|
City Council |
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 13, 2017
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 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
5. Recognitions, Donations and Communications
6. Items Removed from Consent Agenda
7. Business Items
a. Consider an Ordinance Amending City Code, Chapter 304: Lawful Gambling
Finance Director Chris Miller briefly summarized this item as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA); and five substantive changes made as a result of previous Council direction to staff for revisions of outdated language as outlined. As noted in the RCA, Mr. Miller reported on the responses heard from three of the lawful gambling organizations currently operating in the community and addressed their concerns.
Discussion ensued about possibly expanding the trade areas, with clarification that both the Moundsview and Irondale Senior High Schools were included in those cities currently listed in the Roseville trade area (New Brighton and Arden Hills).
At the request of Councilmember Etten, City Attorney Gaughan clarified that expenditures would be more closely associated with an institution versus any actual broader residency status of students in either school district.
Mayor Roe summarized the intended changes including the changes to the permitted numbers of premises permits (from 8 to 12) and sites per organization (from 2 to 3), and rationale for doing so as detailed by staff in the RCA; and offered an opportunity for public comment at this time, with no one appearing for or against.
Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of adopting the ordinance as drafted by staff and the City Attorney without further amendment.
Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1518 (Attachment B) entitled, “An Ordinance Amending Title Three, Chapter 304.”
Councilmember Laliberte expressed her appreciation for the opportunity to work through this revised ordinance; thanked current permit holders for their feedback; and stated that she was pleased with the results and would support it as presented.
While not being entirely satisfied with the revised ordinance, Councilmember McGehee stated she would support the motion as presented. She continued, however, stating her concern that other local organizations may not now have similar opportunities because of the limited number of venues available and the fact that individual organizations are, under this change, able to be active at up to three venues concurrently.
Mayor Roe spoke in support of the motion; and concurred with the comments made by Councilmember Laliberte.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, enactment of Ordinance Summary No. 1518 (Attachment C) entitled, “A Summary of an Ordinance Amending Title Three, Chapter 304.”
Roll Call (Super Majority)
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
b. Consider Adoption of Ordinance Prohibiting the Sale of Dogs and Cats in Pet Stores
As detailed in the RCA, City Manager Trudgeon summarized the most recent draft prepared by the City Attorney (Attachment B), and apologized for not including an ordinance summary.
In her review of the draft ordinance, Councilmember McGehee requested the following revisions:
§ Line 28: striking the end of the statement “…and misleading tactics of pet stores in some cases.”
§ Lines 39-40: striking any reference to the “burdens of cost” and eliminating “…which will likely reduce the burden on such agencies and reduce financial costs on local taxpayers;”
§ Line 48: replace “affect” with “negatively impact”
Mayor Roe suggested changing “negatively to “adversely” with agreement from Councilmember McGehee.
In general, Councilmember McGehee stated her difficulty in the second and third findings (lines 18 – 23 and 25 – 30 respectively), questioning if Roseville was in any position to make statements about the conditions or puppy mills and could only surmise those conditions. Councilmember McGehee deferred to the city’s legal counsel as to whether either of those findings were necessary to include or were critical findings important to this ordinance or if they were simply superfluous and could be eliminated.
Mayor Roe clarified that it would be up to a City Council as to whether or not to include them, rather than for the City Attorney to determine.
Public Comment
Councilmember McGehee provided a bench handout summarizing Minnesota pet shop laws and applicable links.
A packet of email comments was provided for the record as a bench handout, also attached hereto and made a part hereof. Those email comments were from Courtney Hogan, Government Affairs Specialist with the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council with a testimonial letter attached; Julie Watkin, Alisha Sickler, Sarah McNeal, Jennifer Swick; Diane Alshouse; Warde and Cindy Schwie; Robin Ray; Mary Chapman; Gail Wieberdink, Holley McCree; Candace and David Miller; Amy Swalley; Todd Lavanty, Rachael Rodriguez; Anne Geoghegan; JoAnn Barte; Curtis Broz, Jana Rieck; Karri Kerns, and Leola Rempel.
Mayor Roe thanked those submitted email comments, as well as those previously submitted as part of the record. Announcing that an updated draft ordinance had been prepared by staff based on that past input and discussion, Mayor Roe offered a final opportunity for public comment, while recognizing that this ordinance had general City Council support for its adoption.
Ruth Sorenson-Prokish, 1019 Shryer Ave. W
Ms. Sorenson-Prokish spoke in favor of the ordinance, opining that it reflected the values of Roseville as a humane community while also protecting both consumers and animals from the results of inhumane treatment.
