HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC_Minutes_2005_0822
City of
~~~
City Council Meeting
City Council Chambers, 2660 Civic Center Drive
Minutes
Monday, August 22,2005
Call Roll Call Roll
Mayor Klausing called to order the Roseville City Council
regular meeting at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone.
Roll Call (Voting and Seating Order)
Councilmembers Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Mayor
Klausing. All were present.
City Attorney Scott Anderson was also present.
Approve Agenda Approve Agenda
Mayor Klausing called for any comments or discussion on
tonight's Agenda.
Councilmember Ihlan requested removal of Consent Agenda
Items 3.f, g, and h for discussion, respectively entitled, "Approve
the Request of Monarch Bus Service, Incorporated, to Install a
4,000 Gallon above-ground Fuel Tank at 1743 County Road C
(PF 3675);" "Approve United Properties' Final Planned Unit
Development (PUD) for Midland Hills, 2001 Fulham Street (PF
3670);" and "Approve Dennis Guptil's Final PUD, 185
McCarrons Boulevard (PF 3575)."
Councilmember Schroeder requested removal of Consent
Agenda Item 3.e entitled, "Approve the Request of Meritex for
an Interim Use Permit at 2258-2280 Walnut St. (PF 3659)."
There were no other changes to the Amended Agenda.
1. Receive Public Comment about City Issues Public Comment
Mayor Klausing called for public comment by members of the
audience on any non-agenda items.
/
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 2
A. John Kysylyczyn, 3083 N. Victoria Street
Mr. Kysylyczyn provided a bench handout with his
personal historical analysis of City Levies for Tax-
Supported Operations versus Inflation from 2000 through
2005 with additional detail provided as well.
Mr. Kysylyczyn also reviewed recent budget increases
from the City Police Department; encouraging the City
Council to request evidentiary infonnation related to
personnel needs to hold the department staff accountable.
Mr. Kysylyczyn concluded his comments by alerting the
City Council to a Pioneer Press article dated January 25,
2003 entitled, "Get help, probe neighborhoods before a
long-distance move;" and assumptions regarding higher
property taxes signifying better services.
No one else appeared to speak.
3. Approve Minutes
Approve Minutes
3.a Council Meeting of August 8, 2005 August 8, 2005
Kough moved, Maschka seconded, approval of the August
8, 2005 Council Meeting as presented.
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
3.b Council Meeting of August 15, 2005 August 15, 2005
Maschka moved, Kough seconded, approval of the August
15,2005 Council Meeting as presented.
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
Abstentions: Schroeder.
3. Consider Consent Items Consent Items
As previously noted, Consent Agenda Items 3.e, f, g and h were
removed for discussion.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 3
There were no additional changes to the Consent Agenda.
At the request of Mayor Klausing, City Manager Beets briefly
reviewed those items being considered under the Consent
Agenda.
3.a Approve Check Register Check Register
Schroeder moved, Kough seconded, approval of the
following claims and payments as presented.
ACH Payments $476,844.07
40346-40590 461,598.02
Total $938,442.09
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
3.b
Approve ContractslPurchases in Excess of $5,000
Schroeder moved, Kough seconded, approval of general
purchases and/or contracts for services as follows:
Contracts &
Purchases in Excess
of $5,000
Vendor Itemillescription Amount
Bergman Liquid Road for pathways at Langton $8,358.00
Companies Lake
Kath Fuel Oil Extend Blanket Purchase Order for fuel 50,000.00
Upper Cut Tree Additional amount to remove diseased 45,000.00
Service trees
Roseville Area Shared facility cost for Brimhall 16,787.26
Schools Elementarv
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
3.c Approve Business License Business License
Schroeder moved, Kough seconded approval of the
business license for W. J. Tobacco, 2805 Hamline
Avenue, for cigarette/tobacco products for the period of
one year beginning July 1,2005 and ending June 30, 2006.
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 4
3.i
4.
Nays: None.
3.d
Approve a One-Day Gambling License for the
Roseville Fire Department Auxiliary
Schroeder moved, Kough seconded, approval of the
Roseville Fire Department Auxiliary's request to conduct
a raffle on October 2, 2005 at Roseville Fire Station #1,
located at 2701 N Lexington Avenue.
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
Award Bids for County Road B-2 Pathway
Schroeder moved, Kough seconded, adoption of
Resolution No. 10325 entitled, "Resolution Awarding
Bids for County Road B-2 Pathway Improvements;"
awarding bids for Project 05-03 in the amount of
$1,078,712.13 to T. A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. of North St.
Paul, MN.
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
Items Removed from Consent Agenda
4.a
Approve the Request of Meritex for an Interim Use
Permit at 2258-2280 Walnut (PF 3659) (former Consent
Item 3.e)
At the request of Mayor Klausing, City Manager Beets
briefly reviewed this request.
Councilmember Schroeder questioned the type of materials
proposed for storage in the trailers, noting the poor
condition of the parking lot; opining that a potential
pollution site was being relocated from one site to another.
Community Development Director Dennis Welsch
One-Day Gambling
License
Roseville Fire
Department
Auxiliary
Resolution 10325
Award Bids for
County Road B-2
Pathway
Items Removed
from Consent
Agenda
Resolution 10326
Request of Meritex
for Interim Use
Permit at 2258-
2280 Walnut (PF
3659)
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 5
responded to Councilmember Schroeder's concerns by
noting that both the Fire and Police Departments had
reviewed the request and had discussions with operators;
and that the materials would primarily consist of office
supplies, and both departments were satisfied that the
proposed storage materials were not a hazard. Mr. Welsch
also noted that staff was of the opinion that the site would
be safer without installation of a fence, thus the exclusion
of that condition.
Councilmember Schroeder questioned proposed refueling
and other operations on the site.
Mr. Welsch advised that there would be no fueling on-site,
and only storage of materials in the trailers.
Councilmember Kough opined that storage of more trailers
would see an increase in wooden pallets and other debris
on the site; and questioned the intent of the owners for
cleaning around and under the trailers to provide sufficient
maintenance.
Mr. Welsch noted that this was a responsibility of the
tenant and owner, and that the owner had specified that
they would use best management practices to keep the lot
clean; and such practices would be monitored by the City's
Code Enforcement staff; and was a standard condition
applied to an interim use permit.
Schroeder moved, Maschka seconded, adopted Resolution
No. 10326 entitled, "A Resolution Approving an Interim
Use Permit for Meritex Enterprises at 2258 to 2280 Walnut
Street (PF 3659);" to allow storage of a maximum of 300
motor freight trailers on a parcel located east of Walnut
Street at the approximate address referenced above; for a
two-year period; based on the comments and conditions of
the staff report dated August 22,2005.
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 6
4.b
Approve the Request of Monarch Bus Service,
Incorporated, to Install a 4,000 Gallon Above-Ground
Fuel Tank at 1743 County Road C (PF 3675) (former
Consent Item 3.f)
At the request of Mayor Klausing, Community
Development Director Dennis Welsch briefly reviewed this
request. Mr. Welsch noted that it was a matter of
environmental safety to keep the tank above ground and
within containment areas with safety barriers. Mr. Welsch
further noted that, in the past, above-ground tanks have a
much better history of spill and leak protection than
underground tanks, and can be removed much easier.
Councilmember Ihlan advised that she had significant
questions, and suggested the Council may wish to postpone
consideration ofthis request for a future meeting.
Councilmember Ihlan's questions concerned:
I) Whether sufficient public notice had been provided
related to this request. Mr. Welsch advised that this type of
request did not require a public hearing.
2) Whether this request was consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning for the Twin Lakes area,
even though temporary, when the City was moving away
from tanks in that area. Mr. Welsch advised that the zoning
for this area is 1-2, Heavy Industrial District, and since the
moratorium expired August 1, 2005, and similar storage
has taken place on the site in the past, there was nothing to
exclude such a use; and no control over the site except City
Council approval or denial based on safety and security
rationale. Mr. Welsch noted that the Fire Marshal had
reviewed the request and the site, and recommended
approval. Councilmember Ihlan referenced a portion of
City Ordinance related to above-ground tanks. Mr. Welsch
referred Councilmember to a paragraph in the code and
staffs interpretation.
3) Councilmember Ihlan questioned what environmental
review had been done on the site. Mr. Welsch noted that
Monarch Bus
Service
4,000 Gallon
Above-Ground
Fuel Tank
1743 Co Road C
(PF 3675)
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 7
the Pollution Control Agency (PCA) and State Fire
Marshal, had reviewed a standard prototype system as
reasonable and approved such a system in advance.
Councilmember Ihlan questioned whether the PCA had
approved this request. Mr. Welsch responded in the
negative, noting that it was not a requirement.
Councilmember Ihlan questioned whether underground
tanks were allowable. Mr. Welsch advised that
underground tanks were subject to an entirely different set
of permits, determined by remediation situations from
original in-ground tanks.
