View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
Council Meeting Minutes
October 19, 2015
1. Roll Call
Mayor Roe called
the meeting to order at approximately 6:00 p.m. Voting and Seating Order:
Willmus, Laliberte, Etten, McGehee and Roe. City Manager Patrick Trudgeon and
City Attorney Mark Gaughan were also present.
2. Pledge of
3. Approve Agenda
As noted by
Mayor Roe, an amended agenda for tonight's meeting was provided as a bench
handout to include Budget Item 13.b entitled, "Continue Discussions on the 2016
Budget & Tax Levy."
McGehee seconded, approval of the agenda as presented.
Laliberte, Etten, McGehee and Roe.
4. Public Comment
Mayor Roe called
for public comment by members of the audience on any non-agenda items.
Kathy Ramundt, 1161 Laurie Road
announcement at the previous City Council meeting, Ms. Ramundt advised that the
October 25, 2015 "Do Good Roseville" Idea Exchange location had been changed
from Autumn Grove to Lexington Park, with hours from 1:00 - 3:00 p.m. Also,
Ms. Ramundt reported that based on the feedback and comments she'd received at
that meeting, a website was not available to promote this type of activities
and events, as well as a page to be added showcasing local causes for future
suggestion of Councilmember Willmus, Ms. Ramundt reported she would be meeting
with representatives of the I.S.D. #623 to coordinate clothing drives and
discuss other areas of common interest.
Communications, Reports, and Announcements
Roe announced the availability of flu shots, with free hearing, eye, and blood
pressure checks at City Hall, and fees for flu shots and mists, with additional
information available at City Hall. Mayor Roe also noted an upcoming free
community workshop at the library sponsored by the Roseville Housing &
Redevelopment Authority at the Ramsey County Library-Roseville Branch offering
free guided assistance for fixing various household items.
Mayor Roe announced November Roseville University classes, the last of the 2015
sessions focusing on the Community Development Department, with the classes
free but requiring registration at City Hall.
Mayor Roe reported on provided updates from the North Suburban Cable Commission
and their recommendation to the nine member cities to approve a second cable
franchise agreement with Century Link, with a public hearing scheduled to
consider the City of Roseville's draft CenturyLink franchise ordinance at the
City Council meeting on November 9, 2015.
Donations and Communications
7. Approve Minutes
Approve Consent Agenda
Consider Items Removed from Consent
General Ordinances for Adoption
Continue Discussions on the 2016 Capital Improvement Plan
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Chris Miller provided a brief overview of the
2016 capital improvement plan (CIP) as detailed in the Request for Council
Action (RCA) dated October 19, 2015. Mr. Miller reviewed the material, noting
new information and trends through September 30, 2015, projected by staff since
the last discussion with the City Council. In the 20-year CIP schedules, Mr.
Miller noted that this information shifted timing of the schedule, but did not
change the total impact or needed funding level.
reviewed graphs for three specific CIP funds: General Facilities Replacement,
Pavement Management and Park Improvement as detailed in the RCA, both current
and revised as noted. As noted on page 1 of the RCA(lines 19 - 29), Mr. Miller
advised that staff was recommending-- changes to the CIP in order to shore up
those funds, and effectively reduce the 2016 City Manager recommended budget by
$335,000 without impacting the 2016 Tax Levy due to the amortization of CIP
funding over twenty years. Mr. Miller advised that Department Heads were in
tonight's audience to respond to questions or provide additional information at
the City Council's discretion. Mr. Miller sought feedback on any lingering
questions or unmet information needs they desired from staff before finalizing
budget information for presentation at the November 30, 2015 public hearing.
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Mr. Miller expounded on each of the six items recommended by
staff: 3 new items and 3 transfers as noted.
In staff's recommendation
to defer this item from 2016 to 2017, Mr. Miller stated that this item was not
as time-sensitive as other items; and would involve the potential hiring of a
Patrick Trudgeon concurred, advising that the consultant would be tasked with
reviewing existing geothermal systems already in place to determine if there
were any additional energy savings to be had as well as determining if the
system was operating as originally intended.
At the request
of Councilmember McGehee, City Manager Trudgeon advised that solar energy could
be part of that analysis to determine if it could be inter-linked; with solar
currently under consideration for the roof of the skating center; and would be
dependent on timing and overall operations that the consultant's expertise
could address in more detail.
recommendation to defer this item from 2016 to 2018, Mr. Miller reported that
it was based on its current condition.
Since the Zamboni
was replaced in 2015, Mr. Miller advised that this was inadvertently in the
2016 schedule and should be moved to 2025.
clarified that the three recommended transfers represented a one-time shift
given current trending, and with the goal of boosting funding for facilities
experiencing more radical funding challenges.
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miler clarified the graphs - current and revised - and advised that given a number of moving pieces, the graphs showing revised
funding level projections represented more than just those six staff recommendations,
but also needed to include City Council conversations regarding repurposing
funds for debt service and levies coming offline as opportunities arise.
Mayor Roe noted
the revised graphs including proposed recommendations certainly served to bring
those funds closer to financial sustainability and put them on much more solid
ground, while challenges remained. As an example, Mayor Roe noted the OVAL
refrigeration systems, which may require seeking outside funding for sharing
those costs, and depending on the success of those efforts, would also impact
sustainability. With the OVAL refrigeration system currently scheduled for 2020,
Mayor Roe noted bonding through legislative action may be one source of
responded that this would be one of the policy decisions for the City Council,
and even though its replacement was 20 years out, it was good to plan ahead and
be prudent in proactively addressing that needed replacement.
transfers on page 1 of the RCA, Councilmember Willmus asked if those were
coming about as a result of freeing up equipment not needed in the future.
confirmed that was the result as reflected; and as an example noted the $100,000
savings in specialized equipment no longer needed with the City Council's
discontinuation of the annual curbside leaf pick-up program.
Management Fund (PMP)
Director Miller advised that the graphs presented from "current" to "revised" status repurposing of the 2016 debt levy that had been incorporated in the City
Manager recommended budget as preliminarily adopted by the City Council in
Even with that
adjustment in the PMP, Mr. Miller noted that there remained long-term deficit
needs requiring management by future City Councils to address future funding
needs. Mr. Miller noted that while work remained to be done, the recommendations
of staff would go a long way toward financial sustainability.
For the benefit
of the listening audience, Mayor Roe reviewed past City Council action and
original intent in establishing an endowment for PMP purposes with
approximately $10 to $12 million maintained at that level, using interest
earnings and Minnesota State Aid (MSA) monies for annual street projects and
maintenance. Mayor Roe asked Finance Director Miller to explain what had
occurred in that fund over the years.
Director Miller advised that in the past, between $700,000 to $800,000 in
annual interest earnings had been sufficient from this large endowment to fund
needed annual projects and maintenance for the PMP. However, with current interest
rates, which he didn't see changing anytime soon based on economic realities
the nation was facing, had been reduced to approximately $200,000 in annual
interest earnings for the PMP. Mr. Miller opined that he didn't see the low
interest rate environment changing dramatically in the foreseeable future. Mr.
Miller further noted that the MSA allotment has remained stagnant and not
growing as it did at one point, thus not going as far as it used to while the
cost of projects and maintenance continued to rise. Mr. Miller noted that this
created a funding challenge for the annual PMP, a dynamic that was not in
evidence 6-8- years ago.
