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

City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

June 13, 2016


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.  Councilmember Willmus had previously advised he would be arriving late for tonight's meeting, and arrived at approximately 6:42 p.m.


2.       Pledge of Allegiance


3.       Approve Agenda

Councilmember Laliberte requested removal of Item 8.i from the Consent Agenda for separate consideration.


Noting a potential minor language revision suggested as part of the minute amendments for the May 23, 2016 meeting, Mayor Roe noted this would possibly affect Consent Item 8.j resolution language as well, and therefore, requested removal of that item for separate consideration.

                                                Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte, McGehee, Etten and Roe. 

Nays: None.


As requested by Councilmember McGehee, at approximately 6:03 p. m. the City Council observed a moment of silence in remembrance of this weekend's Orlando, FL terror victims.

Advisory Commission Interviews

Councilmembers conducted interviews with four applicants for one vacancy each on the Human Rights Commission and Community Engagement Commission respectively.



Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 6:54 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 6:58 p.m.


4.         Public Comment

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


a.            Wayne Groff, 2266 Marion Road

Mr. Groff thanked the City Council for observing a moment of silence in recognition of the tragic events that transpired in Orlando, Fl over this past weekend.  Mr. Groff presented a written copy of his language suggestions for a resolution of support, respectfully asking it be adopted by the Roseville City Council condemning such hate crimes and sending consolation and hope of healing to the city and the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual and Transgender (LGBT) community. 


b.            Brett Kolland, 1926 Gluek Lane

Mr. Kolland advised that he had recently received a notice of violation for a two-axle trailer at his residence, noting apparently all two-axle trailers were considered commercial and in violation of Roseville City Code.  Mr. Kolland advised that this trailer was used for residential and volunteer work only, and asked the City Council to reconsider this code.


Councilmember McGehee sought a photo of the trailer and follow-up information from Mr. Kolland on the nature of his volunteer work.


Mayor Roe advised that this would be taken under advisement for future response; and if there was a recommended change to city code for this particular type of trailer, the issue would be taken up at that time at the discretion of the City Council, or at their request during Councilmember initiated items for future meetings.


Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of the resolution of support proposed by Mr. Groff.


Since this item was not on tonight's agenda, and Councilmembers had not yet seen a copy of the proposed language, Mayor Roe suggested it be added to a future agenda.


Councilmember McGehee opined that it would no longer be as relevant as it would tonight, and asked that it be included on tonight's agenda.


Councilmember Willmus stated he had no problem adding the proposed resolution to tonight's agenda, as long as Councilmembers received a copy of the suggested resolution.


Laliberte moved, Willmus seconded, adding the proposed resolution of support for the City of Orlando, FL; directed staff to make copies available for the dais and for the public audience.


Without objection, the proposed resolution was added as Business/Action Item 14.a to tonight's agenda, with staff providing a copy of the proposed resolution language from Mr. Groff.


Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


5.         Council and City Manager Communications, Reports, and Announcements

Mayor Roe announced upcoming Human Rights Commission-sponsored book selections and subsequent discussions as part of the summer reading program, scheduled for two Saturdays in June.


Councilmember Laliberte thanked city staff for their involvement over the weekend of the Metro Transit's Bus Rapid Transit A-line launch along Snelling Avenue from Rosedale Center to the Hiawatha Street station.  Councilmember Laliberte noted the community planning group she had participated with, and commended staff's involvement at that planning level as well as their presence at the kick-off event.


Councilmember Laliberte reported the most recent meeting of the Cedarholm Golf Course Club House Task Force, discussing financial considerations for how to pay for a clubhouse and thanked Finance Director Miller for his presentation of options and accounts for how the facility is currently funded.  Councilmember Laliberte noted that this provided a better understanding of the situation for the task force.


6.         Recognitions, Donations and Communications


7.            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 May 23, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the May 23, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes as amended.



§  Page 11, Line 39 (Etten)

Typographical Correction: Delete one "50%" reference.

§  Page 18, Line 30 (Laliberte)

Correct to read: Remove the additional "not" that occurs before the one this is already stricken out" (Councilmember Laliberte would support the PUD process if it provided a better solution.)

§  Page 20, Line 27 (McGehee)

Correct to read: "[but] for this small parcel"

§  Page 24, Line 32 (Laliberte)

Correct to read: "add an "s" to "tank."

§  Page 25, Lines 4 - 5 (Etten)

Correct to read: "sufficient space between homes, noting [recent large new developments] [homes in LDR-2 sections of this development] continued to increase in value resulting in some pretty expensive homes.'


                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


8.            Approve Consent Agenda

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly reviewed those items being considered under the Consent Agenda; and as detailed in specific Requests for Council Action (RCA) and related attachments, dated June 13, 2016.


a.            Approve Payments

For the benefit of the public, Mayor Roe clarified that there were two items duplicated in the check register (page 49) that had been incorrectly paid to one entity versus the correct one, and had subsequently been reimbursed by the original entity, but in the check summary, it didn't provide for this detail.


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


ACH Payments


81533 - 81762





                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


b.            Approval of 2016-2017 Business and Other License Renewals

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of annual business and other license renewals as detailed.


                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


c.            Approve Business & Other Licenses & Permits

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of business and other licenses and permits for terms as noted.


                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


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

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of general purchases and contracts for services as noted in the RCA dated May 9, 2016, and Attachment A entitled, "2016 Capital Improvement Plan Summary," dated May 31, 2016.


                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of the sale of surplus items for trade in on replacement or for sale at public auction or bid process as applicable, and as detailed in the RCA dated June 13, 2016.


                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


e.     Adopt Resolution Rejecting Bids for 2016 Larpenteur Avenue Sidewalk Project

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, adopted Resolution No. 11323 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution Rejecting Bids for 2016 Larpenteur Avenue Sidewalk."


