City Council

City Council Meeting Minutes

Regular Meeting

January 25, 2010

1.         Roll Call

Mayor Klausing called to order the Roseville City Council regular meeting at approximately 6:00 pm and welcomed everyone.

(Voting and Seating Order for January: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing)

Councilmember Pust arrived at approximately 6:23 pm. City Attorney Charles Bartholdi was also present.

2.         Approve Agenda

By consensus, the agenda was approved as presented.

3.         Public Comment

Mayor Klausing called for public comment by members of the audience on any non-agenda items. 

a.         Susan Dwyer-French, 319 Capital View Avenue and Ray McDonald, 2241 Marion Street 

Ms. French presented a petition, entitled, “Noise Wall to End Before Marion Street Petition,” attached hereto and made a part thereof, to the City Council from Capitol View residents along Highway 36 opposing construction of the 20 foot noise wall and previous action of the City Council at their June 29, 2009 meeting supporting that construction.  Ms. French advised that residents were asking that the City Council consider modifying their previous resolution, based on a lack of understanding of Capitol View residents and new information learned earlier this week at a public informational meeting with Jim Tolaas of Ramsey County Public Works and the City’s Public Works Director Duane Schwartz at the OVAL.  Ms. French further advised that this opposition for construction of the noise wall in their front yard was the consensus of the majority of Capitol View residents.  Ms. French noted that opposition included the height of the noise wall, its location in their front yards, and adverse affects to their quality of life, air and sunshine, loss of visibility, and the loss of psychological and social amenities with loss of their view of vehicular traffic and weather conditions along Highway 36. 

Councilmember Pust arrived at this time: 6:23 p.m.

Ms. French distributed supporting documentation, including a map, attached hereto and made a part thereof, indicating those property owners opposed, and the one resident supporting the noise wall, as well as those properties either vacant or with data unavailable. 

Ray McDonald, 2241 Marion Street

Mr. McDonald, assisting Ms. French, asked that the wall end slightly before Marion Street as indicated on the aerial map, not including Caliber Ridge, who will be providing their own presentation at a future City Council meeting, based on Mr. McDonald’s discussions with their Executive Director.

Mayor Klausing thanked residents for their presentation, the information and their testimony, and clarified the request of the residents for the City Council to modify their original resolution supporting the noise wall as part of this MnDOT project, making that recommendation based on what the neighborhood supported.  Mayor Klausing advised that staff would prepare additional information for consideration by the City Council at the next City Council meeting, and invited spokespeople of the Capitol View residents to submit any additional information to staff; and directed staff to notice Ms. French and Mr. McDonald on behalf of the neighborhood of that meeting date and time.

          b.         Bobbie Carpenter, 410 McCarrons Boulevard S

Ms. Carpenter advised that her sanitary sewer line had repeatedly frozen, with sewage backing up into her basement at extensive personal cost to her.  Ms. Carpenter advised that the backup had occurred again on February 13, 2009, with more damage.  Ms. Carpenter noted that Public Works Director Duane Schwartz had been most helpful and sympathetic to her, but she was unable to get any remedy or resolution in contacting other agencies (i.e., Rice Creek Watershed District, Ramsey County Public Works, the State Attorney General’s office; and the Roseville City Council).  Ms. Carpenter advised that she was continually told that this was not their issue and they referred her elsewhere.  Ms. Carpenter sought financial assistance for this approximate $6,000 out-of-pocket expense.

Mayor Klausing received documentation of the bills to-date and a record of the sewer back-ups, provided as a bench handout to each Councilmember and City Manager Malinen.

Mayor Klausing asked that staff and the City Attorney review the information and the situation, and asked that Ms. Carpenter allow the City Council time for due diligence prior to their response to her.

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

          Mayor Klausing announced the first public Open House related to revising the City’s Zoning Code to comply with the recently-adopted Comprehensive Plan, scheduled for February 4, 2010 in the City Hall Council Chambers from 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. and encouraged the public to attend to provide input and receive information on the rewrite.

          Mayor Klausing announced the upcoming Roseville Home & Garden Fair scheduled for February 20, 2010, at the Fairview Community Center, with staff scheduled to make a presentation later in the meeting.

Councilmember Pust, as President of the Foundation, distributed the annual audited financial statements to the City Council of the North Suburban Community Foundation.

Councilmember Roe noted the ongoing process to update the Parks Master Plan and the number of opportunities for the community to provide input over the next few months through a variety of venues, and encouraged residents to provide their input for the City’s parks and recreation programs over the next 20 years.  Councilmember Roe noted that the next Listening Session was scheduled on January 28, 2010 at Grace Church on County Road B-2, and another Community Meeting was scheduled on February 10, 2010 at the OVAL, with additional information available on the City’s website and from the Parks and Recreation Department.

5.         Recognitions, Donations, Communications

a.         Proclaim February as Black History Month

Mayor Klausing read a proclamation declaring February as Black History Month in the City of Roseville, inviting all members of the Roseville community to renew their commitment to ensuring racial equality, understanding and justice.

Klausing moved, Johnson seconded, a proclamation declaring February to be Black History Month in the City of Roseville, inviting the Roseville community to renew their commitment to ensuring racial equality, understanding and justice.