Mayor Roe noted
that due to this endowment fund and use of interest earnings, property owners
in Roseville had not been assessed in any significant degree for street
projects and improvements, making the City's assessment rate low compared to
concurred, noting preliminary discussions by the City Council over the last few
years to determine if the assessment policy was still appropriate in today's
construction and economic climate.
McGehee noted that the PMP endowment fund had been advertised to the community
as a fund that would be maintained and questioned the extent of the MSA
reduction or cost of maintenance/street replacements and their net effect.
advised that the net effect was the additional cost of street replacement
relative to a stagnant MSA fund if compared in the past and then again over the
last 7-8 years. Without hazarding a guess, Mr. Miller deferred to Public Works
Director Mark Culver for any detailed comparisons that could be provided at a
later date once researched by staff based on when the PMP was initiated in approximately
1987 as a dedicated levy was established for the PMP endowment.
this endowment had been a significant hit for taxpayers to support,
Councilmember McGehee asked staff for more information on what it would look
like for residents to have their streets reconstructed without that endowment
in place, and how significant that hardship would be; especially recognizing
that a new PMP replacement cycle would be coming up soon.
Mayor Roe noted
that the policy for this PMP fund had been recently revised as recommended by
the Finance Commission, to retain it at a level between $8 and $12 million.
noted that this was the recommendation, but it was not yet reflected in the
graphs presented tonight.
Mayor Roe noted
the need for a City Council decision by 2025 given the challenges already being
experienced in MSA and interest earnings to the PMP fund.
Improvement Fund (PIF)
the current versus revised funding forecast, Mr. Miller noted the City Council
discussions to-date to dedicate new tax levy dollars to strengthen the PIF and
to address the surges as shown. Mr. Miller noted that while the long-term
projections looked better, there were still some timing issues to address to
cash flow major improvements, adjust their timing, find additional revenue, or
not replace those CIP items at the end of their useful life. Mr. Miller
advised that staff could run sensitivity scenarios for various timing replacements,
but suggested having City and Park staff weigh in on policy implications for
operational impacts in deferring any of those CIP items over the next 5-10
advised that both the Finance and Parks & Recreation Commissions had
discussed use of the Park Dedication Fund balance to help out the situation,
but deferred further comment on the status of those discussions to City Manager
Trudgeon. However, Mr. Miller noted the need to balance the leeway in using
those funds with the City Attorney's previous caution on how and where those
funds could be used.
Trudgeon reported that a good discussion had been held with the Finance and
Parks & Recreation Commissions on retaining a minimum balance in the Park
Dedication Fund. Mr. Trudgeon advised that the Parks & Recreation
Commission was scheduled for a joint meeting with the City Council in November
of 2015 and would report on those discussions, including the Park Dedication
Fund and the Golf Course.
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Miler reported that the current Park Dedication
Fund balance, including the recent Owasso Field transaction, was approximately
$1 million. Without expenditure timing changes, as noted by Mayor Roe, Mr.
Miller concurred that the PIF was not brought to sustainability even if all
Park Dedication funds were applied and continued to run a negative. However,
Mr. Miller noted that part of that was due to the front-ended deficit included
for the purpose of educating and keeping everyone aware of the deficit, and
alerting the public and future City Council's to sustainability issues
requiring further discussion.
suggested that it might be helpful - between now and the December
decision-making for the 2016 budget and tax levy - for staff to come forward
with several recommended scenarios. For the purpose of projections, Mayor Roe
stated he was more comfortable with having a plan in place closer to staying
above "zero" and understood the implications that created. Mayor Roe suggested
it would be helpful to have staff and advisory commission input on those
McGehee agreed with Mayor Roe, noting that in her discussions earlier today
with Finance Director Miller, she had noted the difficulty in addressing
sustainability from an abstract versus a more realistic view including the fine
detail. Councilmember McGehee stated that information as requested by Mayor
Roe was necessary and asked that a combined effort by the Finance and Parks
& Recreation Commissions and staff should lay out at least the details of
what's involved beyond graphics.
Mayor Roe noted
that it would be nice to have those details to allow an exercise in defining
the dollars, but that analysis also needed to address impacts to programs,
services, and facilities.
McGehee noted the expertise of the Finance Commission in providing those
various scenarios, and appreciated them providing options for City Council
objection, Mayor Roe asked staff to provide that information to the City
Council prior to final CIP approval.
Etten expressed interest in creating a scenario that would also put these
things on the front burner, not just to further defer timing of the CIP items.
Mayor Roe noted
the challenges ahead for this and future City Councils in making some tough
decisions and whether they were willing to adopt those changes or put them
off. However, Mayor Roe reiterated the need for the City Council to understand
the position in making those decisions based on current and future revisions,
and the implications involved. Overall, Mayor Roe noted the goal was to
maintain funding and not move further in the negative realm as that didn't help
future sustainability; and addressed the need to retain a fund balance in case
something unforeseen occurs that could move the fund further into the negative.
Etten, with agreement by Councilmembers Willmus and Laliberte, spoke in support
of several scenarios being presented, recognizing some may be more painful than
Laliberte noted the need for this ongoing and periodic review to avoid a
situation where previous recommendations were followed on a continuing basis,
and without addressing the ever-growing operating budget. By not addressing
these issues, Councilmember Laliberte opined that it would only serve to defer
those difficult decisions.
Mayor Roe noted
the rationale in concentrating on these three funds, based on them having the
greatest funding deficit; with others addressed previously and not having as
much of an issue.
Continue Discussions on the 2016 Budget & Tax Levy
At the request
of Mayor Roe, Finance Director Chris Miller, as detailed in the Request for
Council Action (RCA) dated October 19, 2015, reported on new information and
trends through September 30, 2015, projected by staff since the last discussion
with the City Council. Mr. Miller clarified that previous discussions and
direction from the City Council to staff had been incorporated in this information
as well; and had recognized that there remained several larger pieces requiring
additional discussion as part of the final budget and tax levy.
reviewed the projected 2015 budget savings in various funds and identified
potential operational savings to carry forward and offset future budgetary
impacts as detailed in the RCA. Mr. Miller further addressed trending to-date
in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and Employment Cost Index (ECI) used as
guidelines per City Council policy to establishing annual non-union employee
cost-of-living-adjustments (COLA). Mr. Miller cautioned that these are trends,
and while weather-related or overtime may impact cost savings before year-end,
staff felt confident in projecting these potential positive revenue situations.
provided specifics and projected cost savings in the General, Recreation,
Communications, and License Center Fund and potential carryover from each fund.
Specific to the
Communications Fund, Mayor Roe noted that based on ongoing cable commission
discussions and the pending status of the Comcast Franchise Agreement renewal,
this fund may not be as lucrative as in past years; with some of that money
possibly shifting over to the cable access entity for their operational needs.
Therefore, Mayor Roe recommended that a healthy fund balance remain until
future financing was finalized that may not represent the same revenue stream.
