City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

October 10, 2016

 

1.       Roll Call

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

 

2.         Pledge of Allegiance

 

3.         Approve Agenda

Etten moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the agenda as presented.

 

                             Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

4.         Public Comment

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

 

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

Councilmember Etten announced Fire Prevention week activities during this week and this year's theme: "Don't Wait, Check the Date."

 

Councilmember Laliberte announced the next Community Health Awareness Team (CHAT) workshop topic on advanced care planning and health care documentation.

 

City Manager Trudgeon thanked Finance Director Chris Miller for filling in for him at last week's City Council meeting while he attended the annual International City Manager's Association (ICMA) conference in Kansas City, MO.  Mr. Trudgeon provided a brief summary of the professional workshops he attended; highlighted several keynote speakers focusing on race, class and religion; and networking opportunities with colleagues to learn best practices nationwide.  Mr. Trudgeon thanked the City Council for allowing him to attend the conference.

 

City Manager Trudgeon announced that the City of Roseville had been nominated for several 2016 Leader in Local Government awards from the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce; one for planning and land zoning for the Twin Lakes redevelopment area, and another for its regional communications efforts.  Mr. Trudgeon provided information on date and location of the awards ceremony.

 

City Manager Trudgeon read a letter from St. Michael's Lutheran Church addressed to the City Council as part of the ELCA's Community Outreach Day, with young people encouraged to send letters to groups they felt were making the world better.  Mr. Trudgeon proudly noted that they had chosen Roseville as one of those groups; and distributed personal thank you notes to the City from those young people.

 

Mayor Roe thanked the young people for this honor.

 

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 26, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes

McGehee moved, Etten seconded, approval of the September 26, 2016 City Council meeting minutes as amended.

 

Corrections:

·         Page 16, Line 27 (McGehee)

Typographical Correction: Delete "art" before "high schools."

 

                                                Roll Call

                        Ayes: Etten, McGehee, Laliberte and Roe.

                        Nays: None.

                   Abstentions: Willmus.

                   Motion carried.

 

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) dated October 10, 2016 and related attachments.

 

a.            Approve Payments

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

 

ACH Payments	$543,437.61
83184 - 83325	351,574.54
TOTAL	$895,012.15

 

                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

           

b.            Approve Business Licenses

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

 

                        Roll Call           

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

Nays: None.

 

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

Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of general purchases and contracts for services as noted, and Attachment A entitled, "2016 Capital Improvement Plan Summary," updated September 30, 2016.

 

                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

d.            Authorization of Joint Fuel Purchase for City Fleet

Councilmember Laliberte referenced 2016 budget and year-to-date actual expenditures for this annual line item, and asked staff to provide additional information in a more detailed report of fuel consumption and actual savings to-date in 2016 through this contract.

 

City Manager Trudgeon duly noted this request.

 

Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of participation in joint purchase of fleet fuel for 2017 as part of the State of Minnesota contract.

 

                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

e.            Issuance of 1-4 Day Temporary On-Sale Liquor License

Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of a Temporary Liquor License application as requested for Bent Brewstillery, located at 1744 Terrace Drive, for an event they will be hosting on October 27 - 29, 2016, that will entail selling spirits on site.

                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

9.         Consider Items Removed from Consent

 

10.        General Ordinances for Adoption

 

Recess

Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 6:15 p.m., and reconvened at approximately

6:17 p.m.

 

11.        Presentations

 

a.            Human Rights Commission (HRC) Meeting with the City Council

Mayor Roe welcomed HRC Commissioners.  Present were Chair Wayne Groff, Molli Slade, Lauren Peterson, Nicole Dailey and John Eichenlaub; and Youth Commissioner Elizabeth Hansel.

 

Chair Groff thanked the City Council for appointing additional commissioners to fill vacancies and provide the HRC with a full complement of members, noting the difference it had made in their work load and activities.  Chair Groff presented a brief video prepared by the HRC highlighting some of their activities in 2016 to-date.

 

Each commissioner took the lead in reviewing some of the activities and accomplishments during the year; and Chair Groff concluded by reviewing proposed work plan items for the remainder of 2016 and anticipated in 2017.  Chair Groff sought feedback from the City Council on activities, accomplishments of those items shown on the work plan yet to be addressed.

 

Discussion included the upcoming annual essay contest and this year's independent topic involving prejudice, stereotyping and human interaction; and continued coordination by the HRC with middle school teachers and leaders, as well as parochial schools, to encourage involvement of students in the contest.

 

Councilmember Etten thanked the HRC for their work, especially their efforts in helping coordinate the recent Imagine Roseville community dialogue on policing and race and how Roseville residents could build a stronger community.  Councilmember Etten asked that the HRC keep that effort at the forefront of their activities.

 

Mayor Roe concurred, noting the event provided a cross-section of community, agency and organization support and involvement.

 

Councilmember McGehee also concurred.  However, Councilmember McGehee suggested a different name for the effort rather than "Imagine Roseville" to avoid any confusion with the Imagine Roseville 2025 effort of a few years ago and its tie to the comprehensive plan update at that time.  Councilmember McGehee opined that this effort was timely and unique and deserved its own moniker.

 

Regarding meeting space if and when the library is not available for various HRC-sponsored events, at the request of Councilmember McGehee, City Manager Trudgeon suggested the City Council Chambers if and when available to facilitate video and audio needs.

 

Councilmember Laliberte thanked the HRC for their ongoing efforts.  Specific to this year's annual essay contest, Councilmember Laliberte asked if the question was part of the State Human Rights contest or if it was independent for Roseville this year as it had been last year.

 

Chair Groff advised that this year's question was Roseville-specific and suggested continuing the essay contest based on school curricula, noting state level discussions that may change that organization and its role in the future.

 

At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Chair Groff confirmed the HRC would continue hosting the naturalization ceremony and human rights awards.

 

Councilmember Laliberte asked that the HRC's planning for elder mental health issues partner with efforts of CHAT and/or the Roseville Alzheimer's and Dementia Community Action Team (RSVL A/D),

 

Member Slade reviewed HRC initiatives related to mental health to-date expanding beyond the National Alliance for Mental Illness (NAMI) for those partnerships, while differentiating that separate component for the elderly by diagnosis.

 

Councilmember Laliberte noted it was always great to have partners, but asked that the HRC ensure the efforts of the RSVL A/D and CHAT groups are not duplicated by the HRC initiatives.

 

At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Chair Groff reported that the proposed cultural festival is still being discussed at this point, with research scheduled at the next HRC meeting to seek co-sponsors (e.g. area school districts) and if the event would be incorporated into Rosefest activities or as a separate event.

 

As a follow-up to Councilmember Laliberte's comments on the CHAT program, Councilmember McGehee noted they spent considerable time on care giving topics that included elder issues with depression and anxiety, agreed with the need to expand upon and reach into those other organizations by the HRC, especially given the large number of caregivers in Roseville.

 

Mayor Roe suggested another partnership for the HRC to consider: Northeast Youth and Family Services (NYFS) who already promoted the senior chore program and had existing connections in observing some of those needs firsthand.

 

Mayor Roe agreed with the HRC continuing with their things on their work list going forward; but asked that they not lose sight of the role of their advisory commission now that they had a full complement of members again.

 

Chair Groff thanked the City Council for filling the vacancies on the HRC; and recognized the new commissioners for their good energy and positive participation.

 

Councilmember McGehee suggested a copy of the HRC video be provided to C-TV for occasional play on the city channel to promote their message.

 

Mayor Roe thanked all commissioners for their ongoing service and willingness to dive into these issues; and expressed his anticipation as they moved forward.

Recess

Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 6:45 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 6:50 p.m.

 

12.        Public Hearings and Action Consideration

 

a.            Public Improvement Hearing for Wheeler Street Closure Project

Mayor Roe recognized Assistant Public Works Director Jesse Freihammer for a short presentation on the Wheeler Street closure project background, including its temporary closure in 2011 as part of the redevelopment and expansion of Presbyterian Homes-Johanna Shores project, scheduled for completion in the fall of 2016.  Mr. Freihammer noted this was one of two requests brought forward to the City Council to-date since adoption of the City's Traffic Management Program (TMP), with detail provided in the RCA dated today's date. 

 

Mr. Freihammer reviewed the multi-jurisdictional nature of the project and roadways in this area as it involved both the Cities of Roseville and Arden Hills, each with different processes and logistics.  Mr. Freihammer noted many closure costs of Wheeler Street would be borne by Presbyterian Homes as part of their expansion, creating significant savings to the City of Roseville and residents along Wheeler Street.  One remaining cost would be relocation one driveway, and Mr. Freihammer reviewed remaining costs, including the driveway location, and division of those costs between benefiting residents and the city, in accordance with the city's current Assessment Policy, but significantly reducing those costs from original estimates, but yet to be determined until final construction costs are completed with the project itself. 

 

Mr. Freihammer reviewed anticipated impacts to the neighborhood; reported on three traffic studies done in the area to-date; and advised that construction on County Road D had actually been started today.  Mr. Freihammer advised that, if and when the Roseville City Council makes their decision regarding the project, that decision would be incorporated into the process.  If the decision is to close Wheeler Street, Mr. Freihammer anticipated approximately two weeks for signage and other logistics before it could be completed.  Due to seasonal considerations, Mr. Freihammer noted concrete work would be done next spring; and the final assessment hearing anticipated in October of 2017. 

 

Mr. Freihammer reviewed the two actions requested of the City Council tonight; and advised modified resolutions had been distributed as bench handout and replaced those included in RCA attachments.

 

At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Freihammer advised that the current driveway on Wheeler Street, even though considered substandard, would remain in use until next spring, but eventually eliminated.

 

At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Freihammer advised that "No Outlet" signage was already in place and would continue to be monitored by city staff.

 

At the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Freihammer clarified that rain garden plantings used as a softening feature would be outside County Road D reconstruction costs.  However, Mr. Freihammer further clarified that the city would receive stormwater benefits for future total maximum daily loads (TMDL) on Lake Johanna.

 

Mayor Roe opened the public hearing at approximately 6:57 p.m., advising the purpose, format and protocol for the hearing.  City Manager Trudgeon provided the project number, a brief description; and confirmed published and mailed notices in accordance with statutory requirements.

 

Public Comment

Michelle Lacy, Shorewood Drive (Arden Hills)

Ms. Lacy thanked the city for allowing an opportunity to speak to this proposed closure; and advised she would have filed an objection but was unaware until last week that the decision had already been made, nor was she aware of the opportunities available to file an objection. 

 

Ms. Lacy stated her objection to the closure, along with others in their neighborhood, especially concerning safety with only a one-way access for their street in times of emergency or storm, landlocking their neighborhood for emergency vehicles.  Ms. Lacy noted this had already happened in the past with storms downing trees over the street.  Ms. Lacy opined that this closure would also increase traffic at the 5-way intersection, already dangerous, especially creating additional struggles with increased traffic north on County Road D during rush hour.  Ms. Lacy stated this not only impacted traffic but school bus safety.  Ms. Lacy reported that it was not unusual to have 15-20 vehicles daily using their driveways to turn around when realizing Shorewood Drive was not a thru-street.  Also, Ms. Lacy opined that an additional safety issue was pedestrians having to climb snow banks during the winter months if Wheeler Street was closed.