Galen Mills, 3024 Pascal St.
Attending tonight at the urging of a friend to support passing this ordinance and as a thirty-year resident of Roseville, Mr. Mills anecdotally reviewed his personal experience with pet store dog purchases and adoption of pets prior to his knowledge of puppy mills, but now having personally been impacted as a family with their latest purchase. Mr. Mills stated his love for Roseville and asked that the City Council support this ordinance.
Dr. Karen Arras, Lexington Avenue, St. Paul (Como Park area)
As a shelter veterinarian, Dr. Arras provided that perspective of the physical and psychological damages to pets coming from puppy mills or large breeder facilities, specifically due to their lack of socialization with other pets at those facilities. Dr. Arris encouraged the city to end the sale of cats and dogs from pet stores, opining that this ordinance was a step in the right direction.
Dr. Lisa McCarger, Veterinarian, Minneapolis
Dr. McCarger expressed her excitement with the city’s introduction of this humane ordinance; and while in agreement with Dr. Arras’ comments, also touched on physical pet health issues beyond psychological and socialization issues, including internal parasites that could be transferred to humans.
Betsy Mitchell, 1480 Applewood Ct.
Having purchased a kitten from a big box retailer, Ms. Mitchell provided her anecdotal experience as a result and the apparent misrepresentation by the seller of the kitten to her, creating a sad situation for the pet and pet owner.
Christine Coughlin, MN State Director, The Humane Society of the United States, 2615 34th Avenue S, Mpls., MN (HSA)
In response to Councilmember McGehee’s comments related to several of the “whereas” of the draft ordinance, given past court challenges to this ordinance as presented and subsequently being upheld on constitutional grounds six times, Ms. Coughlin recommended that the language be retained as presented at the recommendation of their legal counsel having defended the ordinance. Ms. Coughlin expressed appreciation for the city’s systematic review and adoption of this ordinance.
Daniel Brady, Brooklyn Center
As a dog rescuer, Mr. Brady provided a brief update on the over 3,000 adult dogs trapped in MN breeding facilities and cages; and thanked the city for their consideration enacting this ordinance.
Kristen Smith, Retail Pet Store Owner from Blaine, MN
Ms. Smith asked that the city reconsider the model ordinances from the cities of Bloomington and Shakopee, MN rather than this ordinance banning sales in pet stores. Ms. Smith opined that those ordinance models would better address the specific problems being experienced in Roseville and identified with only one store versus completely banning the sale of puppies on a broader scale.
Steve Olson
Mr. Olson stated that he had been encouraged to attend tonight to share his personal anecdotal history in his family’s purchase of a rescue dog from a Roseville pet store that they were still trying to bring back to health after multiple trips to the veterinarian. Mr. Olson further noted that his research of the breeder where this particular dog had originated was originally located in Pennsylvania and after being forced to shut down, had then relocated to Iowa and was operating the same type of business model. Mr. Olson further reviewed apparent consideration by the pet store owner to make restitution of veterinary bills, but after submission of itemized bills from the veterinarian specifically related to direct costs from parasites, Mr. Olson reported that they had yet to receive restitution or any response to-date.
City Council Deliberation
After hearing public testimony, Councilmember McGehee stated her agreement to leave present language including the findings as presented other than for striking the end of the first sentence (line 28) as previously noted.
Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, adoption of an Ordinance (Attachment B) entitled, “An Ordinance Creating and Administrative Offense for the Sale of Dogs and Cats by a Retail Establishment;” amended as follows:
§ Striking the end of the sentence related to financial costs and taxpayer burden (lines 39 and 40);
§ Replace “affect” with “adversely impact” (line 48)
Councilmember Willmus stated his appreciation of the effort going into this ordinance and thanked the dozens of Roseville residents providing testimony. Councilmember Willmus stated his continued support for the adoption ordinance model as more humane and fitting for Roseville and ultimately for those animals involved. Councilmember Willmus stated his support of it from the onset and advised that he continued to support it.
Councilmember Laliberte also stated her support from the beginning, opining that this is a model fitting the values of Roseville that current conditions were not achieving. Recognizing that the city was not in a position to take on the inspection aspect and in consideration of the limitations and concerns about other inspection processes in place (e.g. United States Department of Agriculture), Councilmember Laliberte stated that this was the best alternative for Roseville and its residents.
