expansion off their campus; and further opined that their campus's pollution of Little Johanna and Lake Johanna itself had been overwhelming.  Councilmember McGehee stated that she just found this whole thing as an unreasonable clinging to something planned for in 1983 that was now completely different.  Councilmember McGehee opined that the whole idea originally was that this area would become another CenterPointe, which it was not going to become. 

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that it was businesses, not retail, that provided tax base revenue versus simply more traffic generation that the City and its taxpayers needed to pay for.  When talking about the City's tax base and protection of residential neighborhoods, Councilmember McGehee opined that to deny this neighborhood an opportunity to work with Community Development Director Bilotta was not fair.  Councilmember McGehee opined that this was not City Engineer Culver's problem to solve, but one of tax benefits and the expense to residents
to build yet another structure to maintain.  Councilmember McGehee opined that additional traffic routed up Fairview Avenue and onto County Road C-2 even with planned intersection changes were also additional expenditures and the tax increment financing proposed to pay for them could be used to buy or clean up land.  Councilmember McGehee stated that she'd seen the City of Roseville already lose two really good business prospects to the City of New Brighton because the land was not cleaned up yet; and suggested that this was another case of "If you build it, they will come."  Councilmember McGehee further opined that to deny the neighborhood a voice in the process, with little thought given to the current market and environment, was a terrible action environmentally.

 

Specific to Councilmember McGehee's reference to Parks & Recreation Director Brokke, Councilmember Willmus opined that Mr. Brokke had done more for the City's parks than Councilmember McGehee had ever done.

 

Specific to access to the interior of developable properties (e.g. the former PIK parcel) Councilmember Willmus noted the potential for smaller businesses and the need to provide a manner of access to allow those parcels to further subdivide, and providing for access from all directions.  Councilmember Willmus opined that the Parkway would facilitate that, and would actually get the City away from potential big box uses and allow those smaller businesses to come in.

 

Specific to comments by Councilmember McGehee that the City had lost potential business to New Brighton, Councilmember Willmus opined that one overwhelming factor in that was that the City of New Brighton controlled the land versus multiple private owners of this area in Roseville.

 

Councilmember Willmus stated that his focus was how to move the community forward and work with neighbors and property owners for everyone's future best benefit, and not continue looking over their shoulder.  Councilmember Willmus opined that the best scenario to accomplish that was to pursue an updated traffic study and determine impacts based on information received today.

 

Councilmember Etten sought additional information on the cost of an updated traffic study as part of the larger work currently being done for the City by SRF.

 

City Engineer Culver advised that SRF would rerun the model to make sure they had an up-to-date and accurate projection of 2030 traffic volumes, as well as impacts to traffic infrastructure in this area.  Mr. Culver anticipated that update could be accomplished for an estimated additional fee of $8,000 to $10,000.

 

Councilmember Etten asked Mr. Culver if he saw any benefit of working with Ramsey County for financial assistance for Lydia Avenue and/or County Road D improvements.

 

Mr. Culver responded that staff continued to pressure Ramsey County for updates for Lydia and Fairview, but their cooperation would be dependent on receipt of federal grants or other grant funding to accomplish the work.  Mr. Culver opined that updated traffic numbers would certainly further that cause, however, he could not guarantee it would come to fruition.

 

Councilmember Etten questioned if the City would derive more benefit from this through working with other entities to relive some of the funding pressures.

 

Mr. Culver responded that it had already been determined with the 2007 AUAR that these improvements would ultimately be needed, and opined that an updated traffic study would allow the City to put pressure on those other entities to move those remedies forward.  Mr. Culver advised that staff had informally continued to discuss with those entities the shifting of their focus to Lydia Avenue, County Road D and Fairview Avenue.

 

Councilmember Laliberte noted that, at the beginning of tonight's meeting, she had sought to delay this discussion.

 

Laliberte moved, McGehee seconded, not acting on this design services contract at this time; inviting Public Works staff and Commissioner McGuire to discuss the entire Fairview Avenue area prior to pursuing a larger discussion with neighborhood residents.

 

Councilmember McGehee offered a friendly amendment that at the same time the City Council ask Public Works staff to fund and make available the updated traffic study as requested by residents.

 

Councilmember Laliberte stated that she was not sure how she felt about that friendly amendment; while agreeing that the City needed an updated traffic study, it would be an educated guess at this point as it how it may impact Fairview Avenue.

 

Councilmember McGehee withdrew her friendly amendment.  Councilmember McGehee opined that the least that the City Council could do was to pursue their commitment to the community.  Councilmember McGehee stated that she had repeatedly said to residents that this was a better City Council in terms of wanting to facilitate interaction and work with residents and try to understand their perspectives.  To push this design forward through approval of this contract at this time, Councilmember McGehee opined was not in that spirit at all, since there remained plenty of information yet to seek.

 

Councilmember Etten opined that there was no reason this action needed to stop the City's communication with neighbors, and it was important to continue it, and this would provide additional information to facilitate those discussions, as well as addressing any issues related to maintaining the water ponding or adding new elements as part of any environmental work needed around that development, along with environmental clean-up issues around Langton Lake.  Councilmember Etten noted that this study, along with the traffic study was all part of that.  From that perspective, Councilmember Etten spoke in opposition to the motion.