 

Ms. Lacy stated this Presbyterian Homes project, and now proposed closure of Wheeler Street continued to cause distress to their neighborhood; creating a four-story building in her backyard.  Ms. Lacy stated her overall disappointment came from feeling there was a wall proposed between the Cities of Roseville and Arden Hills with no concern regarding public safety on the Arden Hills side from either city.  Ms. Lacy advised that she had attended meetings and phoned the City of Arden Hills several times, since Wheeler Street's temporary closure in 2011, and was surprised to learn in a September 23, 2016 letter stating the intended permanent closure, and then realizing the immediate reconstruction start on County Road D without prior notice.  Ms. Lacy opined this didn't include a lot of insight or perspective from those living on the other side of this blockade, and reiterated her disappointment in the lack of collaboration for a workable situation by the two cities for those living in that area beyond Wheeler Street residents.

 

Warren Wilds, (Arden Hills)

Mr. Wilds advised that he lived down the street from Ms. Lacy, and expressed how grateful he and his neighbors had been that they could also access their neighborhood through Wheeler Street in the past.  Mr. Wilds stated that to have this closed permanently caused them great concern, and while understanding the concerns of those residents living on Wheeler Street, he was in agreement with the comments of Ms. Lacy.  Mr. Wilds also emphasized the lack of communication and concern to any degree for those living on Shorewood Drive and residents of Presbyterian Homes.  Mr. Wilds opined that while that involved hundreds of people, the vote for closure was only taken from those residents living on Wheeler Street.  Mr. Wilds further opined that if their properties were located in Roseville, they would have been contacted and asked for their opinions; but being in Arden Hills had proven a disadvantage with little information shared during the   five-year temporary closure period other than indicting the temporary closure would be eliminated when the Presbyterian Homes project was finished.  However, now to find that upon that completion, Wheeler Street would be permanently closed, and then waking up to County Road D being torn up this morning, Mr. Wilds stated showed a definite lack of concern for those living on other streets equally affected by this closure, particularly those living in Arden Hills.

 

Dave Seaborg, (Arden Hills)

Mr. Seaborg advised that he used to live on Shorewood Drive, and owns a duplex on Wheeler Street where he used to live.  Mr. Seaborg noted his biggest concern was that Wheeler Street created an easy shortcut to the freeway, and anticipated it would have been even more enticing once the City of Roseville completes the extension of Twin Lakes Parkway off Fairview Avenue rather than using County Road D as their chosen route. 

 

With his duplex on the dead-end and having undergone different plans over the last few years, Mr. Seaborg reported on the logistics of winter plowing, rerouting his driveway and that of 3100 Wheeler Street with the new roadway, and relocation of the driveway.  Mr. Seaborg questioned the need to change the driveway location with closure of Wheeler Street, opining it only added expense to the project and had no effect, including it made it handy for him to get to his duplex without going the long way around.  With the reconstruction of County Road D addressing traffic on Wheeler Street that never should have been there, Mr. Wilds opined traffic would be sufficiently addressed without closing it off.

 

Steve Anderson, 1768 Shorewood Curve

Mr. Anderson advised he had been involved with this project since the beginning, and shared the concerns expressed by the previous two speakers.  Mr. Anderson noted the difficulties experienced in these two neighborhoods during the expansion of Presbyterian Homes and construction traffic, and understood their frustration. 

 

Noting residents weren't consulted relating the Presbyterian Homes project and relocation of access onto Wheeler Street, Mr. Anderson opined it was important to point out the rationale for Wheeler Street residents originally submitting the petition for closure of their road was based on additional construction and employee traffic, with three employee shifts accessing the site, creating the impetus of residential involvement.  Mr. Anderson reported that residents had brought their concerns to the Arden Hills City Council but were told it was too late, recommending residents go to the Roseville City Council seeking blocking off Wheeler Street.  Mr. Anderson noted the two cities shared engineering services at one point, and opined he was sure attempts must have been made to coordinate the closure, and allowed there was frustration on both sides.

 

At the end of the day, Mr. Anderson noted residents had followed everything laid out by the City of Roseville and outlined in the TMP; with the result being 90% of residents along Wheeler Street were supportive of its closure.  Mr. Anderson thanked the City Council for considering this request.

 

Timothy Callaghan, 3062 Shorewood Lane, Roseville

While the conversation seems to be mostly about people using Wheeler Street to cut through from Fairview Avenue, Mr. Callaghan opined that the most traffic he observed was not actually those cutting through, but traffic directly related to Presbyterian Homes, with hundreds of cars and multiple trips daily using the streets.  Mr. Callaghan further opined that even though it was requested that the driveway for Presbyterian Homes not be on Wheeler Street, residents had been overruled, and even though it appeared to be against Arden Hills City Code, residents were told it was their idea.  From a safety standpoint, Mr. Callaghan stated there were many pedestrians and disabled on the street, and the slower traffic is the better and safer with fewer accidents.  Mr. Callaghan noted his observation that already they have seen fewer vehicles when attempting to leave their driveway, opining it may have even dropped by a third from original counts.

Mr. Callaghan stated he found it interesting that the three different traffic studies had been performed at three different locations, even though there had been a dramatic drop in traffic from his perspective anyway, and even though there were different points of view expressed. 

 

Mr. Callaghan reminded all that there were still no sidewalks available.

 

Peter Funnel, 3140 Shorewood Drive (Arden Hills)

Mr. Funnel admitted this was a tough decision, and recognized interesting cases had been made either way.  However, Mr. Funnel agreed with Ms. Lacy 100%, opining a more effective way to reduce traffic would be through restricting traffic with calming options (e.g. speed bumps) rather than blocking off Wheeler Street. 

 

While understanding concerns, Mr. Funnel noted the objective was to get traffic under control, and suggested that while the simplest thing was a "Road Closed" sign, it was proving even more disharmonious and suggested a more effective way to keep the control and alleviate the situation.  Mr. Funnel thanked the City Council for reconsidering this, offering his great respect for each speaker, no matter their opinion.

 

Tom Duvere, 3053 Wheeler Street

Mr. Duvere stated the temporary closure had left him feeling boxed in and required rerouting, and opined that the traffic would only further increase with development of Twin Lakes Parkway.  While the citizen petition originally said it was a temporary closure, but was ending up to be a permanent closure, from his perspective, Mr. Duvere opined it wasn't an improvement at all, but simply trapped residents.  Mr. Duvere opined that whoever determined who the 42 residents making up the neighborhood consisted of, the closure should have sought opinions from a broader neighborhood (e.g. Langton Lake, either side of Lydia, Hamlin and Snelling Avenues).  Mr. Duvere noted city closure of a roadway involved many more than just 42 residents on Wheeler Street, even though residents on Wheeler would end up paying for the closure.

 

Mr. Duvere stated he would prefer to change the street back to how is was when he purchased his property in 1997, since his intent wasn't to live on a cul-de-sac; and asked that Wheeler Street remain open.

 

Nadine Bordhos, 3100 Shorewood Lane (corner lot)

Ms. Bordhos expressed appreciation to the City Council for listening to everyone, including Arden Hills' residents from that immediate neighborhood.  With closure of Wheeler Street, and even with traffic directed onto County Road D, re-alignment of driveways, and dealing with the 5-way stop, Ms. Bordhos stated she wouldn't change that closure in a heartbeat.  Ms. Bordhos reported traffic observations before and after the temporary closure of Wheeler Street, and removal of the pork chop at Presbyterian Homes as requested by the Fire Department for emergency vehicle access.

 

If the roadway was re-opened, Ms. Bordhos opined children would no longer be safe, especially on that corner during rush hour when a race track was evidenced around that 5-way stop.  Ms. Bordhos noted that the basketball stand in their driveway had been knocked over twice from outside vehicles turning around in their driveway.  If people were mad with the road closed temporarily, Ms. Bordhos stated it scared her to death to see their reaction if the road was opened up again. 

 

Even though their property would lose several mature trees with the project, Ms. Bordhos spoke in support of the project and thanked the City Council for allowing permanent closure of Wheeler Street.

 

John Bell, 3065 Shorewood Lane

Mr. Bell advised that their home was one of nine homes backing on Wheeler Street and fronting on Shorewood Lane.  In terms of access to and from their garage off Wheeler Street, Mr. Bell stated that in the forty plus years living there, the quality of life had improved beyond belief since the temporary closure of Wheeler Street as it related to traffic, the number of children playing on the street, and increased and safe bicycle traffic.  Mr. Bell opined it made all the difference in the world, and stated he couldn't say enough about how it had changed the entire neighborhood's qualify of life, even when backing out of your driveway and not being as concerned getting hit when doing so.

 

Mr. Bell stated he was strongly in favor of the closure, and couldn't emphasize that support enough.

 

Sandra Brennen, 1776 Shorewood Curve (corner of Shorewood Curve and Wheeler Street)

Ms. Brennen stated she was 1000% in favor of the closure, also having lived forty plus years on her street and the traffic changes she'd observed as Lydia traffic had increased and with the expansion of Presbyterian Homes.  While steel having no sidewalks, with everyone having to use the streets, Ms. Brennen noted the increased safety, including just last week a track team from the University of Northwestern able to use the street without traffic safety concerns.  Ms. Brennen recognized the inconvenience for some, but compared to safety and other pluses it created, she opined that inconvenience seemed minor, closure was the most prudent action.  Ms. Brennen asked the City Council to consider keeping the road closed.

 

Patrick Phillips, 3084 Shorewood Lane

Having lived in his home for over 49 years, Mr. Phillips reviewed the past character of the neighborhood, University of Northwestern changes over the years, and changes within the neighborhood over those years.  Noting the attractiveness of the streets in this neighborhood as a speedway, Mr. Phillips addressed hazards, and what precipitated the proposed closure of Wheeler Street based on his perceptions, and as it related to redevelopment at Presbyterian Homes in Arden Hills, with notices sent to the neighborhood requesting their contributions to that discussion, even though the City of Roseville had been excluded from that mailed notice that ended at the north end of Wheeler Street.

 

Mr. Phillips recognized the agreement being indicated by Mayor Roe and Councilmember McGehee as they recalled the process as well. 

 

Since it was disconcerting to have this fate accompli made for changes to the neighborhood by Presbyterian Homes and the City of Arden Hills, Mr. Phillips noted this prompted neighbors to come to the Roseville City Council at that time (2011) and seek recourse with their agreement that the City of Arden Hills could have been more accommodating to receive input from Roseville, with a letter sent by the Roseville City Council asking Arden Hills to listen to residents beyond their borders and attempt to accommodate them.

 

Mr. Phillips noted the response from Arden Hills was to essentially not recognize that request.  When neighbors also met with owners of Presbyterian Homes at their facility on Hamline Avenue and voiced concerns about the exit created and traffic dumping onto Wheeler Street directly, Mr. Phillips noted they had been very accommodating and created the pork chop to help divert traffic from going straight down Wheeler Street, even thought that pork chop would now go away based on his understanding. 

 

Mr. Phillips advised that he had written a letter voicing his support of the closure, and as mentioned by Ms. Brennan, the temporary closure had made their neighborhood a true neighborhood and changed its quality.  Mr. Phillips agreed it may be a minor inconvenience to access the freeway at a different location to the north, he opined it was extremely minor compared to the enormous benefit and importance to all those affected in the neighborhood and creation of a substantial enhancement to their property values by no longer having a throughway or race track from Lydia to Presbyterian Homes. 

