HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021/04/19 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session Official minutes
City council special study session
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
April 19, 2021
The meeting convened at 7:43 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Lynette Dumalag, Rachel Harris,
Larry Kraft, and Margaret Rog
Councilmembers absent: Nadia Mohamed
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms.
Walsh), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), CFO (Ms. Schmitt), Senior Engineering Project
Manager (Mr. Sullivan), Senior Management Analyst (Ms. Solano), and Recording Secretary (Ms.
Pappas)
1. Governmental accounting overview
Ms. Schmitt presented the overview to the council.
Councilmember Rog asked if 59 funds is a large amount for a city the size of St. Louis Park, and
if there is a benefit to having more or fewer funds. Ms. Schmitt stated it is not unexpected to
have 59 funds and added the benefit of more or fewer funds depend on the funding structure
of the city. She noted many city funds come from TIF districts, it is smart to open a larger
number of funds to account for TIF and Bonds.
Councilmember Rog asked if it is recommended to keep a 35-50% fund balance, and noted the
city is at 45%. She also asked if there is a difference in ratings between 35-45%. Ms. Schmitt
stated the lowering of a fund balance could tip a lower bond rating but added bond ratings can
be caused by many factors.
Councilmember Rog asked if a restricted fund balance is related to staffing. Ms. Schmitt stated
it is not, it is related to maintaining the debt. Ms. Schmitt then explained what arbitrage
reporting is for each bond.
Councilmember Rog asked about strategic investments for the city. Ms. Schmitt stated you
cannot intentionally invest debt proceeds to make more interest than you are paying, it is illegal
to do that.
Councilmember Rog noted that Hennepin County’s 2020 levy was zero percent and that there
may be more needs the city has to fill because of that. She also asked about a status update on
federal cares act funds for the city. Ms. Schmitt stated staff does have an idea of what the city
will received in federal funds, noting it could be $4 -5 million; however, staff has no details on
what the funds can be used for yet.
Councilmember Kraft asked about keeping 45% of expenses in the fund balance and what this
all applies to. Ms. Schmitt stated this is the city’s fund balance policy and only appl ies to the
general fund. She added the general fund is the largest and has the most money in it, noting
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F397AE4-255D-4F36-A6B0-4C278845F613
Special study session minutes April 19, 2021
this is the most important fund. She added the city also has utility funds and other funds and
each has a fund balance policy related to it, noting it varies on what the funds can be used for.
Councilmember Kraft stated last year the city’s expenses ran under balance and asked if this
then generates a fund balance. Ms. Schmitt stated it certainly can, adding the budget is the
plan, but there are unanticipated overages or underages. She stated staff watches and tracks
this with monthly financial reports and if something happens on the revenue side, it could be
used for the fund balance.
Councilmember Dumalag asked about yearly tax rate changes as it relates to market values. Ms.
Schmitt stated the tax rates change every year, and the market rate depends on values which
also change every year. She noted all communities in the Twin Cities metro area contribute 40%
into a pool and the state prepares a distribution rate and sends funds back out. Ms. Schmitt
added this is only done in Minnesota and makes it fair as it relates to a city’s development and
tax rates.
Councilmember Dumalag asked if the term of debt varies. Ms. Schmitt stated ideally more
infrastructure can be maintained using debt. She pointed to pavement projects as an example
here, that can be completed over a 10-year revolving schedule.
Councilmember Harris asked if there are best practices related to the maximum amount of debt
to carry. Ms. Schmitt stated that depends on the overall financial structure of a city, and every
city does it differently.
Councilmember Harris asked if using debt to pay for pavement structure is common. Ms.
Schmitt stated yes.
Mr. Harmening added Connect the Park has been driving this in St. Louis Park over the last 5-7
years. He noted also with the magnitude of projects coming up, the city may have to investigate
the local option sales tax again or certain projects like Connect the Park may not be able to be
done.
Councilmember Rog asked about grants and what the city secures in grants each year. Ms.
Schmitt stated she will find out and report back. Mr. Harmening stated the city does put energy
into some foundation funds available for municipalities for climate action or racial equity. He
noted most grants come from county, Met Council, or the state, but not from private
foundations that support certain goals. He noted the McKnight Foundation may have some
funds for housing and could be pursued.
Councilmember Kraft asked Ms. Schmitt if franchise fees go to pavement management. Ms.
Schmitt stated yes but noted cable fees are different.
Councilmember Brausen added the pavement management is needed and more must be
invested for infrastructure of the city which is 75 years old.
Ms. Schmitt stated the next budget discussion will be at the May 10 meeting of the council .
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F397AE4-255D-4F36-A6B0-4C278845F613
Special study session minutes April 19, 2021
Mayor Spano thanked Ms. Schmitt for the very helpful presentation.
2. Connect the Park policy discussion
Mr. Sullivan presented the updates on Connect the Park policy and approach. He noted this will
be a different way to approach the public process portion and staff recommendations and
presents a new and updated way to review Connect the Park projects going forward .