 

As a result of this and even though it will generate information, Councilmember McGehee opined that, from her experience, once you approve going ahead with the design process, it precluded any further discussion.

 

Mayor Roe stated that he did not support the motion to delay action; and expressed his willingness to have discussions with residents or anyone interested in the project.  Mayor Roe noted that the City had already approved and accomplished right-of-way purchase for the Parkway as designed and for construction as shown, all decisions and actions of this very City Council.  With the City Council fully informed about and throughout the process, to now imply that discussions with neighbors may change that location and general design, Mayor Roe opined was not fair to the neighbors to make promises that could not be kept when those changes were no longer an option.  Mayor Roe stated that this engineering project would provide the additional information needed to help inform the overall process; and for those residents not previously involved, offered to provide ways to get that information to them for their edification.  Mayor Roe opined that from his personal analysis there were many more benefits in pursuing Phase III of Twin Lakes Parkway than concerns; and opined that those benefits ultimately outweighed the concerns.  Therefore, Mayor Roe reiterated his opposition to a motion to delay the design work.

 

Councilmember Laliberte challenged Mayor Roe's statement that because right-of-way had already been purchased, nothing could be done because of that, was not the only solution, as that acquired property could always be put back on the market.

 

                                                Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte.

Nays: McGehee, Willmus, Etten, and Roe.

Motion failed.

 

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, pursuing an updated traffic study prior to entering into a contract for design of Phase III of Twin lakes Parkway, and at a cost estimated at $8,000 to $10,000.

 

At the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Culver estimated approximately 3-6 months for completion of the updated traffic study, as part of the current work under the RCA.

 

At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Culver advised that for any further development in the area, an updated traffic study would be needed; and pending any land use changes beyond current development proposals in process, the traffic study remained doable and could be incorporated within those timeframes.  Mr. Culver reiterated that data would be collected throughout January, and once the model was updated and redone, it could be tweaked if needed and if a land use change came into play.  However, with the current developments and/or current proposals taken into account, Mr. Culver stated that he did not see any reason other elements could not be incorporated into that study.

 

                                                Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte, McGehee, Willmus. 

Nays: Roe and Etten.

Motion carried.

 

With agenda items 14.a and 14.b remaining, at approximately 10:00 p.m., Willmus moved, Etten seconded, to extend the meeting to the conclusion of the remaining agenda items.

 

Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte, Willmus, Etten, and Roe. 

Nays: McGehee.

Motion carried

 

14.         Business Items - Presentations/Discussions

 

a.            Request by the Community Development Department for Direction on the Creation of a Formal Voluntary Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Waiver Process for Projects Zoned Community Mixed-Use (CMU) in the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area

Community Development Director Paul Bilotta and City Planner Thomas Paschke were present to discuss this draft worksheet, as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014.  Mr. Bilotta explained that the worksheet actually mirrored pieces of a formal Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), but where the City's Alternative Urban Area-wide Review (AUAR) indicated there was no issue it provided a level of review at a more cursory nature based on those lesser elements.  Mr. Bilotta noted that the City Council could then determine where specific changes may be needed, mostly related to traffic issues, stormwater and hazardous waste materials onsite, along with any other elements that may be evident as well.

 

On page 5, #26 (Visual Impacts), Councilmember Etten asked for more information on what and how those visual impacts would be identified.

 

City Planner Paschke advised that it was taken from the existing AUAR and depended on how it was answered at that time.

 

Mr. Bilotta advised that it may vary depending on the actual location, and would be at City Council discretion to consider those issues for each project.

 

If someone proposed something that the City Council considered applicable, Councilmember Etten asked if applicants were then not required to repeat that analysis; opining that he thought the visual impact should be part of the preliminary review process.

 

Mayor Roe concurred, opining that, even if the answer in the AUAR process was "no," the City Council should still have the option of asking the question versus simply eliminating it.

 

Mr. Paschke responded that staff thought an applicant should answer every questions, depending on the location of the development, to determine if and how it was applicable, prior to the project being presented to the City Council for their review and consideration.

 

Mayor Roe opined that he preferred that the applicant answer ALL questions.

 

Councilmember Etten concurred, that he preferred them all included.

 

McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11198 entitled, "A Resolution Superseding and Repealing Resolution no. 11015, and replacing it with the Roseville Environmental Review Worksheet Application (PFOJ0032); as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014;" similar in form to that provided as a draft (Attachment D).

 

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

b.            Discuss City Council and Staff Retreat

City Manager briefly summarized this discussion as detailed in the RCA dated December 8, 2014.

 

Councilmember McGehee suggested, if discussing personnel-related issues, could a portion of the retreat be held in Closed Session.

 

City Attorney Gaughan responded that the retreat could not be held in Closed Session; and clarified that such a Closed Session for the purpose of personnel review for someone directly under the authority of the City Council, could only be held if and when duly noticed.  City Attorney Gaughan further clarified that, whether this was a City Council retreat or a regular meeting, it remained subject to all of the same Open Meeting Laws in accordance with applicable State Statute.

