Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023/12/12 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA DECEMBER 12, 2023 6:30 p.m. City council study session –council chambers Discussion items 1.40 min.Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 2.30 min.Discuss ordinance requirements for on-sale liquor licenses Written reports 3.Systems year in review and 2024 preview 4.Boards and Commissions program update 5.Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update Members of the public can attend St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, city council meetings and study sessions in person or watch live by webstream at bit.ly/watchslpcouncil or at www.parktv.org, or on local cable (Comcast SD channel 14/HD channel 859). Recordings of the meetings are available to watch on the city's YouTube channel at www.youtube.com/@slpcable, usually within 24 hours of the end of the council meeting or study session. The council chambers is equipped with Hearing Loop equipment and headsets are available to borrow. If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952.924.2505. Meeting: Study session Meeting date: December 12, 2023 Discussion item: 1 Executive Summary Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Recommended action: No action required. Policy consideration: None; the city charter requires the council to provide for an annual audit of the city’s finances. Summary: The city is required to have an independent (external) audit each year, through which the audit firm issues an opinion on the city’s financial statements. The city’s ACFR received an unmodified audit opinion for the Dec. 31, 2022 report. For 2022, the auditor has deemed St. Louis Park’s audit as “unmodified” which means that they are of the opinion that the city’s financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, and are in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework for the Dec. 31, 2022 ACFR. In keeping with the previous 38 years, the city has submitted the ACFR to the Government Finance Officers Association for consideration of the Certificate of Achievement award for financial reporting. We anticipate the submission will be accepted and the city will be, for the 39th consecutive year, granted the award. Rebecca Petersen from Redpath and Company will present financial details from the 2022 audit. Because the audit is public at the time it is finalized, it has been proactively added to the city’s website and can be accessed online. It is labeled “2022 Financial Report”. Financial or budget considerations: This report shows the City of St. Louis Park continues to remain in strong financial condition. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: In addition to the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for 2022 which can be found here, the below are attached: Communication with those charged with governance Minnesota legal compliance report Schedule of expenditures of federal awards and independent auditors reports Prepared by: Joe Olson, deputy finance director Reviewed by: Amelia Cruver, finance director Cheyenne Brodeen. administrative services director Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager Page 2 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Discussion Background: Each year the city is required to have an audit on the city’s financials, internal controls, and a Single Audit (if applicable). The completion of the audit will result in the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). This report provides transparency to the public regarding the financial well-being of the City of St. Louis Park. 2022 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR): The 2022 ACFR is located on our website along with reports from previous years. Governmental Fund Highlights: The city has the following major funds that are recorded separately due to their size and significance to the City of St. Louis Park. “Other Governmental Funds” encompasses all other governmental funds that do not meet the classification of major. •The General Fund is the city’s primary operating fund. It accounts for all financial resources of the general government, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. •The Housing Rehabilitation Fund is used to account for revenues from revenue bond fees and expenditures related to preventing deterioration of multi-unit housing. •The COVID Fund accounts for the proceeds of Federal COVID relief funding. •The Debt Service Fund accounts for the resources accumulated and payments made for principal and interest on long-term general obligation debt of the government. •The Development EDA Fund accounts for transactions related to redevelopment efforts in the city; financing is provided by investment income, grants and developer reimbursements. •The Redevelopment District Fund accounts for transactions relative to acquisition and development in the city’s tax increment redevelopment districts; financing is provided by the sale of general obligation tax increment bonds along with tax increment property tax payments. •The Streets Capital Project Fund accounts for street construction projects. Revenues are provided by the General Fund for maintenance expenditures or by the issuance of general obligation bonds. Governmental Funds Fund Balance - 12/31/21 2022 Revenues 2022 Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Ending Fund Balance - 12/31/22 Cash and investments 12/31/22 General Fund 23,815,356 46,061,169 (44,134,199) (80,662) 25,661,664 32,350,939 Housing Rehabilitation 6,098,978 945,048 (5,423,956) 4,947,091 6,567,161 4,052,774 COVID Fund 5,625 733,396 (2,678) (812,941) (76,598) 4,426,178 Debt Service 287,219 5,782,427 (6,834,625) 1,339,417 574,438 7,012,458 Development EDA (1,300,863) 3,259,657 (4,670,410) 109,890 (2,601,726) 6,656,977 Redevelopment District 1,244,527 14,061,292 (10,637,625) (2,179,140) 2,489,054 6,108,479 Streets Capital Projects (6,585,167) 1,676,173 (8,261,340) - (13,170,334) 29,283 Other Governmental Funds 4,902,753 9,723,464 (5,889,204) 1,068,493 9,805,506 15,852,781 Page 3 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 •The fund balance for the city’s governmental funds increased $780,737 during the year of 2022 from a beginning balance of $28,468,428 to an ending balance of $29,249,165. •Total governmental revenues totaled $82,242,626, expenditures totaled $85,854,037, and other financing sources (uses) totaled $4,392,148. The majority of the revenue and expenditures collected and disbursed occurred in the General Fund with revenue totaling $46,061,169 and expenditures of $44,134,199. •Other Financing Sources (Uses) – are items that are not classified as revenue and expenditures according to the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB). This includes items like transfers in and out to other funds, issuance of debt, and other items classified by GASB. •The city’s cash and investments in the city’s