View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 26, 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: Willmus; Pust; McGehee; Johnson; and Roe). City Attorney Mark Gaughan was also present. Mayor Roe noted that Councilmember Tammy Pust had previously advised that she would not be in attendance at tonight’s meeting due to an out-of-town trial.
2. Approve Agenda
Councilmember McGehee requested removal of Consent Item 7.d entitled, “Approve “No Parking” Resolution – County Road C-2 between Hamline and Lexington Avenues.”
McGehee moved, Willmus seconded approval of the agenda as amended.
Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Johnson; and Roe.
3. Public Comment
Mayor Roe called for public comment by members of the audience on any non-agenda items.
a. Will Shapira, Rose Pointe 209, 2545 Hamline Avenue N
Mr. Shapira provided a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part hereof, from the Secretary of State’s Office dated March 20, 2012; and expounded on the challenges and opportunities for the City to address second hand smoke. Mr. Shapira asked that the Roseville City Council serve as an example for other Minnesota communities throughout the state and live up to their motto of “Living Smarter.” Mr. Shapira specifically addressed smokers in residential rental units in Roseville.
Councilmember McGehee expressed her appreciation to Mr. Shapira for bringing this issue to the attention of the City Council; and further expressed her personal support toward such efforts, and efforts to eradicate second hand smoke throughout the community.
Mayor Roe asked City Manager Malinen to alert Mr. Shapira when this issue came before the City Council for discussion at a future date.
4. Council Communications, Reports, Announcements and Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Report
Mayor Roe announced vacancies on the City’s Police Civil Service Commission for a three (3) year term through March 31, 2015. Mayor Roe advised that the application deadline was April 12; with candidate interviews scheduled on April 16, 2012; and appointments made shortly thereafter. Applications are available by contacting City Hall at 792-7071 or on line at the City’s website.
Mayor Roe announced the upcoming Roseville University, with seven (7) consecutive sessions scheduled from 6:30 – 9:00 p.m. 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.
Mayor Roe noted that the Wal-Mart subdivision land use case previously scheduled for tonight’s agenda had been delayed until April.
5. Recognitions, Donations, Communications
6. Approve Minutes
a. Approve Minutes of March 19, 2012 Meeting
Johnson moved, Willmus, seconded, approval of the minutes of the March 19, 2012 meeting as amended.
Councilmember Willmus provided additional corrections as follows:
· Page 4, line39, specify “Planning Commission” vacancy
· Page 10, lines 25 – 29, revise as follows:
“Councilmember Willmus sought additional information from staff on whether business property owners had an option to prepay undergrounding costs and receive a discount from Xcel Energy [.] , since they were ineligible for the CRFS option.”
Councilmember McGehee provided additional corrections to the meeting minutes on pages 11, 14, and 20, via a bench handout, as well as providing several additional grammatical corrections verbally at the meeting.
· Page 21, line22, correct “of” to “or”
· Page 21, line 32, correct “diversity” to “diversify”
Ayes: Willmus; McGehee; Johnson; and Roe.
7. Approve Consent Agenda
There were no additional changes to the Consent Agenda than those previously noted. At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Bill Malinen briefly reviewed those items being considered under the Consent Agenda.
a. Approve Payments
Johnson moved, McGehee seconded, approval of the following claims and payments as presented.
65730 – 65799
b. Approve Business and Other Licenses
Johnson moved, McGehee seconded, approval of a Cigarette/Tobacco Products License renewal for RBF, LLC of Wisconsin, d/b/a Rainbow Foods $8802, 1201 Larpenteur Avenue W, Roseville, MN for a term of one (1) year beginning July 1, 2012 and ending June 30, 2013.
c. Approve General Purchases and Sale of Surplus Items Exceeding $5,000
Johnson moved, McGehee 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 26, 2012.
Town & Country Fence
Replace Split Rail Fence (South McCarrons Blvd.)
Lawn Ranger Outdoor Services
Retaining wall repairs (3050 S Owasso, 1810 Alta Vista, and 1824 Alta Vista
e. Adopt a Resolution Re-establishing Precinct Boundaries
Johnson moved, McGehee seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10973 (Attachment A) entitled, “Re-establishing Precinct Boundaries;” as detailed on the 2012 Redistributing Map (Attachment B)”
f. Approve Utility Relocates for the new Fire Station Project
Johnson moved, McGehee seconded, authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to enter into contracts for relocation of utilities for the two (2) cell towers located on the City Campus as part of the new fire station project, said relocation not to exceed the amount of $11,563.00.
