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

City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

September 26, 2016


1.      Roll Call

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


Mayor Roe announced that, due a family scheduled activity, Councilmember Willmus would not be not available for tonight's meeting.


Mayor Roe recognized Finance Director Chris Miller who was serving as Acting City Manager for City Manager Patrick Trudgeon, out-of-town at a conference.


2.        Pledge of Allegiance


3.       Approve Agenda

Mayor Roe referenced a revised meeting agenda, provided as a bench handout and as public copies at the back of the room.


Acting City Manager Miller requested removal of Item 8.h from the Consent Agenda for separate consideration, with a grant agreement and revised draft resolution available as bench handouts.


Councilmember McGehee requested removal of Item 8.e from the Consent Agenda for separate consideration.


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


                                                Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe

Nays: None.

Finance Commission Interviews (1 Vacancy)

At approximately 6:05 p.m., Councilmembers interviewed two candidates for a vacancy on the Finance Commission; with appointments scheduled at the October 10, 2016 City Council meeting.



Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 6:24 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 6:30 p.m.


4.         Public Comment

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


Ann Olsen, Osceola Avenue, St. Paul

Ms. Olsen referred to the City Council's discussion at their last meeting regarding a potential pet store ordinance prohibiting the sale of dogs, cats or other animals.  As the Executive Director of the Association for Animal Rights, Ms. Olsen encouraged the city to take advantage of their organization as a resource moving forward.  Ms. Olsen noted their organization had been instrumental in recent breeder regulation legislation, and had extensive research materials and considerable data available on pet stores, including the Roseville store prompting this discussion. 


Mayor Roe thanked Ms. Olsen for her offer, and contact information was provided to Acting City Manager Miller.


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

Mayor Roe announced upcoming events, including the Fire Department Auxiliary Booya, Fire Department Open House and Fire Prevention Week activities; and invited Roseville residents to attend an upcoming Imagine Roseville discussion about community policing, race and changing demographics in the community. 


Councilmembers Etten and Laliberte announced the upcoming Tapped & Uncorked Roseville Fundraiser, a ticketed event at the OVAL, with numerous breweries, wineries, food trucks, and local restaurants confirmed for participation.


Councilmember Laliberte announced the second of three educational series at the Ramsey County Library - Roseville Branch, sponsored by the Roseville Community Health Awareness Team (CHAT).


Mayor Roe announced the upcoming annual Taste of Northeast Event by the Northeast Youth and Family Services (NYFS) serving families in its sixteen city member area; with this event providing a sampling of food and beverage vendors in the northeast metropolitan area; and this year held at the Vadnais City Commons in Vadnais Heights, MN.


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 September 12, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, approval of the September 12, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes as amended.



·         Page 14, Line 43 (McGehee

Typographical correction: Change "form" to "from"


                                                Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe

Nays: None.


b.            Approve September 19, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes

McGehee moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of the September 19, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes as amended.



·         Page 1, Line 26 (Roe)

Correct to read: "will [otherwise] be taken as a single motion."

·         Page 10, Line 3 (McGehee)

Typographical correction: Change "due" to "problem"


                                                Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe

Nays: None.


c.            Approve September 19, 2016 Roseville Economic Development Authority (REDA) Meeting Minutes

Mayor Roe referenced the bench handout providing revised REDA meeting minutes correcting the REDA Attorney's identify.


Etten moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the September 19, 2016 REDA Meeting Minutes as amended.



·         Page 1, Title Line 4 (Etten)

Typographical Correction: Change time from "4:00 p.m." to "8:10 p.m."


                                                Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


8.            Approve Consent Agenda

At the request of Mayor Roe, Acting City Manager Miller briefly reviewed those items being considered under the Consent Agenda; and as detailed in specific Requests for Council Action (RCA) dated August 22, 2016 and related attachments.


a.            Approve Payments

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


ACH Payments


82961 - 83183





                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


b.            Approve Business and Other Licenses

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of new 2016-2017 Massage Therapist Licenses as detailed, dependent on completion of successful background checks.


                        Roll Call           

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


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

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of general purchases and contracts for services as noted in the RCA dated September 26, 2016, and Attachment A entitled, "2016 Capital Improvement Plan Summary," updated August 31, 2016.