Councilmember Etten asked his colleagues to consider discussion of lines 104-106 of Attachment B, opining that he found it unreasonable to require that overnight and on-site staffing be provided specific to cats, citing several area examples (e.g. Chuck & Dons and the Como Humane Society) based on his personal research.
Motion to Amend
Etten moved, Willmus seconded, striking lines 105-106 of the draft ordinance.
Roll Call (Amendment)
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Friendly Amendment
McGehee offered a friendly amendment to strike line 28 related to misleading tactics of pet stores in some cases; with the maker of the motion not accepting the friendly amendment.
Motion to Amend
McGehee moved to strike line 28 related to misleading tactics of pet stores in some cases. Due to lack of a second, Mayor Roe ruled the motion failed.
Specific to striking line 28, Councilmember Laliberte noted that it did not stipulate “every” pet store, but only noted “some cases.” Since it was her belief that the statement pertained in some instances, Councilmember Laliberte stated her preference to leave it as presented.
Councilmember Etten stated that he had been upset to learn the details about sourcing of animals at the Har Mar Pet Shop and his further research on breeders. While still of the belief that the ordinance was not addressing all of the concerns with USDA reports and emails and calls received about smells and the care of animals in that facility, Councilmember Etten stated that he would support this motion based on the reports on sourcing of animals and additional information provided tonight.
For a different reason than that of Councilmember Etten, Councilmember McGehee stated her support of the motion, noting her support all along, even though it may fall short of providing protection for other animals in the system (e.g. highly social birds and related breeding practices). Councilmember McGehee urged staff and the City Council to think about the humane treatment of those animals in Roseville as a similarly important issue; and to give consideration to enhancing this ordinance in the future to address any animal in the distribution channel. While this is a necessary step, Councilmember McGehee urged those residents in attendance tonight and all in the community to turn their attention to any evidence of similar conditions in Roseville stores for ordinance application and their protection as well.
Councilmember Laliberte agreed that this was a big and important step; but noted that it didn’t necessarily address all of the concerns she’d heard expressed in the community over the years; and therefore, agreed that there was more to do.
Mayor Roe spoke in support of the motion. Based on the comments brought to his attention in a variety of contexts related to this ordinance, Mayor Roe stated he had heard universal support expressed from a variety of backgrounds, indicating that the city was on the right track. While agreeing that there were other issues still needing to be addressed, Mayor Roe opined that the models provided from the Cities of Bloomington and Shakopee were considered by him to be more regulatory in nature beyond the parameters of resources in Roseville.
Roll Call (original Motion as Amended)
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Recess
Mayor Roe recessed the meeting at approximately 6:52 p.m., and reconvened at approximately 6:56 p.m.
c. Consider Text Amendments to City Code, Chapters 1009.07 and 1102.01 Pertaining to Developer Open House Meeting Requirements
As detailed in the RCA, City Planner Thomas Paschke summarized this request, advising that the recommendation was for a resolution allowing more flexibility than ordinance as this continued to evolve and allowing more specificity for any particular project.
In the RCA (line 172), Councilmember Etten questioned if the intent was in stipulating the time of a meeting or the minimum amount of time as two hours.
Mr. Paschke stated that the intent was to provide a general guide requiring a two hour open house that could be at a certain time, consist of more than one meeting, but overall for the duration of two hours at a minimum.
While agreeing with the concept of providing more flexibility in most areas and adjustments made accordingly, Councilmember Etten questioned if there should be more restrictive language than “should”.
Mr. Paschke noted that language didn’t dictate “shall” or “must,” and therefore from his perspective allowed the flexibility for staff to work with an applicant on an appropriate timeframe.
Mayor Roe opined that he found the language sufficiently flexible as written.
Mayor Roe noted that this didn’t apply to Conditional Uses (CU) and asked staff to remind the City Council why open houses only applied to Interim Uses (IU) and zoning changes at this time.
Mr. Paschke responded that the original City Council direction to staff when embarking on the open house requirement for different applications was that to apply similar requirements for a CU may create financial hardships for single-family residential or smaller business uses considering a CU application. Mr. Paschke noted this could include finding a location outside their home small business location in which to hold an open house, and potentially creating a financial and logistical burden.
Mayor Roe noted that this option could also be added as a CU requirement at a later date if determined preferable.
Mayor Roe suggested a technical change to Attachment A (lines 25 and 70) and references to “Please refer to” and rather stating “applicants shall refer to” or “should refer to” as more of a direct statement.