 

Mr. Phillips stated he had not been aware of any residual resistance to the closure before attending tonight, thinking all had been said and done.  However, Mr. Phillips advised that he couldn't allow some of the misperceptions to go unchallenged without stating the actual events and process leading up to this requested action for the benefit of the public and this City Council.  Mr. Phillips opined that if there had been considerable contention from the neighborhood, the City Council would have heard it before tonight and certainly seen a larger contingent in opposition.  Mr. Phillips reiterated his support for the closure, and asked that the City Council also support that closure.

 

Patrick Burney, 3045 Shorewood Lane

Mr. Burney opined that even with the County Road D reconstruction, if Wheeler Avenue was reopened, vehicles would still use it to get north.  Mr. Burney stated he'd seen an increase in traffic since the temporary closure, but noted it was good traffic (e.g. pedestrians, bicycles, and kids playing on the street) and five years ago that couldn't have happened with limiting traffic to the neighborhood versus through traffic.  Mr. Burney stated he was very much in favor of the permanent closure, opining it was a great idea and hoped it would move forward.

 

Tom Lundberg, 2035 Wheeler Street

Mr. Lundberg advised he had originally heard about the Presbyterian Homes' expansion and Arden Hills City Council actions, being asked if he was aware of it, prior to receiving the petition for temporary closure of Wheeler Street.  Mr. Lundberg noted discussions with Presbyterian Homes about how bad traffic was coming from their parking lot and anticipating further issues with the expansion; and all agreeing that traffic was a big issue even without the expansion, with vehicles using the street as a frequent shortcut.  Mr. Lundberg stated he really wanted Wheeler Street closed.

 

Repeat Speaker: Michelle Lacy, Shorewood Drive (Arden Hills)

Stating her appreciation for all comments made tonight, Ms. Lacy asked to add that, while understanding and empathizing with speakers and the nice neighborhood created with the temporary closure, she simply asked that the Roseville City Council pause to consider other alternatives to rectify the situation that their neighborhood had expressed.  Ms. Lacy noted the numerous Arden Hills City Council meetings she'd sat through and objections stated to the nature of the huge Presbyterian Homes project and changes to driveway outlets.  Ms. Lacy opined that they didn't feel their concerns had been considered at all even though the impacts were to the broader neighborhood and global community. 

 

Repeat Speaker:  Patrick Phillips, 3084 Shorewood Lane

Mr. Phillips noted that when Wheeler Street was closed, his driveway served as a turnaround spot, and even though that will only get worse when closed further back, it wouldn't change what was happening.  Mr. Phillips noted traffic flow wouldn't be known until vehicles start using other side streets.

 

Repeat Speaker: Tom Lundberg, 2035 Wheeler Street

At the request of Mr. Lundberg, Mayor Roe responded to questions about planting and signage to facilitate fewer driveway turnaround episodes.

 

Mayor Roe closed the public hearing at approximately 7:35 p.m.

 

McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11368 (revised) entitled, "Resolution Accepting Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for Wheeler Street Closure" AND adoption of Resolution No. 11367 entitled, "Resolution Ordering the Improvement for Wheeler Street Closure;" both respectively revised as noted in the bench handouts.

 

In recognizing speakers from Arden Hills, Councilmember McGehee stated she was extremely sympathetic to their situation, but opined the public safety concerns were not due to closure of Wheeler Street.  As a long-time volunteer at Presbyterian homes as well as serving on the City Council throughout this Wheeler Street temporary and permanent closure process, Councilmember McGehee noted her distress in the Presbyterian Homes expansion that used up considerable green space without any apparent consideration by their firm.  After consulting with city engineers, Councilmember McGehee stated she had personally met with the architect for Presbyterian Homes seeking a change to plans that would have brought    their traffic onto Lake Johanna Boulevard versus Wheeler Street or Shorewood Lane, but opined she had found them intractable and suggested the pork chop may have been their response.

 

While recognizing that the City of Arden Hills hadn't offered an olive branch to Roseville residents, Councilmember McGehee stated the Roseville City Council's commitment was to their residents.  In response to concerns with the permanent closure, Councilmember McGehee referenced a previous closure of County Road B at Highway 280 and similar worries and contention in that neighborhood.  However, now that it had been completed, Councilmember McGehee noted the neighborhood was now a quiet and peaceful neighborhood, with a pathway recently installed to facilitate neighborhood pedestrian and bicycle traffic. 

 

As a continuing volunteer at Presbyterian Homes, Councilmember McGehee noted their parking was inadequate, and if Wheeler Street was to remain open, it would only serve as a shortcut but also would invite Presbyterian Homes parking on Wheeler street as well.

 

Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of the permanent closure of Wheeler Street; opining Twin Lakes Parkway may actually turn out to be a positive, even though it would bring additional traffic into and through Roseville.

 

Councilmember Willmus stated he was in agreement with much of Councilmember McGehee's comments; and also sympathized with Arden Hills' resident concerns on Shorewood Drive.  However, Councilmember Willmus stated he didn't think the answer was to keep Wheeler Street open due to Presbyterian Homes' development north of the intersection at County Road D and Wheeler Street.  Instead, Councilmember Willmus suggested the Roseville City Council reaching out to its colleagues in Arden Hills to take a closer look at the performance of the 5-way intersection to see if improvement measures were available.

 

Councilmember Etten seconded all of the comments of Councilmember Willmus, noting ongoing discussions regarding this intersection in the past.  Councilmember Etten asked if City Engineer Freihammer had any thoughts about incorporating such additional intersection work as part of the County Road D reconstruction project.

 

Mr. Freihammer responded that, as noted in previous City Council discussions, staff had consulted with Ramsey County on the possibility of an additional turn lane off County Road D, but stated he was unaware if that was still under consideration by Ramsey County or if it would be possibly be part of Fairview Avenue reconstruction in the future.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Freihammer clarified that there was nothing planned for the intersection as part of the current Arden Hills project on County Road D.

 

Councilmember Laliberte concurred with the comments of her colleagues in supporting this permanent closure, eliminating people using it as a cut-through.  Councilmember Laliberte noted the temporary closure had clearly shown what the neighborhood could be if it no longer served as a shortcut.  While favoring moving forward with permanent closure, Councilmember Laliberte also agreed that the Cities of Roseville and Arden Hills should work together, whether or not Arden Hills had communicated well in the past with Roseville, it could be changed for the better going forward.  Councilmember Laliberte expressed appreciation for alerting her to previous interactions or lack thereof, since she had been unaware of that past process.   Since Ramsey County seemed interested in discussing options for Fairview Avenue that would impact the 5-way intersection, Councilmember Laliberte urged Roseville city staff to pursue that interest sooner rather than later to address issues in this congested area.

 

Mayor Roe noted that one other past discussion in terms of reconfiguring the 5-way intersection was the potential to disconnect Lake Johanna Boulevard and moving further north on Fairview Avenue, creating a 4-way intersection instead.  However, Mayor Roe noted it hadn't gone beyond discussion at that time, and while unsure what will ultimately occur, it should remain on the radar screen, especially given the ongoing changes at the University of Northwestern over the years and growth occurring in the Twin Lakes area; and continued discussions with Ramsey County.

 

Regarding Arden Hills residents and their concerns with notices of the proposed permanent closure, Mayor Roe reviewed the City of Roseville's land use notice policy for notification 500' from a project site, he noted this TMP approach was different in addressing those property owners asked to pay for an improvement, and thus no notice to Arden Hills residents.  Mayor Roe suggested Roseville city staff keep this situation in mind for future reference when a project bordered another jurisdiction.

 

In terms of this particular action, Mayor Roe offered his support of this action as addressed by his colleagues; and while sympathizing with concerns expressed by Arden Hills residents, noted that neighborhood had long had limited access in and out.  Having served on the Roseville City Council in 2011, Mayor Roe noted his observations when driving through that neighborhood and seeing its isolation and access issues.  Mayor Roe opined it didn't seem fair to Roseville residents on Wheeler Street to continue providing access to that broader neighborhood when there was easy access west on Fairview, especially with the improvements being made to County Road D.

 

Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

Recess

Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 7:46 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 7:52 p.m.

 

13.        Budget Items

 

14.        Business Items (Action Items)

 

a.    Consider Complaint Alleging violations of the Roseville Ethics Code by City Council Members

Councilmembers McGehee and Laliberte recused themselves from the discussion and vote.

 

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Attorney Gaughan reviewed the alleged violations to Roseville Ethics Code by Councilmembers Laliberte and McGehee as formerly filed by Mr. Brad Koland as part of his application for a Minor Subdivision at 1926 Gluek Lane earlier this summer. 

 

City Attorney Gaughan advised that his office had reviewed, investigated and provided a written report, submitted to the Roseville Ethics Commission last week, noting the three options available for that body in their consideration of a complaint were as follows:

1)   Adopt the findings of the City Attorney and forward them to the City Council for their ultimate action on the matter;

2)   Fashion their own report, and while they are not authorized to conduct any further investigation, they can craft their own findings and forward them to the City Council for their ultimate action on the matter; or

3)   Take no action and defer to the City Council for ultimate action, but with no action by this body on the matter.

 

City Attorney Gaughan noted that, in accordance to the Roseville Ethics Code, the City Council was obligated to take final action on both complaints.  Since both complaints were similar in nature and filed simultaneously, Mr. Gaughan advised that their office had consolidated their investigation into one report and outlining facts supporting their identical conclusion regarding each complaint.  Mr. Gaughan advised that this report had been presented an open and televised meeting of the Ethics Commission; and was included in tonight's agenda packet materials for public review and submitted to the City Council for their ultimate action in accordance with the Ethics Code.

 

For the benefit of the public and as a refresher for the City Council, City Attorney Gaughan reviewed what the Ethics Code was intended for as a code of conduct, and not a law, but an attempt for the best interest of the broader community to be at the forefront of any city actions.  Mr. Gaughan reviewed the two prongs of ethics code, for government officials and/or elected officials and also for city management. 

 

As noted in his written report, City Attorney Gaughan stated one thing notably missing was that there was no implication or notice that either Councilmember Laliberte or Councilmember McGehee did anything in their own personal interest as opposed to the city's best interest that would indicate either made any decisions on the Minor Subdivision application without the best interest of the city at the forefront of their decision-making.  As such, Mr. Gaughan advised that his office determined that neither alleged complaint supported any provision that the Ethics Code had been violated by either councilmember.  Mr. Gaughan further noted that in terms of elements of a violation, the complaint didn't even present a true interpretation of the city's Ethics Code. 

 

City Attorney Gaughan advised that deliberation by the Ethics Commission was included in their meeting minutes provided as a bench handout for tonight's meeting and also available for the public at the back of the City Council Chambers.  With no violation found as noted in his written report, Mr. Gaughan recommended that the City Council, as final decision-makers, should find that no Ethics Code violations occurred and therefore, no adverse actions taken against Councilmembers Laliberte and McGehee.  Mr. Gaughan referenced the findings and recommendations in agreement with his office by the Ethics Commission that no violations of the Ethics Code had been established by Mr. Koland's complaints against Councilmembers Laliberte and McGehee.