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

6.         Approve Minutes

a.                 Approve Minutes of January 11, 2010 Regular Meeting

Johnson moved, Pust seconded, approval of the minutes of the January 11, 2010 Regular meeting as presented.

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

7.                 Approve Consent Agenda

There were no additional changes to the Consent Agenda than those previously noted.  At the request of Mayor Klausing, City Manager Bill Malinen briefly reviewed those items being considered under the Consent Agenda.

a.                 Approve Payments 

Councilmember Ihlan noted on Page 2 of the Check Register, a number of expenses for “Dance Costumes” totaling approximately $10,000 and sought clarification if this was a City expense or to be reimbursed to the City.

City Manager Malinen advised that he would seek out that clarification from staff for Councilmember Ihlan.

Councilmember Ihlan further noted on Page 16, an expense of $3,000 for a sidewalk at Rainbow Foods, and questioned if that was a City expense.

Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon responded that this was the City’s cost-share portion for half the trail in the right-of-way to replace the previous sidewalk relocated and grades corrected as part of the expansion of Rainbow Foods, with cost sharing from the City’s Trail Fund and Rainbow Foods.

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

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

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

Roe moved, Johnson seconded, approval of general purchases and/or contracts as follows:

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

c.                  Set City Council Strategic Planning Meeting for Saturday, February 13, 2010

Roe moved, Johnson seconded, scheduling a Special Strategic Planning Meeting for Saturday, February 13, 2010 from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. in the Fireside Room at the Roseville Skating Center.

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

d.                 Approve Request by Clearwire for a 60-day Conditional Use Extension for a Tower in Acorn Park

Roe moved, Johnson seconded, acceptance of the written request from Clearwire, an applicant for approval of a telecommunications tower in Acorn Park as a CONDITIONAL USE, to extend the final action timeline for an additional 60-days, to expire on April 7, 2010, to allow further exploration of an alternate location within the park and surrounding area.

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

e.                 Adopt a Resolution Approving Request by Complete Building Maintenance for a Conditional Use for Outdoor Storage of Vehicles, Equipment, and Landscaping Equipment at 2931 Partridge Road (PF10-003)

Councilmember Ihlan sought clarification, with Mr. Trudgeon responding, on the type of materials proposed for storage in enclosed bins at the rear of the parking lot.

Roe moved, Johnson seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10780 entitled, “A Resolution Approving Outdoor Storage of Buses and the Vehicles, Equipment, and Supplies associated with Landscaping and Snow Removal, at 2931 Partridge Road, as a CONDITIONAL USE in Accordance with Roseville City Code, Section 1014.01, for Complete Building Maintenance (CBM), (PF10-003).”

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

f.                   Appoint Grass Lake Water Management Board Members

Roe moved, Johnson seconded, appointment of Joan Manzara and Jeff Boldt to the Grass Lake Watershed Management Organization Board for three year terms to expire on December 31, 2012.

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

g.                 Adopt a Resolution in Support of Complete Streets Legislation

Roe moved, Johnson seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10781 entitled, “Resolution of Support for a Statewide Complete Streets Policy and a MnDOT-Led Complete Streets Partnership with Local Governments.”

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

h.                 Rice Street Interchange Project Undergrounding of Overhead Power Lines Update

Roe moved, Johnson seconded, acceptance of a staff update on the potential undergrounding of overhead power lines as part of the Rice Street Interchange Project.”

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

8.         Consider Items Removed from Consent

9.                 General Ordinances for Adoption

10.             Presentations

a.                 Legislative Agenda Discussion with Representative Mindy Greiling (54A) and Representative Bev Scalze (54B)

Mayor Klausing introduced and welcomed both Representatives Scalze and Greiling.

Representative Bev Scalze

Representative Scalze encouraged City Councilmembers to contact them at any time for assistance.  Rep. Scalze reviewed her work on several committees of interest to the City of Roseville, including the Capital Investment Committee and the Natural Resources Committee.  Issues included the Rice Street Bridge and funding sources for this 2010 project; and the need to bring the State of MN’s infrastructure up to par with other states to provide a quality to that infrastructure for those large employers choosing to remain and expand within the State of MN for the state’s economic viability and job market.  Rep. Scalze advised that she was attempting to secure leftover monies from the County Road I/Medtronic project for the Rice Street Bridge project.  As part of her work on the Natural Resources Committee, Rep. Scalze noted the issue of sediment from undiluted coal tar sealants in water quality and monies provided to the U of MN and the MPCA to determine future remediation.  

1)     Rep. Scalze noted a pending bill for the Capital Investment Committee for a Fire Training Center in Maplewood; and a bill to increase the level of veto authority for Housing Improvement Areas, based on past experiences, including the City of Roseville, with Senate authors still being sought for that bill.

Discussion among Councilmembers and Rep. Scalze included the Governor’s Bonding Bill; appreciation to both Representatives for their assistance to the City for including the OVAL in past bonding bills; and clarification that the undiluted coal tar was not used by Cities, but was used throughout the Midwest from Texas to MN.