Councilmember Laliberte suggested starting at “open house meeting policy is a component of…”
Mayor Roe offered an opportunity for public comment at this time, with no one appearing for or against.
McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1520 (Attachment A) entitled, “An Ordinance Amending Roseville City Code, Chapters 1009.07 of Title 10 (Zoning Ordinance) and Chapter 1002.01.B of Title 11 (Subdivision Ordinance)” amended as follows:
§ Replace “Please refer to…” with “Applicants shall refer to…” (lines 25 and 70)
Councilmember McGehee thanked staff for resolving this process.
Mayor Roe also thanked staff, and in addition to addressing some of his concerns not originally included in language brought to the Planning Commission, expressed his appreciation for staff taking those comments into consideration. Overall, Mayor Roe opined that resulted in a better ordinance as presented and subsequently amended.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, enactment of Ordinance Summary No. 1520 (Attachment D entitled, “An Ordinance Summary Amending Roseville City Code, Chapters 1009.07 of Title 10 (Zoning Ordinance) and Chapter 1002.01.B of Title 11 (Subdivision Ordinance).”
Roll Call (Super Majority)
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Etten moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11399 (Attachment B) entitled, “A Resolution Creating an Open House and Public Hearing Notification Policy for the City of Roseville” as presented.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
d. Adopt an Interim Ordinance Prohibiting Requests for Residential Minor Subdivisions
As detailed in the RCA, Community Development Director Kari Collins summarized this request for new moratorium, clarifying that it was no intended as an extension of the previously adopted, six-month Interim Ordinance, as outlined in the RCA (lines 17 – 29). Due to unforeseen delays and recent selection and approval by the City Council of a consultant, Ms. Collins noted that additional time was necessary for a review of the city’s subdivision in whole; with additional language added to this new moratorium accordingly, in effect ceasing the original moratorium once this one goes into effect. Ms. Collins advised that an update was scheduled for the City Council at their next regularly scheduled March meeting.
At the request of Councilmember Willmus, Mayor Roe advised that the current moratorium had gone into effect September 18, 2016 for six months.
Councilmember Willmus stated that he had originally supported a moratorium to look at this without any intent that it would stretch out over a year. Councilmember Willmus opined that the ball had been in the city’s court over the last six months and had been dropped by the city. Stating his concern in possibly losing an entire construction season with this new moratorium, Councilmember Willmus stated that he was not in favor of extending the moratorium any longer.
Mayor Roe offered an opportunity for public comment at this time, with no one appearing for or against.
McGehee moved, Etten seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1521 (Attachment B) entitled, “An Interim Ordinance Temporarily Prohibiting Minor Subdivisions of Residential Property in the City of Roseville;” amended as follows:
§ Section 3: Effective Date and Duration (lines 46 – 52) “This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from March 19, 2017 and after its publication. It shall remain in effect through May 31, 2017 or until an ordinance is adopted, updating Title 11 of the city code, whichever is sooner
With additional issues recently brought up related to boundaries, drainage and tree preservation, Councilmember McGhee stated her interest in the broader review indicated in the first place.
Councilmember Etten addressed the concerns expressed by Councilmember Willmus and concurred with his frustration with this review lasting so long. From their administrative perspective, Councilmember Etten asked if staff was seeing interest in lot splits with having to advise residents to wait.
Ms. Collins responded that staff had advised some applicants that there was a moratorium in place until spring, deferring to City Planner Paschke and Senior Planner Lloyd, she advised that she wasn’t aware of a number of pending applications.
Mr. Paschke concurred with that statement, clarifying that having a moratorium in place didn’t preclude an applicant from pursuing the subdivision process, just not available under the minor subdivision ordinance.
Councilmember Willmus reiterated that enactment of this new moratorium would back applicants up to the end of August if subject to a sixty-day land use approval process. Councilmember Willmus noted that the intent wasn’t to put the word out that the City of Roseville was closed for business, but to simply halt things for the city to review rapidly without further delay. Therefore, Councilmember Willmus stated that he could not support the motion as presented.
Councilmember Etten agreed with those concerns, but stated that he would support the motion since the original issues had yet to be addressed.
Councilmember Laliberte agreed with her colleagues expressing her disappointment with the current status; but offered her support of the motion to avoid receipt of any applications with issues remaining unresolved.
Roll Call
Ayes: Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: Willmus.