License Center Fund, Mr. Miller advised that based on 2016 programming as
approved by the City Council's preliminary budget and levy, additional
discussion may be required in 2017 as to whether it could continue its current
business plan in funding the City's Information Technology department. Mr. Miller
noted that the License Center was addressing mandated changes requiring
additional personal without even considering additional marketing to solicit
title transfer and passport business. Mr. Miller noted that this would require
City Council policy discussions for budget years 2018 and beyond as to
sustaining funding for other City operating areas.
analyses by staff to-date, Mr. Miller advised that the 2016 City Manager recommended
budget - as adjusted - would represent a reduction of $335,000 from the
preliminary budget as adopted on September 14, 2015.
the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and Employment Cost Index (ECI) Mr. Miller noted
that the City Manager recommended budget had included an across-the-board 2%
COLA for union or non-unions employees, but advised that not all city contracts
had yet been settled. Mr. Miller further reported that some peer communities
were settling at more than 2%.
Finance Director Miller's comments, City Manager Trudgeon referenced the
indices, and noting that peer communities are ranging between a minimum 2% to
2.5% COLA for non-union employees, he supported a 2% COLA for Roseville City
employees as a fair adjustment.
At the request
of Councilmember McGehee, City Manager Trudgeon reported on remaining union
contracts yet to be settled and depending on negotiations in process.
Preliminary Budget and Tax Levy
previous discussions and to continue transparency efforts, Finance Director
Miller reviewed new positions included in budget projections. Mr. Miller noted
that the tax levy impact was only $5,000 as the remainder of the proposed
positions would be funded by fees or other funding sources, including a significant
amount of non-local funding. The new positions were listed in the RCA, page 6,
lines 138 - 145.
asked that the City Council alert staff now before the final budget is
presented to the public and the City Council, that they provide staff with any
additional feedback or present additional information requests now in order to
guide discussions and recommendations between now and then.
Trudgeon concurred, noting that the attempt was made to leverage non-levy
dollars to make the new positions happen and minimize impact on the tax levy.
McGehee requested additional information on the Part-Time Park Building
Scheduler and further analysis based on current staff performing those
scheduling duties, comparison information on past and increased use of park
facilities by residents and non-residents, and fee disparities for those two
groups. Councilmember McGehee stated her concern was that Roseville residents
are being asked to provide an unfair amount of subsidy for non-resident use of
buildings while those non-residents also do not pay city taxes that go toward
upkeep and maintenance, suggesting the non-resident fees may need to be
benefit of that additional analysis, City Manager Trudgeon preliminarily
reported that the use of park buildings continued to be busy; and while a
report was planned year-end, staff could report now on current trends, depending
on what information was being requested (e.g. overhead and maintenance). Mr.
Trudgeon noted that the position would pay for itself through providing
improved rental scheduling and supervision; but opined with that better
management revenue could also be increased. Mr. Trudgeon offered to provide a
breakdown of that information, advising that staff had seen a spike in park
building use from residents as well as non-residents, and also in use of the
facilities by the City organization itself.
Speaking to the
need for a scheduler, Councilmember Etten provided an example of an experience
in his family renting a facility several weeks ago, and the staffing resources
required through that rental process. Councilmember Etten opined that the majority
of the scheduling had been taken on by Assistant Parks & Recreation
Director Jill Anfang, outside her already full-time job duties. Councilmember
Etten noted the need to balance use and care of the facilities without continuing
to drain the lifeblood of full-time employees already exceed a 70-80 hour work
week. Furthermore, Councilmember Etten noted that some former park facilities
had not been used in this manner in the past due to their poor conditions; and
it therefore required someone capable of monitoring use of the buildings on a
Willmus echoed the comments of Councilmember Etten; and referenced the comments
of City Manager Trudgeon on users of the buildings whether inside or outside
the City organization programming itself and the community and non-residents.
McGehee clarified that she was not arguing against the position; but was simply
seeking more detailed information to make sure sustainability was built into
the position; as well as reviewing fees to make sure planning was done going
Etten noted that City Council had already had a robust discussion on that issue
some time ago providing that information. Councilmember Etten further noted
that the goal of providing park facilities had not been to make money only, but
to encourage their use and provide an additional benefit to the community.
Laliberte expressed her interest in seeing who was actually using the park
buildings, with the first year now under the city's belt, opining it was her
understanding that was why Ms. Anfang had been performing scheduling to track
and monitor usage accurately. Councilmember Laliberte questioned there wasn't
already someone in the employee system that couldn't take on those scheduling
duties without the addition of another employee. While sounding rhetorical,
Councilmember Laliberte reiterated her previously stated question as to how the
communication functions now having been streamlined had allowed other employees
additional time after that burden had been removed. Councilmember Laliberte
stated that was her question; quantifying the time gained by those employees
freeing them to perform other duties such as this, especially using someone
already in the system who knows programming, the buildings and having that
institutional knowledge. Councilmember Laliberte questioned how the City could
move this function from Ms. Anfang internally to an existing employee, based on
the steps taken to gain efficiencies.
Trudgeon advised that staff would provide that additional information to the
City Council in more detail, but as a preliminary response noted that, while
communications efforts had been retooled for a more centralized approach, a lot
of communication work continued to be done on a department level. Mr. Trudgeon
noted this was especially evident in the Parks & Recreation Department
given their annual recreation programs; and many of their employees going
beyond the capacity of a normal work day. Mr. Trudgeon noted that the communication
efforts in that department had been streamlined somewhat.
Manager Trudgeon advised that while the communications efforts had been
restructured, he could not equate that to a significant dollar savings. In
order to do so, Mr. Trudgeon advised that he would have to take all communication
efforts away. Mr. Trudgeon recognized that Councilmember Laliberte had asked
this question in the past, but also recognized that the City was also doing
more communicating than in the past, therefore, he couldn't identify anything
specific for cost savings, even though he and staff continued to look to
further evolve those efforts, but it was a challenge in defining actual dollars.
Specific to the Parks & Recreation Department, Mr. Trudgeon reported that
he and Parks & Recreation Director Lonnie Brokke continually discussed how
to address staffing issues; and advised that to-date no other solution or staff
capacity had been found beyond part-time staff to address this need.
Based on his recollection
in approving the communication reorganization, Mayor Roe stated that it was not
intended to necessarily free up Parks & Recreation staff and time, but
simply bringing them back down to the work level of what their job description
actually entailed before that additional work had been added, or in other words
back to a sane level.
As part of a
future discussion and in requesting additional staff information, Councilmember
Willmus asked for a historical full-time employee (FTE) count and trending over
the last few years for the Parks & Recreation Department.
Specific to the
proposed new passport supervisor and auto dealer license specialist positions,
Councilmember Laliberte noted that creating new positions would not necessarily
create additional businesses. Therefore, Councilmember Laliberte asked staff
to provide additional information showing ideas for pursuing memorandums of
understanding (MOU's) or agreements with automobile dealers or auto rental
companies or other options to know those agreements or commitments from auto
dealerships are in-hand before adding these high level positions and their related
annual costs. Councilmember Laliberte further stated that, included in that
information request she would be looking to how more revenue would be gained in
the passport area, recognizing the mandates and firewall in separating this
function from the other deputy registrar duties, but defining how revenue would
increase to support this position.
past e-mails with Finance Director Miller, Councilmember Willmus noted that
while much business came in from auto dealers, there was also considerable foot
traffic. Councilmember Willmus noted that many license centers offered later
hours that could prove beneficial for the passport center given pending
mandates on driver's license and additional forms of identification for air
Based on her
recollection, Councilmember McGehee noted that the License Center had paid its
own way as well as providing revenue for other areas of city operations. Given
that history under Finance Director Miller's management, Councilmember McGehee
stated that she was inclined to move forward as recommended, since the areas of
operation managed by him appeared to make money. Councilmember McGehee stated
that she felt the same with the License Center as she with Rosedale Center:
they know what they're doing, so therefore, she had no problem in allowing them
to continue operating as they have been. While not having any problem in staff
providing more information, Councilmember McGehee questioned if a MOU would
work with that type of business, but if so, she anticipated Finance Director
Miller pursuing that option, otherwise she expressed confidence in allowing the
current track record to prevail.
concurrence by Finance Director Miller, Mayor Roe noted that, while the credit
was being given to Mr. Miller, he was sure Mr. Miller would give credit to
those employees in these operations and reporting to him.