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


f.        Adopt Resolution to Accept Work Completed and Authorize Final Payment on the 2015 Pavement Management Project (PMP)

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, adopted Resolution No. 11324 (Attachment A) entitled, "Final Contract Acceptance - 2015 Pavement Management Project;" accepting the work completed, initiating the one-year warranty period, and authorizing final payment in an amount not to exceed $63,094.19.


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


g.            Adopt Resolution Awarding Bid for Twin Lakes Area Traffic Signals

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, adopted Resolution No. 11325 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution Awarding Bids for Twin Lakes Area Traffic Signals;" awarding bid to Forest Lake Contracting, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $179,600.

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


h.            Adopt Resolution Awarding Bid for 2016 Heinel Watermain Lining Project

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, adopted Resolution No. 11326 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution Awarding Bids for 2016 Heinel Watermain Lining;" awarding the project to the firm of Fer-Pal Construction USA, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $542,808.30.


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


k.            Adopt Resolution Memorializing Denial of an Amendment to the Official Zoning Map for Property at 1415 County Road B (PF16-006)

Mayor Roe noted that this item had originally received a 3/2 vote, but without objection the item remained on the Consent Agenda for action.


Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, adopted Resolution No. 11327 (Attachment A) entitled, "A Resolution Memorializing the Denial of an Official Zoning Map Change (Rezoning) from High Density Residential-1 District to High Density Residential-2 District at 1415 County Road B (PF16-006)."


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


l.             Set Date for I-35W Managed Lane Public Hearing

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, adopted Resolution No. 11328 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution Ordering Public Hearing for Municipal Consent of I-35W Managed Lane Project Final Layout;" scheduled at the July 25, 2016 City Council meeting.


                   Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


9.         Consider Items Removed from Consent


i.             Authorize Purchase Agreement to Purchase Property located at Zero Cleveland Avenue

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly reviewed this item as detailed in the Request for Council Action and related attachments, dated June 13, 2016.  City Manager Trudgeon clarified that this would be only a first step to acquire the property, and prior to any development of the parcels, community discussions would definitely take place.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Parks & Recreation Director Lonnie Brokke displayed a Parks Master Plan update map of the parcels.


Councilmember Laliberte advised that she had asked for removal of this item from the consent agenda as she felt it didn't belong there without public discussion.  Councilmember Laliberte noted considerable community concern related to the project that residents apparently felt had come out of nowhere.  Councilmember Laliberte noted the need for more clarification from the City Council's perspective and explanation of their rationale in moving forward.


To provide additional context, Mayor Roe reviewed the City Council meeting in closed session several weeks ago to consider this property that had been put on the market, with the current owner offering the city the first option to acquire it.  At that time, Mayor Roe advised that it had been brought to the City Council to consider the acquisition, and as per State Statute, the City Council had met in closed session to consider making an offer on the property.  Mayor Roe further clarified the closed nature of that consideration was for the purpose of forming a potential offer, and to not make such an offer known in a public forum to disadvantage the city making an offer.  Mayor Roe noted that these parcels located in this southwestern part of Roseville had been reviewed as part of the 2010 Park Master Plan and subsequent Park Renewal Program, and identified as possible future park land opportunities at that time.


Referencing the displayed map specifically, Councilmember Etten identified the "circles" and their distances from green space or public use land, noting that this land is outside every existing circle, and would serve to bring more people closer to available park land.  Based on the concept of the map, Councilmember Etten opined that this acquisition would ensure more people within that area could be tied into the park systems in that area of Roseville.


Councilmember McGehee stated that she had originally been opposed to this acquisition, and that opposition had been reinforced with several neighborhood meetings since then.  Councilmember McGehee stated that most people in the southwest area of Roseville more commonly identified the vacant parcel across the street rather than these parcels.  She stated that this parcel (2025 County Road B) had been brought to the attention of the Parks & Recreation Commission and Department, but for reasons she couldn't understand, was apparently found undesirable.  Councilmember McGehee opined that every city park did not need to facilitate recreation land and ballfields, which apparently was the rationale of one commissioner who stated the preferred parcel (2025 County Road B) wasn't big enough to toss a ball.  Councilmember McGehee stated that the way the street was set up, and with the city continuing to work on connecting the community through pathways and sidewalks, the same distance of ¼ mile to reach the preferred parcel was not problematic.  Councilmember McGehee stated that most residents could access green space, ballfields, and tennis courts elsewhere within a ¼ mile radius, including at the adjacent Brimhall School when school was not in session, as well as those same activities available at Falcon Heights Community Park.  All of these areas are currently easily and safely accessible using Roseville-installed pathway connections.  However, Councilmember McGehee opined that the one piece still missing was natural parkland in this southwest area of Roseville, which had been requested by residents during Park Renewal public hearings, seeking a relaxing park similar to those areas of Central Park, the Nature Center, and Arboretum, having identified the preferred parcel as that kind of property for complementary green space versus active space.  Councilmember McGehee noted that SW Roseville also had access to skiing and sledding on the two golf courses (University of Minnesota and Midland Grove) and a dog park located at Lauderdale Park, all connected by pathways.


Councilmember Willmus stated it was important to note the difference with the subject parcel and one that may be preferred by neighbors was that this parcel and the one immediately north of it were potentially available for acquisition now, with a willing seller, thus the reason for Council consideration of its acquisition.


Public Comment

Written public comment in opposition to proposed land acquisition by the city for a park at Zero Cleveland and supportive of a park at 2025 County Road B, instead had been submitted for the record, attached hereto and made a part hereof, from Kathleen Turner, 2250 Midland Grove Road, #209; Jackie Eastman, Midland Grove Road, #107; Satya & Vijay Pothapragada, 2215 Midland Grove Road, #105; and Richard & Florence Holmsten, 2240 Midland Grove Road #107.