Councilmember Ihlan expressed her concern regarding the
applicant's need to only bring a permit before the City
Council for consideration of above-ground tanks; opined
that the tanks were located very close to two residential
neighborhoods, in addition to a major shopping facility,
and questioned the Council's allowance for such tanks
without public notice and a more detailed evaluation of
public safety concerns.
Mr. Welsch noted that the Fire Marshal had reviewed the
information and performed a site review, prior to his
approval ofthe request.
Further discussion included tank leakage above and
underground and visibility and inspection advantages for
above-ground tanks; risk factors; transport trucks
delivering fuel to the site; Interim Use Permit application
rather than City Council approval process; short and long-
term plans for redevelopment ofthe area.
Councilmember Kough expressed his concerns.
Councilmember Maschka opined that he was much more
comfortable with an above-ground tank under temporary
permit, rather than a long-term or permanent underground
tank.
Mayor Klausing recognized Councilmember concerns, but
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 8
spoke in favor of an above-ground storage tank for visual
monitoring for leaks, and for future relocation and/or
removal.
Councilmember Ihlan reiterated her preference for not
allowing any tank installation at all, given the
environmental concerns, proximity to shopping and
residential areas, and desire to clean up the Twin Lakes
area.
Further discussion ensued among Councilmembers and
City Attorney Scott Anderson regarding type of permit
used and Council discretion; consistent and necessary
findings related to public health, safety and welfare for
denial by the Council supported by documentation and
previous case law; court determination of Council action
and whether the Council acted arbitrarily or capriciously or
if they had a legally sufficient reason to deny the
application or permit and whether there were any facts in
record to support the rationale.
Councilmember Ihlan suggested the request be tabled until
the next meeting, to document sufficient findings in the
resolution.
City Attorney Anderson noted that City Code needed to set
a standard, and when the Council denied any type of permit
or application, legitimate reasons needed to be stated for
denial.
Councilmember Kough expressed concerns regarding the
permanence of the permit, and no recourse for the City if it
was determined harmful to the area.
City Attorney Anderson noted that the City's Nuisance
Ordinance provisions would apply; as well as the
regulatory scheme required by the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) and State Statute, due to the
potential hazards of this type of storage facility, and
monitoring by the State Fire Marshal.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 9
Mayor Klausing opined that an above-ground storage tank
was more favorable than an underground tank.
Bruce Dischinger, 2141 N Avon Street, Applicant
Mr. Dischinger advised Councilmembers that due to
timing, they had chosen an above-ground installation,
rather than a more detailed underground installation. Mr.
Dischinger also noted his awareness of the future plans for
the area, and didn't view the location as permanent. Mr.
Dischinger advised that the tanks would be small, would be
for diesel fuel storage, not gasoline; and were very safe in
terms of environmental concerns; and provided less
liability with potential problems clearly visible. Mr.
Dischinger advised that his compelling reason for this
request was due to the northern suburb charter service and
bussing his company provided, and his efforts to increase
efficiencies and decrease costs in his operation through
achieving competitive bidding for fuel supplies. Mr.
Dischinger noted that Metro Mobility had similar storage
tanks in the lot adjoining theirs; and reiterated his intent
that he could relocate the tanks when redevelopment
proceeded in the area.
City Attorney Anderson, upon further review of City Code,
advised that this type of permit was subject to annual
review by the City Council; with provisions for the City to
terminate the permit for cause; and that the permit was
subject to automatic renewal, under code, for five years,
with annual one-year extensions thereafter.
Councilmember Maschka thanked Mr. Anderson for his
clarification of Code; opining his support of the application
given City Attorney Anderson's interpretation and
additional information.
Councilmember Schroeder opined that an above-ground
storage tank was a better situation for the City than
underground storage tanks.
Maschka moved, Schroeder seconded, approval of the
request by Monarch Bus Service to install a 4,000 gallon
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 10
above-ground fuel tank at 1743 County Road C, subject to
conditions as outlined in Staff Report dated August 22,
2005.
Councilmember Ihlan advised that she would be voting
against the motion due to no public notice to or comment
from surrounding businesses and residents; allowing
additional fuel storage in a mixed-use business park that
she opined was inconsistent with the long-term plans for
the Twin Lakes area; no environmental review; and
speaking as a resident, further opined that it was not an
appropriate use in a residential and major shopping center
neighborhood.
Councilmember Schroeder recognized Councilmember
Ihlan's concerns, but opined that if this request wasn't
approved, the chances for an underground tank were more
prevalent; with this scenario allowing more Council
control, and further noting the precedence of tanks on the
adjoining lot.
Councilmember Kough noted he would be voting against
the motion, due to the permanency of the tanks, and his
desired beautification of the area.
Roll Call
Ayes: Schroeder, Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: Ihlan and Kough.
Motion Adopted.
4.c
Approve United Properties' Final Planned Unit
Development (PUD) for Midland Hills, 2001 Fulham
Street (PF 3670) (former Consent Item 3.g)
[7.1]
At the request of Mayor Klausing, City Manager Beets
briefly reviewed this request.
Councilmember Ihlan noted her concerns with this item, as
well as the next item for final approval of a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) being put under the Consent Agenda;
opining that they were complex issues and required ample
United Properties
Final PUD
Midland Hills
2001 Fulham Street
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 11
time for discussion and review.
Councilmember Ihlan noted the changes in land use from
Concept to Final Plan, from type of home proposed, and
zero lot line concepts, larger homes on smaller lots, and
lack of further Planning Commission and public input
related to the revisions from the Concept stage.
City Manager Beets noted that staff had determined that six
single-family homes was an improvement in terms of
community perception, with same land and lot
configuration, than the previous proposal. Mr. Beets noted
that United Properties had worked consistently with the
neighbors throughout the process, and with the proposed
entrance off Fulham, there was less impact to the
neighbors.
Mayor Klausing concurred with staffs determination; and
as a former Planning Commission member, opined that this
was not a substantive change warranting further Planning
Commission review; and the project had continued to
receive extensive public input through neighborhood
meetings.
City Planner Thomas Paschke noted that staff determined
that this was not substantially different from Concept to
Final; and noted that the public had been noticed of this
item being considered before the City Council at tonight's
meeting.
There was no one, other than the applicant, present at
tonight's meeting wishing to speak related to this project.
Councilmember Ihlan expressed her preference for the
benefit of additional input from the Planning Commission
process for the change from town home to single; and a
determination as to its consistency.
Ihlan moved, Kough seconded, tabling this item and
sending it back to the Planning Commission for further
input and recommendation. Councilmember Ihlan later
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 12
revised the original motion, and Kough seconded the
modification to postpone action and send the request back
to the Planning Commission for their recommendation.
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough and Maschka.
Nays: Klausing.
Motion Adopted.
Further discussion ensued regarding whether to provide
public notice regarding the Planning Commission
consideration of the request; with consensus of the City
Council that additional public notice would not be required
and was not intended as part of the motion.
4.d
Approve Dennis Guptil's Final PUD, 185 McCarrons
Boulevard (PF 3575) (former Consent Item 3.h)
At the request of Mayor Klausing, City Planner Thomas
Paschke briefly reviewed this request.
Ihlan moved to postpone consideration of this request to a
future meeting; opining she had several items for
discussion that she could submit to staff in writing, related
to a senior housing condominium complex; no site line
plan; parking issues; and the Park Dedication fee; for all of
which she would like additional information prior to voting
on the matter.
City Planner Paschke advised that, since preparation of the
Staff Report, most of the items had been resolved: payment
in lieu ofthe park dedication fee approved by the Parks and
Recreation Commission at $1,000 per unit; parking lot
lighting; the common practice for the proposal not to have
a photometric plan at this time, but required to meet City
code.
Councilmember Ihlan provided additional detail to her
objections for approval at this time of the request, without
further information being provided, noting the sufficient
time frame available for consideration and action.
Ordinance 1325
Dennis Guptil
Final PUD
185 McCarrons Bv
(PF 3575)
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 13
Councilmember Kough noted that, at the time of the Public
Hearing, the neighborhood was supportive of the proposed
development.
Mr. Paschke advised that all concerns brought forward by
the neighborhood have been addressed by the applicant;
and information provided in the staff report was consistent
with Concept Approval, including off-street parking. Mr.
Paschke further noted that the public had been noticed
regarding this meeting.
Councilmembers Maschka, Schroeder and Kough
concurred to move forward with the request as presented
tonight.
Mayor Klausing questioned the Council's role and
authority and their expectations of staff; opining that the
City Council didn't need to act as attorneys for contract
approval. Mayor Klausing opined that, while the public
input and process was important, the public input heard to-
date and the request before the Council tonight for Final
approval was consistent with the Concept Plan.
Staff addressed additional concerns expressed by
Councilmember Ihlan related to senior housing related to
the McCarrons Master Plan and parking issues; noting
those concerns were addressed in the conditions applied to
approval.
[9.1]
Maschka moved, Kough seconded, approval of the Final
Plat, creating five town home lots and one single
condominium lot, and one non-buildable outlot.