Laliberte clarified that these operations were well-run with good employees and
providing good services to the City and those living near Roseville she also
noted that these were two high-level positions being requested. Therefore, Councilmember
Laliberte advised that her purpose in requesting the information to justify the
positions through projected new business and not just in adding the positions
and hoping business would increase.
As part of that
additional information request, Councilmember Willmus asked that it include
research on other communities with this type of service and exploring other
business models versus continuing as we've always done it, including exploring
possibilities or opportunities for people to utilize the License Center outside
of the current operating hours.
agreed that further analysis and information may be prudent; and expressed his
personal appreciation of the presentation by License Center employees at the
beginning of the budget process and hearing their thoughts and ideas directly.
Mayor Roe suggested scheduling an annual check-in and update from those
employees that wasn't necessarily tied to the budget to help the City Council
and residents better understand operations and be more attuned to their
functions, needs and challenges.
Director Miller offered to provide the additional information as requested for
presentation in a more formal capacity between now and November 30th;
and thanked the City Council for providing an opportunity to do so.
preliminary overview, Finance Director Miller advised that the Passport Supervisor
position was being forced upon the City and wasn't not being asked for but due
to federal passport and Department of Homeland Security mandates. Mr. Miller
stated that staff was attempting to make lemonade from lemons and grow the
passport business, since people were already being turned away with only a tiny
office space available. Since passport renewals are only necessary every ten
years, Mr. Miller noted it was difficult to track whether or not those
customers were returning or going elsewhere.
auto dealers, Mr. Miller advised that staff couldn't even solicit any other
dealers with the current capacity, even though they and the passport business
were the money making aspects, while money was lost on tabs and other customers.
Therefore, Mr. Miller advised that passports and auto dealers allowed the
business to facilitate the other services offered.
offering extended hours, Mr. Miller reported that this had been attempted in
the past, but it had proven a money loser; and since some of the License Center
operations were already losing money, a conscious business model decision had
been to provide customer services within current hours and fund other
services. Mr. Miller expressed appreciation of Councilmember Willmus' sentiment
about thinking outside the box, and advised that the two new positions proposed
were an effort in doing so, advising that he was unsure how to transform the
current business model without those two new positions. Mr. Miller reported
that Plan B would be to not fill positions coming up with pending retirements unless
revenues were increased, thus creating the rationale for this strategic
At the request
of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Miller advised that staff had created a
preliminary internal concept plan to increase space for passports in the current
leased space with minimal restructuring and cost without too many enhancements
to addressed increased passport business space. If that business continues to
grow over the next ten years, Mr. Miller advised that this current restructured
space - if approved - would not be sufficient and would require either
additional leased square footage or a city-owned facility.
At the request
of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Miller addressed pending state legislative action
for changes in identification for air travel; but offered to provide additional
information as requested on what those proposed changes may imply.
Roe welcomed a young gentleman from Boy Scout Troop 231 in the audience tonight
working on his Citizenship Badge; and invited him to introduce himself.
Business Items (Action Items)
Discussion of 2015 - 2017 Policy Priority Planning Document
this item is listed under "action items," Mayor Roe clarified that it was intended
for discussion tonight; and introduced the topic and discussions held to-date.
the request of Mayor Roe, and as detailed in the RCA dated October 19, 2015,
City Manager Trudgeon asked that the first discussion be specifically address
the "Infrastructure Sustainability" strategic priority followed by the "Housing
and Redevelopment" priority as previously identified by the City Council. Mr.
Trudgeon advised that staff was available at the City Council's discretion for
responding to questions or addressing anything during their discussion; and
offered to share information related to the housing and redevelopment priority
learned by staff earlier today and since previous discussions.
initiate discussion, Mayor Roe noted previous discussions among Councilmembers
on the actual titles and how to organize the matrix going forward, seeking
individual City Council input.
Laliberte opined that the second column heading for "Key Outcome Indicators
(KOI)" was not appropriate for the content of the categories listed.
McGehee stated she didn't have a particular problem in identifying items under
this priority, opining that both categories under KOI were important going
forward and she felt were representative of what the City Council was asking
staff to bring forward as additional information specific to each.
Laliberte questioned if and why staff was working on those categories rather
than the City Council's advisory commissions.
McGehee clarified it should be staff, and any additional help they wanted from
advisory commissions. However, in deciding across-the-board asset categories,
Councilmember McGehee admitted she couldn't think of a particular commission to
whom that belonged. Regarding the infrastructure plan and funding strategy
targets, Councilmember McGehee stated her confidence in staff working on
funding ideas to make things more sustainable, after which input could be
sought from the Finance Commission or other applicable advisory commissions after
staff brought items forward to the City Council for ranking purposes. As for
asset categories, Councilmember McGehee opined that they were vital and was a
job for staff in suggesting industry standards as applicable (e.g. OVAL
chiller, lift stations, etc.) for equipment as a first touch and how best to
evaluate them, with staff being in the best position to provide that analysis
Laliberte stated that she didn't disagree, but preferred further involvement
beyond just the City Council and staff, including receiving public input as
part of the conversations for a broader perspective from various audiences.
McGehee opined that, until there was something in place for people to react to,
it would be difficult to get their input.
to the broader picture, if agreement is achieved among individual Councilmembers
and the Priority Plan is adopted by the City Council, City Manager Trudgeon
advised that a lot of staff work would be required at the beginning for this
priority, as well as through a number of the advisory commissions and impacts
for the CIP.
that initial step, Mr. Trudgeon stated that the next step would then be moving
the plan itself from funding to policy, with staff able to provide a basis for
that information, as well as input from advisory commissions, but ultimately
coming to the City Council - all as part of a partnership from his perspective. Once staff gets the green light from the City Council, Mr. Trudgeon advised
that staff would perform research work and obtain input from advisory
commission before moving forward. As part of that, Mr. Trudgeon stated his
interest in a better CIP process with more detail and easier to understand
coming out of this, using industry standards and having appropriate advisory
commissions move that process forward as recommendations to the City Council
for their ultimate final approval.
Laliberte stated her understanding that the asset management program was at
various levels of implementation, and while not wanting to create additional work
for staff, sought additional information on the areas identified as the highest
priority and determining what information staff is capable of providing.