Rep. Scalze noted her pleasure in working with the City’s Public Works Director Duane Schwartz on the Rice Street Bridge project; and noted the collaborative efforts of all three cities involved.

Mayor Klausing suggested that the City’s Public Works, Environment, and Transportation Citizen Advisory Commission may want to look at the undiluted coal tar issue to see if it was a concern at a local level.

Rep. Scalze advised that she was aware of three ordinances adopted to-date: Austin, TX; the Wisconsin county where Madison, WI is located; and Washington, DC.

Representative Mindy Greiling

Rep. Greiling addressed the huge deficit and affects on Minnesota Cities and School Districts; and the actual size of the deficit based on the February forecast due out soon, and depending on the March 15, 2010 Supreme Court resolution on whether the Governor’s unallotments would stand.   Rep. Greiling opined that the issues remained, from her perspective over the years, but that they continued to grow larger, with an unprecedented deficit.  Rep. Greiling addressed loss and impacts to Cities of Local Government Aid (LGA); cuts from the State to the County to local governments and their respective impacts; fair and progressive funding at the state level and difficulties in pursuing a consensus for that viewpoint.  Rep. Greiling solicited the assistance of local elected officials and residents in assisting them with this legislation. 

Discussion among Councilmembers and Representatives Greiling and Scalze included levy limits and impacts to local government in 2010 and 2011; cooperative work of Rep. Scalze with Chair of the Tax Committee, Representative Lenczewski; School Districts seeking legislation to allow them to levy without going to the voters with a referendum; philosophical benefits of Market Value Homestead Credits (MVHC) and needs to reform this funding mechanism to protect cities based on honest realities; and corrections to upcoming property tax statements that will address only those actual aids and credits made available to respective cities.

Additional discussion included transit options that would assist the City of Roseville and lack of local government support for rail in addition to buses in the NE Metro Corridor; and potential action for early childhood resources to be included with K-12 legislation.

Mayor Klausing thanked Representatives Scalze and Greiling for their attendance and continued work in the Legislature.

b.                 Home and Garden Fair update

As introduced by Mayor Klausing, Community Development Director Trudgeon reminded residents of the upcoming 15^th Annual Living Smarter Home & Garden Fair, with additional information available at www.livingsmarter.org or by calling 651/792-7079, for this rebranded event with an energy-related emphasis.

Mr. Trudgeon highlighted some of this year’s events and seminars; acknowledged the six sponsors; and expressed appreciation to the generous restaurant community for providing door prize donations.  Mr. Trudgeon advised that staff would be sending the City Council an e-mail in the near future to sign up for a booth during the day, as a great opportunity to show their support of the event and to interact with residents.  With 1,000 estimated attendance in 2008, Mr. Trudgeon anticipated a greater attendance for this year’s event.

Mayor Klausing heralded the event as an ever-improving opportunity; and expressed appreciation to the City’s HRA and staff for their work in coordinating the event.

Mr. Trudgeon recognized City employees, Kara Hoier and Jeanne Kelsey, as well as a significant number of volunteers in the community for their efforts in making this a quality event.

Councilmember Roe attested to the volunteer enthusiasm and support that he had recently observed.

c.                  Annual Code Enforcement Report

Codes Coordinator Don Munson presented the annual code enforcement report as detailed in the staff report dated January 25, 2010. 

Mr. Munson noted that this enforcement is accomplished through two separate Programs: the reactive complaint-based Land Use Code Enforcement and the pro-active Neighborhood Enhancement Program (NEP).  Mr. Munson respectively reviewed the closed cases summary and timeline for closure; compliance rates; case types similar and comparable year to year; a synopsis of cases from 2004 – 2009, with increased numbers due to reassignment of staff and better documentation, and a map displaying areas of enforcement throughout the City.  Mr. Munson noted that overall, quick compliance and cooperation were received from residents, evidenced by the closed case rate and timing; with a 20% reduction in cases in the NEP from 2008 and 2009 due to increased education of neighborhoods and their support of the program and concern for their neighborhoods, with most comments very supportive.

Mr. Munson reviewed information previously requested by the City Council for those public hearings held and abatement billings in 2009; with 16 of the 20 public hearing cases resolved to-date, and three working their way through the court system.  Mr. Munson noted that, while a significant amount of staff time was required for this enforcement, bringing them before the City Council for abatement did serve to help resolve cases; and reminded Councilmembers that all expenses were eventually recovered through voluntary payment or assessment to property taxes. 

Mr. Munson provided before and after pictures of several foreclosed homes where abatement action was taken in 2009; and anticipated several procedural changes in 2010 to speed the documentation process; as well as bringing forward several proposed ordinance changes for City Council consideration and additional public education in 2010.

Councilmember Roe thanked staff for working cooperatively with the City Council on this concerted effort to make the program work better for citizens; and noted the benefits already being realized for the residents and the entire community.

Mayor Klausing concurred with Councilmember Roe, expressing his particular interest in the value of the education efforts to allow residents to support the importance of maintaining a quality of life and the market values of homes in their neighborhood.

d.                 Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update

Parks and Recreation Director Lonnie Brokke introduced Citizen Facilitator Jake Jacobson of the 28-member Citizen Advisory Team (CAT) convened in September of 2009 for a ten month review of the Roseville Parks and Recreation System to process situational discussions, receive community input, and facilitate professional findings.