Roll Call [9.1]
Ayes: Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
Abstentions: Ihlan.
[9.2]
Maschka moved, Schroeder seconded, enacted Ordinance
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 14
No. 1325 entitled, "An Ordinance Amending Title 10 of the
City Code, Changing the Zoning Map Designation of
Certain Real Property at 185 McCarrons Boulevard from
R-1 Single-Family Residence District to Planned Unit
Development with Underlying Zoning of R-6, Townhouse
District and R-3, General Residence District (PF 3575)."
Roll Call [9.2]
Ayes: Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
Abstentions: Ihlan.
[9.3]
Maschka moved, Kough seconded, approval of Final
Development Plan (Planned Unit Development Agreement
and Site Plan) Agreement No. 1325 and DRAFT PUD
Agreement; subject to conditions stipulated within Section
8 of the Project report dated August 22, 2005; and subject
to the review by the City Attorney as to form and content,
and approval by the City Manager.
Roll Call [9.3]
Ayes: Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
Abstentions: Ihlan.
5. Recognitions, Donations, Communications
Recognitions,
Donations,
Communications
5.a Recognition of General Donations to Parks and General Donations
Recreation Department
Parks and Recreation Director Lonnie Brokke reviewed
recent and various donations.
Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, authorization to accept the
following donations, and expressed the appreciation of the
City Council and community.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 15
Donor Item Value
North Suburban Evening Lions Cash for Scholarship Program $500.00
North Suburban Evening Lions Cash for Harriet Alexander 500.00
Nature Center
Richard Jacobson Ad in Parkview School Drama 100.00
Program (spring)
Robert and Carmen Bell Cash for walking bridge 200.00
replacement in Central Park
Midway Speedskating Printing of OVAL Task Force 345.00
Reports
Friends of Roseville Parks Microwave Oven at FORPARKS 298.00
(FORPARKS) Shelter
Friends of Harriet Alexander Cash from Annual Fundraising 5,947.00
Nature Center (FORHANC) Dinner
FORHANC Cash from Pancake Breakfast 567.00
FORHANC Cash 1,000.00
Barbara Lawry Cash for flowers along Lexington 1,000.00
Avenue
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
5.b
Proclamation of National Alcohol and Drug Addiction
Recovery Month
City Manager Beets read a proposed proclamation
designating September, 2005 as National Alcohol and Drug
Addition Recovery Month in the City ofRoseville.
Kough moved, Klausing seconded, designating September
2005 as National Alcohol and Drug Addiction Recovery
Month.
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
6.
Consider Todd Iliff's Request for a Minor Subdivision at
1822 Dale Court (PF 3655)
Community Development Director Dennis Welsch reviewed the
request, noting the unique shape of Parcel B and comer lot
requirements. Mr. Welsch noted that while no proposal for a
house was being made at this time, various designs had been
provided to determine various designs that could be
accommodated on the lot as discussed by the Planning
Commission. Mr. Welsch noted the only concerns expressed by
Proclamation of
National Alcohol
and Drug
Addiction Recovery
Month
Resolution 10327
Todd Iliff
Minor Subdivision
1822 Dale Court
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 16
neighbors were whether the lot was actually buildable, and
concerns that any fencing on the lot would interfere with site
lines. Mr. Welsch noted the additional condition that a permit
would be required for any fence, regardless of height, along with
staff review of landscape plans at the time a building permit
would be issued.
Discussion included fence installation and whether prohibition of
fence construction could be made a condition of the variance; the
actual buildable area of the Lot; and the hardship definition being
the unique shape of the lot and demonstration that a house could
be built upon the lot with a variance, but not without.
Todd Iliff, Applicant, Representing Chuck and Sue Lesky
(in-laws)
Mr. Iliff spoke in support of the request, noting that until
recently, Mr. and Mrs. Lesky had lived on the adjoining
property, and were looking to sell their home and hopefully, a
buildable adjoining lot. Mr. Iliff advised that the applicant was
not interested in building a home, even though they had an
architect provide several design possibilities to assure the lot was
buildable.
Peter Zeller, 1773 Alameda Street, southwest of site
Mr. Zeller questioned the visibility issue for residents accessing
Dale Street. Mr. Zeller also questioned the location of the stakes
on the proposed lot, alleging they were actually only 10'
setbacks from Dale Street, rather than the necessary 25'; and
appeared to be in line with an existing fence on the property,
which may actually be in City right-of-way.
Further discussion included the actual stake location and survey
work done by a registered land surveyor; and the applicant
opining that a clear line of visibility existed for cars looking onto
Dale Street.
Councilmember Kough spoke in support of the request, noting
the unusual lot shape and right of the property owner to develop
the property.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 17
[8.1]
Kough moved, Schroeder seconded, adoption of Resolution No.
10327 entitled, "A Resolution Approving a Request by Todd
Iliff, 1822 Dale Court, for a Variance to Section 1004.016
(Residential Lot Size Dimensions - Comer Yard Lot Size) of the
Roseville City Code (PF 3655).
Councilmember Ihlan spoke against the motion, opining that she
could not determine that a hardship issue existed; that the
property had been put to a reasonable use for a long time, and it
wasn't a hardship that you couldn't subdivide your lot; and
expressed concern about the visibility and safety for the
neighborhood regarding the site lines, particularly during adverse
weather conditions.
Councilmember Schroeder spoke against the motion, opmmg
that an exception didn't exist that created a hardship for granting
a variance; and that the Council was being asked to create a
small lot to erect a small house.
Councilmember Kough cited a similar unique situation on
Hamline and Woodhill and the favorable outcome and blending
accomplished with the neighborhood; further opining that he
didn't observe a safety factor.
Mayor Klausing spoke in favor of the motion, as per Planning
Commission recommendation for approval; opining that the
hardship test had been adequately described and met as outlined
in the staff report. Mayor Klausing noted that this accomplished
a broader public policy consideration for a first-ring suburb that
was substantially developed to provide renewal sources for the
City in encouraging smaller and younger family units to remain
in the City rather than locating further away.
Councilmember Maschka noted that the unique shape of the lot
allowed an opportunity to create a smaller home, and anticipated
if it would be a marketable lot. Councilmember Maschka opined
that the lot was close to minimum lot size, and spoke in support
of the motion.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 18
Roll Call [8.1]
Ayes: Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: Ihlan and Schroeder.
[8.2]
Kough moved, Klausing seconded, approval of a minor
subdivision (a three parcel Minor Subdivision, as per City Code,
Section 1004.04E, creating one new parcel ("B") with a parcel
size of 11,608 square feet; thereby reducing the size of existing
Parcel "A" to 15,514 square feet, for property located at 1822
Dale Court; based on findings in Section 5 and subject to
conditions of Section 6 of the project report dated August 22,
2005; including an additional condition: that a permit shall be
required for any fence, regardless of height; and staff is to review
landscape plans at the time of building permit issue.
Roll Call [8.2]
Ayes: Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: Ihlan and Schroeder.
7.
Hear a Presentation about Possible Eminent Domain
Ordinances
Councilmember Ihlan introduced Professor David Schultz of
Hamline University to provide possible alternatives for a local
eminent domain ordinance following the recent Supreme Court
affirmation of local government use of eminent domain for
purposes of economic development.
David Schultz, Professor at Hamline University Graduate
School of Public Administration and Management
Professor Schultz provided a Bench Handout regarding the Kelo
v. City of New London Supreme Court case and reviewed the
Court's rationale in their decision; the significance of Kelo and
public reaction to Kelo; as well as options available for the City
Council's consideration.
Discussion included validity of taking for public use, with just
compensation; impact statements related to burden and benefit;
discretion available to the City Council to be more restrictive or
protective of private property than State Statute would dictate;
appropriate public use in the community; and a mechanism to
Possible Eminent
Domain
Ordinances
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 19
establish policy for the current City Council and/or future
Councils; whether current laws protected the public from abuses;
and whether the Council could adopt an ordinance requiring a
4/5 vote to use eminent domain, with City Attorney Anderson
dictating caution without further review by his office of super-
majority and simple majority requirements, lacking Minnesota
case law for support of a super majority stipulation.
City Attorney Anderson opined that he was not in favor of
constraining discretion, as the law had sufficient guidelines and
procedures to detennine whether an issue was arbitrary; and the
inability of the sitting Council to perceive all future issues,
particularly when the City is redeveloping.
Mayor Klausing thanked Professor Schultz for his attendance
and comments.
Recess Recess
Mayor Klausing recessed the meeting at approximately 8:19 p.m.
and reconvened at 8:29 p.m.
8.
Presentation of Community Development
Redevelopment Authority (BRA) Budgets
and Housing Community
Development &
HRA Budgets
Community Development
Community Development Director Dennis Welsch
Mr. Welsch distributed a bench handout providing refined
budget proposals for specific Community Development
Department budgets including, City and Project Planning;
Economic Development and Housing; Building Permits and
Codes; and Geographic Infonnation Systems.