Councilmember McGehee questioned if this software license wasn't an excessive amount for an annual fee.


Acting City Manager Miller responded that the annual fee was based on volume, and noted that over the last two years, the city had averaged 5,000 applications coming through this software system.


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


d.            Approve Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) Municipal Inflow and Infiltration Grant Agreement

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11364 (Attachment A) entitled, "Approval of Construction Cooperation Agreement with the Metropolitan Council;" for rehabilitation and restoration work within the City of Roseville as part of the MCES sanitary sewer and treatment plants and pipe system.


Councilmember Laliberte asked about the timing and budget for this expenditure.


Assistant Public Works Director Jesse Freihammer responded that the city undertook an annual sanitary sewer lining project, and advised that funds would be shifted from city to Metropolitan Council lining projects as applicable.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Freihammer confirmed that the sites being addressed by the Metropolitan Council had been included in the city's priority list.


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


f.             Intergovernmental Agreement between Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) and the City of Roseville for the Oasis Pond Iron Enhanced Sand Filtration Basin

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement (Attachment A) between the City of Roseville and Rice Creek Watershed District for the iron-enhances sand filter basin project adjacent to Oasis Pond, part of Ramsey County Ditch 4 draining into Little Lake Johanna.


Regarding sand infiltration improvements for Oasis Pond, Councilmember McGehee pointed out that they will also serve to improve water quality in Little Lake Johanna, a state identified impaired body of water, and further address significant downstream issues for both Little and Big Johanna.


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


g.            Resolution Authorizing City Manager to Apply for a SCORE Funding Grant

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11363 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution Requesting 2017 SCORE Funding Grant for use in Roseville's Residential recycling Program; authorizing submission of a grant application to Ramsey County for grant funds in the amount of $84,315.


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


i.             Approve a Cost Share Agreement between the City of Roseville and Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for the South Lake Owasso Drainage Improvement Project

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded,, approval of an Incentive program Agreement (Attachment A) between the City of Roseville and Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for the South Lake Owasso Drainage Improvement Project; authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute the agreement.


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


j.             Authorize Entering into Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Agreement for 1716 Marion Street

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, approval of an Agreement (Attachment C) for CDBG Program grant funds between the City of Roseville and the Ramsey County Housing and Redevelopment Authority for acquisition of the property at 1716 Marion Street for development as a Roseville City Park;


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


 9.       Consider Items Removed from Consent


e.            Set Public Hearing for Public Input on a Portable Recording System, a/k/a Body Worn Cameras, scheduled for October 24, 2016

At the request of Mayor Roe, Acting City Manager Miller briefly reviewed this item as detailed in the RCA dated August 22, 2016 and related attachments.  Mr. Miller referenced the Bench Handout related to this item: Senate File No. 498 (revised Attachment A) highlighting language on page 8 that had originally been inadvertently omitted. 


Councilmember McGehee stated she had read the senate materials, and opined this was an expensive proposition for the city to undertake resulting in a great deal of additional data to keep track of, with complex private and public data requirements to be considered, including important issues about what can or cannot be redacted.  Councilmember McGehee opined this would involve a huge expenditure of manpower, and significant fees for errors if the city failed in its endeavors.  Councilmember McGehee urged her colleagues to look carefully at the senate document and think about those impacts to the city and actual expenses required to properly implement this program.


Mayor Roe clarified that tonight's action was to schedule the hearing; with the next step being receipt of public input and City Council deliberation in considering the policy.


Councilmember Laliberte noted the donation of body cameras to the city's Police Department; and asked that the public hearing would include a report from the Police Chief on how the cameras were currently being used in their trial use.


Acting City Manager Miller advised he would pass that information request on to the Police Department as they prepare for the October 24, 2016 meeting; including how many cameras were available, how they were being used now and their intended use going forward.


Councilmember McGehee questioned the effective date of legislation and impacts to past, current and future use; and reiterated her request that substantial attention be paid moving forward.  While not saying their use wasn't important, Councilmember McGehee suggested the City's Finance Commission provide their assessment and research on what their use could entail related to manpower and other citywide ramifications.


Mayor Roe questioned if such a research project was suited to the charge for the Finance Commission; and suggested staff research may be the starting point.