Councilmember Kraft stated he is excited to see this keep moving forward. He suggested when
discussing how people move about the community, the phrase “without a car” be added as well
as e-bikes and e-scooters. He has a concern with the use of the term “best fit design ,” which
sounds like a term that assumes a certain outcome. He is also concerned there is some
unconscious bias in saying “best fit”.
Councilmember Kraft noted the term “populations served” and asked how staff is thinking
about this term. Mr. Sullivan stated there can be no forecast about who might use the corridor
and it depends on the population that has access here, their ages, demographics, and would be
dependent on this information.
Councilmember Kraft asked how the model will consider the network effect of the biking
infrastructure. Mr. Sullivan stated the bike network analysis tool helps staff understand how
biking levels could change, adding he is not sure if it represents all areas, but it can look at
correlations.
Councilmember Kraft added impacts could be negative; however, there can be positive capital
returns. Mr. Sullivan agreed, adding impacts do not have to be negative. He stated staff will
learn from this and refine each project to keep it more in line with what council and future
councils want to see.
Councilmember Kraft added when looking at policy, he will want to see racial equity
considerations included.
Councilmember Harris noted the public input phase, ROI criteria, and bike buddy program, and
stated some might not be aware the city is creating a program for those interested by
concerned or more cautious bikers. She encouraged staff to share widely that the goal is for the
more casual bikers. She requested a public input feedback loop or infographic to articulate to
residents how and when the city will take input, how their input will impact the process, how it
matters and changes that will come.
Mr. Sullivan stated staff does have a feedback loop in practice and will take suggestions to find
ways to illustrate infographics to the community for a better recommendation and project.
Councilmember Rog stated she appreciates the thinking behind this, and all is moving in a great
direction. She noted the ROI chart and that the best fit is the interested but concerned biker .
Ms. Sullivan stated interested but concerned means more with larger negative impacts, but in
the end will get more riders out. He stated staff can change how they are described or find a
better name to remove preconceived notions.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F397AE4-255D-4F36-A6B0-4C278845F613
Special study session minutes April 19, 2021
Councilmember Rog stated she would like to push more thinking about changing how cars work
on the road. She would like to see the Dakota Bridge costs and funds included in the ROI
analysis as well. She agrees with resident input comments, adding each project might have its
own needs around public engagement and councilmembers can bring ideas from within their
wards and connect earlier in the process about who else to engage with.
Councilmember Rog also stated she wants everyone to continue to think about non-motorized
definitions, noting that electric bikes do have motors. She asked if there is value in scoring or
looking at different segments or the order of choosing segments in terms of equity or as being
more supportive of the city’s racial equity goals.
Councilmember Brausen stated he would also like a ROI analysis, noting carbon reduction and
public health impacts may be hard to quantify, but he will want to see them. He added he sent
staff his comments on data, bike, and pedestrian counts also.
Councilmember Brausen stated some of the improvements will be retro fitting as the roads
were built for cars and trucks, and the city will continue to get negative feedback on this. He
pointed out as the Ward 4 councilmember, the west end of Cedar Lake Road continues to have
improvements pushed out until 2036 and this is difficult to tell his constituents .
Mayor Spano stated he likes the fact this is being approached as a work in progress versus a
solution to implement. He agreed with Councilmember Kraft’s comments on race equity as well
and asked staff to clearly state the differences between bike trails and bikeways.
Mayor Spano added he would like to bring in and leverage the strength of other professional
organizations to help build community and community engagement around this.
Councilmember Kraft stated guidance is not clear on the interested but concerned biker and
noted it would be valuable to create a transportation commission here.
Councilmember Brausen added, however, he worries about adding increased costs with
involving professionals. He asked if the city is still planning to do a community survey soon,
noting that Connect the Park has been great about connecting communities who can talk on
sidewalks and meet their neighbors. He stated the city gets ROI on community building but
noted they do not do a good enough job on promoting before going onto the next project.
Councilmember Dumalag stated she sees value in hiring an outside consultant on the public
engagement process, noting it would be money well-spent and should be explored. She pointed
out the city is already halfway through Connect the Park.
Councilmember Rog stated she feels what the Mayor is proposing is entirely different based on
what council has directed staff to work on for many months, adding she feels like this
supersedes what was presented tonight.
Mayor Spano stated he sees this as part of the public engagement process.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F397AE4-255D-4F36-A6B0-4C278845F613
Special study session minutes April 19, 2021
Councilmember Rog stated, however, this seems like a whole other conversation. She stated
while she likes this idea as a concept, the resource allocation would be significant, adding this
item should be taken up at a separate time.
Ms. Heiser stated next steps will be discussing financials with Ms. Schmitt, and how to speed up
the process as it relates to Cedar Lake Road and Louisiana Avenue.
Communications/meeting check-in (verbal)
Councilmember Brausen volunteered to conduct the planning commission interviews, as noted
in the written report, seeing as Councilmember Harris is unable to do them.
Ms. Solano stated she will make that schedule change and send an email update to the council
on the boards and commissions appointment process, as well as a poll regarding scheduling the
council closed session.
The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
3. Boards and commissions appointment process update
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F397AE4-255D-4F36-A6B0-4C278845F613