Mr. Welsch reviewed specific goals and objectives including
encouraging community collaboration for economic growth,
strengthening relationship with the business community, and
working to achieve consensus on community planning projects
with an annual case review of 80-100 cases; reorganization of
staff positions to become more efficient; provision of staff
support to the Planning Commission, Variance Board, HRA and
City Council; pursue continued implementation for development
of major projects including Twin Lakes, McCarrons
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 20
Neighborhood Master Plan, Hamline Shopping Center, HRA
Housing Plan, Presbyterian Homes, Mastell Trucking site,
Rosedale and larger residential renovation projects; anticipated
personnel increases at 3.0% COLA on wages and a 10% increase
in health/dental premiums, as well as staffing position change to
add a Planning Associate and eliminate the Department Assistant
position.
In the Building Permits and Codes division, Mr. Welsch
reviewed goals and objectives to provide residents and
contractors with prompt and responsive permit issuance and
inspection services; informational assistance to residents;
education and cooperation to significantly reduce land use
violations in the community; and increase efficiencies of
office/field operations and in-field data recording. Mr. Welsch
noted the request for a new code officer position to be
reimbursed by the HRA if additional rental licensing and housing
maintenance programs were implemented.
In the Geographic Information Systems division, Mr. Welsch
addressed continued installation, and implementation of various
software programs and databases and realignment of the staff
position from GIS Coordinator to GIS Technician, with the loss
of David Windle as a City employee, to reduce the role of GIS to
provide technical support within the department.
Mr. Welsch reviewed 2004/2005 achievements within each
division; and noted that the department was always challenged to
balance revenues with expenses, and to adjust fees accordingly.
Mr. Welsch noted that the department was currently working
with 2002-era fees, and would be reviewing those fees prior to
the Council's annual consideration and adoption of a city-wide
fee schedule for 2006.
Discussion included fee structuring and compensatory
itemization for larger projects; portion attributed to general levy
for rental housing licensing and housing maintenance programs
with the HRA serving as a revenue source upon program
implementation; fair and reasonable costs recoverable through an
up-to-date fee schedule; and the governance of development and
building permit fees by State Statute, and justification required.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 21
BRA Executive Director Cathy Bennett
(BRA Chair Bill Majerus was also present)
Ms. Bennett noted that on August 16, 2005, the HRA had
approved a resolution requesting a $288,985.00 HRA Tax Levy
for 2005, Collectable in 2006, in accordance with State Statue
469.033.
Ms. Bennett provided a summary of HRA goals and
accomplishments in 2004/2005.
Ms. Bennett reviewed both the restricted and non-restricted
budget funds and proposed budgets for 2006. Ms. Bennett
detailed proposed revenue purposes for the Home and Garden
Fair; Multi-family rehabilitation programming; ownership
rehabilitation programming; first-time buyer program;
neighborhood enhancement program; marketing studies; and
general HRA expenditures.
Discussion included addition of a \12 time code enforcement
employee through contracting for the service, or job-sharing
partnership opportunities with other communities (i.e., City of
Little Canada); cash balance projections for the year ending
2005; and proposed rental income.
Ms. Bennett provided a bench handout summarizing what other
communities were doing in the rental income code compliance
and licensing areas.
Discussion included the HRA levy as related to the General
Levy; and City Council decision related to hiring a code
enforcement position.
9.
Council Discussion and Direction about Budget Targets
Mayor Klausing sought Council comment related to City
Manager Beets' August 22, 2005 memorandum related to budget
direction related to City Manager recommendation options.
Councilmember Kough opined that, due to the number of retirees
in Roseville on fixed incomes, the Council needed to be
conservative, particularly with rising energy costs.
Councilmember Kough noted that departments were looking to
Council Discussion
and Direction
about Budget
Targets
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 22
maintain services city-wide, while ensuring staff received
adequate compensation. Councilmember Kough was looking at
a levy increase of between 7% and 8%, holding service standards
steady.
Mayor Klausing expressed his appreciation to Councilmember
Kough for his realistic observations; opining that while he was
sensitive to those on fixed incomes, it needed to be balanced with
the quality of life expectations of residents who were willing to
pay for quality services. Mayor Klausing noted that the City was
continuing to deal with decisions on a state level that impacted
the City, in addition to the realities of increased city operating
costs (i.e., rising fuel, vehicle and health care costs). Mayor
Klausing opined his support of a levy increase closer to 9%, with
phasing of requests by the Police Department.
Councilmember Kough opined that a reasonable budget and
service level could be maintained through use of reserves to keep
taxes down, while running the city efficiently.
Mayor Klausing noted the discussion was related to structural
imbalances and regular operating expenses, not use of "rainy
day" funds such as that recently used for additional costs of
$45,000 for tree removal, being relied upon for general operating
expenses, and cautioned the Council using that rationale.
Councilmember Schroeder noted that he was in the process of
preparing a more detailed outline of his recommendations that he
would forward to staff and Councilmembers upon completion,
opining that the Council needed to use the information provided
for each specific department with their interpretation of where
the City should be headed, in addition to input from residents in
an effort to provide government services at a fair and reasonable
cost. Councilmember Schroeder noted that some items were
one-time costs (i.e., County Road C streetscape) and could be
paid from tax reduction funds and allow the City to look at
recurring budget items in determining a levy amount.
Councilmember Schroeder was tentatively looking at a 3.69%
levy increase, basically 4%, without stripping departments,
through removing one-time expenses for 2006 (i.e., election,
police record management, skating center capital improvements)
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 23
from the 2006 budget for general operating funds, to allow
incorporation of needed items (i.e., CSO's and addition of a
traffic officer).
Councilmember Maschka opined his support for an 8% to 9%
preliminary levy increase, with anticipated reductions as the
Council reduced items from that point. Councilmember
Maschka opined that he didn't expect that the Police Department
was going to receive all of their requests; and further opined his
lack of support for the Fire Department requests.
Mayor Klausing reminded Councilmembers of the Preliminary
Levy on a "not to exceed" adoption on September 12, 2005, with
further reductions sought over the next few months.
Councilmember Kough noted his concerns with the ranking of
the Police Department and implications while trying to provide
incentives.
Councilmember Ihlan noted the substantial levy increase for
residents last year, with the referendum and increased property
tax values; and opined that it would be difficult to justify another
double-digit levy increase, when adding the HRA Levy.
Councilmember Ihlan further opined that it was not necessarily
reasonable to assume that because Roseville taxes are lower than
other comparison communities, that it was good policy to raise
them; noting that keeping taxes low was an important asset for
the community. Councilmember Ihlan observed that the burden
of property taxes fell to two segments of the population: the
senior population on fixed incomes and young families who were
being encouraged to remain and/or relocate to Roseville.
Councilmember Ihlan discussed the impacts, both short and
long-term, for the Twin Lakes development, increases in health
insurance premiums, increased fuel and shared-dispatch center
costs; and opined that the City needed to be extremely frugal and
conservative this year by tapping into reserves with good
management. Councilmember Ihlan spoke in support of bearing
the employee portion of rising health costs; and opined her
support of an inflationary-only levy increase to maintain existing
services, with little or no expansion this year; and no more than a
3% to 5% overall levy increase (inclusive of the HRA Levy).
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 24
Councilmember Ihlan noted that she was also preparing more
detailed recommendations and budget targets, and would forward
them to staff and the City Council when completed.
Further discussion included rising medical costs; short and long-
term funding; and the need to remain conservative in levying.
Consensus was, in terms of setting a maximum levy, that the
upper range would be 8% to 9% and making further reductions
from that point.
John Kysylyczyn, 3083 N Victoria Street
Mr. Kysylyczyn again reviewed his historical companson of
levies for tax-supported operations versus inflation; and
reviewed previous budget book policy statements related to the
Parks and Recreation Department becoming more self-sufficient;
Police Department ranking history and rationale; and his
personal preference for reducing City Manager salary amenities
rather than cutting employees. Mr. Kysylyczyn cautioned the
Council on "ball parking" estimates high for the Truth in
Taxation Statements that would be the information going to
residents for comment.
10.
Consider Fire Training Officer and Fire Department
Response to Accidents with Injuries
Mayor Klausing spoke in support of employee initiative to find
innovative ways to provide department efficiencies, as a
challenge previously provided to employees from the City
Council, and asked the City Council to consider the Fire
Department proposal as an award for their innovative leadership.
Mayor Klausing noted that the City couldn't continue to sustain
double-digit levy increases annually, and needed to look at
innovative approaches. Mayor Klausing endorsed the upcoming
proposal as an appropriate initiative worthy of Council support.
City Manager Beets reviewed his recommendation for
authorizing a full-time Training ManagerlFirefighter/Daytime
Shift Supervisor in the Fire Department and provided a
spreadsheet detailing short and long-term cost savings. Mr.