Mr. Jacobson presented a summary of activities to-date by a Power Point presentation, to be made available on the City’s website in the near future; and thanked the Roseville City Council and citizens for their input to-date.  Mr. Jacobson reviewed the efforts to-date in creating an up-to-date Master Plan for the Roseville Parks and Recreation System, including background and reference information gathering over the first few months of the CAT; information gathering from various community meetings and sources; park planning history since the first Master Plan was developed in the1960’s with updates provided over the years; and development of this Master Plan as a direct outcome of the Imagine Roseville 2025 community visioning process in serving vital community functions, framing future investments and community-defined goals, and shaping the City’s Parks and Recreation System over the next 20 years.

Mr. Jacobson addressed the purpose of the process in engaging the community to establish or reinforce standards, to anticipate future needs, and noted the broad-range of community interests represented by the CAP.  Mr. Jacobson, with input from Mr. Brokke, addressed input received from more than 1,000 questionnaires received to-date; the upcoming second Community Meeting scheduled on February 10, 2010 at the Roseville Skating Center from 7:00 – 9:30 p.m., and encouraged the public to attend; Sector Listening Sessions underway allowing for more in-depth discussions with individuals representing groups, associations, and specific neighborhoods connected to park facilities and recreation programs; and attendance at other Citizen Advisory meetings. Mr. Jacobson provided some preliminary findings that neighborhood-scaled parks were meeting the needs of the Roseville community for the most part, except in the southwest part of the community that was not being reasonably served, which proved consistent with the findings of the Comprehensive Plan Update.    

Mr. Jacobson and Mr. Brokke encouraged the public to visit www.cityofroseville.com and link to the questionnaire, or view the upcoming meeting schedule, or to contact Lonnie Brokke by phone direct at 651/792-7101.

Mr. Brokke noted that the planning process has become more than just parks and recreation, but about the community and integration of various areas through connectivity and gathering places.  Mr. Brokke advised that, once public input is received, Technical Advisory Team advisors comprised of City Department Heads, City Manager Malinen, Mounds View and Roseville School District representatives, Watershed District representatives; the Minnesota Parks and Recreation Association; surrounding community representatives, as well as business community representatives, would then weigh into the process. 

Councilmember Pust encouraged the CAT and staff to include discussions on available resources as another tier to the “wish list” planning process.  Councilmember Pust further noted that bike and walking trails, an apparent priority, could be easily quantified with a per block or per mile cost to allow that to be a tangible piece of the discussion. 

Mr. Brokke advised that the resource aspect would be part of policy and procedure discussions in determining priorities for the Master Plan, with the CAT discussing resources in greater detail.

As a Council representative to the CAT, Councilmember Roe highlighted some of his personal thoughts and impressions, including the need to reach out to those working in Roseville or coming for the retail amenities but not necessarily living in Roseville, but using park and recreation services; pursuing listening sessions with business owners; and micro-park options allowing for park-like amenities within new developments in the community, that may be on private versus public property. Councilmember Roe personally acknowledged the CAT members as a great and diverse representation of the community - geographically, demographically, and economically – and the great process being utilized in this CAT, taking past things learned from other groups (i.e., Comprehensive Plan Task Force) and suggested that its model be used for future citizen teams.

11.             Public Hearings

12.             Business Items (Action Items)

a.                 Approve Request to Issue a Ramsey County Court Citation for Unresolved Code Violations at 1450 County Road C

Permit Coordinator Munson reviewed the request for a Ramsey County Court Citation as detailed in the staff report dated January 25, 2010; providing a visual update on the property as of today of this industrial property (zoned I-1) owned by Ms. Joy E. Albrecht, residing in St. Paul, MN with the subject property occupied by Minnesota Irrigation.  Mr. Munson noted that there had been ongoing and repetitive complaints over the last 10 to 15 years with this property from adjacent residential property owners abutting the rear yard. 

Mr. Munson advised that Mr. Albrecht is currently in Ramsey County Court on a separate issue involving outside storage violations at 1408 County Road C where he operates Albrecht Landscaping, and while he’s been slowly cleaning that site, he has been temporarily moving vehicles and materials to the 1450 site. Mr. Munson noted that, while Mr. Albrecht claims that he will comply, he can provide no date for completion, and continues to be unresponsive, with court action required on the 1408 property before he took action.

Mr. Munson summarized the numerous violations consisting of open storage of materials in the rear, side and front yard areas; operative vehicles and equipment stored within the 40’ rear setback area adjacent to residential property; semi-trailers in a front yard area being utilized for storage; and parking/storing inoperative/unlicensed vehicles on the property; and the specific code section violations.

Staff recommended that the Community Development Department be authorized to issue a Ramsey County Court Citation to Ms. Joy Albrecht for violations of Roseville’s Zoning Ordinance and City Code, occurring at 1450 County Road C.

Discussion among Councilmembers and Mr. Munson location, height and construction of the fence at the 1450 property (built approximately two months ago).

