Roseville MN Homepage

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

City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

March 12, 2012


1.         Roll Call

Mayor Roe called to order the Roseville City Council regular meeting at approximately 6:00 pm and welcomed everyone. (Voting and Seating Order for March: Johnson; Pust; McGehee; Willmus; and Roe).  City Attorney Mark Gaughan was also present.  Mayor Roe announced that Councilmember Bob Willmus was excused due to vacation and Councilmember Johnson was excused due to ill health.


2.         Approve Agenda

McGehee moved, Pust seconded approval of the agenda was approved as presented as amended.


                        Roll Call

            Ayes: Pust; McGehee; and Roe.

            Nays: None.

Commission Interviews

Beginning at approximately 6:05 pm until approximately 7:45 pm, City Council members and applicable Commission Chairpersons interviewed applicants to various City Advisory Commissions. 


Applicants included: Nancy O’Brien (Ethics); Nolan Wall (Parks and Recreation); Austin Anderson (Parks and Recreation and Planning); Shannon Cunningham, Gerald Olsen, and David Pitt (Planning).


Mayor Roe recessed the commission interview portion of the meeting at approximately 7:45 pm and reconvened in regular session at approximately 8:02 pm.


3.         Public Comment

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


4.            Council Communications, Reports, Announcements and Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Report

Mayor Roe announced an upcoming community dialogue, sponsored jointly by the Human Rights Commissions of the Cities of Shoreview and Roseville, with various topics related to elder abuse.  Mayor Roe noted that the seminars were scheduled for Monday, March 19, 2012, and Monday, April 23, 2012 from 3:00 – 5:00 pm at the Shoreview Community Center.  Pre-registration is required for these free events, and light refreshments will be served.  To register, contact Tessa Melvin at Shoreview City Hall at 651/490-4613 or at for more information.


Mayor Roe announced the upcoming Roseville University, with seven (7) consecutive sessions scheduled from 6:30 – 9:00 pm and to begin on Thursday, April 12, 2012.  Mayor Roe advised that this seven (7) week free course (registration required) provided a fun, interactive and informative way for citizens to receive a first-hand look at City operations and departments, and encouraged sign-up at City Hall or via the City’s website.


5.         Recognitions, Donations, Communications


6.         Approve Minutes

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


a.            Approve Minutes of February 27, 2012 Meeting

Pust moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the minutes of the February 27, 2012 meeting as presented.


                                 Roll Call

         Ayes: Pust; McGehee; and Roe.

         Nays: None. 


7.            Approve Consent Agenda

At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Bill Malinen briefly reviewed those items being considered under the Consent Agenda.


a.            Approve Payments

Pust moved, Roe seconded, approval of the following claims and payments as presented.     


ACH Payments


65544 – 65661





                     Roll Call

         Ayes: Pust; McGehee; and Roe.

         Nays: None. 


b.            Approve Business and Other Licenses

          Pust moved, Roe seconded, approval of business license applications for the period of one (1) year, for the following applicants:



Type of License

Jimari Paige Brown at Massage Envy Roseville

2480 Fairview Avenue, Suite 120

Massage Therapist

LA Sisters, LLA; Har Mar Mall; 2100 N Snelling Avenue

Massage Therapy Establishment

Chun Liu, Jie Swanson at LA Sisters LLS; Har Mar Mall

Massage Therapist


                     Roll Call

         Ayes: Pust; McGehee; and Roe.

         Nays: None. 


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

Pust moved, Roe seconded, approval of the submitted list of general purchases and contracts for services presented in detail on the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated March 12, 2012.


                     Roll Call

         Ayes: Pust; McGehee; and Roe.

         Nays: None. 






Storm Sewer

Ess Brothers &
Sons, Inc.

Blanket P. O. for catch basins and manholes (replacing existing in accordance with PMP)



AAA Striping




d.            Award Contract for Engineering Services for an update to the City’s Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan

Pust moved, Roe seconded, approval of an engineering services contract to S. E. H., Inc. in an amount not to exceed $72,950 for engineering services for the Comprehensive Surface Water Manager Plan Update. 


City Manager Malinen noted that the budgeted amount for the update was $100,000; and that the contract included the base bid, as well as additional components for three (3) public meetings and three (3) technical advisory meetings during the course of plan development ($2,000 additional cost); and assistance with developing a web presence on the City’s website regarding protecting water resources ($1,000 additional cost).


                      Roll Call

         Ayes: Pust; McGehee; and Roe.