Manager Trudgeon expressed appreciation of Councilmember Laliberte recognizing
the status, but stated that staff could devote their energy to that facet of
the process if they knew what they needed to do and would invest their time accordingly
beyond the current piece-meal discussion of some topics that were sometimes off
and sometimes on the table over the course of time. Mr. Trudgeon stated that
he and staff are interested in doing this strategic planning, which he
considered long overdue and requiring time to accomplish. However, Mr. Trudgeon
opined that the critical thinking facing the city as an organization was to get
the City's infrastructure under control for replacement and funding in place or
identified to accomplish that, putting the city in a better overall position.
Roe questioned if the current asset management software was proving the exact
tool for this process or needed enhancement as well; which he anticipated as a
topic of discussion given his lack of confidence that it was the single tool
needed moving forward.
Manager Trudgeon advised that this software provided real time information for
what staff was working on and the ability to track information, which would
improve as that was built on over time since all of that historical information
was yet to be input.
Willmus, with agreement by City Manager Trudgeon, suggested the need for a more
enhanced CIP tied to metrics for staff to develop and bring back to policy
makers as a necessary piece of the plan.
Roe suggested flip-flopping those two strategic initiatives as identified in
Manager Trudgeon responded that, as they feed into the infrastructure plan and
metrics, that would work.
staff was being asked to bring things back to the City Council, Councilmember
Laliberte asked staff what milestones they anticipated in 2016, including
recommended asset categories by a certain time; since this had initially
started as a one-year plan, then moved to a 3-4 year plan, and now moving back
toward a one-year plan.
Manager Trudgeon advised that work had been initiated earlier this year to map
things out, and staff could further refine that with the goal of keeping it as
aggressive as possible and not allowing it to drag out, shooting for the 2017
budget, which would still be a major undertaking and involve a lot of people
for that input.
Roe suggested the timeline be through the end of 2016, and while recognizing
everything may not be accomplished by then, it would provide a realistic
timeframe of where the City Council wanted to be.
Laliberte expressed appreciation for the work by staff on the timeline, opining
it would be helpful for the City Council to have a timeline continuum of public
involvement: where staff was involved, where the advisory commissions would
plug in, and thereby identifying those milestones within that year to help
everyone stay accountable and on track.
Roe concurred, noting that would address the what, who and when in a format for
McGehee opined she would like the applicable advisory commissions tasked to aid
staff in pulling that initial information together, seeking feedback from her
colleagues as to whether staff could be authorized by the City Council to task
advisory commissions accordingly rather than having that directive come
directly from the City Council.
Roe opined that would need to be agreed on by the City Council and advisory
commissions at the time; with City Manager Trudgeon agreeing since staff had
the best information available and expertise for their respective fields.
Roe further noted the need for policy decisions for some items, while others
may be straightforward. As an example, Mayor Roe noted the need for policy
discussions on replacement schedules and rationale for choosing options for
hard assets underground, with that City Council policy developed and based on
staff and advisory commission advice. However, Mayor Roe questioned if
advisory commissions could do a lot of research on those existing assets and
compiling appropriate lists as part of that process.
McGehee opined that some of the advisory commissions were seeking things to do,
particularly when it involved researching other cities for their programs and
similarities; further opining it would alleviate some of the more mundane
research work and be useful to those advisory commissions making recommendations.
Laliberte noted her first instinct was to have staff start the process, and
still supported that as the best idea moving forward, and subsequently tossing
things to advisory commissions when more specificity was needed.
Roe concurred, identifying that as a charge from the City Council directly to
the advisory commission once something was better identified.
Laliberte agreed with Mayor Roe, noting the need to also consider the less
frequent meeting schedule of advisory commissions, and allowing them time to
build in a level of review, discussion and decision on a judicious recommendations
to the City Council after their study and analysis.
Willmus agreed that at the front end the process needed to be driven by staff;
while he supported having check-ins with advisory commissions along the way.
Etten also agreed, noting that when discussion options and technical
information, while the advisory commissions could contribute, the City Council
needed to rely on its professional staff at the front end followed by that
advisory commission input.
McGehee clarified that she was not suggesting anything beyond staff's ability
to offload more mundane assignments directly versus coming to the City Council
for a formal charge of those tasks and seeking assistance more informally.
Councilmember McGehee stated that she would support that process.
Roe suggested it may be more appropriate, if and when applicable, that such a
process work through the Volunteer Coordinator, which Councilmember McGehee
agreed was a good idea.
Manager Trudgeon clarified that he was hearing the City Council direct staff to
prepare a schedule of milestones for the City Council to review and potentially
adopt in the future. Mr. Trudgeon advised that staff would start digging into
the details and make sure advisory commissions were aware of their potential involvement
in the future moving forward.
structure, Mayor Roe sought clarification from Councilmember Laliberte on her
concept for the product coming back to the City Council from staff. Based on
his understanding, Mayor Roe suggested a written description of areas and basic
general starting outlines, but not necessarily including all the details or
timelines, for initial City Council approval and to be revised later as the
process continued to evolve, but allowing something to be in place as a
starting framework prior to 2016; and again without too much detail involved at
Laliberte agreed with Mayor Roe's understanding, and suggested another good
thing to have would be to adopt standards for each target, or provide smaller
targets under the initial target for adoption, and defining what that meant
(e.g. various asset categories) to make it clear for future City Councils and
benefit the community going forward and inform the work of those future City
Councils in an easy-to-understand format for periodic updating.
Roe suggested identifying asset categories with the ability to measure the
level of condition for each category as a strategic initiative.
Manager Trudgeon advised that, unless the City Council was wedded to this
current format (Attachment A), staff could reformat it completely to lay it out
in a more reader- and user-friendly document.
Roe agreed with that reformatting, suggesting also including areas to identify
staff, City Council and/or advisory commission responsibilities, as well as
public input opportunities.
member Etten addressed current headings and strategic priorities and KOI's and
suggested key outcome indicator be changed to strategic initiatives. He also
questioned those titles beyond the new "strategic initiatives" column. Councilmember
Etten noted that since the initiatives would be acted upon, he found targets
are largely outcomes and should be listed on the other side of the 4th
column and renamed outcomes and the column known as strategic initiatives becoming
Goals or goals area.
Roe agreed with that, but suggested "outcomes targets" remain where it is now,
providing the outcome you want to achieve and then listing how to achieve those
reviewing those things currently listed under "strategic initiatives," Councilmember
Etten opined that out of that you could create actions, such as "increase
community meeting value, etc that would be a result of the other column rather
than the other way around. However, as stated by Mayor Roe, Councilmember
Etten admitted he could understand that concept of the "target."
Roe noted that would address how strategic planning was done, including where
we want to be and how to get there.
McGehee suggested, instead of "KOI," titling it "Areas of Interest."
Etten stated he didn't like the word "initiative."
Roe noted there was obviously a philosophical layout issue with the document
and two different ways to look at it from the perspectives of Councilmembers
Etten and McGehee in moving "target" to the end of the list as where you wanted
to end up. However, Mayor Roe stated his perspective was that if the "target" was first on the list, it would drive everything after that, opining that it
made more sense to put it on the list earlier rather than at the end.
Etten and McGehee agreed with Mayor Roe's process as stated.
Laliberte stated that another thing she would appreciate and something not
included in this document, was tools to use in measuring those things - in
whatever format staff chose - that would be consistent for each area.