Councilmember Laliberte reported that a recent meeting of the Metro Cities Board addressed data requests that were becoming cumbersome for many cities.  Councilmember Laliberte further reported that over the next year, Metro Cities intended to hold a forum, similar to the housing forum held earlier this year, to discuss the amount of staff time and costs expended by municipalities for this type of effort.


Mayor Roe referenced the legislation and the date of adoption by municipalities compared to the effective date of the legislation.


Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, scheduling a public hearing for October 24, 2016 to hear public comment on a draft policy to facilitate implementation of a portable recording system (PRS), a/k/a body worn cameras for police officers, intended for implementation in early 2017.


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


h.            Approve Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Municipal Inflow and Infiltration Grant Agreement

At the request of Mayor Roe, Acting City Manager Miller briefly reviewed this item as detailed in the RCA dated August 22, 2016 and related attachments.  Mr. Miller referenced two missing items in the packet materials, provided as Bench Handouts.  Mr. Miller advised that, after further consideration when tonight's meeting materials were being processed and reviewed, staff requested that the Metropolitan Council provide a copy of the grant agreement (Attachment to 8.h) for the Inflow/Infiltration (I & I) Grant Program, allowing the City Attorney's review between now and yearend.  Upon review of that agreement, Mr. Miller advised that a revised draft resolution (Attachment A) had been provided to provide more clarity. While minor elements remained to be resolved, Mr. Miller advised the City Council should feel comfortable in adopting the revised resolution at this time.


City Attorney Gaughan agreed with Acting City Manager Miller.  Mr. Gaughan informed the City Council that this action item to adopt the resolution had originally come forward without receipt of the grant agreement; opining that was not a preferred course of action that he or staff would recommend, therefore prompting the city to ask the Metropolitan Council for a copy of the draft agreement.  Mr. Gaughan advised that after his office and staff's review prior to this final action, changes had been made in the resolution demanding more definitive paperwork prior to City Council formal approval.


Mayor Roe clarified that the agreement would be monitored and reimbursement made based on contract award, not pending items, but actual expenses incurred.


Acting City Manager Miller agreed; and further clarified each of those projects would require approval by the City Council when they were scheduled to actually occur.


Assistant Public Works Director Freihammer also clarified that the projects the city would be applying to the Metropolitan Council had already been approved by the City Council and completed through October of 2016 or earlier.


For the benefit of the public, Mayor Roe provided a brief overview of the Inflow/Infiltration issues currently before many municipalities, including the City of Roseville, including addressing illegal residential sump pump discharge to the sanitary sewer system.


McGehee moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11365 (Attachment A as revised) entitled, "Approval of Grant Agreement between Metropolitan Council and the City of Roseville for Grant Eligible Works, authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to executive the agreement, subject to minor modifications and final review by the City Attorney; for infrastructure work to reduce inflow and infiltration (I/I) to the metropolitan sanitary sewer disposal system.


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


10.        General Ordinances for Adoption


a.            Erosion Control Ordinance Amendment

Assistant Public Works Director Jesse Freihammer provided a brief overview of the proposed update to Section 803.04: Erosion and Sedimentation Control, of Title 8, Public Works chapter of city code, as detailed in the RCA of today's date.  Mr. Freihammer noted one of those changes proposed was to reduce land disturbance provisions for greater than 10,000 square feet to greater than 5,000 square feet for minor projects outside shoreland districts, and adjust fees accordingly.    Mr. Freihammer noted this would provide more consistency and be comparable to other requirements, and provided examples of some of those projects (e.g. parking lot expansion, new impervious coverage, etc.).


At the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Freihammer advised the process for submitting a stormwater management plan and applicable fees that would be reviewed on a case by case basis.


Mayor Roe provided an opportunity for public comment, with no one appearing to speak for or against.


Etten moved, McGehee seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1510 (Attachment A) entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Selected Text of Title 8, Storm Water Drainage Ordinance of Roseville City Code."


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


Etten moved, McGehee seconded, enactment of Ordinance Summary No. 1510 (Attachment B) entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Selected Text of Roseville City Code, Title 8, Chapter 803, Storm Water drainage."


                        Roll Call (Super Majority Required)

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 7:11 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 7:13 p.m.