Councilmember Pust advised that she had been in court when the 1408 case came up, and noted that nothing else helped initiate this clean-up; and opined that the clean-up was still taking too much time, particularly the movement of violations from the 1408 to 1450 site; and encouraged the Prosecutor’s Office to make this a priority.  Councilmember Pust spoke in support of moving forward with this action, given the time in the court system for the 1408 site, in addition to the number of years the violations had been repeatedly and consistently occurring.

Pust moved, Johnson seconded, directing staff to issue a Ramsey County Court Citation to Ms. Joy Albrecht for violations of Roseville’s Zoning Ordinance and City Code, as detailed in the Request for Council Action dated January 25, 2010, at 1450 County Road C.

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

Mayor Klausing concurred with Councilmember Pust’s comments that this situation had been going on too long.

Mr. Munson estimated that the compliance at the 1408 property was about 80% completed.

13.             Business Items – Presentations/Discussions

a.                 Discuss Proposed Changes to City Code, Chapter 302, Liquor Control related to Conditions of License and Civil Penalty

A Council Subcommittee of Members Roe and Pust discussed and provided draft changes to City Code, Chapter 302, for Liquor Control related to Conditions of the License and the Civil Penalty, prompted by past issues from the Davanni’s case of alcohol sales after license suspension and State Statute requirements and provisions. 

Councilmember Roe summarized the proposed ordinance changes (Attachment A), with proposed changes that Manager and Serve Training be a condition of the license, not optional, and that proof of that training be maintained by the licensee; that a less drastic penalty be applied in some cases between suspension and revocation and fine; and further review of levels of penalties for minors, currently two-tiered, with one tier with up five levels of violation and respective penalty suggested in the revisions, with the first violation not subject to only a letter of warning, but immediate penalty.

From her perspective, Councilmember Pust elaborated on Councilmember Roe’s summary, and whether a five-year revocation for a violation during suspension, as proscribed by State Statute, was too drastic.  Councilmember Pust noted that the City’s current ordinance was enacted ten years ago, and was probably thought adequate; however, she opined that community values and recognition of the harms caused by alcohol abuse by minors had evolved, with the majority of the Council supporting treating the issue as seriously as possible within the confines of City ordinance and within the parameters of State law which allows two options: license suspension of only up to60 days and no more, or license revocation, and fines capped at $2,000. 

Councilmember Pust, in consultation with Councilmember Roe and law enforcement officers, reviewed the original rationale for the two-tiered training for incenting behavior; and current recognition that, as a responsible business owner in Roseville, training should no longer be optional and required by most insurance carriers.  Councilmember Pust advised, in meeting with Acting Chief Rick Mathwig and staff, they concurred that it would make their job easier, not harder; and their request for added language on Page 1 related to all licensees maintaining documentation evidencing training provisions and made available upon reasonable request by the City pursuant to the inspections provisions of the ordinance.  Councilmember Pust noted that the increased severity of penalties recognized society’s view that this is part of the job of local government to enact public policy reflecting their views. 

Councilmember Pust reviewed the proposed penalties on Page 3 of Attachment A, with the first three related to individual sales and penalties, and the remaining based on the policy of management versus the individual.  Councilmember Pust advised that the chart form was incorporated based on and typical of ordinances of other communities, the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) model ordinance, and State Statute.  Councilmember Pust advised that the City Attorney had reviewed the document and she further clarified that the revised language did not take away the City Council’s ability to deviate, with that language remaining intact. 

Discussion among Councilmembers included Fourth Amendment Rights allowing City inspectors access to the premises, with ordinance language (Subparagraph B on Page 1) their waiver of that right as a condition of the City granting a license to them.

Further discussion included the comparable cities (i.e., St. Paul, Coon Rapids, Burnsville, Bloomington, and Apple Valley ).

Councilmember Ihlan sought input from a representative of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) related to the original penalty structure versus the proposed structure before any decision is made on the revisions in how those revisions may impact incentives for compliance with reduced penalties. 

Mayor Klausing requested that staff follow up with a MADD representative before the next consideration of the revisions.

Further discussion among Councilmembers and Acting Police Chief Rick Mathwig included frequency of compliance checks related to prosecution versus other violations (i.e., Social Hosting Ordinance); house parties versus licensed businesses; police addressing a minor purchasing alcohol of the evidence rather than against the license holder; potential occurrence of multiple violations;

Councilmember Ihlan requested additional background information from Acting Chief Mathwig regarding recent cases of multiple violations and how the proposed ordinance would have impacted those businesses, or whether there was an actual problem with repeat violators, particularly in selling to underage people or sales to inebriated persons.

Mayor Klausing requested that staff provide that information, to ensure that the law of unintended consequences didn’t come into play with high penalty amounts and conditions drastically impacting the viability of a business and forcing a significant number of employees from their job.

Mayor Klausing thanked Councilmembers Roe and Pust for their work and rationale proposed in a more graduated system.

Additional discussion included whether assistance from the City’s Legislative Representatives to revise State Statute to increase the penalty cap was indicated; and whether 60 days was appropriate for a third violation, with the City Council retaining discretion for presumptive penalties.