Motion carried.
e. Consider Amendments to City Code, Chapter 314.05: 2017 Fee Schedule
City Planner Paschke reviewed highlighted revisions as noted in Attachment B and as detailed in the RCA. City Manager Trudgeon noted revisions for pet store requirements highlighted on page 7.
Mayor Roe offered an opportunity for public comment at this time, with no one appearing for or against.
McGehee moved, Etten seconded, enactment of Ordinance No. 1517 (Attachment A) entitled, “An Ordinance Amending Chapter 314.05, Fee Schedule, Adopting a Revised 2017 Fee Schedule;” as presented (Attachment B).
At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Councilmember Etten clarified that the pet store violation fees were rolling over twelve months for each violation and not reset for each calendar year; but further clarified that the violations could be revised by formal City Council action at any point in the future if so indicated.
Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of increasing the violation fees from those recommending by shifting each up by an additional $500 for each violation tier.
Motion to Amend
Willmus moved, Laliberte seconded, amendment to the motion as follows:
City of Roseville 2017 Fee Schedule (page 7)
§ 1st violation = $1,000
§ 2nd violation = $1,500
§ 3rd violation = $3,000
Councilmember McGehee opined that the proposed fees were sufficiently high without amendment.
Noting that some pets are quite expensive, Councilmember Etten spoke in support of the amended fine increases, opining it would make a big difference.
Mayor Roe spoke in support of the motion.
Roll Call (Amendment)
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Roll Call (Original Motion as Amended)
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
McGehee moved, Willmus seconded, enactment of Ordinance Summary No. 1517 (Attachment C) entitled, “An Ordinance Summary Amending Chapter 314.05, Fee Schedule, Adopting a Revised 2017 Fee Schedule.”
Roll Call (Super Majority)
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
f. Public Hearing to Consider Approval/Denial of an On-Sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor License for No Match, Inc., d/b/a Green Mill located at 1595 Highway 36, Suite 1010
Due to the relocation of the Green Mill Restaurant within the Rosedale Center, and as detailed in the RCA, Finance Director Chris Miller advised that it required transferring the license to the physical address of the restaurant, with separate procedural steps and associated public hearing required to do so. Mr. Miller advised that staff recommended approval of the transfer; and at the request of Councilmember Willmus, confirmed that there had been no alcohol compliance failures of this restaurant since its last renewal.
Mayor Roe opened and closed the public hearing at approximately 7:23 p.m. for the above-stated purpose, with no one appearing for or against.
Etten moved, McGehee seconded, approval of an On-Sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor License for No Match, Inc., d/b/a Green Mill, located at 1595 Highway 36, Suite 1010.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
g. Public Hearing to Consider Approval/Denial of an Off-Sale Liquor License to Target Corporation, d/b/a Target Store T2101
In reviewing the RCA, Finance Director Miller corrected a typographical error in recognizing the non-renewal of one of the city’s ten available liquor licenses by Love from Minnesota, not Taste of Minnesota; and making one license available.
Specific to Target Corporation, d/b/a Target Store T2101, Finance Director Miller advised that they currently held a 3.2 license; and had received no alcohol compliance violations within the last five years; with staff recommending approval of this request.
Given timing concerns and possibly reserving the license, Councilmember Willmus questioned Target Corporation’s intent to seek permits for a stand-alone facility for the sale of liquor, or seeking confirmation of their plans to do so and applicable timeframe.
Finance Director Miller reviewed requirements for such a facility; and without knowing Target’s final concept plans, confirmed that they would be required to submit them and demonstrate their seriousness in moving forward with their new business model versus simply reserving it “just in case.” At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Miller advised that the license would be effective for the duration of 2017; and if staff was not in receipt of something from Target Corporation in the next few months, they would seek further determination from them as to their seriousness and plans to be operational. Otherwise, Mr. Miller advised that there was no reason for the city to issue a license for 2017 if Target didn’t intent to be operational this year.
Mayor Roe opened the public hearing for this purpose at approximately 7:27 p.m.
Applicant Representative(s)
Jonathon Redburg, Target Senior Analyst for Licensing and
Drew Anderson, Target Store Manager at T2101
Mr. Redburg reviewed plans to take out the current café, and similar to other stores in Minnesota at which this was done, rehabilitate the store to facilitate requirements for separate liquor sales. Mr. Redburg noted the corporation’s excitement when finding an available license; and with the store’s 55-year history in Roseville, was eager to move forward as fast as possible. Mr. Redburg noted that they had waited to seek a building permit until the City Council’s decision as to approval of their license application.