11.        Presentations


a.            Accept the Cedarholm Clubhouse Replacement Advisory Team Final Report and Authorize Pursuance of Professional design Services

Parks & Recreation Director Lonnie Brokke, Assistant Director Jill Anfang, and Advisory Team Chair Dave Holt were in attendance for this presentation.


Mr. Brokke reviewed a history of the City Council directive and guidance to the Advisory Team and introduced Mr. Holt for his executive summary.  Mr. Brokke noted Mr. Holt had served on the City's Parks & Recreation Commission, and subsequently agreed to facilitate the Team.  Mr. Brokke thanked Mr. Holt and the entire Team for their extensive work over the last six months, including not only meeting attendance but research between meetings.  Mr. Brokke recognized the leadership of Ms. Anfang as staff lead in keeping track of the many details for the Team.


Mr. Holt provided an executive summary of the Final Report of the Cedarholm Clubhouse Replacement Advisory Team, including a background, mission and purpose as directed by the City Council, and a timeline since November of 2014 when the Parks & Recreation Commission had initially brought their concerns to the City Council seeking future direction.  Mr. Holt reported on the many elements of input received by the Team, with an average of twenty-three participants on the Team by the end of the process, with a total of nine thematic meetings including community engagement opportunities.


As deliverables provided by the Team, Mr. Holt referenced this Final Report and recommendation to the Parks & Recreation and subsequently tonight for the City Council; and reminded the Council of the Park & Recreation Commission's original four options from prior to the Advisory Team getting underway and detailed pros, cons and considerations for each of those options.

Option 1: Rebuild to Existing Size and Function

Option 2: Rebuild to size similar to larger park buildings

Option 3: Rebuild to smaller size for golf check-in, limited seating/snack


Option 4: Renovate existing clubhouse


As detailed in the report (pages 11 - 12), Mr. Holt reviewed the four recommendations of the Team, as follows:

1)   Replace the Clubhouse


2)   Use Identified Funding Options (including Park Renewal Program remaining funds of $400,000, available and applicable Park Dedication Fees of approximately $1.37 million, and available Golf Course Enterprise Funds anticipated by yearend of approximately $200,000).


Mr. Holt suggested other options could include levy and bonding; as well as the building design process remaining open to possibly expanding space for the Roseville Historical Society, maintenance and storage, that would also impact funding sources; as well as pursuing partnerships and collaborations.  Mr. Holt opined that the Team felt this would provide maximizing not only access but also impact revenue sources, perhaps similarly realized by the regional OVAL use.


3)   Plan for Supporting Infrastructure

Mr. Holt highlighted the Team's support to recommend replacement or improvement of the entire area supporting golf operations, including parking; maintenance; storage of golf carts, maintenance and product storage; and improved working conditions to meet current building and safety standards and code requirements.


4)   Reconsider the Status of the Golf Course as an Enterprise Fund

Mr. Holt noted criteria suggested the golf course was not currently operating fully as an Enterprise Fund; warranting current/future operations and capital needs reconsideration.


Mayor Roe invited any Advisory Team members in the audience to add their comments to the presentation, with no one volunteering.  Mayor Roe thanked all for their contributions, and then provided an opportunity for public comment.


Public Comment

Betty Wolfangle, 837 Heinel Drive, Member Roseville Historical Society

Ms. Wolfangle thanked the Team for the privilege of looking at the draft Final Report before tonight's City Council presentation and provided thoughts from the perspective of the Historical Society.  Ms. Wolfangle commended the Team for their good and thorough review and report.


From the Society's perspective, and recognizing budget shortfalls, Ms. Wolfangle stated their understanding in being able to consider their organization as part of the new building, especially when they were not a revenue source.  Even though the wish may be for a multi-faceted building for year-round use, Ms. Wolfangle noted the Society was aware of the reality of the revenue shortfall and their inability to remedy that or produce funding.


However, Ms. Wolfangle reminded the City Council that the Society had been in existence for over forty years, and remained "homeless."  Based on the proposed footprint for a golf course building, Ms. Wolfangle questioned if the square footage available could meet the needs of their organization, advising that the bottom line was that their optimum needs would be approximately 1,300 square feet to provide showroom, office space and files.  Ms. Wolfangle noted the Society had a lot of computer and file storage needs as it represented over 100 years of Roseville history, and still collecting artifacts.  Ms. Wolfangle noted the Roseville artifact collection was the envy of many communities, as well as other agencies. 