 

Councilmember Willmus stated that he was not really interested in hiring a facilitator; and if the retreat was agreed upon, would like it to focus on strategic planning or goal setting.  Regarding public access to the meeting, Councilmember Willmus opined that, since it was a meeting of the City Council, access should be afforded to the public; but remained open as to whether through live broadcast or videotaping for later viewing.  Councilmember Willmus based his concern in open access with that of former Roseville City Council Work Sessions that gave the perception of a closed environment, and therefore, made it difficult to determine the intent of meeting discussions.  Councilmember Willmus stated that he was open to meeting during the middle of the workday if that proved more convenient for staff.  Councilmember Willmus opined that the retreat did not require two days.

 

Councilmember Laliberte agreed that her vision of a retreat was for the purpose of goal setting, prioritization and proactive planning; and also did not see a need for a facilitator, as she was not in favor of spending money on a facilitator and/or another location.  Councilmember Laliberte opined that the retreat should be recorded and should have meeting minutes; but was open to whether or not it was broadcast live or held on videotape for the archives.  With enough prior notice as to the date and time, Councilmember Laliberte stated that she was supportive of a weekday retreat if it was easier for staff to attend, and advised that she could be available as long as there was sufficient time for planning her work schedule ahead.  Councilmember Laliberte also agreed that two days were not necessary for the retreat.

 

Councilmember Etten concurred with the strategic planning and goal setting purpose, and supported having staff involved, as well as doing it during the weekday.  Councilmember Etten suggested a Friday afternoon meeting with staff for four or five quality hours, but no more than that; and then if necessary the City Council could continue the next morning (Saturday) for a few hours.  Councilmember Etten spoke in support of using the City Council Chambers; or suggested one of the new park structures (e.g. Lexington Park) that would allow the brain to operate differently and be a positive change from the normal location.  Councilmember Etten spoke in strong support of having minutes, and if held at an alternative site, was fine with having a videotape for the archives, which would preclude the need for a live broadcast.

 

Mayor Roe noted that it was easier to do videotaping or a live broadcast if the Retreat was held in the City Council Chambers, and agreed that he saw no need to go off-site.  Regarding an agenda, Mayor Roe supported strategic planning and City Council and City goals for the next year, along with prioritizing them.  Mayor Roe opined that having it on a weekday was good for the part of the Retreat involving staff; and several half days would probably be adequate.  Regarding a facilitator, Mayor Roe advised that, having served as a Facilitator while acting as Chairperson, from his past experience had not been productive, nor allow him to participate in discussions.  Mayor Roe suggested that facilitator services may be available at a more reasonable cost than originally estimated by staff; and suggested several resources, including Barbara Raye as an option.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that hiring a facilitator didn't represent that much of an expense, if you wanted to have the Chairperson running the meeting as well as participating in discussions.  Councilmember McGehee suggested that the cost could come out of Communication Funds reserves. Councilmember Willmus advised that he was not necessarily against hiring a facilitator, just against spending the money to provide one, and suggested looking to other "free" options.

 

Mayor Roe suggested a look at alternatives may provide less expensive options for a facilitator.

 

Councilmember Laliberte expressed her openness to resources available; and spoke in support of having part of the meeting with staff and the other part without staff if broken into two partial days.

 

Councilmember Etten stated that he'd be open to a facilitator who could move discussions in a positive manner and forward versus circling around.  Councilmember Etten also spoke in support of having staff available for part of the meeting, or possibly before and after the City Council meetings. However, Councilmember Etten stated that he'd like to initially hear from staff to work into a broader discussion.

 

Mayor Roe spoke in support of staff's involvement, as long as their participation was not in the form of a "presentation" but part of a general discussion and with everyone getting their fair share of time. Mayor Roe opined that he was impressed with this City Council, and that it was one of the most effective City Council's he'd served with to-date.

 

City Manager Trudgeon advised that he would take this feedback and return with suggestions and a proposed framework for the City Councils  January 5, 2015 organizational meeting; along with potential dates and other logistics for finalization.  Mr. Trudgeon sought the City Council's intent for staff's involvement; with Mayor Roe responding that several concepts were brought forward tonight, and would need further fleshing out.

 

Councilmember Laliberte supported Councilmember Etten's suggestion for conversations with Department Heads as the first part of the Retreat allowing City Councilmembers to digest that information and factor it into their priorities, and then spending the second half of the meeting without staff and in planning strategies and goals.

 

Mayor Roe questioned if Councilmember Laliberte was supporting staff remaining available as a resource or not; she responded that she would not ask them to come in on a Saturday; but was suggesting that the City Council use that time to discuss their goals and priorities and what they wanted to accomplish over the next year.

 

Mayor Roe questioned what might happen if the City Council set their goals that were not in line with staff's with Councilmember Laliberte expressing her assurance that staff would be quick to subsequently set things straight.

 

15.         City Manager Future Agenda Review

City Manager Trudgeon distributed written preliminary agendas for several upcoming meetings.

 

16.         Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings

 

17.         Adjourn

Willmus moved, Etten seconded adjournment of the meeting at approximately 10:19 p.m.

 

                                    Roll Call

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

Nays: None.