When remodeling earlier this fall, and in response to Councilmember Laliberte’s comments about that recent remodeling of the café, Mr. Anderson advised that updates to the café had been limited at that time. Mr. Anderson likened the plans for remodeling for the liquor store to mirror those recently completed at the Midway Target Store.
Councilmember Laliberte expressed a cautionary noted concerning the many complaints she’d heard about the extensive time for Target’s last remodel and frustration expressed by their customers; which was duly noted by Mr. Anderson.
Mayor Roe closed the public hearing at approximately 7:30 p.m., with no one appearing for or against.
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of an Off-Sale Liquor License to Target Corporation, for their location at 1515 West County Road B.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
h. Appointments Members to Finance, Human Rights, Parks & Recreation, Planning, Police Civil Service, and Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commissions
Mayor Roe noted that twenty-five interviews had been conducted by the City Council of twenty-nine applications received, and expounded on the level of interest and breadth of experience represented by those applying. With only seven vacancies available, Mayor Roe expressed his hope that the majority not appointed tonight would seek other ways to become involved with and connect to the city.
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, appointment of Malcolm McRoberts to the Finance Commission for the term expiring March 31, 2018.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, appointment of Darrell Baggenstoss for the term expiring March 31, 2018 and appointment of Gregory Hoag for the term expiring March 31, 2020, to the Parks & Recreation Commission.
While recognizing that there were many good candidates, Councilmember McGehee disagreed with the proposed appointees, opining that she was interested in finding balance on some of these commissions, as indicated by her individual tally. She spoke of MS Misra bringing an environmental viewpoint and Mr. Wisher bringing attention to the need to provide opportunities for those with disabilities, both views which she felt were under represented on the Commission.
Councilmember Laliberte agreed with Councilmember McGehee’s comments related to balance on the commissions; and while supportive of candidate Misra’s background, encouraged her to seek different openings as noted by Mayor Roe in his opening remarks.
Mayor Roe noted that the tally didn’t include Candidate Lindberg due to having not been spelled correctly by Mayor Roe, but now corrected.
Councilmembers Willmus and Etten agreed that there were many great applicants.
Mayor Roe stated his support for the motion.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Laliberte moved, Willmus seconded, appointment of Tammi Ethridge for the term expiring March 31, 2018 and appointment of Peter Sparby for the term expiring March 31, 2020, to the Planning Commission.
Based on Candidate Sparby’s previous work with the Community Engagement Commission (CEC) on the community engagement part of the comprehensive plan and task force work with the Planning Commission, Councilmember Laliberte expressed her confidence that he would continue to bring that perspective to the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Etten agreed with Councilmember Laliberte’s statement, and stated his full support of the motion.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Laliberte moved, McGehee seconded, appointment of Randi Lundell to the Police Civil Service Commission for the term expiring March 31, 2020.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Etten moved, Willmus seconded, appointment of Nancy Misra to the Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commission for the term expiring March 31, 2020.
Councilmember Willmus noted Candidate Misra’s expression of strong interest in the PWETC at her interview.
Mayor Roe noted how providing a second choice on applications proved beneficial to the process.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Etten moved, McGehee seconded, appointment of Mankpondehou Etienne Djevi to the Human Rights Commission for the term expiring March 31, 2020.
Councilmember Willmus stated that he had some concern with appointments to the commission at this time without knowing potential changes in its scope, duty and function of the yet-to-be formed newly combined CEC/HRC commission. Councilmember Willmus also noted previous discussion of the City Council to allow attrition to formulate the combined group and final commissioner numbers. Councilmember Willmus asked his colleagues if this proposed appointment set up new commissioners ending up serving on a commission entirely different from what they though going in.
Councilmember Laliberte noted she had brought up the same concerns the last time the City Council discussed it. Councilmember Laliberte addressed the ongoing work of the City Council subcommittee (Mayor Roe and Councilmember Laliberte) and subsequent appointment of two representatives of the CEC and HRC respectively to help inform and identify the scope and duties of the combined group. In her recommended appointment of Candidate Sparby to the Planning Commission and leaving the CEC, Councilmember Laliberte assured her colleagues that she had taken that into consideration in seeking appointment of a candidate that would bring that background of volunteerism, outreach and community engagement into the picture; and therefore applied that to her selected candidates according based on their background and experience.