         Nays: None. 


e.            Certify Unpaid Utility and Other Charges to the Property Tax Rolls

Pust moved, Roe seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10972 (Attachment A) entitled, Resolution Directing the County Auditor to Levy Unpaid Water, Sewer and Other Charges for Payable 2013 or Beyond.”


                     Roll Call

         Ayes: Pust; McGehee; and Roe.

         Nays: None. 


g.            Authorization to Send Environmental Remediation Fund Letter of Support

Pust moved, Roe seconded, authorizing staff to send a letter to Roseville’s legislative delegation, signed by the Mayor on behalf of the Roseville City Council, urging their support for the continuation of the Environmental Response Fund (ERF) Program with the passage of House File 113 and Senate File 772.


                     Roll Call

         Ayes: Pust; McGehee; and Roe.

         Nays: None. 


Mayor Roe suggested that staff provide copies of the letter to legislative committee members (e.g. authors of the bills and committee chairpersons) as well.


8.            Consider Items Removed from Consent


f.             Receive Authorization to Apply for COPS Hiring Program (CHP) Grant

In recognizing previous unsuccessful applications for this funding by the Police Department, Councilmember McGehee questioned the amount of staff time required and whether this application was worthwhile.


City Manager Malinen noted that staff has gained some experience from previous applications and feedback; and opined that the effort was worthwhile.


Councilmember McGehee noted that the grant was specific to a commercial officer; however, she questioned if this fit the actual needs of a commercial officer for Roseville’s needs.


Mayor Roe suggested that Councilmember McGehee move to remove this item from the Consent agenda for further discussion.


McGehee moved, Pust seconded, removal of this item from the consent agenda for separate vote.


                     Roll Call

         Ayes: Pust; McGehee; and Roe.

         Nays: None.


Councilmember McGehee noted that it would be an ongoing problem if the grant funding was approved and an officer hired, but then having to pay their full salary after the terms of the grant had been met.  Instead, Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of a commercial officer funded in part by sources from commercial businesses.


Councilmember Pust clarified that the requested action was to allow the Police Department to apply for a COPS grant.


Mayor Roe supported the motivation of a hiring program to hire veterans, and noted advantages from their experience and training from direct or indirect military roles.  However, Mayor Roe noted that they still needed to be qualified to meet other requirements in the State of MN; and if the City determined that they were willing to continue supporting the position once grant funds had expired, the City Council then make that determination, following a successful grant application.


Councilmember McGehee concurred with Mayor Roe’s observations; however, she reiterated her concern in the amount of staff time required to prepare and submit a grant application.


Pust moved, Roe seconded, authorizing the Roseville Police Department to apply for funding through the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) under the COPS Hiring Program (CHP) to add one (1) new position of full-time commercial patrol officer to its roster.


                     Roll Call

         Ayes: Pust; and Roe.

         Nays: McGehee.

         Motion carried.      


12.         General Ordinances for Adoption


13.         Presentations


a.            League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT)

Several League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) informational items were provided as a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part hereof.


Three (3) representatives of the LMCIT were present at tonight’s meeting.

Assistant Administrator of the LMCIT Dan Greensweig, Senior Claims Officer Mark Rosso, and Underwriting Manager Liam Biever


Dan Greensweig, Assistant Administrator of the LMCIT

Mr. Greensweig thanked the City Council for their invitation, and advised that it was his intent to provide an overview of the LMCIT regarding claims; and answer any questioned of those functions for the City Council on a broad basis, while not addressing specific claims.


Mr. Greensweig’s presentation included a brief history of the LMCIT, established in 1980 and operating under a Joint Powers Agreement (JPC); providing a list of current board members; and the LMCIT organization itself with over 813 member cities and 361 other entities in that membership.  Mr. Greensweig reviewed the mission of the LMCIT, noting that in general, losses took away from the primary mission and focus of any city.


Mr. Greensweig reviewed property and liability premium rates and the LMCIT’s attempt to provide member cities with stability in their rates and stabilize premiums and claims; and help cities become successful in addressing their loss control efforts.  Mr. Greensweig reviewed dividends to-date for the City of Roseville; Workers’ Compensation losses from 2007-2010 consisting of approximately 38% of the City’s annual losses, followed by liability losses of approximately 31%, and property losses of approximately 19%.  Mr. Greensweig noted that the largest areas of loss for most member cities were in Police Department claims (26%), followed by land use claims (21%) and sewer back-up claims (11%).