 

Public Comment

Brad Koland, 1926 Gluek Lane

Mr. Koland reviewed the City Attorney's office' analysis and agreed that there had no personal gain for either Councilmember McGehee or Laliberte.  However, specific to Section related to public officials, Mr. Koland provided his interpretation of "fair and equitable treatment."  Mr. Koland further reviewed his interpretation of the Preamble to the Ethics Code related to ethical considerations.  Mr. Koland clarified that the basis of his complaint(s) stemmed from mailings sent out for his Minor Subdivision land use application and the City Council's role, referencing and displaying the post card mailing for the public hearing on that land use application.  Mr. Koland stated that his concern was with false statements he considered had been made, and staff recommendations made related to the subdivision of lots as submitted in his application and how square footage and lot configuration had been interpreted from his perspective.  Mr. Koland opined that if findings of individual city council members were personal opinions and not that of elected officials of the City Council, he questioned where accountability for those opinions came in during the course of city business, and their reliability for those judgments or whether they became questionable.

 

City Attorney Gaughan responded briefly noted that such robust discussions and individual opinions were frequently part of the decision-making process of elected officials, including the City Council.  Mr. Gaughan refocused tonight's discussion on the formal written complaint merely consisting of an accusation of violation of the City's Ethics Code.  Mr. Gaughan noted this didn't in any way state that it wasn't important that public officials treat citizens fairly; noting the process for citizens to voice their displeasure if they felt a public official hadn't duly executed the duties of their office through the election process.   Mr. Gaughan reiterated the intent of the Ethics Code to be applied when a public official used their position for personal interest or gain versus that of the city and its broader constituency.

 

Specific to the Preamble clause of the Ethics Code addressed by Mr. Koland in his statements tonight, City Attorney Gaughan noted Mr. Koland's misunderstanding of the City Attorney's written report and reference, suggesting that as the complainant, Mr. Koland alleged that Councilmembers Laliberte and McGehee failed to follow proper channels by not simply rubberstamping city staff's recommendation for approval of Mr. Koland's Minor Subdivision application.  Mr. Gaughan clarified language in the Preamble as well as Section 1 of the Ethics Code, specific to individual opinions related storm water mitigation concerns in this particular case.

 

Councilmember Willmus advised that he had viewed the Ethics Commission and report of the City Attorney to that body, noting that it had proven a robust discussion; and left him in agreement with the Commission that no violation of the Ethics Code had occurred.

 

Willmus moved, Etten seconded, concurrence with the findings of the investigation and recommendations of the City Attorney and recommendation of the Roseville Ethics Commission, that no violations of the Ethics Code had been established by Mr. Koland's complaints against Councilmembers Laliberte and McGehee; and no further action was indicated.

 

While not agreeing with the findings for denial of Mr. Koland's Minor Subdivision request heard by the City Council in July of 2016, Councilmember Etten advised that he didn't feel anything rose to the status of an Ethics Code complaint; and stated his support of the findings of City Attorney Gaughan and the Ethics Commission.

 

Mayor Roe stated his agreement with City Attorney Gaughan that this did not meet the definition of a violation of the Roseville Ethics Code.  Mayor Roe opined it was the discretion of all elected officials to review, apply and act on their own viewpoints, including consideration of city staff recommendations and input heard from residents.

 

As with Councilmember Etten, Mayor Roe noted he also did not vote to deny Mr. Koland's application based on findings expressed at the July meetings.  However, Mayor Roe clarified that the purpose of findings was to advise the reason for such a denial; and if there was contention related to a denial, noted the appropriate course of action for contesting those findings was through a court of law.

 

Mayor Roe opined that the only nuance he could find for a potential violation of the Ethics Code would be the issue of confidential information if it was not otherwise obtainable.  However, in this case, Mayor Roe opined it was clear there had been no violation of the Roseville Ethics Code; and reiterated that the court system could be used if and when appropriate as it related to disagreeing with a finding and actual action of the City Council.

 

Mayor Roe clarified that by finding that there was no violation of the Roseville Ethics Code, it further indicated that it meant those having the complaint filed against them found no evidence or interpretation that there was any existence of any ethical lax on the part of those individuals.

 

                        Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus, Etten and Roe.

Nays: None.

Abstained: McGehee and Laliberte.

 

b.    Appoint Member to the Finance Commission

Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, appointment of John Murray to the Finance Commission for a term expiring March 31, 2017.

 

Mayor Roe thanked both applicants for this one vacancy; and thanked the Finance Commission Chair, Robin Schroeder, for her input on the process.

 

                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

c.    I-35W Project Municipal Consent and Noise Wall Vote

Public Works Director Marc Culver summarized this project and related action items requested as detailed in the RCA of today's date.  Mr. Culver noted a formal public hearing had been held by the City Council at their July 25, 2016 meeting, with no public comments - either written or verbal - heard at that hearing. 

 

As part of his presentation, Mr. Culver reviewed the project scope, timeline and up to four-year construction period anticipated starting in 2018 or 2019 depending on final funding.  In the proposed design build project delivery method, Mr. Culver advised that it allowed an opportunity for a contractor to provide value engineering to reduce the overall cost of a project and/or shorten the construction timeline as well.  Mr. Culver reviewed state law as it pertained to municipal consent when a trunk highway added capacity, modified access or obtained right-of-way; in this case adding capacity.  Mr. Culver noted other communities besides Roseville also needing to provide their consent, including the Cities of New Brighton, Arden Hills, Mounds View, Shoreview, Lexington, Blaine and Lino Lakes.

 

Mr. Culver advised one other item for consideration by the City Council tonight was installation of a noise wall based on an analysis conducted by MnDOT at eight different locations along this area of the I-35W corridor based on their criteria and if and where warranted and whether or not it was proven cost-effective.  Mr. Culver reported that in Roseville, a noise wall was under MnDOT's consideration between County Roads C and D on the east side of I-35W, located just north of the ramps from Cleveland Avenue.  Mr. Culver provided a visual display of the proposed noise wall design, 14' in height; and the process used by MnDOT for impacted and benefitting property owners and tenants and vote allotment. 

 

Specific to businesses along the corridor, Mr. Culver noted some prefer more visibility from the freeway versus benefits of a noise reduction wall; and reviewed how votes were assigned by points based on a property's proximity to the proposed noise wall and whether or not the vote is from a tenant or property owner.  Mr. Culver reported that the City of Roseville, as a property owner due to the location of a trail along the east side of a proposed noise wall making them considered to be a tenant, was allotted eleven votes worth a total of 21 points.  Mr. Culver displayed photos of the current and proposed pathway and location proposed for installation of a noise wall.

 

Mr. Culver provided the current tally of votes submitted as of earlier today and total eligible points to-date.  Mr. Culver reported that there were now enough "yes" votes without the city vote that would warrant installation of a noise wall.

 

Mr. Culver reviewed the city's options to vote "yes" and add to the votes already in favor of the noise wall; to vote "no" and add to the minority not supporting a noise wall; or to simply choose to not submit a vote.

 

At the request of Councilmember Etten, Mr. Culver noted the one business on the north end concerned about visibility, and based on city staff's most recent discussions with MnDOT staff on the possibility to cut the wall off sooner for visibility of that business.  Mr. Culver advised that this property owner had voted "no," even though it was currently an empty lot.  Mr. Culver reported that Xcel Energy, another property owner along the corridor, had not submitted any vote to-date.  Mr. Culver reported there may be an opportunity to truncate the noise wall or modify the design to negotiate a settlement if the city chose not to submit a vote.  Mr. Culver opined this would enforce an opportunity for staff to work with MnDOT on modifying that noise wall height or provide earlier termination than the current proposed northern-most end.

 

Discussion ensued regarding the actual height of the noise wall and interpretations by the property owner in question, with staff agreeing that clarification was needed.

 

Councilmember Etten stated he was in favor of modifying the wall related to visibility for those properties impacted at that point.

 

Councilmember Willmus stated he was fine with the noise wall, but shared concerns regarding exposure for businesses to the freeway.

 

Councilmember McGehee agreed with her colleagues, but stated her preference to defer to businesses with the most stake in visibility issues and agreed with staff's recommendation for the city to abstain or take no action either way if it would help their negotiating position on behalf of city businesses most impacted by the wall.

 

Mayor Roe noted the city had set some precedent in the with the Highway 36 noise wall and no neighbors appearing at the time of the initial approval, but then after the fact the city had been able to get modifications on the wall from MnDOT.

 

Councilmember Laliberte noted hotels further south had expressed interest in the noise wall due to freeway noise from clients staying there and their complaints about noise.  Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of the wall, but recognized visibility concerns of those businesses on the northern most end.

 

Mayor Roe offered an opportunity for public comment on this project, with no one appearing for or against.

 

Etten moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11366 (Attachment A) entitled, "Resolution Approving Municipal Consent for the MnDOT I-35W Project S.P. 6284-172."

 

Councilmembers Etten and Willmus agreed that this would prove a long-term good step and balance for those using I-35W as well as for businesses along the freeway.

 

Councilmember Laliberte also agreed.  However, while work was being done for improvements to the north/south traffic corridor, Councilmember Laliberte noted the remaining pressure on east/west corridors, especially along Highway 36; and still needing addressed for residents as well as those moving through the Roseville community.

 

Councilmember McGehee concurred; even though she stated she was not looking forward to four years of increased traffic back-ups during the construction period.

 

Mayor Roe spoke in support of municipal consent, even though there had been some opposition expressed by some residents via online forums.  From an engineering perspective, and also from a municipal perspective, Mayor Roe opined that high occupancy lanes versus general traffic lanes provided additional benefit to move people through a corridor with those managed lanes that seemed to be proving effective throughout the metropolitan area.

 

                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

Etten moved, McGehee seconded, withholding the City of Roseville's municipal vote on installation of a noise wall as part of MnDOT I-35W Project S.P. 6284-172 for the purpose of continued negotiations by respective staff to end the wall further south of County Road D on behalf of local business interests.

 

                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

 

15.        Business Items - Presentations/Discussions

 

a.            Discuss Recommendations Regarding Neighborhood Associations from the Community Engagement Commission (CEC)

Mayor Roe recognized Community Engagement Chair Scot Becker, who offered his availability during tonight's discussion for any questions of the City Council related to recommendations of the CEC.

 

Mayor Roe noted this report had been presented several meetings ago; and reiterated his and the City Council's appreciation for the work of the Neighborhood Association Task Force and CEC.  Mayor Roe referenced meeting minutes included in tonight's agenda packet as attachments to the RCA, and summarized the City Council's last discussion and conclusion of the body for baby steps, and tonight's subsequent discussion to better identify those steps going forward.

 

Councilmember Laliberte

Since the last discussion, Councilmember Laliberte reviewed the process taken to get to this point, and addressed misperceptions or statements made contrary to the actual intent of the CEC and City Council.  Councilmember Laliberte clarified that no one on either body was advocating for or mandating neighborhood associations anywhere in the city.  However, Councilmember Laliberte there had been some polarity throughout the process, as well as some disappointment.  Councilmember Laliberte noted there had been considerable discussion and struggle among the CEC members and individual City Council members specific to defining the legality of associations, what the city funded, and limits to any funds expended as part of or as a result of the initial report recommendations. 