Beets opined that the position would improve the level of
training in the department, and thus the quality of public safety
Fire Training
Officer &
Fire Department
Response to
Accidents with
Injuries
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 25
service. Mr. Beets noted that one of the objectives of the
department had been to reorganize how fire fighting was manned
to provide better response times and service. Mr. Beets further
noted that the position would provide more consistent, reliable
fire protection during weekdays, during the daytime, which was
the most vulnerable to fires and other emergencies; and should
be budget-neutral while providing the improved service.
Klausing moved, Ihlan seconded, approval of a full-time
Firefighter/Shift Supervisor/Training Manager position.
Mayor Klausing noted that he was not advocating for a full-time
Fire Department.
Councilmember Schroeder spoke in OpposItIOn to the motion;
noted that during the last budget cycle, this issue had been
brought forward and the Council had voted "no;" and opined that
this was one step further toward a full-time department.
City Manager Beets noted the need to provide training for
firefighters now, and with inflationary assumptions detailed on
the spreadsheet, long-term savings would be achieved.
Councilmember Kough spoke in opposition to the motion;
opining his comfort-level with current training personnel and
options; noting that he couldn't support the proposal at this time
under current budget conditions.
Further discussion Kough included projected starting pay of
approximately $62,000; shift duties and potential conflicts; and
accuracy of projected cost-savings and assumptions.
John Kysylyczyn 3083 N Victoria Street
Mr. Kysylyczyn concurred with Councilmember Ihlan's
observations regarding duties and weekend work of the position;
noting that when the Fire Chief and Assistant Chief positions
were hired, it was anticipated that they would provide shift
supervision. Mr. Kysylyczyn noted that full-time Fire
Department personnel were looking for two pensions: from the
Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) and from the
Fire Relief Association, and would prove to be an additional
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 26
liability for the City.
Discussion included unfunded liabilities of the Relief
Association annually; achieving goals and practical scheduling
issues; and the timing of the request.
Councilmember Maschka spoke in opposition to the motion,
noting the increasing full-time employees in the department,
while firefighter staff had been reduced over past years.
Councilmember Maschka requested Finance Director Chris
Miller to provide additional information to the Council related to
the amount spent by the Department for EMS supplies,
equipment, training, and supplies specifically used for technical
rescues.
Roll Call
Ayes: Klausing.
Nays: Ihlan, Schroeder, Kough and Maschka.
Motion Failed.
Klausing moved, Maschka seconded, approval to have the Fire
Department respond to accidents with injuries; with the motion
modified by the maker and seconder following Council
discussion, to stipulate approval on a six-month trial basis, to be
followed by Council review and further determination of
continuing the service.
Councilmember Kough spoke in opposition to the motion, based
on the inability to transport; opining that the department wait
until that approval was granted, potential donation of an
ambulance, and then determine the feasibility.
Councilmember Schroeder sought additional information related
to the Police Department as first responder.
City Manager Beets provided additional infonnation related to
response protocol; dispatch center definition of responders; and
the need for the Police Department to provide traffic control,
preserve the integrity of the scene and obtain witness statements,
rather than providing medical assistance.
Mayor Klausing noted that this would provide better response;
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 27
with the personnel already being available for utilization.
Additional discussion included managing fire calls while
responding to other emergencies; proposed use of Fire
Department to respond to any vehicular accident with injury; and
determination of a trial period to use the skills of current
employees.
Gale Pederson, 929 W Roselawn
Ms. Pederson spoke in support of the motion that time was of the
essence for accidents with injuries, and the Fire Department was
equipped with 35 EMT's and minimal response time; and opined
that the City needed to utilize the current staff available now.
City Manager Beets noted that, due to coordination between the
Fire and Police Departments, and Allina and the Dispatch
Center, staff would keep the City Council and public apprised of
when this service came on line, but noted that it would not be
immediate; and clarified that the six month trial would be from
initiation of service, not from today's decision.
Councilmembers concurred.
Councilmember Schroeder requested that staff provide additional
information in their report as to the rationale for thirty-five
EMT's, their training, and figure costs of training into that
analysis.
Roll Call
Ayes: Ihlan; Schroeder; Kough; Maschka and Klausing.
Nays: None.
11.
Consider Draft Request for Proposals (RFP's) for Recycling
Project
Councilmember Schroeder expressed his concern regarding the
magnitude of the draft RFP; specifically deviating from the
Public Works, Environment and Transportation (PWET)
Commission's recommendation for single-sort, and the RFP's
inclusion of dual sort.
Mayor Klausing opined, from his understanding of reviewing the
Council tape, that it was Council consensus to put together other
Draft RFP
Recycling Project
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 28
options to achieve the best price, whether single or dual sort.
Councilmember Schroeder noted that, since 2002, collection
material volume had remained stagnant. Councilmember
Schroeder further noted that he had substantive questions,
comments and proposed changes in the RFP document for
Council review.
Mayor Klausing requested a summary report from Recycling
Coordinator Tim Pratt prior to Council discussion and comment.
Recycling Coordinator Tim Pratt
Mr. Pratt briefly commented on the draft RFP, from the
understanding of previous Council direction to make the RFP
detailed and weighted to reflect a ranking form to determine the
set of criteria in proportion to community needs. Mr. Pratt stood
for questions and comments at Council direction.
Councilmember Schroeder proceeded to review his expanSIve
list of questions, with Council and staff comment during that
process and revisions proposed as noted:
Page 4, Section 2.01, Contractor Selection Process/Schedule
Councilmember Schroeder sought legal opinion from City
Attorney Anderson regarding restrictions on "unauthorized
contact with City staff, City Councilor Commission members."
Mr. Pratt noted that this language was taken from the City of
Maplewood specifications.
City Attorney Anderson, noted that such language was standard
during the RFP process with the intent to maintain consistency.
Councilmember Schroeder suggested revised language in Section
2.01 deleting language so it reads: "For the sake of uniformity
and consistency, all contact by prospective contractors and their
agents about the City's RFP and procurement decision-making
must only be made with the City's designated contact person,
Tim Pratt. Prospective Contractors are encouraged to contact
Mr. Pratt with questions or requests for more information."
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 29
Page 5, Section 2.05
Councilmember Schroeder questioned staffs negotiation criteria
from RFP to contract stage.
City Attorney Anderson suggested language simplified to: "The
City will negotiate the terms of the contract."
Page 6, Section 3. Background and History
Councilmember Schroeder questioned including "the City of
Roseville is looking for a contractor with experience increasing
participation in both curbside and multi-family recycling
programs". Mayor Klausing said that since this sentence was in
the background and history section he was not concerned.
Page 12, Section 5, General Requirements for all Collections
Councilmember Schroeder questioned the need for these
specifications, when they were all commercial vehicle
regulations specified by Minnesota Department of Transportation
(MnDOT) requirements, and how the City would enforce or
dictate such specifications. Councilmember Schroeder
advocated making the RFP less detailed and complicated; and
suggested deleting the entire 5.02 section regarding collection
vehicle equipment requirements.
Mr. Pratt noted that this was standard language.
City Attorney Anderson noted that the RFP, at a mInImUm,
should state that all vehicles must comply with all state and
federal regulations.
Mr. Pratt noted that 5.02, h) was not a federal or OSHA standard,
but his office had fielded numerous complaints related to
disposal of driver tobacco ashes.
Mayor Klausing, with Council consensus, directed staff to
reference OSHA requirements, and include language regarding
tobacco receptacles.
Page 13, Section 5.03, Pollution Reduction
Councilmember Schroeder noted that the goals of this section
were good, but that they were MPCA requirements and were not
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 30
enforceable at a city level, thus should not be included in the
RFP requirements.
Councilmember Ihlan opined that, given the overall purpose of
recycling programs protecting the environment, this was a valid
point of comparison between contractors, and she supported
asking them to give us the requested information.
Mr. Pratt noted that the MPCA suggested including this language
in the RFP for enforcement purposes.
Page 13, Section 5.04, Personnel Requirements
Councilmember Schroeder questioned the type of two-way
communication device referenced.
Mr. Pratt advised that the language was suggested by Waste
Management in the last RFP process to be broad enough to cover
various communication devices.
Section 5.04, b)
Councilmember Schroeder questioned how the City would
evaluate those requirements.
City Attorney Anderson noted that sometimes RFP's were
inclusive of items allowing potential future invocation of the
liquidated damage or termination clauses, for failing to live up to
performance standards. Mr. Anderson further noted that, while
not necessarily enforceable, if the City were not getting the
service they desired from the contractor, it added additional
weight for termination cause.
Page 13, Section 5.04, e)
Discussion included how to ensure safety and consideration, with
City Attorney Anderson recommending the language remain to
provide prospective bidders due notice of the City's
expectations.
Page 14, Section 5.05, Recycling Containers
Councilmember Schroeder questioned how the City planned to
manage the containers, and how it could be a requirement of the
RFP for enforcement purposes.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 31
City Attorney Anderson recommended leaving the language in to
provide monitoring and obligations under a contract, as with
other provisions to provide the City additional leverage. Mr.
Anderson noted that the specific items were standard language
for RFP's and contracts to provide notice to a contractor of City
expectations and standards.