Councilmember Johnson spoke in total support of the proposed revisions, opining that it was a great policy, and he thanked Councilmembers Pust and Roe for their work; supporting putting the onus on the manager and his trained employees, ensuring that that training was kept at that level and making management responsible in operating their business.

Further discussion ensued regarding the rationale in proposing a five day versus a 30 day suspension for the second violation; the due process hearing and non-renewal options as addressed in State Statute and referenced in City Ordinance; proof of training upon each license renewal (Page 1, Section C) to be incorporated into the renewal form processed by the City’s Finance Department; and ensuring that administrative oversight by the Police Department was covered by the license fees.

Councilmember Roe suggested that the Council may wish to notice license holders to receive their input on the proposed changes.

Klausing moved, Johnson seconded, to schedule a Public Hearing on revise City Ordinance, Section 302, for Monday, February 22, 2010; with the City’s license holders to be noticed as well.

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

b.                 Discuss Storm Water Illicit Discharge and Connections Ordinance

City Engineer Debra Bloom summarized the City’s MS4 (municipal separate storm sewer system) status, and federal mandates related to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP), covering six minimum control measures.  Those measures included public education and outreach; public participation/involvement; illicit discharge, detection and elimination; construction site runoff control; post-construction site runoff control; and pollution prevention/good housekeeping.  Ms. Bloom advised that these best management practices (BMP’s) and measurable goals were submitted annually to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) as required by the City’s MS4 permit; with further detail included in the Request for Council Action dated January 25, 2010.

Ms. Bloom advised that tonight’s discussion and proposed ordinance, Section 803.03: Storm Water Illicit Discharge and Connections (Attachment A) would address one of those six  measures - Illicit Discharge, Detection and Elimination (IDDE).

Ms. Bloom reviewed the purpose of the IDDE to address storm water sources not treated to remove pollutants, including but not limited to, heavy metals, toxics, oil and grease, solvents, dissolved phosphorus, nutrients, viruses, and bacteria that could significantly degrade water quality and threaten aquatic, wildlife and human health, and costing money to clean up.

Ms. Bloom provided a map of the City’s storm sewer system with 123 miles of storm sewer throughout the City.  Ms. Bloom provided an overview of the proposed ordinance prohibiting non-storm water discharge into the MS4; appropriate enforcement procedures and actions; inspection of storm sewer outfalls; investigate reports of illicit discharges (complaint calls); and education (i.e., home swimming pool owners and discharge of that chlorinated water).  Ms. Bloom advised that it was currently difficult if not impossible to enforce violations using the City’s nuisance ordinance, which did not meet the requirements of the SWPPP.

Ms. Bloom advised that, based on a model ordinance from the MPCA, the City’s Public Works, Environment and Transportation (PWET) Advisory Commission had systematically reviewed and revised the proposed ordinance, recommending that the City Council move forward with it, and that it was similar to ordinances in surrounding communities, providing extensive definitions and allowing for reasonable enforcement applicable to anything entering the City’s storm sewer system, with the Public Works Department administering the regulations to the maximum extent practicable.

Ms. Bloom reviewed the ordinance by section and general provisions for private properties to comply with watercourse protection and notification of spills; access to facilities by inspection staff to trace illicit discharges based on Fourth Amendment provisions based on recent case law; and in emergency situations, allowing staff to disconnect a suspected violator from the City’s storm sewer system to protect the overall City.

Discussion among Ms. Bloom, Public Works Director Duane Schwartz, and Councilmembers included access points on public rights-of-way; layout of model language with exemptions listed before general provisions based on the model ordinance; personal washing versus commercial washing of vehicles and how to address group fundraisers by an education campaign; and options to educate groups to redirect runoff to a pervious surface or to contain the area to address the larger concentration of soap and water from a group car wash.

Councilmember Ihlan noted that non-commercial is an exempt discharge; however, noted that in Section H2, there appeared to be some inconsistencies or ambiguities; and specifically noted the “shall” language and suggested that language should be “encouraged” or advisory instead.  Councilmember Ihlan also addressed Section H.4 related to removal of pollutants from impervious surfaces and how health or safety purposes could come into play.

Ms. Bloom provided an example of compost on a driveway, with 2/3 used and the remaining 1/3 needing to be disposed of.  Ms. Bloom advised that hosing the material into the storm system was to be avoided, but is they had swept up and removed the material to the most reasonable or maximum extent practicable, that was the intent of that section.

Mayor Klausing suggested that individual Council comments be provided to staff via e-mail for further consideration and discussion at a future meeting.

Councilmember Ihlan sought how the ordinance would apply to a vehicle parked on a City street leaking oil.

Public Works Director Duane Schwartz advised that this was a difficult situation, with considerable discussion held with the City Attorney on this issue, and dependent on the degree of the violation and how susceptible the situation was to polluting the environment; what containment measures were being taken; whether it was a one-time event that was difficult to enforce, or if it was repeated over time, building a stain.

Further discussion included terms of enforcement; the process when illicit discharges were detected and the need for the responding staff to have a knowledge of the City’s storm sewer system for location of catch basins and manholes in order to trace the source.