 

Councilmember Laliberte suggested starting tonight's discussion with those areas where everyone was in agreement, including goals to build more cohesive neighborhoods and connections for the benefit of all versus reactionary associations to some impending doom or other volatile issue.  Councilmember Laliberte opined the intent was for these neighborhood associations to provide safety, connection and trust; and further opined the City Council could facilitate those goals.  As suggested by Mayor Roe, Councilmember Laliberte agreed that small steps could be taken for those areas of agreement.

 

Councilmember Laliberte noted each neighborhood was unique and opined that organic and informal were just as good as a more formal neighborhood association with bylaws and leadership.  Councilmember Laliberte opined that either option would prove successful based on natural leadership within a given neighborhood that couldn't always be guaranteed, but if neighbors were driven to organize may not remain within that given leadership role or even within that neighborhood.  However, Councilmember Laliberte acknowledged that the City Council was in agreement that the city didn't have sufficient staff to spearhead neighborhood associations or serve as community liaisons, referencing the City of St. Louis Park and City of Edina Models provided as part of the report.

 

Councilmember Laliberte referenced her discussions with the Police Department's Community Relations Coordinator Corey Yunke related to current block captains and ongoing visits in neighborhoods by Police and Fire Department personnel during various events or neighborhood activities. With approximately 150 identified block captains, Councilmember Laliberte suggested focusing on them to increase communications, possibly through a city newsletter component to engage those leaders and encourage a broader role, or through using a variety of social media tools already in place.  Councilmember Laliberte opined that the bones of that block club program were good, and there was room for building trust with that; and noted even though it basically ran itself now, it could use more focus.  Councilmember Laliberte noted that the program currently worked on a project-related response based on need (e.g. code enforcement or crime alerts), and as noted by Mr. Yunke, the attempt was to deal with situations as they arise beyond the annual Night Out efforts and annual training event coming up soon.  Councilmember Laliberte suggested making sure that training by asking involved block captains, already proven leaders, how they considered ways to ramp up their neighborhood's involvement in and with the community.

 

Councilmember Laliberte advised that she had also learned from Mr. Yunke that the Police Foundation had funded an intern to audit the current neighborhood watch program and assess those contacts still engaged and where new contacts were needed.  Councilmember Laliberte suggested that the city follow that lead to identify neighborhood teams versus those with only one person or contact (e.g. such as co-captains or block teams).  Councilmember Laliberte noted this would help recruit some new captains to take up the mantel.  Based on GIS special mapping applications, Councilmember Laliberte noted that, even though approximately 60% of the city was covered by current and active leaders, there remained areas of overlap or gaps.

 

Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of the CEC recommendation to create a tool kit providing tips or suggestions to build a cohesive neighborhood as a good place to start, such as the 12-tip document model included in packet materials.

 

While recognizing the merit of the fuller presentation by the Task Force and CEC, Councilmember Laliberte questioned if the City Council had sufficient answers to move forward today.  Councilmember Laliberte suggested initial staff needs may be needed before making those decisions (e.g. copying costs and frequency for mailings).  Councilmember Laliberte also noted the lack of many neighborhoods in finding meeting space, and suggested that was another opportunity for the city to assist with public meeting space. 

 

In conclusion, Councilmember Laliberte suggested the City Council needed more discussion and decision-making before moving forward with other recommendations; noting the steps she outlined above would provide a good starting point.

 

Councilmember McGehee

Councilmember McGehee opined that tonight had proven an example of how the city works and works well, with the Wheeler Street neighborhood working with staff for over five years, resulting in a good resolution. 

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that any number of community organizations or people came up with good ideas as individuals or as a group.  When the city performed its last community survey, Councilmember McGehee noted the leading thing felt by respondents was their connection with their neighborhood, opining that proved to her that there was no lack of cohesion or self-identity. 

Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of having tips for forming informal neighborhood associations, or making meeting space available through one or more of the six park buildings located throughout the city that she understood were free of charge for community or civic use.

 

Councilmember McGehee opined that the block captain program was excellent, but opined there were other neighborhoods that were equally as cohesive without that leadership.

 

Councilmember McGehee stated she was happy to be as helpful as possible for any group of residents with ideas or proposals, positive or objective.  However, Councilmember McGehee stated she was not supportive of an approach that required an association to meet specific requirements and the city would respond accordingly, opining all members of the community were important.

 

Councilmember Willmus

In his review of discussions to-date, and recommendations of the Task Force and CEC, Councilmember Willmus opined that he found a lot of good initiatives. 

 

However, when considering expenditures of tax monies for the benefit of one group or one neighborhood association, Councilmember Willmus opined that it was important to have some level of oversight to make sure of the process and how those funds are being spent, something he considered to be an important aspect.

 

Specific to the use of community facilities, as long as meetings remained open to the public as a whole and not limited in attendance, Councilmember Willmus stated he was fine facilitating their meetings, but suggested that may be a point of discussion going forward.

 

Going back to his review of those involved in preparing the series of recommendations, Councilmember Willmus opined that they had done a good job, and even though he understood there had been some disagreement, dissent and personality issues as things progressed, to him that didn't mean all of the recommendations got tossed aside.  If a framework approach is used, Councilmember Willmus opined that there were things that could be moved forward; and agreed it was unfortunate that a lot of misinformation had been tossed about suggesting city mandates, and reiterated that while it was unfortunate, it was certainly not true.

 

Councilmember Etten

Councilmember Etten expressed his appreciation to Councilmember Laliberte for her thorough thoughts on this item; and supported a lot of what she addressed in her comments. 

 

Councilmember Etten spoke specifically to the Cohansey neighborhood group with which he was involved, and recognized Mr. Yunke having spoken to their group; and expressed his interest in seeing that communication continue and improve.  Councilmember Etten suggested other city staff could support those efforts so Mr. Yunke wasn't doing it alone, and resulting in more formalized and/or frequent communication (e.g. list serves and other existing communication tools) to make more direct connections to neighborhoods. 

 

Councilmember Etten opined that he loved the training for block captains and future captains and encouraging positive interaction.

 

Councilmember Etten spoke in support of a tool kit to help organize and guide neighborhoods; but agreed with Councilmember Willmus that before more city resources and tax dollars are spent on mailings, copies, or city website space, acknowledgement of how an association or group of neighbors organized themselves for voting purposes was necessary, not necessarily indicating the need for a formal neighborhood association, but making sue the group was serving its neighborhood equitably. 

 

Councilmember Etten noted his family was personally interlaced with two separate neighborhood associations, and they found it to work fine, and opined that it actually served to encourage communication among neighborhoods to avoid competition and provide interaction at different levels.

 

Mayor Roe

Mayor Roe thanked Councilmember Laliberte for setting up a framework for tonight's discussion and for moving forward. 

 

Mayor Roe noted that one nice thing about the outline was getting experience to find out what was working, what was lacking, and provide an opportunity for neighborhood feedback. 

 

The recommendations provided by the Neighborhood Association Task Force and CEC, Mayor Roe opined were helpful; but agreed that before taking twenty steps to put an infrastructure and/or policies in place, it made sense to get some smaller things in place now and grow from that. Mayor Roe opined this may indicate a lot of unmet needs were in the community, but agreed it was a good thing to find out first that would allow the city to be in a better position to meet that need if that was the only result coming out of these broader recommendations. 

 

Mayor Roe suggested following the steps outlined by Councilmember Laliberte for that starting point in the process.

 

CEC Chair Scot Becker

At the request of Mayor Roe, CEC Chair Becker clarified that the original recommendations of the Task Force and CEC did not include copies as part of the services provided to neighborhood associations by the city.  Chair Becker advised that only an annual mailing for a formal association was suggested.

 

In looking at bock clubs, Chair Becker further clarified that the intent was not to exclude them beyond a return on the city's investment in terms of money or staff resources and website emphasis, as well as endorsement of those organizations by the city.  Chair Becker stated that the intent was that there should be some minimal considerations to make sure there was no discrimination in membership or within the neighborhood as part of the recommendations.

 

Discussion

Councilmember Laliberte clarified that the broader work done and recommendations of the Neighborhood Association Task Force and CEC were relevant when the timing was right.   Councilmember Laliberte acknowledged that she'd met several Roseville residents who had moved here from other communities having a formal neighborhood association who expressed that they missed that aspect.  Councilmember Laliberte opined that building up to that point was important as well as understanding the give/get piece and soliciting feedback from neighborhoods already providing that aspect.  Councilmember Laliberte suggested that by doing this preliminary work and taking smaller steps in the process would make the broader effort more successful if and when the city pulled the trigger on these recommendations of the Task Force and CEC.

 

Councilmember McGehee suggested those efforts could be part of the training for block captains, and supply contact information.  However, Councilmember McGehee noted the need to provide a parallel source of information for communication beyond social media and the website for those in the community without internet or computer access.

 

City Manager Trudgeon verified direction to staff:

·         Staff preparation of a draft tool kit of best practices for a neighborhood to pursue, using available resources, and further refinement going forward

·         Recognizing that block clubs were intended for public safety efforts by the Roseville Police Department, City Manager Trudgeon cautioned that they not be morphed into something else during the process or require that a block club engage in an annual meeting, with his understanding that such a step would require more City Council discussion in directing staff accordingly.  Mr. Trudgeon noted his perception that the City Council was not suggesting more work for the Police Department or Mr. Yunke specifically, and if additional resources or information were sought, it would be necessary to define how those requests would work while not compromising the original intent of the block clubs.  Mr. Trudgeon opined he thought that could easily be worked through.

 

Councilmember Laliberte suggested discussion with Mr. Yunke to inform and involve the whole department as to the needs and determine time requirements involved.  If all were in agreement, Councilmember Laliberte further suggested hearing from Mr. Yunke on his ideas that he or the department would like to pursue but were unable to do so at this time, or ways the program could be enhanced, using that additional information moving forward.

 

Councilmember Etten agreed with the need for additional communication methods beyond the internet that would not exclude anyone.

 

Mayor Roe suggested not putting everything on the Police Department but making it inter-disciplinary throughout the city organization, similar to the efforts with the Karen community, Imagine Roseville and other efforts to find ways to do things better.  If the effort was public safety based, Mayor Roe noted the Police Department's involvement was obvious.  However, if it was more broadly based, Mayor Roe noted there were other ways to make those connections by using interdepartmental staffing by a team to make something work.

 

Councilmember McGehee agreed on the interdepartmental approach.  Councilmember McGehee expressed appreciation for Councilmember Laliberte's recognition that not everyone was a leader or wants to be a leader, and not every neighborhood has or wants a leader.  Councilmember McGehee opined that the reality is that they are their neighborhoods, with their voices and their unique system.  Councilmember McGehee stated her only concern in terms of the tool kit was if someone felt like a leader, they could get information from the City Manager to assist them, even though most leaders took the initiative to find resources on their own.

 

Councilmember Laliberte spoke in support of a collaborative proposal from staff on what they thought they might need and how it may work.

City Manager Trudgeon duly noted that suggestion.

 

Councilmember Laliberte further suggested addressing privacy issues and boundaries with block captains, providing an opportunity but also alerting them to potential limitations or conflicts. 

Specific to discussion about revamping the Welcome Packet, no matter what scenario resulted, Councilmember Laliberte suggested that may be a good location for the bullet point ideas for neighborhood associations.