Further discussion included ownership, maintenance and repair
of recycling containers, impacts to cost comparisons, and single-
sort or dual-sort provisions.
City Attorney Anderson recommended an additional clause at the
end of Section 5.05 addressing provisions for all containers,
whether single or dual sort, and addressing multi-family
recycling as well.
Page 15, Section 5.05, Curbside Single Stream
Mr. Pratt clarified that the City anticipates there may be cart
providers, and language should say, "The City maintains the
right to use its own designated company to provide carts, cart
maintenance and repair service."
City Attorney Anderson suggested that due to depreciating the
carts, the two items should be differentiated; and another stand
alone paragraph be added to encourage bidders to utilize options.
Page 16, Section 5.06, Collection, Curbside Dual Sort
Councilmember Schroeder suggested additional qualifications to
define how to apply for free walk-up services.
Mr. Pratt reviewed historical problems creating the need for this
section to allow only City staff to make that determination.
City Attorney Anderson recommended that the clause
referencing Section 4.37 should be moved immediately
following the "Free walk-up service.. .." provision both in the
curbside dual sort section, and the curbside single stream section.
Typographical correction in line 1 of Curbside Single Stream,
first paragraph, delete "by" or "at."
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 32
Page 17, Section 5.07, City Retains Right to Specify Resident
Preparation Instructions
Mr. Pratt noted that, in the past, there had been conflicts between
the two sets of instructions and that the City would therefore
prepare instructions.
Page 19, Section 5.13, Non-Completion of Collection and
Extension of Collection Hours
Councilmember Schroeder suggested simplification of language
for the last two sentences, then remove, "first designated
alternate of..."
Page 19, Section 5.14, Severe Weather.
Councilmember Schroeder questioned the realistic logistics of
this provision.
Following discussion, it was Council consensus to delete the
portion dealing with the contractor's responsibilities.
P. 21, Section 5.20, Damage to Property
Mr. Pratt noted the number of problems in the past related to the
contractor providing timely repair or replacement, particularly in
multi-family units.
City Attorney Anderson recommended, with Council
concurrence, deleting "Except for reasonable wear and tear,..."
from the language, but noted the remaining language was
adequate.
Page 21, Section 5.21, Municipal Facilities
Councilmember Schroeder questioned the language of "dual
stream cart" service to City facilities.
City Attorney Anderson recommended, with Council
concurrence, removing that language.
Page 22, Section 5.22, Purchase of Bins, Lids and Wheel Kits
Councilmember Schroeder questioned the rate of reimbursement
and rationale for the contractor to pick up used containers.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 33
Mr. Pratt noted that the purpose of this provIsIOn was to
eliminate any leftovers from storage.
City Attorney Anderson noted the intent of Mr. Pratt to
encourage the contractor to find a market for used equipment and
to remove it.
Page 23, Section 6.03, Marketing Agreements
Councilmember Schroeder questioned why the City was
concerned with the contractor's marketing agreements if he was
certifying the materials were marketable. Councilmember
Schroeder noted that Sections 7.01 and 7.06 on page 25 dealt
with the same thing.
Mr. Pratt noted that this was in reference to the revenue-sharing
portion of the contract.
City Attorney Anderson noted that this provided additional
enforcement, referencing paragraph 7, to make certification and
copies of the contracts required.
Councilmember Schroeder noted another typographical error on
the last paragraph of page 23, "meeting."
Page 29, Section 8.04, Revenue Sharing
Councilmember Schroeder suggesting tying that paragraph closer
to Section 6.03 (Marketing Agreements).
City Attorney Anderson noted that Section 6 dealt with annual
reporting, and the format of the RFP was better served with
Section 6 as a separate section, rather than including it in this
area related to Payment and Damages.
When questioned where the revenue sharing funds would be
applied, Mr. Pratt advised that this would be a future Council
discussion for their determination and direction.
Council consensus was to include Revenue Sharing discussion
on a future Study Session agenda.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 34
Page 31, Section 8.05, Liquidated Damages
City Attorney Anderson spoke in support of defining as many
liquidated damages as possible for the City's benefit in putting
prospective contractors on notice ofthe City's expectations.
Mr. Pratt addressed numerous issues related to missed walk up
collections and the frustration of residents when this occurred;
and the need to entice drivers to perform their duties.
Mr. Pratt also noted the potential for designing a program to
effectively meet the City's needs (i.e., tonnage collected versus
collection points).
Section 8.05, d), Throwing or Dropping Containers
Councilmember Schroeder questioned how to enforce this
section; and cautioned that residents may use this to make a
contractor look bad.
Page 32, i)
It was Council consensus to remove item i) "Failure to maintain
vehicle in manner which prevents nuisances such as leaky seals
or hydraulics."
Page 37, Section 9.07, Governing Law
Councilmember Schroeder questioned whether the contractor
should have a clause allowing him to terminate the contract.
City Attorney Anderson questioned if the City wanted such a
clause with the potential for no service provider.
Page 41, Section 9.22, Contract Conditions
After discussion of the provisions in a), b) and c), and comment
by City Attorney Anderson, it was determined that this section
would remain as worded, allowing the City to draft the contract,
not the contractor.
Staff was directed to implement those discussed revisions into
the draft RFP.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 35
Jennefer Klennert, Public Sector Manager, Waste
Management
Ms. Klennert provided a written statement from Waste
Management dated August 22, 2005, outlining the firm's
concerns that they may be unable to meet the specifications of
the draft RFP. Ms. Klennert requested Council reconsideration
of their proposed RFP.
John Kysylyczyn, 3083 N Victoria Street
Mr. Kysylyczyn made suggestions to various sections ofthe draft
RFP. Council took note of the comment regarding Section 5.07,
with staff determining that there was a typographical error in the
last line of the section, and it should be "4.03," rather than
"4.02."
Mr. Kysylyczyn took issue with the City requesting free
recycling services, opining that it was not correct budgeting
practice nor did it allow proper accountability of various
departments, particularly the golf course since it operated as an
Enterprise Fund.
Mr. Kysylyczyn noted the cost of the RFP process; and opined
the length of the meeting was indicative of poor agenda
management.
Additional Council discussion included provisions of page 44,
Section 10.06, Curbside Dual Stream Bi-Weekly Collection
Proposal Scenario; including, revenue sharing and lower costs
with Councilmember Ihlan suggesting language rephrasing to
provide for information on how processing is accomplished,
without detailed processing information and residual rates, in an
effort not to arbitrarily rule people out while still allowing the
Council to compare different packages. Councilmember
Schroeder concurred.
Staff was directed to make the recommended revisions before
issuing the RFP and that staff provide a revised RFP to
Councilmembers.
No formal action taken.
City Council Regular Meeting - 08/22/05
Minutes - Page 36
12. Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 11 :55 p.m.
Adjourn
,/tJ
yor
ATTEST:
HAMLINE
UNIVERSITY
Graduate School
ol Puhlic Administration
and Management
Roseville Eminent Domain Talk on Ke/o v. City of New London
August 22, 2005
David Schultz, Professor
hamiine University
651.523.2858
dschultz(a1hamline.edu
I. Introduction
A. What is eminent domain?
I. 5" Amendment stipulation
a. Public use
b. Just compensation
B. Public use doctrine
I. Must fmd a public use
2. Public use primary over incidental private benefit
3. What are traditional public uses
B.
Oy of New London
Basic facts
I. Taking of private house for parking lot to support new facility for Pfizer Pharmaceutical
2. Comp plan and hearings in place
3. Challenged as not a valid public use
Central legal qnestion: Is the taking of private property from one individual and transferring it to
another for the pnrposes of economic development a valid public use? Supreme Court says yes.
Permitted under 5" Amendment
Reasoning:
I. Long held that economic development is valid public use
2. No bright line rule
3. Role of comprehensive plan and hearings
II.
Keto v.
A.
C.
D.
III. Ke/o's Significance
A. Ok to economic development
B. Board judicial deference but not surren(ier
C. Role of comp plan
D. State and local governments canbe more restrictive
IV. Reaction to Keto
A. The government can take my house!! ! !
V. Options
A. Do nothing and rely upon wisdom of local officials
B. Bright line at economic development or private homes
C. Eminent domain impact statement
1. Factors to assess
2. Who bares burden and benefits
3. Impact on those whose property is taken
4. Impact on neighborhood
D. Redefme public use
I. Declare what is a valid public use and when
VI. Conclusions
MS-A1740 - 1536 Hewitt Avenue, Saint Paul, MN 55104-1284
651-523-2284 - 651-523-3098 fax - gradprog@hamline.edll - www.hamline.edll/gpam
ilJinneso!a ;i' FinI <<ff#,-j 7hulition Since
._u"'
I ,I I I ~' 1,1: I
~1\ 1 1\1 I ~ I;;:: i ~ 'CJ V
. (
"1\ I I I I ,!,",
..~ I '\ I + I I .~' i 'I I J~ - =; :.:..
..
0'
s,: :
',::::; ~,~ .