Vijay Pothapragada, 2215 Midland Grove, #105

Mr. Pothapragada submitted a formal petition to City Manager Trudgeon signed by 135 Midland Grove residents asking for the city's purchase of property for a park at 2025 County Road B rather than the proposed parcels.  Mr. Pothapragada stated there was a lot of support and demand for a simple, nature-themed park in the area rather than what could be developed on these proposed parcels under consideration.  Mr. Pothapragada questioned the notification process that was involved to residents for this acquisition, opining most had found it came out of left field, and asking to be involved in the process based on the definite interest in a small, nature-themed park.  Mr. Pothapragada encouraged Councilmembers to view the 2025 site, opining it was amazing and like going back to the rain forest, while at the best, the proposed park across the street would be only a mediocre park while this one could be exceptional.  While unsure of the history of this proposed parcel being on the market, Mr. Pothapragada noted the 2025 parcel had been on the market several times, and while only marketed to developers to-date, why not to the City of Roseville as well.  While unable to comment on the proposed park without knowing the details of it, Mr. Pothapragada reiterated that a lot of residents in the area support a park at 2025 County Road B.


Wayne Groff, 2266 Marion Road (west side of Cleveland Avenue)

Mr. Groff relayed comments from residents in this area, and their concern if the city purchases a smaller piece of property, it would eliminate the possibility of a better, larger park in the future if such an opportunity came up.  Also, Mr. Groff noted resident concerns with the city going ahead with a purchase without residents knowing the details of a potential park.  Summarizing, Mr. Groff noted resident concern was related to the community engagement process and the park's potential location.


Joyce Teilen, 2210 Midland Grove Road, #302

Ms. Teilen spoke in support of the 135 signatures on the petition and living at Midland Grove, and potential development of the proposed parcel as a park.  Ms. Teilen expressed concern about a park in area in her neighborhood, and her personal concerns with drugs, and asked if a park was developed, whether the city would consider a safety feature by closing the park at dark, noting other small parks to limit use of the park by those in the immediate neighborhood.  Ms. Teilen noted that the preferred parcel for a park at 2025 County Road B was covered by 100-year old trees, and since the gentleman owning it had come before the city twice seeking to build a large condominium development, she had publicly spoken in opposition to those developments.  In this instance, Ms. Teilen opined that the owner could sell the property to the city for a good price, and have the property serve as a memorial to his grandmother, the original owner of the property.  Ms. Teilen asked the city to consider this option before making any other decisions, and to have that discussion publicly and through open dialogue to hear everyone's opinion.


Jackie Eastman 2250 Midland Grove Road, #107

With the knowledge that the current owner of the 2025 property wants to sell the property adjacent to their condominium complex, and isn't interested in living in the neighborhood, Ms. Eastman asked if the city had ever put a proposal in front of the owner that he would consider in an affirmative manner.  Ms. Eastman asked that the City Council made such a proposal to this property owner as well.


Councilmember Willmus noted it was important to recognize that these particular parcels are actively on the market for sale, and therefore the city has an opportunity to acquire and take position of them, setting into place the planning for their future use.  Councilmember Willmus opined that the Parks & Recreation Department has a history of doing an excellent job for community outreach and involvement, particularly in the Parks Master Planning process and neighborhood engagement to determine each neighborhood park's amenities.  While the city could engage in that public planning over a number of months at this time, Councilmember Willmus noted that during that time, the parcel could be purchased by a private party for another use.  Councilmember Willmus opined that that it was particularly advantageous for the city to take control of these parcels now; and even if the community later says they aren't interested in a park on those parcels, the property could be resold by the city, with no damage in their having taken control at this time.  While there is also a lot of speculation at this time regarding the 2025 parcel, Councilmember Willmus noted the owner had been working with developers to maximize the return on his investment; and therefore, questioned if the city was in a position to acquire the parcel for a comparable price that the owner could receive in the private development market, which was considerably different.  Councilmember Willmus reiterated the process involved in considering public input for park planning and development that will be ongoing through the Parks Master Plan process if and when the city acquires this site.


Willmus moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution (Attachment E) No. 11329 entitled, 'Resolution Approving the Purchase/Sale of Certain Land by the City of Roseville;" authorizing the purchase of property located at "O" Cleveland Avenue and "O" Cleveland Avenue in Roseville, MN from Constance J. Ternes, as Trustee, for a sum of $154,000; and authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Purchase Agreement (Attachment D) on behalf of the City setting forth the terms and conditions of the sale and undertaking any actions or contingencies contained therein.


Councilmember Position Statements

Councilmember McGehee stated she would not support the motion, and was doing so for a number of reasons, including community survey results of 2014 and 2016.  Councilmember McGehee stated this was another expenditure of public money when there were willing private buyers interested in purchasing the property for new home construction that would add to the city's tax base rather than removing the parcels from that base. Councilmember McGehee further opined that the majority of residents in the area didn't want this particular property for a park, and advised that when park staff had been approached on at least two different occasions about pursuing purchase of the parcel at 2025 County Road B, staff's response had been that the city wasn't interested in pursuing that acquisition.  Councilmember McGehee noted that that parcel was larger with mature trees and vegetation, while this land may be available for purchase, but much less desirable with fewer amenities.  Councilmember McGehee opined that to acquire these parcels and then engage in a planning process for their development was a folly and waste of taxpayer money while other things were already on the agenda, including the Cedarholm Golf Course and funding needed there.  Councilmember McGehee opined that this is not a significant or important purchase at this time, especially when numerous requests had been made by SW Roseville residents for the city to purchase the 2025 parcel, with funds available to do so without effort versus spending part of those funds to purchase something not wanted by residents.  Councilmember McGehee further opined that this was not a desirable location for a park while overlooking other preferable sites, not desired by residents, an inappropriate use of public funds, and represented poor public policy.