Ms. Wolfangle advised that they were excited about those many artifacts, currently stored at Fire Station No. 2, and would appreciate being able to display them and change those displays frequently or seasonally, rather than simply stockpiling them in a room.  However, Ms. Wolfangle noted storage would also be needed for those items not on display.


Specific to parking, Ms. Wolfangle advised that the Society meets approximately four times annually, exclusive of special events; meeting during daytime.  One of the attractions to the clubhouse, Ms. Wolfangle reported was access to a kitchen, restroom facilities, and parking for their average needs for twenty-five people; making that space perfect for them. 


Ms. Wolfangle stated the Society had been dreaming of a permanent home and expressed her personal hope that she lived long enough to see it become reality. 


If consideration is given to the facility no longer being an Enterprise Fund, Ms. Wolfangle questioned what was wrong with raising taxes to support it.


Ms. Wolfangle advised that the Society had been in the process of raising money and getting pledges, and had spent many hours talking with the Minnesota Historical Society for grant potential; and had been encouraged that the Society was qualified for funding.  When the Society considered Evergreen Park, Ms. Wolfangle stated they had been told by the Minnesota Historical Society at that time that they were eligible for grant funds to cover that expense, ranging from $150,000 to $200,000.  Ms. Wolfangle suggested if an additional 1,300 square feet was added to the golf clubhouse, there may be the potential of getting that kind of money to help fund the new clubhouse as well.


In conclusion, Ms. Wolfangle stated that the Roseville Historical Society had agreed that they didn't just want cabinets sitting around at the clubhouse for storage, but wanted a display area or showroom for Roseville's precious and enviable artifacts and treasures, needing to be showed off.


Benno Sydow, 2750 Oxford Street N

As a member of the Advisory Team, Mr. Sydow stated how impressed he was by the thoroughness of city staff during this process.  Mr. Sydow opined that every point possible had been covered,  and encouraged the city to proceed with replacing this outdated facility as it served an important part of the community.


City Council Questions and Deliberation

Councilmember McGehee asked if there was a particular reason the golf course issue had not been addressed as a community survey question in 2011,2014 or 2016.


With Mr. Brokke responding he was unaware of any particular reason, Mayor Roe clarified that this was a City Council survey.


Councilmember McGehee pointed out a number of questions were addressed specific to parks and recreation, as well as in the Park & Recreation specific survey done in 2011.  Based on the 2011 survey, Councilmember McGehee noted indications were that 24% or respondents used the golf course, and Mr. Brokke provided an estimate that 29% of the users of the course were Roseville residents.  Councilmember McGehee stated she needed to have more understanding of those estimates; and also why there was no difference in resident or non-resident fees, as well as learning the average fee for a 9-hole, par 3 golf course in the Twin Cities area.


Mr. Brokke noted all fees were reviewed and reported annually as the City Council set its fee schedule for the coming year.  Mr. Brokke advised that staff attempted to recommend fees that would remain within the market, with Roseville's probably somewhat lower than some, but similar on average to the majority.


At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Holt clarified that the $200,000 balance in the Enterprise Fund was the projected balance at this time.


Councilmember McGehee questioned how much of the annual revenues were over and above operating expenses.


Mr. Brokke responded that, depending on the weather, it should come in close to covering annual operating costs, but not contribute to any capital needs of the golf course.  Mr. Brokke noted the fund balance fluctuated, but remained in the estimated $200,000 range; with the total balance of approximately $250,000 and that additional $50,000 held as a carry over to pay expenses prior to receipt of revenues.


If 60% to 70% of golf course users are non-residents, Councilmember McGehee asked if there was any plan or discussion for improving the revenue stream so Roseville residents who didn't play golf or participated in any way no longer needed to carry this rather large tax burden.


Mr. Brokke responded that staff could consider residential and non-residential rates differentials.  However, Mr. Brokke noted it was often difficult to determine residency status when people come in without requiring their driver's licenses or some other type of verification.  Mr. Brokke noted some of the anticipated residential or non-residential data was available for open golf estimated at approximately 40% residents and 60% non-residents for open golf with leagues more readily defined. 