I:: t.i
l~ f)
. :.- ~,j ;
, ,.
I
I 11
5 IJ
~~ .~
'''' 't
;;:; I
. I I 1\ I, r- I
~ ~ .
." t"l. ~
~
.
"
:... ~l I I I \:: I ' ., 1 '"" I. ,;; ;.~
I . - i: 'I I I I ", :J I I l:: I :- (~
i:!. ~
~ i~,
I~:
~ ~~ ~ ~
.". c,~ c~ '~ r-~ ~
-
~~I ;:;:; " ~.: S~ ,~~ ~~ ;
:
.:
; ~.: ~; ~ ~: ,
( ;.;. .;,: ~, : -~ j
f' !
~- ~
~ ~ '""' ~ :
.;.,. !c' ~ 'l ". ~: !-~ ~) : ::: 's;! i
" '.!;; CJ
I.t:, <::! ~ . .~
::.,~ ....." ::, , ::; ::- :},:..~ ~ ,; 'I'l
~ ~ I,..' X ,~ C 0 C :" ' ~," I ,(l i"~ -= .;:; ,; S<
, 'J r" ':::.1 (~-:;:~ 0:' ~, c:;>"':' Is' I,:: i !Q ~ _ 2 ;!
!:l ,'" "}. -:. <'. - . . I "t I~' :=; II>> ~:
:1 ,~ ,... '0 c:: ,=, ,;;> v 'I.... " I.... ' .J: ~:;;l : '
-
. I1j r" ~ ~ ~) -~ 2 ~
~ ~ ,~~ ' : ~~!~. .s,
~, (: .~ u C) OJ ., = (j) ~ ":::;.;: ::.,.
.::;
'c t:ll ; , .o' :;::; '11 ':2 " 5 +" ::'~) OJ ~ Ti;-; "
;:; :f"- c Q "::> :;:~ t : ~! : ' ~: ,:::;,' ~ :i~, ~:::
:; ,:; ~~ i:: - .~~:: ") 5 ';::.l: .~ ~ 0 ~2 ;~
, cb t:! ( .::: ~, ;2 = ;p. l . :~ l~ .~:,.: ~ -.: ~, ,::
. Ill, as = c~ :=:' >JJ :;:; i: ,:: ..': .:::! :_ '(] (Q.;:::;g ~ .~~ :~; . __.."
tI, c i: .::- ,I. ~:, ,\ :i:~,
, : ~ '!: ~: i~ (: = (-,- c/, : I~ "tl :'i .~: 5 ;~;: .': .. . \II'
J.l -' : ':::To i'i :<' ~~ ~: ~ 15 :-- c = 0 ~? iii
, '!1 ::! "= :;::; :" 5. :;: ,~ 6, n; .;: !:: I) C C ;:: ":_ i'" ..... :~.
. i...- ;:;:;, .l:. ; : .:: ~::: ' -' ;5:-' ::( (CD ~r, [J ITi ": rfl .,: ... , ~, ,:;;~ :;, :
_:. ,~. C) ,,;: .:: ~ C CD m :;:: ,:: C~ :,
; .l:: :: ,: c' .= L . =: ~) -!';. ;;;";;.~: l) n ~~ I: [:D t:
, i i .;=~: p ,- c' :; ~! '<:,1 ,~~ 0 q ~~. .::' r I :!i'::::; ;;;, ::: ' ,
:::. '- ~- ~'
~ l:'.l.~i:l. (~,;:;5 ~J.lv'i?i) c,'):>~;<~.!!;~ n:s J. .~!
,i)l :? ~ i: ~: ,: i';:::, , ,.:~ "" ~:(1; .i:: '- "'n () ;'5 "':. ,CD " t,
I.. : J - ~ c: ~ .~::' ~! < E; ;:~"tJ 6 ii .C ili ~_ ~) cii I;;; . ::;;;;: ' ....
~: .':: ~~ , '" ';;': (J)::;;; 0 i:) 9J::> '0 :>, .;: m c.... ..;, ~~, :
.' ~ : (.~ i~,(j..!. I.~::~::: ":., c: iD . : -=, -' .:: I]) .t:
~~ _'Cl :c'= bij :<". H ~:u,: L!) ,=. i "';:,1: ,. ( ~~
Subsequent Budget Actions
Subsequent to the Council adopting a Preliminary 2005 Budget and Tax Levy in September, a
number of budget action items were enacted or realized as n~w information became available.
These items as it pertains to the property tax levy are shown below.
Tax Levy adopted on 9/13/04
Less savings from revised health care estimates
Less savings from the elimination of Skidsteer loader
Less savings from the elimination of Council goal-setting
Less savings from the eliminationofNLC Conferences
Plus the addition of a snowplow attachment
Revised Tax Levy
$ 10,761,015
(30,000)
(35,000)
(S~OOO)
(4,050)
3.000
$ 10,689,965
As shown above, the revised 2005 Property Tax Levy would be $10,689,965, a reduction of
$71,050. The revised levy represents a 9.5 % increase over 2004.
Final Budget Considerations
Over the past few weeks, Staff has continued to evaluate proposed spending plans in an effort to
finalize a Budget that; reflects the City's current financial challengcs, addresses the core needs of
the community, and is sustainable.
As such, Staff is proposing that the Police FTE-equivalent ~ivilian position scheduled to be
eliminated on 6130105, be accomplished by; reducing the culrrent complement of Community
Service Officers from four (4) to two (2), and to eliminate funding for the Police Cadet position
which has been less effective in recent years. This would b, il~llieu of eliminating one of the two
data technician positions discussed by the City Manager du ng budget review sessions. The
transition to a new records management system in the Polic Department has been slowed by
technological glitches with the new software, making it Wllikdy that the new records system will
come on line in 2005. The elimination of two eso's and tllC cadet position initead of the data
technician posjtion will create the same budget savings without sscrificing public safety.
; . - . - :. .
Staff is also reaffirming its support to eliminate the City's contribution to the I35W Coalition. A
letter recently received from the I35W Coalition requests that tile City contribute $9,000 in 2005'
(At one point, the City contributed as much as $33,000). However, Staff favors a more targeted
effort when a need is identified.
In addition, in light of the recent inspections of the chiller wilt at the Oval, Staff recommends
that $30,000 be redirected from the Park Improvement l'mgram (PlP} to the Skating Center to
provide for the re-inspection of the chiller unit at the endoflhcskating season, or for other
unforeseen repairs and replacements. The Total budget j;:H' the rat!:.s & Recreation function
would not change.
Finally, the Council is reminded that the 2005 Budget reflects ~e 3'd consecutive year of cuts to
programs and services. . What little discretionary spendin that had been aVailable, was
eliminated in previous years. In order to achieve structural udget balance for 2005, staffing
reductions are necessary. Further sustainable budget cuts will require additional staffing
reductions.
~
It /07
_~i
2003 City Council Meeting Agenda Items Addressing 2004 Budget
Issues
April 7'h council meeting, item VIlLA: State Aid Reductions, Potential Impacts and
Possible Solutions
April 14th council meeting, item IILA: Early Retirement Plan
June 2nd council meeting, item IX.D: City's Contribution to the Fire Relief Association
Pension Fund
Junc 9th council meeting, item IILA: Public Safety in the 21't Century; and item IV.A:
Mayor's 2004 Budget Targets
June 16th council meeting, item IV.B: Mayor's 2004 Budget Targets
July 21 Sl council meeting, item II1.B: 2004 Budget Targets and Scheduling Council and
Public Review Sessions; and item IX.A: Consider Motorcycles in the Roseville Police
Department
July 28th council meeting, item IILA: Council and Community Budget Review Session
August 4th council meeting, item IILA: Budget Presentation and Discussion regarding
Public Safety Programs (Police and Fire Departments)
August II th council meeting, item III.A: Budget Presentation regarding the following
Programs: Administration, City Council, Finance, Roseville Visitors Association (RV A),
Community Development Department a~1 ,the Housing R~development Authority (HRA)
August 18th council meeting, item IILA: 2004 Budget Presentation regarding Parks and
Recreation and Public Works Programs
September 15th council meeting, item IX.A: Consider Approving a Tentative, Not-to-
Exceed 2004 Tax Levy for the Roseville Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA);
and item IX.B: Consider Establishing a Motorcycle Patrol in the Police Department
September 29th council meeting, item IX.A: Consider Establishing a Motorcycle Patrol
in the Police Department
October 13th council meeting, item IX.B: Review of Council members' Budget
Submissions
November 17'h council meeting, item IILB: Review of the Finance Dircctor's 2004
Budget Memo, and City Council Budget Discussion; and item VLC: Public Hearing-
2004 City Budget
:>ME
SMART MOVES
,"';ATliHll,\Y, ,1,\NI~AI\l :..;;") , :":(1(1:1 SJ
Get help, probe neighborhoods
before a long-distance move
Acaptain in the U.S. Navy
was stat10neu in South
Korea near the Dl'militarized
Zone when he received orders
that he would be tran,ferred to
a new and unfamiliar arca back
in the United Stall". It I'd] to his
wife to seek Ollt the right m'igh-
Imrhood and home in thl' new
area_ I )ngged research helped'
the woman make the hpsl choic-
es for her f'amil:v or riVl'.