Mr. Greensweig reviewed the LMCIT’s strategic approach to loss control in researching claim data to determine where losses were occurring and which of those losses were preventable; what needed to change (e.g. practices, attitudes, documents, or behaviors); and systematic approaches to define who needed help, what they needed, and how best the LMCIT could deliver that help most effectively.


Mr. Greensweig reviewed loss control initiatives of the LMCIT, with the addition of a retired sheriff on LMCIT staff as a public safety loss control position to address police department areas of improvement to reduce risk; a blanket membership for member cities in the Minnesota Safety Council; land use incentives to reduce the current $3 million spent annually in litigation; and PATROL, an on-line training service for police officer that is POST-Board accredited and mandated for officers, in which Roseville is a participant.


Mr. Greensweig reviewed other opportunities for loss control through periodic training workshops, research by the LMCIT’s various departments and staff attorneys for member cities, and on-line training options.


Regarding claims, Mr. Greensweig reviewed the LMCIT’s philosophy that its obligation was to pay what is owed, while protecting public funds from frivolous or unsubstantiated claims.  Mr. Greensweig noted that the LMCIT was a self-insurance pool of cities, not a for-profit business, and felt its duty to be responsive to member cities as well as claimants.


Specific to sewer claims, of current concern to the City, Mr. Greensweig noted that approximately 550 back-up claims were filed annually with the LMCIT, with approximately 1/3 of those paid, and the other 2/3 denied.  When denied, Mr. Greensweig advised that the determination for those denials by the LMCIT were seldom if ever overturned in the courts.  Mr. Greensweig noted that the LMCIT was confident of where its and member cities obligations lay and where they ended; with the LCMIT paying on those for which they are responsible.


Mr. Greensweig reviewed how negligence and that obligation are determined through four (4) elements: duty of care, breach of duty of care, damage, and proximate cause.  Mr. Greensweig reviewed “discretionary immunity” based on MN Statute, Chapter 466.03, subd. 6, and why discretionary immunity existed.  Mr. Greensweig advised that this immunity allowed decisions to be made locally, not by the court system, allowed city officials to make decisions and exercise judgment or discretion and prioritize resources, and weight competing factors: social, political, economic and safety considerations.


Discussion among LMCIT representatives and City Councilmembers included clarification of one of the handouts on “no-fault back-up sewer coverage, which the City of Roseville does not presently have and for which certain criteria must be met for a member city to be eligible.


At the request of Councilmember Pust, Mr. Rosso reviewed some of the types of eligibility criteria, including claims history, maintenance and inspection records, past claims and city response to address those claims, and availability of staff on cal to respond 24/7 to lift station issues.


Councilmember Pust requested that the LMCIT provide an analysis as to whether the City of Roseville would qualify for this type of coverage.


Mayor Roe asked that City Manager Malinen provide, from a City perspective, why the City of Roseville has not pursued this no-fault coverage.


Historically, City Manager Malinen advised that the coverage had been analyzed, but more recent analyses based on the City’s deductable coverage indicated that it was not a good use of City resourced.


Discussion ensued among LMCIT representatives, City Manager Malinen and Councilmembers on the City’s current deductable compared to annual aggregate caps, standard deductibles, and actual value to the City in no-fault coverage.


With Mayor Roe opining that the City Council needed to better understand the options before making an informed decision, City Manager Malinen advised that staff would forward some of the past analyses from previous City Council information.


Councilmember McGehee addressed weather issues, based on her research and data currently used by the National Weather Service dating only back to 1961.  Councilmember McGehee opined that weather patterns had changed significantly; and questioned impacts in the aggregate for claims and the City’s liability.  Councilmember McGehee asked for average claims paid for sewer back-ups.


Mr. Biever advised that, while each case varied, an average claim for clean-up of sewer water would be several thousand dollars, but total loss would depend on whether or not a basement was finished, furnishings, sheetrock damage, etc.


At the request of Councilmember McGehee on the aggregate limit under the LMCIT’s no-fault sewer program and total claims or pro rating of claims per loss or per incident, Mr. Rosso advised that he would research that information and report back to the City Council through City Manager Malinen.


Mayor Roe thanked LMCIT representatives for their presentation and expressed his anticipation in their follow-up to questions of the City Council.


14.         Public Hearings


15.         Business Items (Action Items)


16.         Business Items – Presentations/Discussions


a.         Discuss Annual Disclosure Filings

As detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated March 12, 2012, and the Code of Ethics (Attachment A), City Manager Malinen advised that part of the charge in Section 6 of the Code of Ethics required him to report to the City Council the names of advisory board commissioners who had failed to file a Disclosure of Financial Interest.  Mr. Malinen reviewed the follow-up by staff in notifying all parties.