In her personal review of the vision statements of both the CEC and HRC, Councilmember McGehee stated that she had no problem bringing them together. Councilmember McGehee further stated that she had never been a proponent of removing a sitting commissioner, noting that there were nine Parks & Recreation Commissioners; and in combining the HRC and CEC, it would only create a ten-member commission if all decided to stay. Councilmember McGehee expressed her confidence that there was enough work to do; and therefore she had no problem appointing Candidate Djevi at this time, expressing further confidence that the merger would go smoothly.
Councilmember Etten stated his agreement with concerns in adding people to a commission with unknowns at this point; but given his perception of the depth and quality of candidates, opined that this opportunity should not be missed and if more spaces were available, expressed his interest in appointing more of those candidates who’d applied. Reiterating the consensus that this pool of candidates were very thoughtful and involved applicants, Councilmember Etten opined that it was important to provide the opportunity for at least one candidate; and if the result was a commission of ten, with Commissioner Sparby moving from the CEC to the Planning Commission, it would reduce the combined commission to nine, allowing for further review in the future. In a related comment, Councilmember Etten noted the work remaining for the City Council subcommittee and as a whole in providing thoughtful and clear direction to this combined CEC/HRC’s charge and not simply allow interpretation by commissioners to develop their own scope of duties.
Mayor Roe addressed the apparent difference of opinion of the City Council subcommittee at this time; and echoed some of the comments already made by his colleagues tonight. Mayor Roe reiterated the tremendous applicant pool and expressed confidence with the responses from candidates as to their interest in a merged HRC/CEC, they were agreeable. In the instance of Candidate Djevi, Mayor Roe noted this candidate’s personal background with human rights and the areas brought out during his interview that would also work in the community engagement area as well. Mayor Roe stated his concern in having candidates apply for a vacancy and not appointing anyone at all; but instead stated his preference to move forward and deal with transitional issues once the matter was settled by the subcommittee. Mayor Roe noted the City Council’s important responsibility to be clear on the scope, duties and functions of the combined group going forward, advising that both he and Councilmember Laliberte, and the selected representatives of the CEC and HRC were also well aware of the need to learn from past errors and since acknowledged since creating the CEC.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
8. 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 City Council Minutes – February 27
McGehee moved, Etten seconded, approval of the February 27, 2017 City Council Meeting Minutes as presented.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
9. Approve Consent Agenda
At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly highlighted those items being considered under the Consent Agenda; and as detailed in specific Requests for Council Action (RCA) and related attachments dated March 13, 2017.
a. Approve Payments
Councilmember McGehee expressed her personal frustration in having a counter in administration, separating staff from citizens, as running counter to the goal for openness and transparency in governance.
Councilmember Laliberte suggested waiting for completion of the space needs study before installation the service counter for the Administration/Finance Department.
City Manager Trudgeon clarified that the rationale in completing the counter at this time was as the last loop in securing entrances as had already been completed in other city hall locations. Mr. Trudgeon suggested moving ahead with the project at this time, opining that the study addressing city hall spaces and impacts to them should not have any impact.
While somewhat in agreement with that rationale, Councilmember Laliberte clarified that it was her understanding that the space need study would include a review of all departments and buildings for potential efficiencies or re-use options.
City Manager Trudgeon duly noted Councilmember Laliberte’s perception.
Mayor Roe advised that he didn’t interpret past City Council action to involve all aspects of the city campus, but to address storage needs and their relationship with the maintenance facility and License Center and to look at all possibilities within the city’s range of opportunities.
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of the following claims and payments as presented and detailed.
|
ACH Payments |
$1,330,577.51 |
|
84605-84860 |
1,313,222.17 |
|
TOTAL |
$2,845,799.68 |
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
b. Approval/Denial of a Temporary Gambling Permit, a Temporary Consumption and Display Permit, and three Temporary ON-Sale Liquor Licenses
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of business and other licenses and permits for terms as noted, pending successful background checks as applicable.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Laliberte, Etten, McGehee and Roe.
Nays: None.
c. Approve General Purchases and Sale of Surplus Items in Excess of $5,000
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of general purchases and contracts for services as noted in the RCA and Attachment A entitled, “2017 Summary of Scheduled CIP Items,” updated February 28, 2017.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Laliberte, Etten, McGehee and Roe.
Nays: None.
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of trade in/sale of surplus equipment as noted in the RCA.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
d. Receipt of Memorandum Related to Police Forfeiture Accounts
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, receipt of the annual summary of information related to forfeiture account activity via staff memorandum dated February 13, 2017 (Attachment A).