High among he!' priol'HiL's ._____CUll_~':~_lIlst
\Va::; finding <l high Sdlool with a - - ----
first-rate baml. This was impol'- agent. Among other sites. YOll
tanl. for her eldest son. a senior might visit that of tht' Employee
and an accomJllislll'd trumpt't Helocation Council w\ovw.cl'l'.
player. She was abo t'oncerl1l'd org.
about the edueation of hel' tW(~ . Don't Make the a.sump-
younger suns. tion t.hat high property taxes
She arranged hour-long con~ mean hetter services. assurnpw
vcrsatiom; with several high lion could be flawed, says Dr.
school mUS1C dlrcelIJI'S, as well Larry DeBoer, un ceonomist and
as principals at schools her chil- property tax expert at Purdue
(h'en might. aU end. This helped Univen~ity.
narrow her choices in he!' pur" High tax rates on residential
suit of thp right community. property could simply mean
Also cl'ntJ'a1 to her quest \vas that the overall tax hase is
the partnership sht' l'stahlishl'(} shrinking due to a decline in
with ht'l' real estate agent, who Iota] husinesses.
~pn(~l'at.ed reams of statistics to . Use the Internet to
help he!' ('OIllIHII'L' OIl<.' neighhor- probe for cl'im-e information.
hood with another. You can pick up statistieal infor-
Th~' family' _ was indel'd mat~m Oll j:.Timc by calling or
vlua~ed veith .its ult,imall' hous- . . l .
ing ,l'hoil'l~. They chose a solid.
20-yeal' ,old. Colonial-st\'le home
with a huge yard in an (-'SlaU-
Iished neighborhood with tI'Pt'-
lined stl'eets. Best of all, the
house was located just two
miles from a high :-Icl1001 \vlwre
the trumpet...playing son could
develop his talf'nls.
MilitaJ'Y"T'l'lat.t::'{1 1'e!()c;\ti()lls
I'emain common, h1l1 on'rilll
long-distance t'mploynll'1l1
moves have dropped ahollt I ()
percl~nt in the wake of Sept. 11.
BeH-tightl'ning by employers
during difficult l'conomic times
is thl' principal n'lIS01l. sa.vs W.
lWUCl' Walli!), af! l'Xl'clltivc with
Cendant Mobility, a major l'l'Io-
catioll compan~'. Still.lIJ(lIl,\' Jll'{J
pie continue to Illake long-dis-
tance IlHlVl'S to kl~t:p their juk;
OJ' find Ill'W OtH'S_ I-len' .In' sug-
g,-;~l,ions for tllO;':\" n::10l'<111ng 1(1
<Ill unfamiliar an';!:
. Work with a real estate
agent with special expcrtise in
lonl-!;-disUuH'l' mow's. The Intel'
nd C<ill help YOll find su('h illl
"
ELLEN JAMES
MARTIN
viHiting neighborhood police
;.;taUons. Another option is to
check Wcil site, offering public
safety ratings on communities.
Onl' such source is "The
!{e!oeation Crime Lab," which
can hI.' I"OWH} at
WWw.hOIlldair.col11.This free
sel'vice provides relative rank-
ings Oil publie safety for thou-
sands of communttieR in the
U.S, and ('anada.
. Compare communities
from an investment standpoint.
Before zeroing in on a pmticu-
lar home, those new to an area
s!HJuld clevi..'lop all ovel'view of
the investment potential of sev~
l'l"al neighborhoods, says
Hitch ie, the Re/Max I'eloeation
spl'eialist. Obtain a history of
appreciation patterns for one
ndghllol'hood vs. anot.her.
YOUI' agent should he able to
gl'neratl' such an analysis, help-
ing you make a prudent choice
from an investment standpoint.
Wallin, of Cendant Mobility,
1't~commends you phone your
new boss to ask for guidance on
neighhorhood selection.
",1/1'11 .Ia!li('s Morrin is a !lotion-
1111.1/ slllldic(ffer! Clilllll/ni....i.
Q '! j \ \ t
W'l'vGt, rt"P0\.Q.,tn,JJ
<2J:;X~ 10 s
WASTE MANAGEMENT
10050 N3ples St. NE
Blaine, ldN 55449
(952) 890-1100
(763) 783-5477 F"
August 22, 2005
Honorable Mayor & City Council Members
2660 Civic Center Drive
Roseville, MN 551 13
RE: Proposed Draft Request for Proposals (RFP) for Recycling Project
Dear Honorable Mayor & City Council Members:
Waste Management is the current recycling vendor for the City of Roseville. Waste
Management through an acquisition has been the City's recycling provider since 1987.
We like to believe that we have been a part of the success behind the City or Roseville's
recycling program.
We have reviewed the proposed draft RFP for Comprehensive Recycling Service.
UnfOliunately after 18 years of being involved with recycling in Roseville we are deeply
concerned that we will not be allowed to continue to be a part of the program. Waste
Management as the world's largest recycler cannot meet the specifications of your drall
RFP_
Let me explain why we will not be able to meet your specifications:
Recycled Contents Products
Page I I Section 4.3 5. Recycled Contents Products are defined as "Products or goods,
including roadbed or other aggregate products that are openly marketing and have
positive value. Recycled content products do not include use of any commodity as
landfill cover."
Waste Management uses umecoverable glass as an alternative daily cover at its landfills.
We believe that alternative daily landfill cover does meet the definition of a Recycled
content product and should not specifically be excluded. Daily cover for landfills (which
includes virgin soil, sawdust, and reusable tarps) must be purchased by landfills if not
readily available and does have a positive value. In fact the State of Milmesota
recognizes alternative daily cover as an acceptable reuse and allows material uscd that
way to be considered recycled.
Marketing Agreements
Page 23 Section 6.03. The drafi RFP stipulates that the contractor shall provide copies of
cunent marketing agreements and/or contracts for all materials, for Primary and
Secondary markets for each commodity within thiliy days of execution of a contract. As
A Division of Waste Management of MN Ine.
@
such agreements, change, expire or are re-negotiated, current copies of all agreements
shall be provided to the City." Waste Management feels that our agreements with our
vendors for sale of recyclable materials are confidential and vital to our recycling
business. We negotiate agreements for all material received not just the City of
Roseville's so our pricing is based on those quantities.
We also do not feel that the Marketing Agreements are even necessary information to the
City of Roseville. Thc RFP goes onto state that revenue sharing shonld be based on
published indexes rather than actual sale amount. Marketing agreements are not
applicable to this contract.
Revenue Sharing
Page 29 Section 8.04. Revenue sharing requires use of published indexed versus actual
sale price. Waste Management patiicipates in what is called hedging to guarantee both a
stable price and a stable market. We do not always get the published rate, but we are
guaranteed a market for our materials. We do not feel that published indexes are valid to
revenue sharing. Revenue sharing should be based on what the facility actually gets for
the material not a published rate.
Processing Facilities
Page 25 Section 7.01. The section on materials processing specifies that "The Contractor
shall dispose of no more than 5% of material (by weight) as process residnals as part of
recyclable materials processing operations." Waste Management's processing facility
processes approximately 14,000 tons of recyclable materials each month. The recycling
comes from programs that at'e source separated, dual stream, and single stream, multi-
family programs, commercial businesses, and source separated commercial fibers. We
have done extensive studies of our facility and have determined that we currently operate
at approximately a 6 percent residual for the whole plant. This is the satl1e plant that has
been processing Roseville's recycling since 2001.
Curbside Dual Stream Collection Scenario
Page 44 Seetion 10.06. If Contractors propose under dual stream scenario, they should
assume materials would be both collected and processed in a dual streatl1mode....It is not
acceptable to propose to collect materials in a dual stream mode and then process them in
a single stream mode. The City's current program is a dual stream program. Paper
products are sorted across Waste Management's Single SortSM line and rigids are sOlied
on our rigid only line. The draft RFP as it stands states that this method is unacceptable
to the city. This indicates that our current progratTI has been unacceptable to the City of
Roseville. That is not the feedback that we have received previously from the City
Council.
Waste Management is currently providing recycle service to 71 contracts in the Twin
Cities area. All of the material that Waste Management collects is processed through our
recycling facility. These communities are satisfied with the efficient, safe recycle
program that Waste Management provides. We have invested over $10 million in
making our processing facility the most state-of-the art facility in the State of Minnesota.
Roseville is the first community that Waste Management currently services to write our
facility out of their RFP.
We respectfully request that thc City Council not issue the existing draft RFP for
Residential Recycling Service and send it back to statT for revision. Thank you for your
time.
Sincerely,
/. ('\1 .
(.\\1_1'\"
\
Jennefer Klennert
Public Sector Manager
Waste Management
Phone (763) 783-5429