Councilmember Etten stated that he generally concurred with Councilmember Willmus' comments that this is not a mutually exclusive acquisition, allowing other possibilities as well.  Councilmember Etten clarified that this was part of the process identified in the Park Master Plan update that looked at creating pocket park concepts, since another Central or Villa Park was not feasible, but still providing a positive gathering and community space in neighborhoods; and opined that this potential purchase addressed the general concept of such a pocket park.  Councilmember Etten noted that the city could move forward over time as such parcels became available, and noted that the sites currently under consideration were accessible from sidewalks on the east and south sides, as well as from the new sidewalk along County Road B west of Cleveland Avenue.


Councilmember Laliberte stated her agreement with her colleagues for the most part, while questioning the accuracy of some of the comments without further research and related to acquisition of the 2025 parcel and apparent lack of interest by the Parks & Recreation staff or their level of interest.    However, Councilmember Laliberte stated she was not interested in paying developer-level pricing for the 2025 parcel, but couldn't comment further without knowing more information on the asking or appraisal prices.  Councilmember Laliberte agreed with Councilmember Etten's comments that this property and the engagement process is a result of the Master Plan discussion updates, and opined that was a good thing.  Councilmember Laliberte opined that anytime the city went back out into the community for additional feedback that was good public process.  When the city asks residents what they'd like their neighborhood park to be, and if that feedback comes back that they can't envision any use for the land, Councilmember Laliberte agreed that the parcels could be resold and other opportunities seized at that time.  Councilmember Laliberte stated she would support the motion, since it provided an opportunity that was available now for the city, and didn't preclude further consideration in the future to pursue other opportunities.  Councilmember Laliberte opined it would be good to get more information as to what other parcels may be available to the city for acquisition.


Mayor Roe stated he had no information about another potential buyer for the Zero Cleveland parcels, nor did he have information that the Parks Department was not interested in the 2025 County Road B parcel.  However, Mayor Roe noted that he did know that there had been a land use application before the city for the 2025 parcel for redevelopment, and opined it would have been extremely inappropriate for the city to attempt an offer on the parcel when at the same time being asked to consider a development proposal, creating an obvious ethical issue with the city appearing to have a vested interested in not approving a proposal because it wanted to acquire the parcel for park use.  Mayor Roe suggested that may have been staff's rationale in expressing a lack of interest in the parcel at the time they were asked to avoid putting the city in a position to appear interested in a property before them for redevelopment, again creating a strong appearance of conflict of interest.


City Manager Trudgeon confirmed staff's response rationale as noted by Mayor Roe.


As stated by Councilmembers Etten and Laliberte, Councilmember Willmus reiterated that this purchase in no way precluded the city from looking at the 2025 parcel in the future, and volunteered to work with Councilmember McGehee to pursue that option.  However, Councilmember Willmus stated that he planned to fully support this motion.


Councilmember McGehee stated she would not oppose the motion if there was some agreement going forward to look at the 2025 parcel.  Councilmember McGehee stated that she was very adamant that the city not do anything while that 2025 parcel was under land use consideration, being fully aware of potential conflict of interest concerns, but rather supported the city waiting to see if it could be purchased.  Given the strong community desire to look at that 2025 parcel for park land, Councilmember McGehee opined that the city needed to take a strong role to acquire the parcel for the city.  Councilmember McGehee stated she would be happy to work with Councilmember Willmus or anyone else to accomplish such an acquisition, opining it would make a spectacular addition to not only the SW Roseville park amenities, but for the entire community-wide park system, creating a parcel unlike any other currently available.


For numerous reasons stated, Mayor Roe spoke in support of both perspectives, but clarified that acquisition of the parcels at "0" Cleveland Avenue for potential park use in no way diminished consideration of looking at the 2025 County Road B parcel as well.  Mayor Roe reiterated and made clear for the public that nothing would be built or developed on any public parcel without a significant public process, in line with the historic community engagement processes followed.


                                    Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


Roe moved, McGehee seconded, directing staff to seek an appraisal for the property owner at 2025 County Road B for potential acquisition by the city.


Councilmember Etten suggested amending the motion directing staff to consult with the property owner since the parcel was not on the open market for purchase, and an appraisal could be premature.


Councilmember Laliberte agreed with Councilmember Etten; that staff should be directed to have a conversation with the property owner, and then proceed to an appraisal if the property owner was found receptive to selling.  Councilmember Laliberte cautioned that the property owner may have a particular use in mind for developing the property, and since he's waited ten years to bring forward two similar development proposals, his intent was unknown at this time.


Councilmember McGehee referenced the suggestion by a resident during public testimony for the property to serve as a memorial to the property owner's grandmother, allowing for several options to honor that past association with the land.


Mayor Roe sought clarification on the actual motion intended based on further discussion, and the language of the motion was subsequently reordered by the makers of the motion as follows:

Roe moved, McGehee seconded, directing staff to initiate a conversation with the property owner at 2025 County Road B about potential acquisition by the city; and if a favorable reception was received from the current property owner, staff was further directed to pursue an appraisal on the parcel.


Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


j.             Adopt a Resolution Memorializing Denial of the Request to Amend Roseville City Code, Section 1004.09.C (Improvement Area) to allow Greater Development of Building Footprints and Paved Surfaces on Parcels in the LDR-2 Zoning District (PF156-010)

As previously noted by Mayor Roe, a minor language revision was implemented as amendment to the May 23, 2016 meeting minutes; and therefore consistent revision was indicated for the proposed resolution.  Mayor Roe noted this was on line 18 of the resolution, revised to read:

"That percentage would be too limiting [for] [of] sufficient green space between or surrounding individual homes; and"


Roe moved, McGehee seconded, adopted Resolution No. 11330 (RCA Exhibit A) entitled, "A Resolution Memorializing the Denial of a Request to Amend Zoning Text Pertaining to the Amount of Building Footprint and Paved Surface Allowed in the LDR-2 Zoning District (PF16-010);" as amended.


                                    Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 8:05 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 8:17 p.m.