Councilmember McGehee thanked Mayor Roe for requesting these reports from Chief Mathwig, opining that the information provided is important to have.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
e. Approve Resolution Awarding Bid for Larpenteur Avenue Sidewalk
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11400 (Attachment A) entitled, “Resolution Awarding Bids for Project 16-07, Larpenteur Avenue Sidewalk Project;” awarding the bid to T. A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $409,018.00.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
f. Approve Amendments to the 2016 Budget
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, amendments to the year-end 2016 budget as presented (Attachment A).
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
g. Award Contract for Engineering Services to Complete the Infiltration and Inflow (I & I) Study
Councilmember made brief comments regarding some of the Consent Agenda items. She stated appreciation that the infiltration study would include the entire city and relayed that it was her understanding from staff that it would allow them to identify “hot spots” shat could allow us the more efficiently and effectively address I&I issues. .
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of a Standard Agreement for Professional Services (Attachment A) and award of engineering services contract to SEH, Inc. for engineering services to perform a Comprehensive Citywide Infiltration and Inflow Study, in an amount not to exceed $95,390.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
h. I-35W at Cleveland Avenue Interchange Project – Approve Final Payment
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11401 (Attachment A) entitled, “Final Contract Acceptance – I-35W at Cleveland Avenue Interchange Project;” accepting work completed, starting the one-year warranty period, and authorizing final payment to Forest Lake Contracting, in an amount not to exceed $9,617.57.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
i. Approve Resolution Awarding Bid for Railroad Crossing Improvements
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11402 (Attachment A) entitled, “Resolution Awarding Bids for Project 17-13 – Railroad Crossings Improvement Project;” awarding the contract to Park Construction Co. in an amount not to exceed $149,138.80,
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
j. Enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Perkins+Will for Consulting Services for the Rice and Larpenteur Area Visioning Plan and Enter into a Cooperative Funding Agreement with the Cities of St. Paul and Maplewood for Visioning Plan Fund Acknowledgement and Payment
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of a Standard Agreement for Professional Services (Attachment A) with Perkins+Will for consulting services for the Rice and Larpenteur Area Visioning Plan.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of a Cooperative Funding Agreement (Attachment B) with the Cities of St. Paul and Maplewood for the Rice Street and Larpenteur Avenue Gateway Area Visioning Plan Fund acknowledgment and payment.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
k. Approval of Oasis Pond Project Agreement
She also stated that we were fortunate in having the Watershed District provide most of the funding for the Oasis Pond clean up, but noted that the City had to install an aeration system in Bennett Lake to make it a healthy aquatic environment. She hoped that there would be more educational efforts to help reduce runoff phosphorus loading on our lakes and ponds.
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, approval of a Project Agreement with the Rice Creek Watershed District (Attachment A) for the Construction, Operation and Maintenance of The Oasis Pond Iron-Enhanced Sand Filter Project.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
10. Council & City Manager Communications, Reports, and Announcements
In addition to those scrolling electronically before tonight’s meeting, Mayor Roe re-announced the children’s winter clothing drive going through the end of March, with a donation box located at City Hall.
Councilmember Laliberte reported on her efforts with Bent Brewstillery in seeking a change to legislation to change current law status precluding any business making beer and distributing spirits from having a tap room, but instead only one or the other and affecting only one or two such businesses state-wide. Councilmember Laliberte reported that unfortunately neither the House nor Senate bills had made it through committee by last Friday’s deadline, and therefore would be deferred for next year.
11. Councilmember Initiated Future Agenda Items and Future Agenda Review
CLOSED SESSION MEETING
Mayor Roe announced that, in accordance with Minnesota State Statutes Chapter 13.D.03 and exceptions to Open Meeting Laws, he would entertain a motion to move into Closed Executive
Session for the purpose of discussing development of a potential offer for acquisition of property located at 2719 Lexington Avenue.
Etten moved, McGehee seconded, recessing the City Council meeting at approximately 8:05 p.m. and convening in Closed Executive Session, per State Statute.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Roe convened the City Council in Closed Executive Session at approximately8:07 p.m.
In addition to the Councilmembers, City Manager Trudgeon, City Attorney Gaughan and Finance Director Chris Miller were also present.
RECONVENE OPEN SESSION
At approximately 8:40 p.m., Laliberte moved, Etten seconded, adjourning the Closed Executive Session and reconvening in Open Session.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.
12. Adjourn
Willmus moved, Etten seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 8:41 p.m.
Roll Call
Ayes: Willmus, Etten, McGehee, Laliberte, and Roe.
Nays: None.