Mr. Holt noted it was not common for golf courses to charge resident versus non-resident fees, since it was frequent that a family member from out-of-town may play with a resident and be subjected to paying a higher fee.


Councilmember Etten thanked the Advisory Team for their report and the extensive time spent during the process.


Councilmember Etten asked if there was a potential cost range for design services.


Mr. Holt estimated approximately $20,000 to $25,000 for design development, with overall engineering services typically 10% of the total project cost including the whole process from schematic design, design development to construction documents. 


At the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Brokke advised that after consultation with Finance Director Miller, staff's recommended funding source would be from the golf course fund balance.


Mayor Roe clarified that the dollar amounts being provided at this point were specifically for preliminary design services and not for complete engineering services as part of that estimated 10%.


Mr. Brokke concurred, advising that more discussion was needed on packaging of the schematic design and design development.


Councilmember McGehee referenced several pictures included in the Final Report, including the clubhouse in New Brighton, and asked the cost of that example when it had been constructed.


Mr. Brokke recalled it was in the $1 million range at that time.


Councilmember McGehee noted the cost of recent park building construction; with Mr. Brokke clarifying the park buildings were recently built in the $600,000 to $1 million range depending on their size and amenities.


At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Holt clarified how the city planned capital expenses going forward was part of the discussion related to whether the golf course remained an Enterprise Fund.


Noting the example of fees for park and recreation activities and programs, Councilmember McGehee stated she was not in favor of the golf course NOT being an Enterprise Fund, opining she preferred to know the plan for how much needed to be set aside for budgeting purposes.


  Mayor Roe opined it was not the Advisory Team's responsibility nor was it part of their charge beyond making the recommendation, to move further down that process of decision-making.


Councilmember McGehee argued that hers was a reasonable question at this time, especially how maintenance was intended long-term.


Mr. Holt concurred that this was part of the Team's recommendation since the golf course was not currently operating entirely as an Enterprise Fund, specifically inclusive of capital and operating expenses.  Mr. Holt reminded the City Council and public that during the golf course's heyday and originally operating as an  Enterprise Fund, it was not only covering all golf course expenses, but allowed the city to allocate additional reserves toward other city expenses.  Therefore, if that reallocation hadn't occurred, Mr. Holt questioned how those additional reserves may have served replacement of the facility at this point beyond the current $200,000 balance if that had not been siphoned off at the discretion of City Councils over the years.  Mr. Holt suggested remembering that surplus when considering tax ramifications; and while not part of the Advisory Team's charge even though they had touched upon it, asked that the City Council explore its status as part of their recommendation.


Councilmember McGehee thanked Mr. Holt for that additional information, stating she had not been aware of that in her tenure on the City Council, but provided a broader picture of the operations.


McGehee moved, Etten seconded, acceptance of the Cedarholm Clubhouse Replacement Advisory team's Final Report.


Mayor Roe and City Councilmembers collected thanked the Advisory Team and staff for their work and their comprehensive report.


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


Specific to the next requested action, Mayor Roe noted additional work would still be needed for approval by the City Council at a later date, but this would serve to initiate the process.


Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, authorizing staff to work with the Parks and recreation Commission to pursue professional design services to create a plan for the replacement of the Cedarholm Golf Course Clubhouse.


Councilmember Laliberte asked if, in the past, the city had solicited professional design services with a hint of partnering with a local architectural or construction firm; and asked if such a provision could be included in the Request for Proposals (RFP).  Councilmember Laliberte suggested something that would allow partnering with a local firm already part of the community; or also questioned if something similar to the "Playground Build" opportunity could be used for volunteers to perform finish or interior work.


Mr. Brokke noted that had been discussed as part of the process, and while it could be considered, he was not aware of any RFP's that asked for partners in financial participation.


Councilmember Laliberte suggested those local firms may also wish to discount their services from their role in the community.


Mayor Roe cautioned compliance with contracting laws, and treatment of like entities similarly.


City Attorney Gaughan concurred with Mayor Roe.


Mr. Brokke noted that, through the Parks Renewal Program process, and selected architect, while the Team wasn't seeking to duplicate the architecture of those park buildings, the desire was that a clubhouse complement their design in order that it be recognized as a Roseville building.  Due to that extensive process, Mr. Brokke anticipated it may be possible that the architectural firm used for those buildings may be interested in submitting a specific club house proposal.


