My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2024_0108
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2024
>
CC_Minutes_2024_0108
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/30/2024 1:18:47 PM
Creation date
1/30/2024 1:18:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
1/8/2024
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,January 8, 2024 <br /> Page 11 <br /> Mayor Roe asked Mr. Trudgeon what he feels the City's role will be in this process. <br /> Mr. Trudgeon thought Chief Brosnahan may certainly have to testify in support of <br /> changes, but he did not think it was proposed to have any specific legislation <br /> introduced on the City's behalf. He stated staff should continue to connect with the <br /> Chiefs' Association and other interested parties and look at the changes. He noted <br /> the first step is the study that is going on so that needs to conclude and then there <br /> might be something that would happen. <br /> Mayor Roe asked if the Council would like to move that item up or keep it where <br /> it is on the list. <br /> Councilmember Schroeder indicated she would keep it where it is. She explained <br /> she was curious about the statewide licensing and massage therapists. It shows <br /> existing and she asked for a little background information on what Roseville does <br /> to work on that. <br /> Mr. Trudgeon reviewed the process Roseville is using to advocate to the State <br /> Legislature on why this item is important. <br /> Mayor Roe explained a topic came up today at the Mayor and City Manager <br /> meeting with neighboring communities and that is potential support for photo <br /> enforcement of traffic because currently, by the ruling of the Minnesota Supreme <br /> Court, in the State of Minnesota photo enforcement cannot be done. As he <br /> understands it, there is the potential that if there are changes to the legislation, <br /> potentially the State could use photo enforcement. He wondered if the Council <br /> wanted to think about a potential addition at a future time. He thought this was <br /> something that people in the community are concerned about, the safety aspect of <br /> speeding and running red lights. <br /> Councilmember Schroder thought that Minneapolis was doing a pilot study on that <br /> with the cameras and knew there were some things that had to change. <br /> Mayor Roe believed there was a Minneapolis case that determined the Minnesota <br /> Supreme Court action. He thought Minneapolis was the prime City pushing for <br /> change of this item, and St. Paul would get on board as well,just given that issues <br /> do not stop at the border of Minneapolis, and St. Paul is pretty big community. <br /> Etten moved, Groff seconded, approving the City's 2024 Legislative Priorities <br /> while changing it slightly to move"Creation of sustainable alternative funding for <br /> Cable Commissions"to the City's other priority list. <br /> Council Discussion <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.