Discussion included no sanction specifically outlined in the current Code of Ethics; rationale provided by those individuals yet to file, with only one (1) of the (3) retiring as a commissioner as of March 31, 2012, but the other two (2) still serving in their various capacities.


At the request of the City Council, City Manager Malinen advised that the following had failed to submit their reports:

David Singleton, Human Rights Commission

          Kelly Quam, Housing and Redevelopment Authority

          James Campbell, Civil Service Commission (term expires 3/31/12)


At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen advised that there was no Police Civil Service Commission meeting scheduled between now and the end of Mr. Campbell’s term.


Concerned with the level of culpability of individual commissioners and their rational in not filing, Councilmember Pust requested that City Manager Malinen review the specific types of contact by staff with these individuals, via letter, e-mail and personal phone call, which he reiterated.  Before being able to consider what action to take, Councilmember Pust advised that she needed more information from those individuals.


Mayor Roe noted the differences in appointment to the HRA by Mayor; and advised he would need to review State Statutes and HRA by-laws to determine the process proscribed for sanctions.  Regarding failure for filing of other commissioners, Mayor Roe questioned what was appropriate for disciplinary action based on the silence of the Ethics Code specific to this failure.


City Manager Malinen opined that on the part of staff, they had been diligent in giving the individuals advanced notice of their obligations, as well as subsequent staff follow-up to remind them of their responsibilities and the date for them to comply.


Councilmember McGehee suggested that the Ethics Commission may need to provide additional information and a process for the City Council to handle this situation.


Councilmember Pust opined that she was not prepared to assume that the individuals were refusing to comply; but if that was the case, that would dictate the City Council’s code of follow-through; however, she further opined that such information was needed to confirm individual rationale in not filing, or if there was any confusion of those individuals in thinking they had filed.


City Manager Malinen opined that based on staff contact to-date, none of the individuals had filed to staff’s knowledge.


Councilmember Pust opined that circumstances were different if individuals refused to file versus they had yet to get it done.


Mayor Roe questioned the preferred action of the City Council and whether a new deadline should  apply.


Since there is nothing written as a sanction in the Ethics Code, Councilmember Pust suggested that staff pursue individual explanations from those individuals between now and future action.


Mayor Roe concurred, suggesting staff to add this as a action item on the March 26, 2012 City Council business agenda, with individuals required by then to either file by then or submit their rationale for not doing so.  Mayor Roe suggested that Mr. Campbell had a legitimate reason for not filing even though that may preclude him from certain activities relative to police service.  Mayor Roe suggested that the City Council further review the current Ethics Code and discuss how to move forward based on the apparently glaringly absent sanction.


At the request of Councilmember Pust as to whether this has been tracked in the past, City Manager Malinen advised that, while staff may have been aware of tardy compliance in the past, this was the first time he was reporting to the City Council in an effort for staff to comply with all City Codes.


City Attorney Mark Gaughan, in his review of the Ethics Code, advised that, even though no sanctions were laid out, this may have been intentional to allow more flexibility for the City Council in addressing failures, since failure to file was clearly stated as a violation in code.  Mr. Gaughan reviewed the process for City Manager or City Attorney follow-up on any violations to be reported to the Ethics Commission, and their subsequent submittal of their findings and recommendations to the City Council for action on any ethics violation.  Mr. Gaughan therefore noted that a process was in place, most likely intentionally left open to allow for a broad discussion and recommendation by the Ethics Commission for City Council action.  Simply because no sanction was set forth, Mr. Gaughan reiterated that this allowed for discretion after the process played out.


After further discussion on the process, Mayor Roe opined that tonight’s discussion alone, along with the threat of a complaint filed with the Ethics Commission, may serve to resolve the issue of tardiness itself.


Mayor Roe suggested staff to provide written communication to commissioners, with a phone follow-up deadline, or staff would initiate an Ethics complaint.  Mayor Roe noted that this follow-up was taking up a considerable amount of staff time, and needed resolution.


Councilmember Pust sought assurance that a person-to-person contact be made


McGehee moved, Roe seconded, to direct staff to contact Mr. Singleton and Ms. Quam, excluding Mr. Campbell due to his impending term expiration, by written and e-mail format, with a deadline for confirming that filing by the end of business on March 24, 2012; and if there was no compliance at that time, an Ethics complaint would be filed with the City Attorney.