8. Consider Items Removed from Consent
d. Approve “No Parking” Resolution – County Road C-2 between Hamline and Lexington Avenues
At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen summarized the “No Parking” restrictions as a result of the reconstruction of County Road C-2 as required for Municipal State Aid (MSA) system; and as detailed in the Request for Council Action (RCA) dated March 26, 2012.
Willmus moved, Johnson seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10974 (Attachment A) entitled, “Resolution Prohibiting Parking on County Road C-2 between Hamline and Lexington Avenues.”
Ayes: Willmus; Johnson; and Roe.
12. General Ordinances for Adoption
14. Public Hearings
15. Business Items (Action Items)
a. Adopt a Resolution Ratifying the Dissolution of the Grass Lake Water Management Organization (GLWMO) and Petitioning the MN Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) to Enlarge the Boundary of the Ramsey Metro Washington Watershed District (RMWWD)
Public Works Director Duane Schwartz provided background information and a history of this decision to-date; as detailed in the RCA dated March 26, 2012. Mr. Schwartz briefly reviewed outstanding contractual obligations and their proposed resolution of those remaining assets and liabilities of the GLWMO; with any remaining funds to be split 50/50 by the member cities, Roseville and Shoreview, at that time.
Mr. Schwartz reviewed the proposed schedule, as outlined in the RCA, for the interim between the GLWMO Board’s decision of March 22, 2012, and dissolution of the WMO by June 21, 2012.
Mr. Schwartz advised that representatives of Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) were willing to come to a Roseville City Council meeting to make a presentation on the activities of the WMO and services for residents of the GLWMO geographical area and its constituents.
Mr. Schwartz noted that the petition (Attachment B) included in the packet would require some additional revisions (additions of dates), as well as clarifying on page 5 the specific Minnesota State Statutes103d.261, as directed by the State earlier today. Mr. Schwartz advised that the Statutes referred to two different types of enlargement process, but the one specific for this merger was addressed in Statute 103d.261.
City Manager Malinen suggested that the DRAFT resolution (Attachment A) be revised to reference the petition (Attachment B) for the purposes of continuity.
Mayor Roe sought clarification on the status of the GLWMO’s DRAFT Third Generation Water Management Plan, whether the RWMWD would adopt it as part of their overall plan or if it would fade away as the new entity absorbed the GLWMO.
Mr. Schwartz advised that the DRAFT Third Generation Plan would be forwarded to the RWMWD; and that the RWMWD would be required within a year of the boundary change to adopt either that Plan or some form of a revised plan into their Watershed Management Plan. Mr. Schwartz advised that he anticipated that they would incorporate the GLWMO Plan into their overall Plan.
Mayor Roe questioned if Mr. Schwartz anticipated that the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) would split the GLWMO geographical area between other existing Districts, or expand the RWMWD boundaries, keeping the GLWMO area intact.
Mr. Schwartz advised that he anticipated that the GLWMO would remain within the RWMWD; and funds collected from storm water funds be applied specifically as applicable.
At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen advised that, with the elimination of the need for the City to fund the GLWMO, and the return to the City of any unused GLWMO fund balance, annual storm water fees would be reviewed between capital and operating needs, and adjusted accordingly.
Johnson moved, Willmus seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10975 (Attachment A) entitled, “Resolution Ratifying the Dissolution of the Grass Lake Watershed Management Organization and Petitioning the Board of Soil and Water Resources for a Change of Watershed Boundary;” amended to reference the petition (Attachment B); and authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute necessary documents; and referencing .
Councilmember McGehee thanked Mr. Schwartz for handling this transition and dissolution; referencing her liaison role with the GLWMO Board. Councilmember McGehee expressed her hope that the RWMWD would take advantage of the considerable work of the GLWMO Board, member city staff, consultants and public input put into the DRAFT Third Generation Plan going forward. While normally an advocate for local control, Councilmember McGhee advised that, in this case given the significant storm water issues in the metropolitan area, she thought an organization providing larger oversight and pooled resources made more sense. Councilmember McGehee expressed her support for the RWMWD organization and advantages through such a merger.
Mayor Roe echoed those comments; and on behalf of the City Council and community, expressed appreciation to the GLWMO Board for their service; noting that future recognition of their efforts would be formally taken.