Mayor Roe suggested that these discussions may more applicable as part of the design proposal and costs associated come into play as the City Council discusses how to pay for a new clubhouse; such as in-kind services or community labor for certain aspects, rather than as part of the initial design process.


Councilmember McGehee stated she had brought that idea to the attention of Councilmember Laliberte earlier.  Councilmember McGehee stated she was interested not only with in-kind in that sense, but also involving art high schools where they offered associate degrees in the field or St. Paul College who may be interested in partnering as a student activity to help with the build.  Councilmember McGehee opined that would also serve as a nice link to the community and education. 


Given the current situation, Councilmember McGehee stated she had a problem with the motion from her understanding, noting that while many options had been presented, it had yet to be determined the building size or whether it was to be a multi-faceted building.  Councilmember McGehee opined that discussion needed to occur before moving down this particular route and preceding seeking a design.


Mayor Roe clarified that the point of the design was to provide those options and range of costs. Mayor Roe noted the Advisory Team reached the point where they could go no further in their analysis without having those costs identified.  Mayor Roe further clarified that this was not action authorizing final plans, but simply seeking conceptual designs.


Mr. Brokke concurred, noting the intent of the Team was to seek initial concept designs as the next and first step.


Councilmember Laliberte agreed with Mayor Roe and Mr. Brokke, noting the considerable time spent by the Team; and now the next step needed for design services to say if the building was best relocated on the golf course site to facilitate other amenities; or how the whole site should be configured on this limit piece of land for best functionality.


At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Holt clarified the four options presented by the Parks & Recreation Commission prior to the Advisory team, as noted earlier, all under the caveat for City Council direction to the Team that they stay within the current footprint while also considering additional space (e.g. basement).  From the perspective of the Team, Mr. Holt advised that the same footprint remained under their consideration, whether it remained at its current site, or was relocated on the site.  As mentioned in the Final Report, Mr. Holt noted that other needs were part of that accommodation and design; with the architect better able to bring that into the discussion (e.g. parking ratios, building design, etc.).


Councilmember McGehee stated before starting from scratch and changing the building orientation, she wanted to ensure the building was energy efficient as part of its major components (e.g. windows, walls or solar panel) and asked that an architect have that as part of his expertise; and even if it cost more money upfront to incorporate that energy efficiency rather than paying the ramifications of not being energy efficient further down the road.  Regarding her long-term maintenance concerns, Councilmember McGehee opined it would be shortsighted to construct a facility without it being energy efficient and asking residents for more support after the fact.  Councilmember McGehee also stated she would like to see any levy discussion dropped, given the history of 42% increases in taxes over the last few years, when many Roseville residents are on fixed incomes.


Mr. Holt reported that came up during the Team's brainstorming discussion; and advised that the intent was to have access to all of that and additional options from the architect as he proceeds with preliminary design work and outlining cost considerations, and ultimate recommendation to staff and the City Council.  Therefore, as noted in the Final Report, Mr. Holt reiterated the Team's request that the City Council remain open to funding options outlined as well as some other possibilities, including levy or bonding.


Councilmember Etten asked if the intent was to use a Best Value Procurement process moving forward for construction.


Mr. Brokke stated that had been considered as an option, noting the good experience to-date in using that process as well as cost savings realized.  However, Mr. Brokke stated the intent would also be to enlist the help of Arizona State University again to help, with additional costs to seek their assistance. 


Mayor Roe stated he was supportive of the motion to proceed with preliminary design work to better understand the costs and associated considerations in looking at funding.  However, before considering levy funding or bonding, Mayor Roe stated he would prefer a discussion on greens fees and other potential bonding options.  From his personal perspective, Mayor Roe stated his strong preference is to include a home for the Historical Society, and expressed his intrigue with the idea of multi-seasonal use of the building (e.g. cross country skiing) and clubhouse amenities for those activities as well as winter month rentals of the facility.  However, Mayor Roe noted the importance of getting the design process underway to clarify those questions, prompting other questions with that cost and what amenities may be possible.

                        Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.

Abstentions: McGehee.

Motion carried.