Willmus opined that even if in transition with the "Housing and Redevelopment"
strategic priority, there appeared to be a clear understanding of what to do or
enhanced tools needed for the "Infrastructure Sustainability" strategic
priority. Therefore, Councilmember Willmus opined that the real discussion was
in the Housing & Redevelopment area, and tools needed to accomplish a strategic
focus or initiative for reliable KOI's.
reformatting purposes, Councilmember Etten suggested taking the "target" column
and revising it as "Smart Goals" with various pieces listed below, and having
each smart goal within a certain time frame. Related to the housing and
redevelopment priority, Councilmember Etten questioned if that priority was too
narrow under the current situation and whether a separate strategic priority
was needed or if it should simply be renamed "Redevelopment and Economic
Growth" to include businesses and not only housing.
Laliberte and Willmus agreed things have changed since this strategic planning
effort was begin earlier in 2015; with Councilmember Etten opining that just a
"Housing and Redevelopment" strategic priority no longer made sense.
Roe asked which focus areas Councilmember Etten would put into those two
Etten responded that he considered a larger strategic priority category under
"Business/Economic Development," noting that SE Roseville fit under housing as
well as business.
Laliberte agreed that this area needed further revision; opining that it may
come down to whether or not to keep everything in the mix for 2016 or lost the
housing priority and replace it with economic development. Councilmember
Laliberte suggested the need for the City Council to reconfirm their corporate
support of the four KOI's listed for that category, whether tonight or at a
future meeting in the near future.
Roe stated it needed to be tonight; and admitted he was seriously considering
whether or not the "move up housing" and "residential housing values" should be
removed for focus on "SE Roseville" and "Twin Lakes" in 2016.
McGehee agreed that the top two KOI's as noted by Mayor Roe included a heavy
economic development piece and opportunity to grow business there. However,
Councilmember McGehee opined that in terms of the economic aspect for the
broader community, both "move up housing" and "residential housing value" also
had a significant impact on the community's bottom line going forward, and
questioned any willingness to downgrade or defer their importance.
Etten stated that the target for "twenty increased units at $350K" continued to
trouble him compared to other targets and for him was a smaller goal that
happened automatically versus others in lower valued homes or units seeking an
assistance program to build value into their existing home. Councilmember Etten
opined that it was not the role of the City Council to address increasing those
higher value housing units, and expressed his support to remove that target.
Roe suggested revising that target to "Improve Housing Diversity."
considering the type of housing units, Councilmember Willmus defended the need
to include those units of over $350K and what tool was needed to facilitate
that type of unit, opining it was an important part of the broader picture and
a needed housing stock type in the community. In addressing the lead-in
comments from City Manager Trudgeon, Councilmember Willmus agreed with Councilmember
McGehee that all items identified in Attachment A are important and he was not
seeking to drop any of them. Councilmember Willmus opined that it was
important for the City Council to at a minimum address zoning for lot sizes to
facility that type of development, while not seeking out specific programs for
funding their development. Councilmember Willmus stated that there were some
things the City Council could do related to that housing need and he was not
ready to agree to set it aside at this point.
recognizing Mayor Roe's suggested target to "Improve Housing Diversity,"
Councilmember Etten noted there were already developments coming forward in
that target zone, but a lack of good low-income-senior housing remained considerably
lacking based on the City's own housing studies, whether or not they may be
deemed more controversial than other housing types.
Roe recognized Community Development Director Paul Bilotta noted that, if the
City Council ultimately decided to delay housing as a strategic priority until
2017 it would also allow it to be fully slotted into the ten-year comprehensive
plan update process. However, Mr. Bilotta clarified that just because something
may be deferred, didn't mean it would stop happening, noting upcoming high
density residential housing amendments and zoning issues slated to come before
the City Council in November. Mr. Bilotta advised that staff still anticipated
bringing things forward in 2016, and would need to know whether or not the City
Council intended to address those priorities in order to scope a Request for Proposals
(RFP) for a comprehensive plan update consultant.
McGehee opined that if left as suggested with move-up housing it acknowledged
to the development community coming forward with plans exactly what the City
was looking for, which seemed to her to be useful to staff and also provided
the developer a good indication of the direction being sought by the City.
Bilotta noted that was a concept with comprehensive plans and how they vary in
identifying development sites with a specific outline in the comprehensive plan
as to the City's desire or how an area was guided.
his perspective, Mayor Roe stated that it was important to put all of the
housing stock needs in the community and currently missing in the market place,
based on research done to-date, and put all of them on an equal standing.
Mayor Roe noted this served to identify needs, and provided options for
developers without diluting the need for move-up housing.
Councilmember Etten agreed with Mayor Roe's comment.
Laliberte opined that the City's existing single-family housing naturally
provided for move-up housing from those in other communities (e.g. City of St.
Paul) and didn't think it was necessary to change paths on this. Councilmember
Laliberte agreed that it was evident there was a gap for high-end executive
housing in Roseville, and a discussion on lot sizes and other tools to allow
for their development was called for, but with the current hot housing market,
it was possible for first-time homebuyers to get into existing single-family
homes in Roseville.
McGehee also noted the broad range of available 1-2 bedroom condominiums in
already-established senior communities in Roseville for those moving out of
single-family housing stock, providing them with a stable sense of community.
Councilmember McGehee questioned what specificity was being sought:
condominiums, stand-alone housing, townhomes, rentals, or what.
Etten opined the need was for rental housing for seniors.
Willmus identified market-rate rentals as a need.
Roe recognized Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Executive Director
Jeanne Kelsey. Ms. Kelsey advised that the market study done by Maxfield
Research addressed a need for townhomes, cooperatives, condominiums and rentals
at market and affordable levels, with those priorities discussed several years
ago and reported on by the HRA. As the City Council establishes their priorities,
Ms. Kelsey suggested it may be prudent to bring that study forward again for a
review of housing priorities and perhaps incorporate them into the City
Council's priority planning.
the request of Councilmember Willmus, Ms. Kelsey advised that Maxfield performed
the original housing study in 2009 and updated it in 2013.
the City Council intends to move up and become involved, Councilmember Etten
opined that, as part of its strategic planning, it needed to look into its role
as an HRA and discuss it further. As far as housing stock needs, Councilmember
Etten provided several examples of young families who may be identified as "blue color workers" seeking to stay in Roseville but looking to get into a
larger home, hearing that need repeatedly and often.
McGehee noted the availability of moving into lower category housing stock at a
reduced price and remodeling it into what they wanted and needed.
Willmus noted how impressed he was at how quickly the homes built by Hansen
Builders and Pulte Homes had filled up.
Roe noted they were all part of the mix.
Laliberte stated that she didn't want to dismiss the data provided in the HRA's
Maxfield Study; but opined the private market was currently very willing and
able to bring senior housing into Roseville. While appreciating that increase
in that type of housing stock, Councilmember Laliberte expressed concern that
the market not be allowed to bring in only that type of housing or for the City
to create programs to invite additional senior housing only in that category.
Roe noted that variables in affordable senior housing beyond that offered at
Applewood Point and elsewhere noting the need for and importance of other types
of multi-family housing for families in the community. Mayor Roe also noted
that just because those facilities area currently senior housing didn't mean
they may stay that way forever and could easily be adapted into other types of
housing depending on the market for them. Mayor Roe noted that in promoting
more density for affordable rentals, they didn't take up as much space in the
community as move-up single family housing would do, creating opportunities to
concentrate that housing on a smaller footprint. Likewise, Mayor Roe opined
that there remained nice areas in the community for single-family development
not yet taken advantage of, and for several identified needs in diverse housing
not yet available in Roseville. Mayor Roe reiterated that all types of housing
are important and should be shown on an equal footing and included on the
City's listed priorities as stated by Councilmember McGehee.