 

Mayor Roe suggested that the intent remained that neighborhoods form for reasons other than reacting to potentially bad things in their neighborhood, but to provide a way for neighbors to connect.  Referencing last week's Imagine Roseville community meeting on race and policing, Mayor Roe noted the ways sought to communication connect with each other, not through a city-initiated mandate, but suggested a team approach as recommended by his colleagues.  Mayor Roe opined that one role of the city should be to foster and develop leaders in a neighborhood community for the broader city and promote leadership.  Mayor Roe opined this was one pathway to achieving leadership, by trying out some things and considering those that may be most prudent moving forward.

 

Without objection, Mayor Roe clarified the direction to staff:

·         Continue to work on the tool kit and bring a revised draft back to the City Council for review and approval

·         Provide staff's thoughts to the City Council on how best to utilize block captains informing future discussion.

 

Mayor Roe thanked the Neighborhood Association Task Force, the CEC and Chair Becker for their work in getting the discussion to this point.

 

Public Comment

Diane Hilden, Bayview Drive

Ms. Hilden noted she had started the Lake McCarrons Neighborhood Association, now in its twenty-fifth year; and in her past had worked in building 100 to 150 block clubs within the City of St. Paul.  In her discussions with other Roseville residents and Mr. Yunke, Ms. Hilden stated her wholehearted support of tonight's discussion.  Ms. Hilden opined that starting with block clubs was a great starting point, since they were organic and already existed. Ms. Hilden noted the many ideas of Mr. Yunke, but also noted he was overworked and suggested no additional dumping on his existing work load, which she understood was not an intent based on tonight's discussion.  Ms. Hilden opined that the framework laid out by Councilmember Laliberte reflected Mr. Yunke's framework as well based on her discussions with him over the years; and applauded the City Council for agreeing to move forward with an informal process.  Ms. Hilden opined that the more formal the process, the more doomed it could prove to be, even though she recognized that each neighborhood was different.  Ms. Hilden stated her support for the idea of promoting leadership and allowing residents to have that opportunity to learn how; and offered her personal services with those efforts.

 

Ms. Hilden thanked the City Council in acknowledging the work put into the report; and while disagreeing with it and the process for a long time, opined it was a good report and a lot of positive things came out of it as the process moved forward.

 

Sherry Sanders, S McCarrons Blvd.

As the current Chair of the Lake McCarrons Neighborhood Association, and as a former member of the Neighborhood Association Task Force and of the CEC, Ms. Sanders reviewed her perception of how the concept of mandating associations had come up through the CEC seeking to have the city decide on boundaries of a neighborhood association, as some communities did.  Ms. Sanders noted her concern that the intent was that the city mandate those associations and expressed concern that this was the path the CEC was going down, which she considered then and continued to feel was a wrong approach.

 

Ms. Sanders noted she was involved in the discussions between Ms. Hilden and Mr. Yunke related to block captains.  Ms. Sanders noted she had included that in the report from the Task Force; and expressed her appreciation that the City Council was choosing to support that idea, opining that neighborhoods needed to build community leadership.  Ms. Sanders also offered her assistance to the City Council and staff as needed.

 

b.            City Council Member McGehee's Request to Consider Requesting a Bid from the Ramsey County Sheriff for Policing Services in Roseville

Mayor Roe recognized Councilmember McGehee related to her previous request to present her request for the City Council to consider requesting a bid from the Ramsey County Sheriff for policing services in Roseville.  Councilmember McGehee's proposal was detailed in the RCA of today's date as well as several related attachments.

 

Prior to her formal presentation, Councilmember McGehee moved to the presentation table and clarified that her proposal had always been and remained only about city finances, and was being presented at this time during the budget process.  With the city continuing to increase its current tax levy, Councilmember McGehee advised that she continued to try to figure out a way to garner substantial savings for the city's annual budget, thus her proposal.

 

Councilmember McGehee referenced attachments to the RCA from City Manager Trudgeon and Police Chief Rick Mathwig as far back as 2015 in response to her proposal; along with her rebuttals to City Manager Trudgeon's memorandum (Attachment C) as redlined.

 

Councilmember McGehee proceeded with her presentation, addressing various financial and budget percentages and impacts with ongoing levy increases based on her research and compared with estimated contract costs from the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department based on average staffing and services with the exception of support staff as well as with enhanced staffing; and based on their knowledge of Roseville from the 9-1-1 dispatch system. 

 

Councilmember McGehee reviewed additional information involving contract savings and potential discounts from equipment and space at the Roseville City Hall; and possible options to use those additional funds to reduce infrastructure and utility costs for residents, possibly moving the License Center to City Hall, store parks & recreation equipment, and house the Roseville Historical Society, as well as providing gym space for a staff wellness program by utilizing the space currently taken up by the Police Department.

 

Councilmember McGehee provided an outline of potential pros and cons with such a contract; and frequent questions based on her discussions with Roseville residents as they shared their questions and her responses to those questions. 

 

Councilmember McGehee asked that the City Council consider the potential of this outsourcing acknowledging that it may impact City Hall, but opined would not significantly change police services or jeopardize the public safety of Roseville residents.  Councilmember McGehee further opined substantial savings must be found for the city to continue providing amenities to its residents without forcing many residents to leave their homes due to ever-increasing tax levies, especially since the Police Department's budget represented a significant portion (22.8%) of the city's annual levy budget.  Councilmember McGehee referenced several documents included those in her presentation based on studies and various newspaper articles.  In conclusion, Councilmember McGehee noted her intent was not to provide a comparison of the two agencies, but simply to ask the City Council to consider the proposal as part of its annual budget consideration.

 

A copy of Councilmember McGehee's power point is attached hereto.

 

City Manager Trudgeon

With permission granted by Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon asked that the City Council indulge him and for a response to Councilmember McGehee's proposal before they began their deliberations.

 

As outlined in more detail in his memorandums as previously referenced, City Manager Trudgeon sought to make the City Council aware of his reasons and stated that he was not supportive of any proposal to seek police services from outside the city organization. 

 

City Manager Trudgeon alerted the City Council of several things, including their need to be aware that the analysis provided in the packet was predicated by numbers from the Ramsey County Sheriff without any input from the City Manager or Police Chief.  Mr. Trudgeon noted this analysis significantly underestimated current services, and while it had been suggested that estimates in the packet were equivalent of current staffing levels, he clarified that they were not accurate, with the services not recognizing the current 2-3 patrol officers, didn't recognize the current four patrol and seven investigators the City's Police Department had, nor did it recognize the services provided by community service officers within the department. 

 

With the cost estimates falling short of current staffing levels, City Manager Trudgeon noted it didn't accurately reflect current staffing and actually resulted in less service than the community currently received.  Mr. Trudgeon noted that the City of Roseville's Police Department had more calls for service and more open cases than the other seven communities combined that participated in Ramsey County's service area.  With less people in Roseville than proposed in Ramsey County, and the dedicated personnel toward those other seven communities, Mr. Trudgeon noted would more than double the County's work load, creating unknown implications.  Mr. Trudgeon further noted per the additional deputy costs were additional costs that had not been factored in to the information provided.

 

City Manager Trudgeon expressed concern in dealing with future cost increases for outsourcing policing services for the city, noting increasing costs for participating cities using Ramsey County Sheriff services. Mr. Trudgeon reported that the current contract communities are seeing up to 6% increase for Ramsey County services for the 2017 budget and control of these costs are totally out of the hands of local city managers and their respective elected officials. Mr. Trudgeon advised that there was usually little room for the city to deny those increases.  Also, Mr. Trudgeon asked what happened, and who the city turned to if an outsourcing model no longer worked and how it would fund starting over again to replaces it current equipment, squads, and personnel. 

 

Even with the goal stated by Councilmember McGehee was strictly from a financial perspective, City Manager Trudgeon stated those figures shown in her analysis were not a truly accurate picture.  Mr. Trudgeon noted such an analysis should take far more than finances into account, but also the policing service levels between local and county officers, the quality of those services with Ramsey County having a totally different mission and service model than that currently found in Roseville.  Mr. Trudgeon stated that simply showing calculations on a spreadsheet, does not provide a clear picture. Mr. Trudgeon described the hiring process for new police officers and the extensive screening, vetting and training, the city does compared to Ramsey County. and for example used the practice of hiring, vetting and training Roseville Police Officers with that of Ramsey County.  Mr. Trudgeon further noted that if contracting out for police services, the city would lose control of discipline of its Police Chief and officers, as well as the direct involvement of those officers with residents of Roseville.  Using another example, Mr. Trudgeon noted the attendance and involvement by Roseville Police officers at the recent Imagine Roseville race and policing community gathering and discussion.  At that meeting, Mr. Trudgeon noted the frequent comment that residents wanted more accountability and transparency, but with abdicating the city's role to that of Ramsey County, that local accountability would be lost.  Mr. Trudgeon noted that Falcon Heights was now dealing with such an aftermath.

 

In conclusion, City Manager Trudgeon noted that the Roseville Police Chief was ultimately accountable to him in his role as City Manager, and if warranted could be fired accordingly.  If the City Council was not happy with how he as City Manager was handling the Police Department or had any other issues, Mr. Trudgeon noted they could in turn fire him.  Even though a contract with Ramsey County may include an escape clause to terminate their services, Mr. Trudgeon opined it didn't provide such accountability.  City Manager Trudgeon opined it was what was best for the city versus what it would cost to get out of the contract.

 

In the end, City Manager Trudgeon opined that with the city having control over how it policed the community and how costs were attributed to the Police Department should remain a prime consideration for Roseville versus the lack of that fiscal control, transparency and accountability; and strongly suggested that the City Council not go out for bid for city policing services.

 

Councilmember McGehee requested to address some of Manager Trudgeon comments, but Mayor Roe denied her request and called for public comment.

 

Public Comment

Three bench handouts were provided as they related to this item, including an email dated October 9, 2016 from Nancy and John O'Brien in opposition; an email dated October 7, 2016 from Vivian Ramalingam support; and an email with attachments dated October 6, 2016 from James Faulconbridge as President of the Roseville Police Foundation, in opposition to this proposal.

 

Nancy O'Brien, 2103 Cohansey Blvd

Ms. O'Brien thanked Councilmember McGehee for her concern about city tax dollars, and as a senior on a fixed income, stated that she shared those concerns. 

 

However, Ms. O'Brien stated that she absolutely did not support this proposal; opining it wasn't about the money, but more about the quality of life, citizen safety and welfare in Roseville.  Ms. O'Brien noted that the Roseville Police Department had taken decades building itself into the fine public institution citizens now had.  Ms. O'Brien noted there were certain services local government could buy through the lowest bid available, but opined schools, police and fire services did not fit in that category.

 

While local policing services may cost more, Ms. O'Brien stated it wasn't about money.  Ms. O'Brien stated she was very impressed with the Roseville Police Department's professionalism and their community engagement; and stated she was not convinced the same quality of services would be realized with Ramsey County.

 

Cynthia White, 21___ Churchhill Street

Ms. White stated her agreement with the previous speaker; opining to her it wasn't about money when it came to police services.  Ms. White stated she had spent the last eight years attempting to understand the annual municipal budget process, but stated this was the very last thing she would imagine being proposed, especially in this hostile day and time. 

 

Ms. White noted the significant work put into the proposal by Councilmember McGehee, and opined if the proposal had been a joint proposal presented and recommended by City Manager Trudgeon, Police Chief Mathwig and Councilmember McGehee, she may be able to find room for discussion.  However, under the circumstances, Ms. White strongly urged the City Council to allow Roseville residents to continue receiving the fine services currently available from its local police force that remained directly accountable to the City Council, Roseville residents and the City Manager. 