                     Roll Call

         Ayes: Pust; McGehee; and Roe.

         Nays: None. 


With Mayor Roe concurring, City Manager Malinen suggested that future discussions be held on whether or not to charge the Ethics Commission with potential revision to City Code to provide clear and specific sanctions in this type of situation.


b.         Discuss Performance Management Program

Finance Director Chris Miller briefly summarized staff’s proposal to tie recent initiatives into a comprehensive Performance Management Program (PMP), as detailed in the RCA dated March 12, 2012.  Mr. Miller opined that such a formal PMP would serve to demonstrate the commitment of the City Council to effective decision-making and ensuring that allocation of resources are aligned with desired outcomes from year-to-year, no matter if there are changes in staff and/or City Councilmembers.


Mr. Miller referenced the first ten (10) pages of Attachment A that provided a framework and program specifics for state and local government; and with the  City Council’s direction, offered for staff to move forward in developing a Roseville-specific PMP.


In general, Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of the PMP process; however, she noted the need for a commitment from a budget perspective, the need to understand the sequential nature of the process, and the key in evaluating outcomes based on citizen input of problem areas or areas of concern, and subsequent follow-up to determine whether improvements are being made in those areas of discontent.


Councilmember Pust clarified her understanding that staff would take this plan and the initiatives to-date and put them together as a Roseville-specific plan.


Mr. Miller concurred with that understanding, provided the City Council so directed; with staff then committing to systematically completing the PMP, and addressing long-term goals based on a biennial citizen survey or establishing an appropriate cycle.


Since only three (3) of the five (5) Councilmembers were present at tonight’s meeting, Councilmember Pust expressed concern in providing that direction without further discussion of the entire body.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Councilmember Pust confirmed that she was interested in continuing discussion of such a program.


Mayor Roe offered his positive interest in continuing discussions, while recognizing that this was only a preliminary template, and the City Council majority  and staff would be involved in creating the end product that would be Roseville-specific.


At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Miller noted conversations to-date between him and Department Heads had indicated their support of such an approach.  Mr. Miller advised that he had held discussions with the supervisors in his department, and understood that other Department Heads were doing so in their functions as well.  Mr. Miller noted that this was one of the steps in the cycle, getting organized and committed to proceed, noting that if departments saw the benefits, their buy-in would be that much stronger.


Mayor Roe, in reading the documents, opined that measurement was key to him in being of value in addressing the organizational culture and measurements of performance.  Mayor Roe noted that ongoing decision-making needed to support the end goals, and tie back to the outcomes or aspirations, in accordance with the Imagine Roseville 2025 community visioning process.  While surveys are part of performance measurement, Mayor Roe opined that, in terms of stakeholder input, citizen involvement needed to be more active and participatory beyond a citizen survey.


Councilmember McGehee referenced page 4 of the document as being important in the process.  In referencing page 45, and the definition of gain sharing, Councilmember McGehee opined that the City Council had not done very well at that to-date.


Mayor Roe noted the need to provide any additional staff training indicated that may provide better understanding of the technical aspects of measurement at that staff level.


City Manager Malinen noted that many of the pieces had been done over the last five (5) years at different times, thanks to Mr. Miller, and that all the pieces are in place to develop a comprehensive, integrated plan in order to pursue that continuous improvement that the City Council and staff were striving for on a daily basis.


14.       City Manager Future Agenda Review

City Manager Malinen reviewed upcoming agenda items.


Discussion included future presentations on fiscal disparities, availability of a bi-partisan presentation by the Department of Revenue; timing and incorporation of the City Manager goals with the City Council’s work plan/strategic plan; and tentative scheduling of the Walmart and Roseville Properties Preliminary Plat at the March 26, 2012 regular meeting.


At the request of Mayor Roe in reformatting City Council meetings to provide work sessions on a more regular basis and based on strategic planning discussions, City Manager Malinen advised that staff would be discussing scheduling of business and work session items at their meeting this coming Wednesday, March 14, 2012, and would then advise Councilmembers of heir recommendations.


15.         Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings


16.         Adjourn

Pust moved, McGehee seconded adjournment of the meeting at approximately 9:44 pm.       

  1. Roseville MN Homepage

Contact Us

  1. Roseville City Hall

  2. 2660 Civic Center Drive

  3. Roseville, MN 55113

  4. Monday - Friday
    8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

  5. Phone: 651-792-7000

  6. Email Us

Arrow Left Arrow Right
Slideshow Left Arrow Slideshow Right Arrow