McGehee provided examples of seniors in Roseville moving out of their
single-family homes and not happy with what options are available to them to
stay in Roseville. Also, Councilmember McGehee noted some of those housing
options were being built in areas of the community where they weren't close to
anything or didn't provide any amenities to encourage relocating to them, which
she opined would have been addressed through the original Twin Lakes
Redevelopment Area in mixed use designations. If Roseville didn't want those
residents moving to other communities who offered those amenities near their
housing, Councilmember McGehee opined they needed to be addressed, and be part
of the bigger mix all working together.
matter which area was being discussed for housing, Councilmember Laliberte
spoke in support of leaving it in the timeframe for 2016, and cautioned if the
title became, "Improve Housing Diversity," it would include a significant
number of categories. Councilmember Laliberte opined that the goals worked on
by the HRA over the summer may no longer be relevant to the City Council, and
as with any development at some point, it was prudent to not just state one
type, but see that programs were in place to support whatever type was needed
and fit that initiative to make it happen. Councilmember Laliberte opined
there was no need to limit anything or require a lot of additional staff time,
but simply to be ready to move forward if and when opportunities arise,
allowing different developers to make that decision.
Manager Trudgeon noted that a lot of these things were already in place or
being done at the staff level as part of normal operations; and often once
programs are approved for a particular area of focus, it simply sat on the
shelf until needed. Beyond the initial set up, Mr. Trudgeon advised that there
typically wasn't a significant amount of staff time involved.
Roe asked if a reasonable 2016 goal would be to have the program up and
Bilotta responded that the plan is achievable and not taking anything away from
the other KOI's, since as stated by City Manager Trudgeon, staff already did
this work. Mr. Bilotta noted that currently the Old Highway 8 project was the
focus point and the City would actively solicit developers, as well as working
on development of the Press Gym site being undertaken by staff as part of their
addition to the Maxfield Study data, Councilmember Willmus noted that by using
fiscal disparities and home valuations and levels of service at that breaking
point, the $350K value had been readily available.
Roe expressed his lack of interest in being prepared to make a decision based
on values versus levels of service when that indicated many homes, including
his, supposedly didn't contribute in any valuable way to the community, which
he didn't consider a true picture.
Willmus opined that was an exaggeration and not his intent, but simply to
identify how the community wanted to move forward.
Roe reiterated his concern in using that as a criterion.
McGehee agreed with Councilmember Willmus on that point, opining she had never
seen a complete listing of the number of apartment units in the City, even
though there seemed to be a lot they were not all specified for seniors, and also
not all necessarily where seniors might choose to live. Councilmember McGehee
opined she didn't necessarily see a terrible need right now and instead saw a
real economic need in Roseville to make the community more sustainable. While
recognizing that a lot of amenities had been recently added that people enjoy
and encouraged people to locate in Roseville, Councilmember McGehee opined that
without creating a huge tax burden, the City would not support those amenities
long-term, and further opined that more apartments wouldn't achieve that goal.
Councilmember McGehee opined that the City had a lot of affordable housing now
and she was not in that market, but instead supported economic development to improve
housing stock with Roseville 98% developed and unable to make any major shifts
in existing housing stock.
Laliberte suggested moving off the focus of move up housing units and simply to
list "economic" in the heading. However, Councilmember Laliberte questioned if
by doing so it missed the commercial/industrial component that needed to be
factored in or if the economic development piece only applied in Twin Lakes and
McGehee noted the need for living wage jobs in all areas.
Roe questioned where other opportunities were in Roseville for commercial/industrial
or corporate focus beyond Twin Lakes and SE Roseville unless something was
already zoned accordingly.
Etten addressed discussions of the HRA over the last few months as part of
their plan to refocus on economic development efforts, with the first step
being to help existing businesses through development of a loan program to
encourage their expansion or to improve their exterior façade as an outcome or
goal. Since some of those HRA programs are already in place or in the planning
process, Councilmember Etten suggested that the City Council look at what had
been produced and refine it as needed. While supporting a category for
economic development, Councilmember Etten noted that some of that work had
already been put in place.
Roe clarified with staff that rehabilitation of facilities was included under
the HRA's business rehabilitation program.
the 2016 timeline, with the City Council looking for a more robust economic
development program as their focus area, Mr. Bilotta noted that some of that
would involve the HRA and what they had been doing, with the City Council in a
position to keep or discard some of those efforts depending on which way they
decided to move going forward, which should be decided by year-end 2015. Mr.
Bilotta suggested talking through those existing programs during 2016 and then
going into the 2017 budget cycle those ideas could be put in place, restructuring
accomplished, and other goals that would involve considerable work. During the
interim, Mr. Bilotta noted that low hanging fruit would continue to be addressed
before then as a normal part of operations.
Roe suggested adding a category as suggested by Councilmember Laliberte to
address "economic development" with added outcomes for development programs.
With concurrence by Mayor Roe, Mr. Bilotta suggested that the Twin Lakes Development
Program may be found by the City Council to be good for all areas, and serve as
an incubator process.
to economic development, Councilmember Willmus stated that he felt strongly
that the City had been dropping the ball over the last few years in that area.
that reason, Councilmember Laliberte noted the importance of adding it to this
document to verify that it was important to us and not stop work elsewhere and
only address SE Roseville and Twin Lakes.
Roe noted that both were works in progress, and would continue to need public
input as the vision was developed, opining that it would take time and considerable
public input during that process.
Willmus concurred, opining it needed to be a collaborative effort with
Manager Trudgeon expressed his appreciation for where things were heading and
the addition of the economic development pieces, noting these were things staff
had been working on already but this provided further context. As noted by
Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon confirmed that infrastructure sustainability
was the first step to factor in before economic development in order to support
it, and to factor in limitations as applicable.
the request of City Manager Trudgeon, Mr. Bilotta called out the work of HRA
Executive Director Kelsey in reporting on staff's work over the last few weeks
as part of their due diligence process and adjusting HRA by-laws. Mr. Bilotta
advised that last week some initial red flags had been raised through
consulting attorneys from a federal perspective related to the dissolution of
the HRA and review of living documents in place. Mr. Bilotta advised that earlier
today at least one document had been identified, an agreement with Ramsey
County for federal Community Development Block Grant funds, blocking the
ability to directly dissolve the HRA at this time. While still being
investigated, Mr. Bilotta reported that state statute may allow the Economic
Development Authority (EDA) process to be established to transfer most things
from the HRA to the EDA versus directly from the HRA into a Port Authority (PA)
process, which to-date the attorneys indicated seemed to provide the easiest
way to transfer items and move toward the desired economic development focus
concept. However, Mr. Bilotta advised due to the CDBG funds with Ramsey
County, it may be necessary to retain the HRA shell for the next 25 years and
hold an annual meeting similar to that done in the past with the HRA for the
former land development entity created under the City Council prior to the
HRA's inception. Mr. Bilotta noted this would be a simple formality annually.