 

Also speaking as a senior on a fixed income, Ms. White stated her advocacy with current police model, and offered her willingness to pay more for those services if necessary.

 

Michal Bilsky, CEO of North American Banking

Mr. Bilsky noted that Roseville city property taxes remained some of the lowest in the Twin Cities metropolitan area, owning in part to the community's commercial area.  Mr. Bilsky asked that Councilmember McGehee not forget about all of those businesses, noting his business property taxes alone exceeded $48,000 annually.  However, Mr. Bilsky stated that he had chosen Roseville as the community in which to start his bank due to those city services, including its local police department. 

 

Mr. Bilsky cited the example when one of his banks was robbed, and the Roseville Police Department quickly apprehended the robbers within 500' of the bank, and recovered the stolen funds.

 

Mr. Bilsky stated the community could not be represented by anyone other than its own police department; and opined that he found the analysis done by Councilmember McGehee appalling to say the least.

 

Dick Houck, 1131 Roselawn Avenue

Mr. Houck noted that when Roseville began as a farm community, Ramsey County had served as its police force, but it didn't need a lot of services.  However, as the community had grown through the years, residential and businesses, Mr. Houck opined that those needs were now much different than in the past; as well as being much different than other cities serviced by the Ramsey County Sheriff as their police presence.  Mr. Houck opined there was no other community in the northern suburbs as busy as Roseville was.

 

In reading through Councilmember McGehee's proposal, Mr. Houck opined that numbers are easy to put down and look good.  However, in business, Mr. Houck noted he'd seen many proposals look good but when the final analysis was done the project or service was way over projections.  Mr. Houck stated he had also ready the City Manager's report on this proposal, and opined he had found it to be an excellent job in providing reasons for retaining the community's local police force.

 

Mr. Houck stated he had known many police chiefs and officers through the years, and opined that Roseville now has one of the finest chief's it had ever had, as well as a good police force. 

 

When reviewing the numbers provided in Councilmember McGehee's presentation, Mr. Houck opined that when things looked too good to be true, they usually were; and further opined they may look more beneficial than they would be in actuality.  Mr. Houck urged the City Council to keep local police services, opining they were one of the best forces in the broader suburban community.  Mr. Houck stated he found the proposal outrageous and hoped the City Council would give it no merit.

 

Jim Falconbridge, President of the Roseville Police Foundation

Mr. Faulconbridge referenced a recent City News newsletter to read about the high performance citizens held for their local government services and staggering approval ratings.  In that same community survey, Mr. Faulconbridge noted Roseville residents listed their biggest concern was high crime rates.  Mr. Faulconbridge stated that Roseville wasn't Mayberry, and urged the City Council not to consider this proposal.

 

Mr. Faulconbridge provided a comparison of inner ring suburb police departments using 2015 statistics and crime data taken from the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension's Uniform Crime Report.  Mr. Faulconbridge also provided a document entitled "Department Summary from Ramsey County Sheriff's Office that included a statement that as a result of increased service demands, there had been a tendency to largely rely on overtime and hiring or retired deputies as temporary staff to compensate for staffing shortages.

 

Mr. Faulconbridge opined that the cities listed in Councilmember McGehee's proposal were representative of Roseville's peer cities, and welcomed further research by Roseville residents.  Mr. Faulconbridge noted that the City of Roseville ranks third lowest in crime rates among the inner ring suburbs in his research as provided in the bench handout, while ranking 8 out of 9 for lowest cost per capita.  Mr. Faulconbridge noted this proposal caused him significant concern beyond simply addressing square footage availability at City Hall.

 

Mr. Faulconbridge stated that he knew the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department well, considering many of them his friends and most wonderful people; however, he stated that he still preferred a municipal police force.  Given the difficulties faced by Falcon Heights with recent events, Mr. Faulconbridge noted the City of Edina's applause of the Roseville Police Department while discussion tonight of this City Council was discussing getting rid of it, which he found disheartening.

 

With his involvement in three businesses, all located in Roseville, Mr. Faulconbridge noted those companies represented a significant number of head of household wage jobs, and part of the allure of Roseville was its services, including its local police force.

 

Mr. Faulconbridge noted he had stepped into the role of president of this Foundation to obtain additional equipment for the Roseville Police Department beyond what was possible with its annual budget.  Mr. Faulconbridge stated that he found this discussion and even consideration of such a proposal unbelievable; and provided several examples of local police service and responses. 

 

Mr. Faulconbridge urged the City Council to quit talking about this proposal; and personally argued that this fine police department was underfunded.  Mr. Faulconbridge opined it was time to get on with the real business of this community.

 

Tim Callaghan, 3062 Shorewood Lane

On other side, Mr. Callaghan opined that residents had no idea what this will be if we actually look at it seriously, even though he is being told there's a large dollar potential and no idea of the effect there could be.

 

Mr. Callaghan noted that City Manager Trudgeon had only provided a verbal response, with nothing in writing; and opined it would be foolish to not see what the real answer was.  If it proved a bad idea, Mr. Callaghan stated his acceptance of that; but opined it warranted looking into especially with taxes continuing to go up much faster than inflation and creating a need to get a handle on those taxes or do something else to address them.

 

Mr. Callaghan admitted he wouldn't have chosen the police department first, but since it was currently on the table, he suggested considering looking at it.  Mr. Callaghan opined Roseville had a great department, but also opined it had problems, especially when the Police Chief repeatedly told him that he won't take actions for a local entity breaking state law, it caused him to have a problem.

 

John O'Brien, 2103 Cohansey Blvd.

Also retired and on a fixed income, Mr. O'Brien noted he'd been involved with his local neighborhood watch program and had coordinated it over the last few years, and it had been in existence for 25 years as part of Roseville's extended outreach by the Roseville Police Department. 

 

Overall, Mr. O'Brien opined that the department's communication efforts are excellent, and their professionalism was evident as he had gotten to know the officers better when attending Roseville U and the Police Citizen's Academy.  Mr. O'Brien referenced several of the outreach efforts of the department (e.g. Coffee with a Cop; Monthly Activity Summary; outreach to immigrant communities; Soccer Camp; and Shop with a Cop as some examples).

Mr. O'Brien stated that he was highly skeptical that Ramsey County can provide the same high level of crime prevention and law enforcement to Roseville and address Roseville-specific needs. 

 

Even though he is on a fixed income, Mr. O'Brien opined some things are more important than cost, and this is one of them.  Mr. O'Brien further opined that citizens were getting great value for their tax dollar, and agreed with the previous speaker that the department could use more staffing to even better meet those community needs.  In conclusion, Mr. O'Brien opined that any financial savings in switching police providers were far outweighed by the high accessibility of the local and able Roseville Police Department.

 

Brad Koland, 1926 Gluek Lane

In his personal review of Councilmember McGehee's documentation, Mr. Koland opined it had been very well done.

 

Mr. Koland provided his comparisons using 2014 information and Roseville Patrol Officer full-time equivalency (FTE) used in the proposal and those currently available in Roseville, with his calculations showing that it would actually cost $10,000 more per patrol officer than the current staffing model compared to that proposed by Ramsey County.  Referencing Councilmember McGehee's Executive Summary, Mr. Koland agreed that there may be no loss of benefits or pensions for Roseville officers, but stated he was not convinced the numbers accurately reflected the potential loss of employment potential for some existing officers.

 

Citing other numerical comparisons, Mr. Koland questioned the accuracy of Councilmember McGehee's projections and comparisons between Roseville and Ramsey County staffing models; and suggested instead a thorough review and adjustment to appropriate staffing levels for the Roseville Police Department versus considering contracting those services out to Ramsey County.

 

Motion to Extend Meeting Curfew

At 10:00 p.m., Willmus moved, Etten seconded, extending the meeting curfew to the conclusion of this item.

 

                        Roll Call

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

Nays: None.

                   Janet Henquinet, County Road B-2

As a retired Professor of Management, Ms. Henquinet expressed discussed consideration when outsourcing what served as one of the core functions of a municipality.   Ms. Henquinet noted this was a major decision and recognized that the City Council was well aware of that. 

 

In her experience with decision-making for over twenty years, Ms. Henquinet the talk about costs did not address cost benefits when comparing services with the model from either group. 

 

Also not mentioned, but an important part of that decision, Ms. Henquinet stated was the current situation with so much pressure on law enforcement.  Ms. Henquinet stated she didn't want Roseville police personnel focusing on whether or not they may lose their job and/or benefits, but stated she wanted them solely focused on their security and their policing of Roseville.  Form a citizen point of view, Ms. Henquinet noted everyone was uneasy, and wanted assurances for their safety and security, with change throwing everyone off, even if it could be a needed change.  Ms. Henquinet suggested timing was a critical issue not effectively addressed.  If there remained an argument to consider making such a change, Ms. Henquinet opined that may be down the road sometime, but stated now was not the time to even seek such a quote.

 

Hubert Thibodaux

As a Roseville resident for over 54 years, Mr. Thibodaux noted he's watched it grow from a simple city to a complex one, and had watched the Roseville Police Department grow with the city.  Mr. Thibodaux opined that the department had done a lot of hard work with good people, ending up with the current premier police department.  Now with the wave of a hand, Mr. Thibodaux opined that was proposed to be all thrown in the trash can and started over in the guise of savings money. 

 

At the age of 85 years and as a long-term consumer, Mr. Thibodaux stated he had heard every cost-savings gimmick out there, but had found the majority unrealistic.  Mr. Thibodaux stated he had yet to find a free lunch; and opined you got what you paid for, and if you buy cheap, you got cheap.  Mr. Thibodaux opined that this proposal represented a cheap imitation of the current Roseville Police Department, and further opined that citizens of Roseville deserved better than that.

 

Julie Dean, 831 Grand Avenue

As a twenty-five year resident of Roseville, Ms. Dean stated she didn't want to lose her police department.  Being employed in the public safety field and understanding the reasoning behind this proposal, Ms. Dean noted that Roseville was unique.  Ms. Dean noted no one had addressed domestic terrorism potentials in Roseville with the local tank farms on the western edge of the city, other chemical manufacturers in the community, the Williams pipeline running through Roseville, and Rosedale Mall as home to over 12,000,000 visitors annually.  Ms. Dean opined that the Roseville Police Department not only provided patrols for the mall but also provided its residents good services. 

 

Ms. Dean referenced prostitution and human trafficking at local hotels, opining that the Police Department had done an excellent job in addressing that.  As far as it being unique, Ms. Dean also noted that Roseville was only one of two inner ring suburbs directly abutting the Cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis.

 

In her review of Councilmember McGehee's proposal, Ms. Dean opined it was attempting to compare apples to oranges when comparing it to other police departments.  Ms. Dean noted those peer communities weren't looking to lose their local police departments, and opined that Roseville shouldn't have to think about losing theirs either.

 

Mary Bakeman, 1178 W County Road B

While most had already been voiced, Ms. Bakeman noted one thing was missing from Councilmember McGehee's report, even though she'd looked for it. When talking about community policing, Ms. Bakeman stated that this was a service Roseville now had.  Ms. Bakeman cited several examples, including a police chief interested in working with the community that would not be available with Ramsey County. 