10.        General Ordinances for Adoption


a.            Community Development Department Requests Approval of Proposed Text Ordinance Amendments to Roseville City Code, Title 9, Chapter 908, to Regulate Rental Licensing for Multi-Family Rental Dwellings of 5 or more Units

Codes Coordinator Dave Englund briefly summarized the changes incorporated since the last presentation, as detailed in the RCA.


For the benefit of the listening audience, Mayor Roe briefly summarized those revisions (lines 19 - 34 of the RCA), and as noted in Attachment A, including other technical changes.


McGehee moved, Laliberte seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1502 (Attachment A) entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Selected Text of Roseville City Code, Chapter 908, to Regulate Rental Licensing for Multi-Family Rental Dwellings of 5 or More Units."


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, enactment of Ordinance Summary No. 1502 (Attachment B) entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Selected Text of Roseville City Code, Chapter 908, to Regulate Rental Licensing for Multi-Family Rental Dwellings of 5 or More Units."


                                                Roll Call (Super Majority)

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

Nays: None.


Mayor Roe thanked staff for their proposed revisions, and for providing the additional research as previously requested by the City Council.


11.        Presentations


a.            New Election Equipment Demonstration

Mayor Roe introduced City of Roseville Elections Coordinator Carolyn Curti for a demonstration, as required by state law, of new election equipment for use over the next decade.  Ms. Curti noted the equipment will be on display for the month of June at City Hall, and encouraged residents to stop in to try out this newer technology equipment with enhanced security. 


Ms. Curti noted equipment was also available for visually impaired voters now able to vote privately rather than in the past with the assistance of two election judges, and able to be coded to ensure the ballot was submitted successfully.


Ms. Curti demonstrated various types of ballots for the public, and advised that equipment would be available at all polling places for absentee or early voting one week prior to this year's primary and general elections.


b.            Joint Meeting with the Park & Recreation Commission

Mayor Roe welcomed Parks and Recreation Commission members present, including Chair Terrance Newby, and Commissioners Jerry Stoner, Philip Gelbach, Cynthia Warzecha, Nancy O'Brien, Luke Heikkila, Jamie Becker-Finn, Ronald Bole, Lee Diedrick


Chair Newby thanked the City Council for this opportunity to briefly review projects the commission was working on and updating them on projects still in process.  Chair Newby delegated reports on various activities and accomplishments as detailed in the RCA to Commissioners Becker-Finn, Heikkala, Gelbach and Stoner.  Chair Newby concluded the presentation by addressing other activities before seeking feedback from the City Council.


Commissioner Gelbach noted a typographical error in the "Summer Fun 2016 Events" flyer on the date of the parade shown as a Thursday, when it was Monday, June 27, 2016.


At the request of Commissioner Becker-Finn, Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Jill Anfang reported that 110 volunteers had volunteered approximately 900 hours on Community Playground Builds to-date.


Considerable discussion was held on the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) update, prompted by Councilmember McGehee's request to know more about the city's goal for the program.

Chair Newby advised that the commission and staff were exploring ways to minimize the impact on Roseville, with one option to treat individual trees even though he noted this was an expensive option and not always practical.  Since the borer appears here to stay, Chair Newby reported that when exploring various alternatives with a goal not to isolate the disease, but consider replacement trees, removal of diseased trees, or treatment if appropriate while realizing treatment may not be the most cost-effective measure depending on the number of trees infected.  Chair Newby reported that another option was finding new species that were not as susceptible to the borer. 


At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Commissioner O'Brien responded to the question if trees were found infected, if they could withstand infestation without treatment.  Commissioner O'Brien reported on information the commission had been told through consultation with the city's arborist, that once treatment was begun it needed to be continued for the life of the tree or was not viable.  Commissioner O'Brien noted that was one reason why the long-term process became expense for areas unless those trees were important in a certain area.  Commissioner O'Brien suggested that the reports from the arborist that the Commission received on a regular basis could be shared with the City Council more frequently to keep everyone more informed.  Commissioner O'Brien noted EAB seemed to now be moving like wildfire, and assured the City Council and public that the city was working locally but also with Ramsey County to address EAB infestation.


In response to whether once infestation was found, was there any hope for the tree, Commissioner Gelbach stated that the need remained to get rid of the bark and beetle to remove the danger of further infestation.


Councilmember McGehee asked if the city had published information for the benefit of private property owners on removal requirements or past experience in removing infested trees.


Commissioner Stoner responded that public or private parties were subject to Ramsey County rules for transporting wood from a quarantined area, such as Roseville was now designated.  Commissioner Stoner stated that it was his understanding that the more cost-effective way now being used was to chip infested wood to mechanically destroy the beetles.  Commissioner Stoner advised that there was a plethora of information available from Ramsey County and the State Department of Natural Resources.  Commissioner Stoner advised that; and at this time, the recommendation was that if you found a tree in poor condition due to EAB, you took it down, with those infected deteriorating quickly, with a projected five-year cycle from start to finish for the disease, and possibly sooner depending on the health of the tree, with visible deterioration seen as the canopy starts to die off.


Councilmember McGehee suggested including educational flyers or handouts for the community and golfers as part of requested public input for the Cedarholm project to help spread the word.


Commissioner Stoner duly noted that request; and also noted the expenditure of funds to-date for treatment of significant public trees, which included some on the golf course within a limited scope.


Specific to the Wildlife Management Program and Ordinance, Councilmember Laliberte noted previous discussion about the educational component (e.g. feeding ban), and asked how or when this was being done.

Chair Newby advised it was an ongoing process; and noted it had been found that the feeding was frequently going on in city parks.  Therefore, Chair Newby advised that the commission would be returning to the City Council in the near future with a recommendation to consider signage in parks explaining and summary the city ban as a gentle reminder.


Commissioner Becker-Finn advised that when city staff receives a call reporting a resident feeding wildlife, in response a staff person was sent out to help educate residents.  Commissioner Becker-Finn noted that the city was not just citing people without a prior warning that they were in violation of city ordinance, especially in certain specific areas of the city where this has been problematic, but that education is being done on a person-to-person basis.