Laliberte thanked staff for the update, but since this was not on tonight's
agenda, expressed concern that it was being discussed without the public being
aware, which she found unfortunate.
the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Bilotta further expounded on the
obligations under this CDBG loan program with Ramsey County whose funds could
not be transferred, and would remain under obligation through the HRA shell for
up to 25 years, and involving AEON and Applewood Point-Phase I single family
the request of Councilmember Willmus, Ms. Kelsey reported that she had asked if
the City could pay off the bonds and shift the obligation; however, because of
the contractual agreement language, there was no providing to allow that since
the original contract had been signed by the Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) arm of the federal government with Ramsey County, and as a HUD contract
would not allow for that.
a long-time proponent of economic development and seeing a need to move from a
statutory HRA to EDA format, Councilmember Willmus asked whether his colleagues
were supportive of moving in that direction to address commercial aspects and
properties that may not qualify as blighted or not have a housing component
attached and the EDA format providing that spectrum to convey properties.
the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mayor Roe clarified that this item
would come before the City Council for action at a later date, with a public
hearing already scheduled for October 26, 2016 originally for dissolution of
the HRA, with a process then needed to establish an EDA if it was decided to
move in that direction.
Laliberte stated that she had long been more in favor of an EDA than an HRA.
Etten stated he was comfortable in establishing and EDA if the PA didn't work
out due to legalities; opining that his goal was to have as many tools
available as needed.
Roe and Councilmember McGehee noted that the City Council appeared to be
heading toward having all three formats - HRA, EDA and PA - in place.
Roe noted the public hearing, as noticed to the public, would still be held
next week to receive public input; but it appeared dissolution of the HRA would
not proceed based on this new information from staff's due diligence to-date.
Manager Trudgeon clarified the target would remain as "20 increase units $350K
housing" would remain and not be revised to "improve housing diversity;" and
that a fifth category would be added under "strategic initiatives" to focus on
"economic development" under the revised strategic priority entitled "housing
and economic redevelopment." Mr. Trudgeon further noted the direction to staff
to re-title "strategic initiatives" and add a column to determine who's
responsible for what as well as attempting a preliminary timeline. Mr.
Trudgeon advised that he and staff would work on a first draft of a reformatted
and reorganized document to bring back to the City Council.
ensued regarding additional guidance to staff related to KOI's and whether or
not SE Roseville was appropriate or needed relocated to another category; the
2016 work plan that may become larger than the work plan in place, and
including preliminary steps toward that overall plan; potential addition of
columns with a timeline, who should be plugged in, and tools to measure
progress which may serve to cull out the "target" column for what is or is not
achievable; and the need to initially provide a starting point to move toward
the benefit of Councilmember McGehee and her concerns about those existing
strategic initiatives that may no longer be relevant as part of HRA programs, Councilmember
Etten clarified that the HRA held its own strategic planning process and the
results of that exercise existed as a completely and distinct document from
that of the City Council and his suggestion was that those goals be taken into
consideration as part of the City Council's overarching strategic plan as they
specifically related to economic and redevelopment efforts.
to the SE Roseville KOI, Councilmember Willmus questioned what that actually
looked like; and suggested including input from other municipalities and the
community as initially identified in recent meetings sponsored by the Chamber
of Commerce and Smart Growth America, as well as Ramsey County to look at the
larger corridor of Rice Street and Larpenteur Avenue. Councilmember Willmus
noted the City Council's involvement related to zoning and other steps to make
redevelopment and/or economic development happen.
Kelsey clarified that there was no timeframe yet and follow-up continued with
all communities (Maplewood, St. Paul and Roseville) continuing to meet and move
forward with a variety of steps, even though it remained in its initial stages.
part of those efforts for SE Roseville, Mayor Roe reported on his meetings with
St. Paul Councilmember Amy Brendmoen representing that area and her staff, as
well as with the Mayor of Maplewood, opining that it was a very productive
meeting. As part of that meeting, Mayor Roe reported that they compared notes
about other respective community efforts with it prompting collaboration on
potential best practices moving forward. Mayor Roe further reported that City
Manager Trudgeon was planning to meet with his counterparts in those communities
as well; with the next step to convene a very preliminary and informal meeting
of residents and businesses of all three communities, with the City of St. Paul
representatives taking the lead on setting that up. Mayor Roe advised that he
had provided various contact information for Roseville's community leaders,
with the purpose of getting everyone in the same room and identifying common
issues and prompting conversations with each other to formulate subsequent
conversations and efforts form a multi-disciplinary point, using those efforts
already put in place in Roseville. Mayor Roe anticipated additional
information from the Chamber of Commerce and/or Smart Growth America to have
available by that time. Mayor Roe reiterated that the process was still in its
formative stage but would provide additional opportunities for input from all
stakeholders as they had been or would be identified.
discussion ensued regarding the City of St. Paul's District Planning Councils
and Ward boundaries; special plans for smaller neighborhood areas as a potential
example; inclusion of various stakeholders in the process; other examples in
St. Louis Park and involvement of Ms. Kelsey; similarity of this potential community
process with that of previous Roseville community engagement efforts and ideas
available from other neighboring communities.
Mayor Roe noted the interest of and need to involve Ramsey County in the process
through engaging their staff with three different county commissioners representing
the three different corners along that corridor; key partnership of Accelerate
Ramsey County as they restructure county government with Assistant County
Manager Worthington actively involved in the process; and cooperative efforts
from a Public Works perspective in addressing some infrastructure and traffic
concerns along the corridor.
Laliberte noted distinctions in areas not within the City of Roseville's
control and requiring collaborative efforts and those specific to Roseville's
ability to drive the timeline.
Roe reiterated that this would be a long-term effort with larger items needing
to be addressed, with some smaller steps along the way and in the more immediate
future, but all with the goal for positive improvement. Mayor Roe asked that
staff make this one of their frequent reporting topics to the City Council and
for public information.
the request of Mayor Roe, and specific to the Twin Lakes redevelopment efforts,
Mr. Bilotta reported that staff would be bringing forward zoning amendments
next week; and reported that the brownfields consultant and infrastructure
improvements had been ordered. Mr. Bilotta advised that the next step would be
to get a new entity set up and a façade program or other pieces, some of which
were already in process and continuing to evolve.
the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Bilotta further reported that the Tree Preservation
consultant would be presenting the final draft of the Ordinance and kicking off
discussions on revised Planned Unit Development (PUD) processes in early
November for the City Council.
Laliberte requested presentation of these documents at a work session versus
regular business meeting. However, after further consideration, Councilmember
Laliberte agreed with presentation of a draft at the November 9, 2015 meeting
for an initial view followed by deeper review at the Worksession the following
Business Items - Presentations/Discussions
City Manager Future Agenda Review
Trudgeon briefly reviewed upcoming agenda items.
Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings
At the request
of Councilmember Willmus, City Manager Trudgeon provided an update on lighting
in the City Council chambers; advising that a consultant had been brought in to
provide professional expertise on proper lighting at City Hall, with the goal
to convert the Council Chambers to LED lighting, as well as other parts of City
Hall in the near future. Mr. Trudgeon advised that he anticipated receiving
recommendations soon, and reviewed some of the problems beyond shadows and
bulbs burning out at a ridiculous rate; and hoped to get it accomplished before
the end of 2015.
Etten seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 8:57 p.m.