12.        Public Hearings and Action Consideration


13.        Budget Items


14.        Business Items (Action Items)


15.        Business Items - Presentations/Discussions


a.            Review and Consider Adopting a City of Roseville and Economic Development Authority Public Financing Policy/Business Subsidy Policy

Mayor Roe recognized and on behalf of the City Council and community congratulated Ms. Kari Collins, recently promoted from Interim Community Development Director to the City of Roseville's new Community Development Director.


Ms. Collins thanked Mayor Roe and reintroduced Jason Aarsvold from Ehlers, Inc. to present a draft Public Financing Policy/Business Subsidy Policy (Attachment B).


Mr. Aarsvold presentation included an overview of the policy, incorporating changes since the original draft and input from previous City Council discussions.  Of those revisions, Mr. Aarsvold noted the following:

·         Rearranged sections and title to place in order of importance/relevance for those referencing policy

·         Incorporated specific recommendation from cc on 8/29/16

·         Interpreted cc feedback to inform general provisions of policy as well as to complete "desired qualifications"

·         Incorporated recommendations from REDA attorney


Councilmember Etten suggested revised language to Section 2.A (page 2) of the draft policy; and without objection, consensus was to remove the subordinate clause and not separate out "when such assistance complies" beyond statutory requirements.


Councilmember Etten noted the similarities of Items 2.A.4 and 5 (page 2) but asked if they were different enough to list separate due to the "but for" analysis).


Mr. Aarsvold opined that they were similar, but he thought distinct enough to include both.  Mr. Aarsvold stated #4 addressed extraordinary redevelopment costs, while #5 provided varying dynamics possibly due to a market dynamic versus extraordinary costs.


Mr. Aarsvold clarified that both items may rise to the "but for" test, particular for tax increment financing, while a project under Item #4 may have contaminated land and in order to get back on par with a Greenfield site, costs would be incurred; while in Item #5, only a market dynamic may hinder redevelopment on a clean site.


In Item 4.A (page 4), Councilmember Etten questioned the intent of a project meeting "any of" the qualifications or meeting all.  Councilmember Etten clarified that just because a project met the qualifications didn't automatically mean they would get money from the city.  By consensus, it was determined to strike "any of" from the second sentence in 4.A.


Councilmember Etten sought clarification of language in Section 4.2.C.5 (page 5) related to rehabilitation of tear downs.


From his perspective, Mayor Roe identified expansion equaling growth, while rehabilitation equaled an existing substandard building.


Mr. Aarsvold offered to further clarify language, but advised that his assumption, from past conversations, was that  the intent was for a project needing rehabilitation, redevelopment or expansion.  Mr. Aarsvold stated he had tried to stay away from language such as "substandard," due to statutory definitions with that term for tax increment finding.  Mr. Aarsvold opined his intent was to leave the language open enough while still meeting the city's desired goals.


Councilmember McGhee asked Ms. Collins if, from her staff perspective, this provided a sufficient working tool for staff while not hindering their initial review of projects.


Ms. Collins responded that this framework would prove significantly helpful when staff fielded calls as to whether or not the city would support a particular use.  Ms. Collins reported that staff received a significant number of calls from entities seeking public assistance before they even had a specific use or project in mind.  With this framework in place, Ms. Collins advised that it would provide staff the ability to give a definitive "no" response where applicable; while structured to provide city staff with sufficient leverage to identify those eligible projects that could be encouraged to make application to the city.


Ms. Collins reported that staff was currently working with Ehlers to develop an application using the City Council's stated criteria as outlined in this policy.


Councilmember Laliberte thanked Ms. Collins and the Ehlers staff for the draft policy that well-reflected discussions and City Council intent.


McGehee moved, Etten seconded, adoption of a City of Roseville and Economic Development Authority Public Financing Policy/business Subsidy Policy; amended with minor technical revisions as per tonight's discussion.


                        Roll Call

Ayes: McGehee, Laliberte, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.


16.        City Manager Future Agenda Review

Acting City Manager Miller provided a preview of upcoming agenda items.


17.        Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings


18.        Adjourn Meeting

Laliberte moved, Etten seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 8:46 p.m.


                                    Roll Call

Ayes: Laliberte, Etten, McGehee and Roe. 

Nays: None.