16. Business Items – Presentations/Discussions
a. Discuss Strategic Planning Aspirations and Mission Statement(s)
At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen provided introductory comments related to the three (3) attachments included in the meeting packet for this item. Those Attachments included: the City’s existing mission statement as outlined in the 2012 budget (Attachment A) and incorporated as part of each annual budget; mission statement and aspiration suggestions prepared by Mayor Roe (Attachment B) that included community aspirations as developed through the Imagine Roseville 2025 community visioning process; Councilmember McGehee (Attachment C) and Department Heads (Attachment D).
Mayor Roe read the current Mission Statement (Attachment A), offering an opportunity to build upon it; and noted that Attachments B and C, he and Councilmember McGehee had both chosen to list the community aspirations first, followed by the organizational mission statement, with the Department Head version the other way around (Attachment D). Mayor Roe questioned individual Councilmembers on their preference.
Councilmember McGehee opined that she personally liked moving from the general to specific in that order, with the mission statement first and points supporting that mission statement listed separately. Councilmember McGehee also expressed her preference for the existing mission statement as the umbrella statement, followed by specifics pointing to it.
Mayor Roe advised that, from his point of view and draft document, he supported the first thing driving the City Council was what the community aspired to and wanted to achieve, then followed by City government in service to those aspirations and goals. Mayor Roe noted that his version separated community from organizational aspirations, since he thought the community aspirations should drive the rest.
City Manager Malinen noted that, with concurrence from Mayor Roe, the community the aspirations were essentially a restatement of the broader Imagine Roseville 2025 goals.
City Manager Malinen opined that, while those goals worked well as a broad category of focus for the organization and represented the community, the Department Heads restated them for specific initiatives and projects under that broader category; and in line with department-specific strategic plans. If that was the consensus of the City Council, then the existing mission statement would work well as an independent statement, moving from a broad statement, then broken down into categories that drive strategic planning now and in the future.
Mayor Roe suggested that the mission statement itself could become the introductory statement of the aspirational statements as well.
Councilmember Johnson agreed with the comments of Councilmember McGehee with the existing mission statement (Attachment A); however, he agreed with Mayor Roe that the mission statement should go after aspirations. Councilmember Johnson expressed his preference that the aspirations and goals, along with the mission statement move forward, since he opined that they captured the views of the community, the City Council and staff.
Councilmember Willmus concurred with Councilmembers McGehee and Johnson that the mission statement should lead, and then flow into the community aspirations. However, Councilmember Willmus opined that he preferred mission statement (Attachment B) better than either that of either Attachments A or C.
Councilmember McGehee expressed her preference for the mission statements and outline of Attachment D since it included a mission statement for the entire City, then one specific to the City Council, at least this particular City Council but not necessarily all future City Councils since that mission statement may change based on changes in community aspirations or changes in the community itself. However, Councilmember McGehee questioned the bullet point (line 25) of Attachment D that included “…mentally active and healthy…” questioning how the City could possibly meet that aspiration since it was an individual issue.
Councilmember Johnson opined that the community could aspire toward that goal.
Councilmember McGehee opined that the other things were individual goals but overarching in Attachment A; however, she still preferred Attachment D, with the exception on the mental health statement.
Mayor Roe provided his perspective of Attachment D in relation to having a City and City Council mission statement separately, expressing his preference that the City Council as part of City government, and in Attachment A, the mission statement made reference to both staff and the City Council, recognizing their different roles; and then leading to aspirations.
Mayor Roe expressed his support for Attachment A as a starting point; with his secondary support for the mission statement in Attachment B, suggesting that the two be melded; leading into aspirations similar to those of Attachment B. Regarding the aspiration language of Attachments C and D, Mayor Roe recognized the need to be more concise; however, he had specifically chosen certain words, and those provided in Attachments C and D didn’t serve the same purpose in capturing the meaning of what he was attempting to accomplish in his language, and those things from the Imagine Roseville 2025 and the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
Councilmember McGehee noted that neighborhoods would be physically connected through parks and trails and technologically connected through e-mails, etc. Councilmember McGehee suggested that while overall they could be provided with more opportunities to be cohesive, they could also draw together as a group to form their own sub-community as parallel structures. Councilmember McGehee volunteered to work with Mayor Roe on further wordsmithing the document.
Related to the “physically and mentally active and health; and…” statement on Attachment B, Mayor Roe noted that this language was taken directly from past documents for a healthy community, both physically and mentally.
Councilmember Willmus, speaking to Attachment B’s aspirations, opined that he could see the parks function in most of those items; and concurred with Mayor Roe on spelling it out and specifying it; and supported the aspirations outlined in Attachment B, including keeping physically and mentally health. However, Councilmember Willmus advised that he was willing to compromise on the format of the mission statement itself.