Additional discussion related to General Provisions, Section H.1 (iii) for pools and the vague language related to pools and chlorine evaporation, depending on the amount of chlorine in the water and the time required for it to dissipate, with staff seeking to educate residents on the current standard, which is changeable, and homeowners responsible for testing and/or sampling for compliance.

Mr. Schwartz suggested language could be included in that section such as “detectable levels of chlorine” to further clarify the intent.

Councilmember Roe suggested that language of Section H.1 (last sentence) be clarified related to a reasonable person not being a discharge.

Councilmember Johnson noted a typographical correction needed on Page 5, line 18 (that).

Mayor Klausing thanked staff and the PWET Commission for their work on this ordinance, noting that the importance of environmental issues and impacts was a recurring theme and priority expressed during the Imagine Roseville 2025 process.

Ms. Bloom directed the City Council’s attention to Section N related to enforcement, seeking Council direction on the appeal process to the City’s Public Works Director, then to the City Manager, then to the City Council; and whether this is the process level preferred by the City Council.  Ms. Bloom advised that, in discussions with the City Attorney, staff had appropriate municipal authority as indicated.

Mayor Klausing noted that there were two views: that the City Council should be involved in policy issues, but that they did not adjudicate those issues well as a political body; and another view that an individual should be able to address their elected officials if they felt they were being treated unfairly.

Councilmember Roe, not leaning toward either option, noted that the City currently had both processes (i.e., Liquor Control, Community Development Department); and that he tended to lean toward the City Council for appeal, however, had not finalized that position.

City Manager Malinen advised that he heard Administrative Fine appeals; and could consult further with the City Attorney and make a recommendation to the City Council.

Councilmember Johnson expressed his concern that there appeared to be significant ambiguity from his review of the ordinance, and suggested that staff look at it again toward that concern to avert future complaints.

c.                  Discuss Tower Rental Fees

Finance Director Chris Miller, by previous request of the City Council, provided background information on tower and ground equipment lease fees and their allocation since their inception and initial tower construction in 1997 and receipt of fees in 1999.  Mr. Miller noted that fees from that initial tower were earmarked to repay an internal loan used to purchase land in what is now known as Reservoir Woods, with that loan repaid from available tax increment financing (TIF) proceeds in 1999, allowing tower fees to be redirected to the City’s IT function. 

Mr. Miller noted that these fees, as detailed in the Request for Council Action dated January 25, 2010, along with revenue derived from Joint Powers Agreements (JPA’s) had allowed the City to provide IT services almost exclusively without property tax dollars, with those fees benefiting all City functions in a proportionate manner for IT hardware and software purchases and updates, and IT support staff.  Mr. Miller advised that he could find no other definitive formal discussion, action or policy at the City Council level from his review of meeting minutes as to the discussion points or rationale for that earmarking at that time.

Councilmember Johnson, who initiated this request for background information, thanked Mr. Miller for providing it.

Mayor Klausing, in response to Councilmember Johnson’s query on any City Council perspectives on that decision-making, advised that he had served on the City’s Infrastructure Advisory Commission during that time when the Reservoir Woods property was acquired;  and advised that he had then and continued to support the City Council making decisions based on priorities and spending at a program and policy level, and was not as concerned about where those particular funds came from or how they contributed the City.

Councilmember Johnson didn’t disagree; however, he advised that his interest had been sparked when the IT Department sought the addition of an additional ½ FTE position in their department, rationalizing and justifying that request based on them not using tax revenue.  Councilmember Johnson questioned the transparency of that approach, and opined that it was insulting, was misrepresented and misleading.  Councilmember Johnson advised that a second flag was before him in considering putting another tower in another park, and questioned if sufficient discussion had been held; and if this was to become practice, if funds from towers should be appropriated to the diminished park to make it better for those impacted by placing it in the park. 

Discussion among Councilmembers included future action to address this concern of Councilmember Johnson during the next budget cycle; and fairness considerations in displacing that revenue throughout the City.

Councilmember Johnson suggested that the issue was two-tiered:

1)     While recognizing that the IT function was unique to the City of Roseville, its representation should be done with care with full transparency; and

2)     A serious discussion was needed on the placement of towers in parks, and impacts to neighborhood and park aesthetics and values; and whether rental fees or a portion thereof should be used to repay for the eyesore in a City park.

Councilmember Roe spoke in support of further discussion of whether to put towers on park property and whether that should be a policy of the City, and if a policy whether a percentage of the income be dedicated to the park.  However, Councilmember Roe, on the topic of allocating funds, opined that the City Council needed to have more discussion on revenues and expenditures of the IT function, take proportionate monies from each department to support that function; or apply tower revenue to the General Fund; and questioned whether the end result is different.

Mayor Klausing noted that this was a common goal for Roseville, and shouldn’t create competing funding for departments.

Councilmember Johnson noted that currently the IT Department was a recipient against all other departments, using as an example the Pavement Management Plan (PMP) created by design, while this funding source just happened.

Councilmember Roe, from a policy point of view, suggested that the City’s Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission review whether a policy was needed related to siting towers on park land; and if that were a policy, where the money should go and if to parks, what criteria should apply, recognizing that, while still City property, park property was different than water tower or other public properties; and that a determination was needed before additional tower placements and revenue were forthcoming.

