Laserfiche WebLink
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,April 8,2024 <br /> Page 11 <br /> Councilmember Etten explained they talk about local decision making but it sounds <br /> like what the State is after is that "not in my backyard" concept. He thought the <br /> City had proven its willingness, as the City had already gone well beyond the <br /> affordable housing requirements from the Met Council for 2040. He understands <br /> that not every City has and wondered how the State can open some of those doors <br /> without getting rid of everything. It is not just about local control, it is about <br /> understanding local impact and then a broad stroke from the State government <br /> eliminates the ability to consider local impact. He thought that was something that <br /> will negatively affect people in their current or future housing that does not have <br /> services connected to the area or bus routes, etc. Then, suddenly, there is housing <br /> in random spots or housing that is not supported by the infrastructure that does not <br /> make sense but is cheap and easy to build. Those local impacts, even beyond local <br /> control, is what the State is missing and it would have potential negative <br /> consequences. <br /> Councilmember Groff asked if it could be tailored so it is Roseville specific. That <br /> is what he would be interested in. <br /> Mayor Roe thought it still made sense to talk about what makes sense for Roseville, <br /> may not make sense for a city like Paynesville. It does not mean that city should <br /> not have things they should strive for and perhaps broad parameters they need to fit <br /> within. To Councilmember Groffs point about not everybody is doing something, <br /> he thought it would be important to talk about that. The reason why the City of <br /> Roseville has been successful is because the City has considered and been sensitive <br /> to those adjacencies and impacts and how it can work in the community which may <br /> not meet the letter of what was in some of these requirements in the legislation. He <br /> thought that was kind of the nuance, the local angle, but also still tying it back to <br /> how something coming from the State legislature does not always fit for all <br /> localities. <br /> Councilmember Schroeder agreed. She thought it was important for the City to pick <br /> out very specific things for the City to do to say, "this does not work for Roseville <br /> because of this, this and this". The Council does not know what will work and not <br /> work for other cities, but the staff and Council does know what does and does not <br /> work for Roseville and that is the important part here. <br /> Mr.Trudgeon explained the purpose of a letter to the legislature is to let them know <br /> that there are concerns the City has generally speaking about the bill. These items <br /> can be listed in the letter. He thought the City would be chasing its tail a little bit to <br /> get very specific and it would be helpful to state the City has some concerns about <br /> the way this bill has been going through the process, the lack of involvement of <br /> local officials, and some of the decisions. He noted the letter can talk about what <br /> Roseville has been doing at a local level and the City would encourage the <br /> legislature to stay in touch with the City as this process moves forward, whether it <br /> is a session or future sessions, and to have a conversation with the City about what <br />