Mayor Roe suggested that he and Councilmember McGehee, as a subcommittee, work on revising it further and return to the full body with a revised draft.
Councilmembers Johnson and Willmus concurred.
Councilmember McGehee thanked staff for their input.
b. Discuss City Manager’s Goals
A bench handout, entitled, “Roseville City Manager Goals Suggestions dated 9.2011-12.2012” was provided with minor revisions as noted, and attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Mayor Roe and City Manager Malinen highlighted those minor revisions to Goals 1 and 5.
Mayor Roe thanked Councilmember McGehee for her work in developing these goals based on City Manager Malinen’s draft and previous modifications and input from individual Councilmembers over the last few months; and expressed his appreciation for the final document and additional input of City Manager Malinen over the last week.
Councilmember McGehee asked that additional formatting be done to convert the printing to all be horizontal, rather than vertical for categories; and expressed her preference that a word other than “competency” be used, such as “areas of expertise.
Mayor Roe suggested that the language from the evaluation form itself or survey be used to remain consistent.
Councilmember McGehee referenced page 5, item 3 and suggested that the language be revised to read: “Support efforts of the Civic Engagement Task Force,” with the Outcome Measurements for City Manager Malinen that: “Following the Human Rights Commission Civic Engagement report presentation to the City Council, and their acceptance of that report, the City Council would establish priorities; and the City Manager would bring his plan for implementing those priorities to the City Council.”
Councilmember Johnson concurred; and referencing the “competency” category, stated that the City Council was looking to evaluate the level or areas of execution by the City Manager in his annual review; and would be better reflected with a category such as “level of execution in these areas.”
After further discussion, it was the consensus of Councilmembers to completely remove the “competency” heading and address “outcome measurements” more specifically.
City Manager Malinen, addressing Page 5, Goal 3 specifically, reviewed the rationale in his outcome measurements for that goal, anticipating that the Civic Engagement Task Force would report to the City Council, but not necessarily accepting them en mass; at which time they would seek review and comment from staff to determine which items were already implemented, those that created more of a challenge or were deemed too expensive; with staff returning after their review and providing that input to the City Council, with City Manager Malinen making those “recommendations.”
Councilmember McGehee opined that she had anticipated a different order in that process, with the Task Force reporting to the City Council, and in their subsequent discussions, some things would be supported, and some not; with the City Manager charged with taking that discussion and report and bringing an implementation plan back to the City Council based on that discussion.
City Manager Malinen noted that it was conceivable that he could recommend that the City Council not act on specific items as well.
Councilmember McGehee opined that she wanted it to be clear that it was an implementation plan.
Mayor Roe, in addressing this item, suggested that the “Outcome Measurement” be revised to read: “Following the Human Rights Commission Civic Engagement report presentation to the City Council, supply the City Council with a report review and “recommendations for [implementation].”
Councilmember McGehee questioned what “report to the City Council” actually meant; a written or an oral report; and expressed her preference for a written report.
Mayor Roe asked City Manager Malinen for his interpretation.
City Manager Malinen advised that either a written or an oral report could be provided, depending on the item itself. City Manager Malinen advised that he anticipated most would be written reports, some status reports, but other items where an oral report may suffice. However, City Manager Malinen advised that a written report could be provided for each item if so requested by the City Council as a whole.
Councilmember Willmus suggested a written report would be preferable, including a listing of those items that may already be in process.
City Manager Malinen noted that the Civic Engagement Task Force had been producing a significant number of ideas to-date.
Councilmember McGehee advised that she was not asking for a doctoral thesis, and using Goal #5 on page 1 as an example, advised that she wanted something more concrete than just a discussion referencing her notes.
City Manager Malinen duly noted that request.
Councilmember Johnson thanked Councilmember McGehee and Mayor Roe for working on this with City Manager Malinen; opining that it looked very good and he was willing to support it.
In summarizing the revisions to the document for further tweaking, City Manager Malinen noted, with Councilmember concurrence, the need to clean up the formatting by re-orienting vertical sections; remove “competency” as a header; and other comments as noted above; and attempt to consolidate it to use fewer pages.
Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approve City Manager’s 2012 Goals as presented in version 9.2001-12.2012;” as presented in the bench handout; and as amended.
14. City Manager Future Agenda Review
City Manager Malinen reviewed upcoming agenda items.
15. Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings
At the request of Councilmember McGehee on the timing for a response to Mr. Shapira, Mayor Roe advised that staff would look into and report back to the City Council on possible options.
Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 7:17 pm.