Chair Newby had noted communication received by staff and the commission on the deer issue; and sought assurances that the City Council was also being copied on those emails.  Chair Newby reported that the only information not forwarded to the City Council was informal comments when commissioners had been out and about the community, and people had inquired about the ordinance, with most of those inquiries about misconceptions about hunting and feeding.


Councilmember McGehee thanked the commission for endorsing the Marion Street park; opining it was a wonderful thing and very much needed; and stated her often voiced opinion that the city adopt a policy to ensure adequate green space in all High Density Residential (HDR) zoning districts.


Chair Newby noted the commission's involvement in reviewing and providing input into the city's asset management program, and adoption by the City Council in 2015 of the civic priority plan, including asset management.  Chair Newby assured Councilmembers that the commission would continue to review respective parks, facilities and infrastructure segments related to parks and recreation.


Councilmember Willmus specifically asked the commission to review the 2016 community survey results about park building use, noting the comments were quite impressive.


Councilmember Etten thanked the commission for all their work, especially the huge accomplishment as the Park Renewal Program nears completion, as well as for looking down the road going forward on new items.


Mayor Roe noted, as a key thing the City Council addressed as part of the city's 2016 budget process was the proactive tackling of capital improvement program (CIP) issues.  Given the significant and immediate deficit in the parks and recreation area of the CIP, Mayor Roe noted that the funds go negative this or next year; and noted the Commission and staff were tasked to look at that very closely.  Mayor Roe asked that the commission do so as well to identify any expenditures that could be reasonably delayed or changes made to the plan; or if additional funding sources could be identified beyond the previously-discussed park dedication fee.  Mayor Roe noted recent accountings indicating surplus Park Renewal Program bond funds that may be applicable to park CIP uses and help to somewhat alleviate the deficit situation.  Mayor Roe stated that he wanted input from the commission and their recommendations about how to address this deficit, noting he didn't want to see negative lines in the CIP going forward, but to see it adequately and realistically funded.


Councilmember Willmus noted past commission discussions about a local option sales tax, especially for the city's major regional component (skating center).


Regarding the skating center, Mayor Roe noted that staff-level discussions were ongoing about how to approach and receive state bonding funds at the next opportunity, in the 2018 legislative session.


Chair Newby noted these were some difficult and complex issues, but assured the City Council that the commission was holding those discussions now.


Mayor Roe thanked commissioners for their attendance and update.


12.        Public Hearings and Action Consideration


a.            Public Hearing to Consider the Transfer of an Off-Sale Liquor License and Cigarette/Tobacco Products License to Roseville Liquor, Inc., d/b/a Chucho Liquor

Finance Director Chris Miller briefly summarized the request as detailed in the RCA.  The applicant was present but did not seek recognition or to make comment.


Mayor Roe opened and closed the public hearing at approximately 9:06 p.m.; with no one appearing for or against.


McGehee moved, Etten seconded, approval of the transfer of the Off-Sale Liquor License and Cigarette/Tobacco Products License to Yeng Vang for the remainder of the 2016 calendar year, 700 West County Road B.


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


b.            Public Hearing to Approve/Deny an On-Sale Wine License for MIAMSP, LLC, d/b/a Painting With a Twist, located at 2100 Snelling Avenue N, Suite 72C (Har Mar Mall)

Finance Director Chris Miller briefly summarized the request as detailed in the RCA. 


Mayor Roe opened and closed the public hearing at approximately 9:08 p.m.; with no one appearing for or against.


Since this is a national chain based on her review of the request with this location the first Minnesota franchise, Councilmember Laliberte noted the application stated that food was not their principle business, but questioned the percentage and type of food service intended, and how it would be monitored.


Finance Director Miller advised that staff had spoken with the applicant about that and, while it may be a grey area initially, the intent was to serve simple sandwiches and snacks that would complement wine.  Mr. Miller advised that this satisfied city requirements as per state law, but advised that staff would monitor it in its annual review of sales data provided.


Councilmember Laliberte noted that her review had also indicated a number of youth options, making it appear that the use of the facility was not limited to adults.


Finance Director Miller advised he would need to research that further for a future report to the City Council if so directed.


As noted by Councilmember Willmus, the city's ordinance specifically addresses food sales, with Finance Director Miller noting this was mostly related to full-liquor licenses, with differences for on-sale wine licenses.  During staff's review of the application, Mr. Miller reported that staff had been satisfied the applicant met requirements, but would continue to monitor the building.  Mr. Miller noted that the applicant had been fully made aware of the city's requirements as they begin operations; and assured councilmember that staff would review sales and follow-up accordingly.


For future reference, Mayor Roe asked staff to include the section of code addressing these specific licenses as part of the meeting packet materials.


At the request of Councilmember Etten, Finance Director Miller assured that the applicant had received full information in their application materials for training compliance and identification of minors.


McGehee moved, Etten seconded, approval of the request of MIAMSP, LLC for an On-Sale Wine License, located at 2100 Snelling Avenue N, Suite 72C (Har Mar Mall).


Councilmember Laliberte stated she would vote in support of the motion; but asked that staff provide the City Council with a six-month report on the business and food sales.

                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


c.            Request for Approval of a Minor Subdivision of the Residential Property at 545 Roselawn Avenue into Three Parcels (PF16-014)

Mayor Roe opened the public hearing at approximately 9:13 p.m., noting this type of minor subdivision request came directly to the City Council versus the Planning Commission for the public hearing process.


City Planner Thomas Paschke briefly summarized the request as detailed in the RCA.  Mayor Roe noted that the applicant was present, but sought no recognition or to make a presentation.


Mayor Roe closed the public hearing at approximately 9:17 p.m., with no one appearing for or against.


Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of a MINOR SUBDIVISION to allow the property at 545 Roselawn Avenue to be subdivided into three conforming parcels; based on the comments and findings of the staff report and input received during the public hearing; and subject to conditions as outlined in lines 92 - 95 of the report as presented and dated June 13, 2016.


                                                Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


13.        Budget Items


14.        Business Items (Action Items)


a.            NEW ITEM - Resolution of Support for the City of Orlando FL

Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11331 (draft provided as Groff bench handout) entitled, "Resolution of Support and Solidarity with the City of Orlando;" as follows:

"WHEREAS, the attack of June 10, 2016, at the nightclub in Orlando, FL was a reprehensible act of terror against the United States, the people of Orlando, and the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, and Transgender (LGBT) community specifically;


BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Roseville extends its deepest sympathy and stands in solidarity with the City of Orlando against all hate crimes and acts of terrorism, sending consultation and hope of healing to the city and the LGBT community and their families and friends."


                                    Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


15.        Business Items - Presentations/Discussions


a.            Receive Information on the Upcoming Comprehensive Plan Update and Provide Direction on the Scope of the Update, the Public Engagement Strategy, and the Overall Timeline of the Process to Update the Comprehensive Plan (PROJ-0037)

Interim Community Development Director Kari Collins and Senior Planner Bryan Lloyd were present to provide an overview of information regarding the upcoming comprehensive plan update, as detailed in the RCA.  Ms. Collins asked the City Council to provide direction to staff on the scope of the update, the public engagement strategy, and overall timeline of the process.


During the presentation, and as per the RCA, staff highlighted each chapter or section, and advised that the scope of the project defined by the City Council would inform the degree of outside consultant use for specific chapters versus in-house technical review of those deemed consistent with the 2008 update.


Public Works Director Marc Culver briefly reviewed those chapters under the Public Works realm, noting that a different outside consultant would be reviewing those chapters on a parallel track with other consultant work and including public input.  Mr. Culver reported that all chapters would be presented together upon their completion for City Council final approval prior to seeking review and comment by other jurisdictions and agencies, before final submission to the Metropolitan Council.  Mr. Culver noted that staff intended to integrate and update the Pathway Master Plan into the transportation chapter, including seeking public input on updated pathway priorities.


Specific to the economic development and redevelopment chapters, Ms. Collins noted the need to identify whether a consultant specializing in those areas was needed to assist the process, noting there would be some level of updating needed in transitioning from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) to the Economic Development Authority (EDA), even though some of the policies and goals remained consistent.


Specific to environmental protection and utilities chapters, Mr. Culver advised that some consultant assistance may be needed for special modeling and data production, most of the work could be completed in-house by staff and then incorporated into the updated plan. 


Mr. Culver highlighted the surface water management section, advising that this was already out for a Request for Proposals (RFP) due to timing with one of the three area watershed districts and their review slated for the city in August of 2017.  However, Mr. Culver noted that this information would also be reviewed and presented to the public for their feedback.


Specific to the parks, open space and recreation chapter, Ms. Collins advised that the Park Master Plan and Park Renewal Program documents would be integrated into the comprehensive plan update.


Senior Planner Bryan Lloyd reviewed the implementation chapter as detailed in the RCA; as well as additional considerations as outlined in lines 119-195 of the RCA.


Ms. Collins noted Planning Commission input included in lines 196 - 216 of the RCA.


If the City Council had any additional considerations, Ms. Collins asked that they direct that information to staff.  For those with little or no familiarity with the comprehensive plan or updates each decade, Ms. Collins referred them to the Metropolitan Council's local community handbook, opining it was a wonderful resource.


Ms. Collins reviewed the draft timeline for City Council consideration, noting it was mirrored against the 2007-08 plan update timeline, and addressed in lines 48 - 71 of the RCA.  Ms. Collins advised that the significant time between November 2017 and December 31, 2018 was to allow review by local jurisdictions, agencies and the Metropolitan Council.


Prior to preparing an RFP, Ms. Collins advised that staff was seeking specific City Council guidance on their preferred scope of the update and preferred option(s) for public engagement strategies.  The recommended choices outlined by staff were as follows:

Options for Scope of Update

a)   Technical update - system statements issued by the Metropolitan Council; OR

b)    Technical and content update; OR

c)    Technical update and full re-write/re-vision of the comprehensive plan.


Options for Engagement Strategy

a)    Engagement strategy developed with consultant, staff and various advisory commissions; OR

b)    Consultant suggested engagement process with Community Engagement Commission (CEC) representation in review of proposals; OR

c)    A steering committee process similar to that used for the 2008 update.



Based on her familiarity with the Comprehensive Plan, Councilmember McGehee stated she found the current plan pretty good.  From her perspective, Councilmember McGehee opined the only piece missing from the engagement strategy used last time was that the process didn't go deep enough into small groups or districts thereby not allowing significant changes to be noticed and vetted by neighborhoods being affected by the corresponding changes as proposed.  Without an opportunity for those neighborhoods or community areas to review those sections and goals, or to voice their concerns, Councilmember McGehee opined that negated ownership by those neighborhoods in the process.  Otherwise, Councilmember McGehee opined that she thought the sections, goals and overall vision was good, but it simply lacked that necessary outreach component and engagement at the level neighborhood and community within the city for the whole plan.


Specific to the scope of the update, Councilmember McGehee stated that only a few technical updates were needed due mostly to legislative changes since 2008.  Councilmember McGehee opined that the vision was fine, but the vision was before the new normal; and it didn't hurt in this process to take that vision back to smaller neighborhoods to take their pulse and make sure everything was still relevant.


Councilmember Willmus stated that he agreed with much of Councilmember McGehee's comments, opining he found it to be a good document and didn't require a rewrite or complete revision, but to simply look to the technical update to make sure a review of goals are still relevant to accomplish, those no longer valid, or those needing new things plugged in.  Councilmember Willmus noted he included bringing the EDA into it.  Councilmember Willmus stated that one thing he would like to consider bringing back into the focus of the comprehensive plan, was a review of the vision, goals and policies related to HDR housing, and to take a second look at that based on recent presentations and former Community Development Director Bilotta's report on the amount of Roseville acreage zoned HDR versus what the community needs.