Roe moved, Johnson seconded, directing the City’s Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council policy issues for the siting of communication towers in City parks and whether any revenue from those leases should go toward park funding.

Further discussion included desirability for input from other Advisory Commissions in the decision-making a policy development process;

Councilmember Ihlan opined that that the first policy discussion of the City Council needed to be where towers are sited in the community; and that referring both issues to the Parks and Recreation Commission skewed that discussion.  Councilmember Ihlan questioned if, before deciding where revenues go, whether the City wanted the towers at all; and further opined that discussion on fees be kept separate until the City Council determined their policy on siting towers.

Mayor Klausing concurred with Councilmember Ihlan, that City Council discussion was necessary in their role to look at decision-making from a broader, city-wide policy standpoint.

Councilmember Pust didn’t disagree with the City Council making the decision on whether to locate towers in City parks; however, she was not opposed to receiving input from the Commission. Councilmember Pust spoke in support of tower rental fees going into the General Fund, but that she did not consider this related to whether a tower was located in a City park or not.  Councilmember Pust opined that a tower located in a park diminished its value, and was opposed to locating them in public parks.

Councilmember Roe clarified that he understood that the City Council would make the ultimate decision; however, he noted that the City Council often referred issues to its advisory commissions to receive their input in that decision-making process.  Councilmember Roe noted that the Parks and Recreation Commission had been responding and making recommendation based on a single situation in Acorn Park, and that this would allow them to step back for a more basic and generic discussion as to whether towers were desirable in parks or not, noting that current policy is for them to be located on public land, and that park land is public land as well as water tower property and the City Hall campus.  Councilmember Roe recognized the passionate support of the City’s park system by the Commission; and similarities to current park dedication fee recommendations provided by the Commission to the City Council.

Mayor Klausing spoke in opposition to the motion, opining that it needed further City Council discussion before seeking a recommendation from the Commission.

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; and Johnson.

Nays: Ihlan and Klausing.

Motion carried.

Finance Director Miller clarified that there was no Information Technology (IT) Department, but that it was a centralized function among all departments; with the tower rental revenue coming to that function as a temporary collection point, and distributed among all departments through purchase of computer hardware and software equipment and support.  Mr. Miller further clarified that no City department was currently paying for any of that IT support from their department budget at this time.

d.                 Discuss 2011 Budgeting-for-Outcomes Process

Due to time constraints, Pust moved, Johnson seconded, tabling of this item to a future meeting.

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

e.                 Discuss Agenda for Strategic Planning Session

City Manager Malinen suggested using a similar format to that used in 2008 with Department Head input; development of short, medium and long-term goals consistent with the Imagine Roseville 2025 community visioning process; and advised that all City departments were currently in the process of updating their strategic plans for City Council information.

Mayor Klausing spoke in support of that approach; however, suggested that a discussion be included on the 2011 budget process, whether to use the Budgeting for Outcomes approach or defer to line items; and to receive input from Department Heads about their specific department challenges.  Mayor Klausing also suggested that hearing from individual Councilmembers as well as staff concerning any issues they saw for 2010 and 2011 that hadn’t been addressed as part of the Comprehensive Plan Update. 

Councilmember Roe urged that the budget discussion not be held at that session in order for it not to dominate the entire planning session; expressing his preference to have a broader discussion on what the City hoped to accomplish in 2010.

Mayor Klausing suggested, as a compromise, that the budget be discussed within a limited time allotment, to allow the City Council to have a sense of the budget process to be used.

f.                   Discuss a Resolution Amending the Citizen Advisory Commission Appointment and Reappointment Process

Mayor Klausing noted the minor language change that he was suggested and drafted by staff related to a quorum of the City Council rather than a minimum of five (5) members, based on practical application.

Klausing moved, Roe seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10782 (superseding Resolution 10266) entitled, “Appointment and Reappointment Process and Term Limits Policy – Roseville Citizen Advisory Commissions.”

Roll Call

Ayes: Pust; Roe; Johnson; Ihlan; and Klausing.

Nays: None.

Councilmember Roe suggested that the recently-adopted HRA policy effectively mirrors this new language as well.

g.                 Discuss City Manager Evaluation

Mayor Klausing asked that City Manager Malinen provide his input to the City Council for his annual evaluation; and anticipated use of the same questions for the review as those used in 2008.

Councilmember Johnson advised that he had some notes for Mayor Klausing from his recent meeting with City Manager Malinen.

Discussion ensued regarding finding different staff members to submit 360 degree evaluations; overlaps and/or widening the group of participants, with the City Council providing some overlap of participants.

14.             City Manager Future Agenda Review

City Manager Malinen reviewed upcoming agenda items.

Councilmember Roe reminded citizens to apply for the three Commission vacancies: two on the Parks and Recreation Commission and one on the Police Civil Service Commission.

15.             Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings

a.                 Recreational Vehicle Parking (Pust)

Councilmember Pust advised that she was looking for a brief discussion with Councilmembers following her preliminary discussions with staff, to be held at a future meeting before proceeding.

16.             Adjourn

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:00 pm.