 

As far as accountability, Ms. Bakeman stated she believed in it and agreed with the comments of City Manager Trudgeon.  Ms. Bakeman referenced a personal request by a Ramsey County Sheriff's Deputies seeking election to the Office of Sheriff asking to place an election sign in her front yard, opining that just wasn't right and she preferred a police chief who was accountable to the City Manager and City Council versus someone elected to the position.

 

While considering herself cheap and believing in accountability, Ms. Bakeman opined that the Roseville Police Department was well worth the money spent for it.

 

City Council Position Statements

Councilmember Willmus

Councilmember Willmus noted several years ago when running for election, at a League of Women Voter's Forum, when specifically asked about going out to bid for police services, his response had been "no," and continued to be so now.

 

While City Manager Trudgeon had already touched on several of his reasons for that response, Councilmember Willmus opined that ultimately it would become difficult for the City of Roseville to contain costs.  With the seven cities currently contracting for Ramsey County Sheriff services, Councilmember Willmus noted they were each seeing a 6% increase in this budget cycle. 

 

In reviewing the comparison figures used in Councilmember McGehee's proposal versus current Roseville Police Department staffing levels, Councilmember Willmus opined that there were significant discrepancies, as also noted in Mr. Koland's public comments when reconciling those numbers with the Ramsey County proposal, especially from a FTE basis, opining that those discrepancies were staggering.  When factoring in space and other intrinsic items, including information technology services, Councilmember Willmus opined that the city still came in with over $10,000 in FTE savings annually.  When reconciling numbers for existing levels of service and applying an apples to apples comparison, Councilmember Willmus opined that the City of Roseville of Roseville was getting a pretty good deal. 

 

By not contracting out services, Councilmember Willmus noted there would be no loss of policing services; and furthermore noted the number of civilian employees beyond sworn officers in the department that factored into that level of service, but not taken into consideration, but all real jobs and real issues.

 

Councilmember Willmus noted that many residents were troubled by this, and while perhaps not being as troubled by the proposal, he found that his concerns are caused because it didn't make fiscal sense nor provide any fiscal savings as presented and therefore, he didn't find the proposal supportable.

 

Councilmember Willmus stated that the City Council was elected as a body to make judgments, one of most important being with the annual budget and tax levy, which he took seriously. Councilmember Willmus stated if the concern is with rising costs, he'd reach out to Councilmember McGehee suggesting she work with her City Council colleagues to find realistic ways to reduce those costs.  Councilmember Willmus noted that, over the last several budget cycles with those concerns in mind, they had been reflected in his vote to not support the budget.  However, Councilmember Willmus opined that he didn't think the answer was farming out this core municipal service to Ramsey County.

 

Councilmember Etten

Councilmember Etten expressed appreciation for public comments, and stated his agreement with those saying Roseville needed to keep its own police force.  With Councilmember McGehee's proposal not providing an accurate apples to apples comparison from his perspective, Councilmember Etten provided several examples, including the work of investigators who also serve for extra saturation patrol in struggling neighborhoods in Roseville, as well as other pertinent issues including extra patrols and monitoring of local motels and their related issues.

 

If the City of Roseville lost its local officers from City Hall, with Ramsey County Sheriff personnel housed in Arden Hills on Highway 96, Councilmember Etten noted the lost response time, as well as losing services through transporting arrestees.

 

Councilmember Etten further addressed another example of service if contracted out, would be reducing the number of officers available during the week and weekends.  During his door knocking this year for re-election to the City Council, Councilmember Etten noted there was no one saying they wanted less of a police presence, with many asking for more patrolling, especially related to speed and safety concerns.

 

Councilmember Etten stated his appreciation for those taking time to go into more detail in comparing numbers in the proposal, especially those comparing inner ring suburbs provided by President Faulconbridge.  As a result of that additional information, and from his personal review and perspective, Councilmember Etten opined that the City of Roseville and its citizens were getting tremendous quality, even when using comparison studies of neighboring cities provided in the League of Women Voters study, with city costs coming in at the middle of those other communities. 

 

Councilmember Etten agreed with concerns expressed by the public with the proximity of Roseville to the larger cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, in addition to Roseville's large commercial districts.

 

Councilmember Etten stated that of most importance to him was accountability to the community, which had been highlighted by the recent Falcon Heights shooting.  Councilmember Etten noted the number of people who called or met with Chief Mathwig directly, noting that couldn't have happened if police services had been contracted out.  Councilmember Etten further noted that Chief Mathwig and his officers had met directly with citizens at various meetings and opportunities used to connect with the community who asked their local office to come up with new and creative ways to interact in the community in purposeful and positive ways.  With 525,000 residents in Ramsey County and only 34,000 residents in Roseville, Councilmember Etten opined the city could control that interaction when done by a local police force.

 

In conclusion, Councilmember Etten stated he never wanted to lose the right to hear and discuss things like this together; but stated he would not and could not support such a proposal.

 

Councilmember Laliberte

Councilmember Laliberte thanked the public for their comments and concurred with several of them, as well as the majority of her colleagues.  Councilmember Laliberte commended Councilmember McGehee's work in presenting a bold proposal to the City Council and Roseville community.  Any time the City Council could take a hard or different look at the budget, Councilmember Laliberte opined was a good exercise.  However, Councilmember Laliberte questioned if this would have been her choice for a place to look.

 

Councilmember Laliberte stated she saw public safety as a responsibility and core function for local government, and not one she'd feel comfortable contracting out.  While agreeing with the need for accountability and transparency, Councilmember Laliberte noted that could be easily addressed with policies that could be changed periodically. 

 

Councilmember Laliberte noted there was information that could be put forth, including addressing frequent comments she heard and their desire for more police presence on their streets and in their neighborhoods.  While being appreciative of looking at anything closer in the budget, Councilmember Laliberte stated she was not in favor of contracting out public safety and police services.

 

Mayor Roe

Mayor Roe echoed the comments of Councilmember Laliberte, while expressing his personal respectful appreciation for Councilmember McGehee taking the time and effort in researching and preparing her proposal in an attempt to save the city money. 

 

Mayor Roe stated he had looked seriously at the proposal and had performed his own analysis through that process.  Mayor Roe reviewed some of that analysis as follows. 

 

Regarding the operating budget numbers, Mayor Roe noted City Hall capital expenditures would remain regardless of whether or not the police department was housed there.  Mayor Roe noted the city had and continued to pay for its debt service per statutory requirements, whether or not it involved the local police department.  Mayor Roe noted that City Hall would still need to be maintained, with some of those areas eating into savings, but not related specifically to the police department.

 

As brought up by several of his colleagues on the City Council and during public comment, Mayor Roe addressed current police staffing in Roseville, noting it was frequently pointed out that it was inadequate for the city's needs, and admitted the city was operating lean with staffing resources.  If the proposal accurately compared staffing levels in the two models, Mayor Roe opined that any projected savings would go away; and just from that basis, he couldn't support seriously looking into such a proposal.

 

Mayor Roe corrected the perception that Roseville paid twice for Ramsey County patrol services in Roseville and in Ramsey County, clarifying that the only services that are paid by the entire county are in the areas of jail housing and document service, all paid through county tax dollars, and not paid by Roseville taxpayers.

 

Specific to accountability, as previously stated, Mayor Roe questioned how an elected county sheriff would be more accountable to Roseville citizens than its own employees under the benefit of local management, with more transparency at that local level.  If the experience of the last few years is used as evidence, Mayor Roe noted Ramsey County's response to Roseville issues and concerns had not proven to be positive.  Not to say Ramsey County is bad, but Mayor Roe noted the reality was that they had many masters, and Roseville often had to play the squeaky wheel to get their attention.

 

In conclusion, Mayor Roe supported the comments of his colleagues in not supporting this proposal.

 

Councilmember McGehee

Councilmember McGehee stated she had not brought this proposal forward because she thought it would be popular, but simply as an area for discussion. 

 

In response to Mayor Roe's comments, Councilmember McGehee clarified that she had removed debt service for City Hall from her calculations.

 

Specific to the figures provided by City Manager Trudgeon, Councilmember McGehee stated she had not verified that documentation at this time. 

 

Councilmember McGehee reviewed Ramsey County's vetting of its officers and training process and found it excellent.

 

Councilmember McGehee stated she didn't want to argue cost or actual savings, thus her proposal to seek a bid from Ramsey County for police services in order to provide an accurate comparison of apples to apples.  Councilmember McGehee stated she was not convinced one way or the other, but had brought it forward to answer some outstanding questions and to confirm the level of savings.

 

However, while it would have been nice to have a collaborative effort, Councilmember McGehee stated she thought it was worth discussing and considering; but if there was an overriding opinion not to do so, she was fine with that decision.

 

In her ongoing efforts to reduce the annual budget and levy, Councilmember McGehee noted she had brought forward a $30,000 budget savings proposal last year, but had been unable to get a second to direct staff to look into it, even though two of her colleagues had voted against the budget and final tax levy.  Councilmember McGehee stated this had indicated to her that there was no particular desire on the part of this City Council to actually save money, so this had seemed to her a way to accomplish that savings.  Even though she had sought interest from her colleagues to look at such a proposal, Councilmember McGehee noted that none had expressed interest in receiving the blow back to consider such an option, but noted that didn't provide sufficient reason for her to turn her back on the potential to save money for Roseville taxpayers.  Councilmember McGehee stated that to not do this research and proposal was turning her back on her own personal sense of responsibility regarding expenditure of taxpayer monies.

 

If people weren't interested, Councilmember McGehee reiterated that she was fine with it and it took a big burden off her shoulders; and if people were happy to have their municipal taxes increased, it was fine with her and she wasn't going to worry about it anymore.  Councilmember McGehee stated that instead, she'd concentrate on utility fees that she found grossly unfair; and advised that she would speak to that later as it would be coming forward for discussion in November.

 

Councilmember McGehee expressed her appreciation of those speaking; and stated her gratification in hearing how much they liked the Roseville Police Department, a sentiment she shared with them.  Councilmember McGehee stated that she knew the Roseville Police Department and those with the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department, opining they were all good people.  Councilmember McGehee reiterated that this had not been a comparison between two good police forces, but simply a potential opportunity to see if Roseville residents could see substantial savings to help support the amenities they wanted in their community. 

 

Councilmember McGehee opined it was nice to be on a fixed income and still support those services and amenities, depending on what that income really was.  Councilmember McGehee stated that she had residents on a fixed income calling her frequently, and not only one or two residents, who were concerned about their monthly income compared with ongoing levy and budget increases that were really hurting them.  Councilmember McGehee stated that those were the people she was speaking about.

 

In conclusion, Councilmember McGehee stated she had made the proposal in her presentation; she was satisfied to now move on until and unless there was significant support from residents.  Clearly there was very little support at this time. 

 

Etten moved, Laliberte seconded, formal confirmation that the Roseville City Council did not support the proposal of Councilmember McGehee's to consider requesting a bid from the Ramsey County Sheriff for policing services for the City of Roseville.

 

                        Roll Call

Ayes: Willmus, Etten, Laliberte and Roe.

Nays: None.

Abstentions: McGehee.

Motion carried.

 

16.        City Manager Future Agenda Review

 

17.        Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings

 

18.        Adjourn Meeting

Willmus moved, Etten seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 10:28 p.m.

                                                Roll Call

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

            Nays: None.