Councilmember Etten stated he would support a middle-of-the-road approach, or option "b" with a technical and content update.  Councilmember Etten suggested some areas needing more time spend on them included housing and economic development; and expressed appreciation for Public Works Director Culver's intent to provide connectivity with the community's Pathway Master Plan, and suggested including that connectivity outside the city or regionally as well.  Also as the city moves forward in reviewing development proposals, Councilmember Etten suggested a more in-depth look, form a public works or parks and recreation perspective, how those pieces connect (e.g. water, climate, health, etc.) and consider them part of the comprehensive plan as well.


Councilmember Laliberte stated her agreement with her colleagues for the most part, noting that the City Council and community had been addressing those areas of the 2008 plan that didn't seem right or needed refinement over the last few years.  Regarding the scope, Councilmember Laliberte supported option "b" to make sure the updated plan was current.  Councilmember Laliberte agreed that obviously the EDA and structural planning changes made since the 2008 plan update needed to be updated, including HDR designations.


Mayor Roe noted it was helpful that the city was already planning to review HDR designations, and integrate those analyses without the need for a separate outside consultant.  Mayor Roe concurred with an option "b" scope as well as engagement strategies that made sure the goals and policy section of each chapter at a minimum met with acceptance of the general public for what the community was looking for and to make sure they were given time to specifically weigh in on goals.  Mayor Roe noted that may have something to do with the Imagine Roseville 2025 community visioning process to ensure those remained in play without opening up that vision again from a clean slate and starting over; but instead to use this opportunity as a check-in with the public to make sure the city is still on the right track or make adjustments as needed.  Mayor Roe noted that one of the downsides of that community visioning process was that it had been huge and unwieldy.  If that could be simplified to a simple draft of aspirations, which had proven to be unsatisfactory to him and Councilmember McGehee, Mayor Roe suggested that a more succinct process could prove more beneficial.


Councilmember McGehee agreed, opining that if groups were vigorously sought out and small enough for engagement and interaction, all components for goals, vision and a lot of HDR considerations and questions heard throughout the community could be addressed and HDR sites defined community-wide.  Councilmember McGehee referenced the "Thrive" document, noting that it wasn't predicting much growth or increase in affordable housing needs; therefore not strapping the city to any unreasonable goals.  Therefore, Councilmember McGehee opined that this should open up opportunities for environmental and sustainability components if that was part of climate change and more discussion about green steps to pursue (e.g. solar, community gardens, etc.), but reiterated the need to make these discussion groups smaller versus a giant district that were too intimidating for people to weigh in.



Mayor Roe stated he didn't find the steering committee process used in 2008 to be the right process to repeat; and given the community's experience with engagement, didn't think a consultant-suggested process was needed either.  In general, Mayor Roe stated his preference for a city-developed process.


Councilmember Willmus agreed, and also stated he didn't want this to fall into the lap of one particular commission, but to receive input from all advisory commissions as part of the process.


Mayor Roe clarified that he thought all city commissions had a role in informing the document's content, but considered the CEC's role to define the engagement process itself, but not tasking them with how something was or was not presented, or not functioning as a steering committee.


Councilmembers Etten, Laliberte and McGehee concurred.


Councilmember McGehee suggested that council members might consider attending some smaller group meetings help inform the council as a whole.


Mayor Roe noted that a lot of input in the Park Master Plan process had been achieved through the "meeting in a box" concept which was great for engagement, but may depend on a consultant versus CEC directed but could also be directed sufficiently to provide good results.  Mayor Roe noted that consultants were the experts in defining those tools.


City Manager Trudgeon noted that the CEC had a better understanding that their role was to come up with best practices to present to the City Council, upon consulting with staff.  Mr. Trudgeon noted those tools could include "meetings in a box," or other options; and anticipated those recommendations coming forward from the CEC within the next few months.  Mr. Trudgeon advised that it was clearly identified for the CEC and he had reinforced to them that the CEC's role was not to serve as a steering committee for the comprehensive plan.


Mayor Roe expressed hope that tonight's scope and goal engagement would serve to inform the CEC's discussion.


Without objection, Mayor Roe confirmed to staff that the Scope option "b" was preferred; and engagement option was a combination of options "a" and "b."


b.            Accept the 2016 Community Survey

Due to time constraints, this item was deferred.


Curfew Extension

At 10:00 p.m., Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, extending the City Council's curfew by five minutes.


                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.


16.                        City Manager Future Agenda Review


17.        Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings


18.      Adjourn to EDA Meeting

At 10:02 p.m., Willmus moved, Etten seconded, adjournment of the City Council meeting, and reconvening as the Roseville Economic Development Authority.


Roll Call

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

Nays: None.




At approximately 10:02 p.m., President Roe called to order a Special REDA meeting, and without objection, the roll call and agenda stood as stated. 



President Roe advised that the closed session, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 13D-05, Subd. 3(b) (3) was for the purpose of reviewing confidential or protected nonpublic appraisal data under Section 13.44, Subd. 3 and to develop potential offers for the purchase of property located at 196 S McCarrons Boulevard and 210 S McCarrons Boulevard


At approximately 10:03 p.m., Etten moved, and Willmus seconded, moving into closed executive session. 


Roll Call

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

Nays: None.



President Roe convened the Roseville EDA in closed executive session.  In addition to the REDA members, REDA Executive Director Pat Trudgeon, Interim Community Development Director Kari Collins, and REDA Attorney Martha Ingraham were also present.



At approximately 10:16 p.m., Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, recessing the Closed Session and reconvening in Open Session


                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.




Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 10:16 p.m.


                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.