governmental funds totaled $76,489,869. The majority of the cash and investments for governmental funds are held in the city’s General Fund in the amount of $32,350,939 (which amounts to 42.3%). General Fund Balance Highlights: •The General Fund balance ended Dec. 31, 2022, at $25,661,664, an increase of $1,846,308 from the beginning fund balance of $23,815,356. •The city will maintain an unassigned General fund balance of not less than 40-50% of the subsequent year’s budgeted expenditures with a policy target of 45%. The city’s 2022 ending General Fund unassigned balance is 50.66% of the 2023 General Fund budgeted expenditures of $47,269,744. This equates to $2,674,461 additional unassigned fund balance more than the targeted 45%. •The city uses five categories of fund balance for the General Fund, which include Nonspendable, Restricted, Committed, Assigned and Unassigned. o Nonspendable General Fund Balance – the ending balance for this category is determined by the total amount of prepaid and inventories the city has as of year- end. o Restricted General Fund Balance – this restriction is created based on an external entity (i.e. State of MN or Federal Government) requiring spending to be spent in a specified way. o Committed General Fund Balance – these are items that were approved by the city council for a specified way of spending. General Fund - Fund Balance Classification Nonspendable Restricted Committed Assigned Unassigned Ending Fund Balance - 12/31/22 Prepaid items 84,898 - - - - 84,898 Inventories 239,241 - - - - 239,241 E-911 purposes - 87,357 - - - 87,357 Inspections - - - 550,000 - 550,000 DWI enforcement - - - 204,322 - 204,322 Tax court petitions - - - 500,000 - 500,000 Community survey - - - 50,000 - 50,000 Unassigned - - - - 23,945,846 23,945,846 Total Fund Balance 324,139 87,357 - 1,304,322 23,945,846 25,661,664 Page 4 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 o Assigned General Fund Balance – these are items established by city council or an official delegate of city council often to be set aside for specific purposes but with less specificity than the committed fund balance items. o Unassigned General Fund Balance – this encompasses all amounts that do not fit the four categories listed above. Enterprise Fund Highlights: The city’s Enterprise Funds include the following: •The Water Fund accounts for the provisions of water services to residents of the city. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, billing and collection. •The Sewer Fund accounts for the provisions of sewer services to residents of the city. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, billing and collection. •The Storm Water Fund accounts for the revenue and expenses related to providing storm water to the residents of the city. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, construction, maintenance, billing and collection. •The Solid Waste Fund accounts for the revenue and expense related to collection, disposal, and recycling of residential solid waste. Financing is provided by charging each property owner a predetermined service fee. •The city’s total net position for the city’s Enterprise Funds (Water, Sewer, Storm Water, and Solid Waste) increased $6,753,296 during the year of 2023 from a beginning balance of $46,890,372 to an ending balance of $53,643,668. •Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses versus nonoperating. Operating revenues and expenses are items closely related to the operations of the Water, Sewer, Storm Water, and Solid Waste funds (for example the utility billing charges for services for the revenue and operational charges like salary for expenses). Nonoperating includes property taxes, investment earnings, and other. •Capital contribution includes items of connection fees, special assessments, and interfund transfers. •Enterprise funds cash and investments ended Dec. 31, 2022, with a balance of $17,060,390 with the majority of the cash and investment balance belonging to the Water fund 42.0 percent, $7,162,790. Enterprise Funds Net Position - 12/31/21 2022 Operating Revenues 2022 Operating Expenses 2022 Nonoperating Capital contributions Net Position - 12/31/22 Cash and investments 12/31/22 Water 14,222,376 9,156,315 (5,651,824) (440,879) 15,385 17,301,373 7,162,790 Sewer 10,059,061 8,971,596 (6,096,247) (88,193) (790,530) 12,055,687 3,725,923 Storm Water 19,781,861 3,541,917 (2,091,229) (72,289) (362,966) 20,797,294 2,944,002 Solid Waste 2,827,074 4,540,176 (3,751,720) 137,195 (263,411) 3,489,314 3,227,675 Page 5 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Internal Service Fund Highlights: Internal Service Funds account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the city, or to other governments on a cost reimbursement basis. The city’s internal service funds account for employee benefits including postemployment benefits and pensions, insurance, capital replacement. •The city’s net position for the city’s internal service funds decreased $2,313,542 during the 2023 year from negative $7,454,882 to negative $9,768,424. The primary reason for the change is the pension obligations recorded in the employee benefits fund. •Net pension obligations were the primary driver for the change in fund balance. This determines the city’s overall share in the state’s employee pension plans (PERA, Police and Fire). This liability is calculated by an actuary firm to determine the city’s share if the state cannot make payment to the state employee pension plans, an extremely unlikely outcome. Changes align with the market value of the assets the state invests in the pension plans. Next Steps: This is an informational presentation after which our auditor and finance team will be available if there are any questions. Please have any detailed financial questions ahead of the meeting if you need an answer Monday night. We will answer questions as we can on Monday but may need time to review detailed or technically specific questions. Internal Service Funds Net Position - 12/31/21 2022 Operating Revenues 2022 Operating Expenses 2022 Nonoperating Transfers (net) Net Position - 12/31/22 Cash and investments 12/31/22 Employee Benefits (29,631,038) 3,310,668 (6,947,120) 585,281 488,000 (32,194,209) 236,023 Insurance 676,874 97,073 (1,334,536) 2,885 2,249,512 1,691,808 2,294,989 Vehicles & Equipment - 1,453,204 (1,448,681) 37,555 6,809,157 6,851,235 856,050 Municipal Buildings - 3,995 (516,809) 259,139 9,717,083 9,463,408 533,404 Technology 21,499,282 5,650 (2,015,597) 1,308,823 (16,378,824) 4,419,334 2,066,632 55 5th Street East, Suite 1400, St. Paul, MN, 55101      www.redpathcpas.com COMMUNICATION WITH THOSE CHARGED WITH GOVERNANCE  To the Honorable Mayor and   Members of the City Council  City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota  We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business‐type  activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of St.  Louis Park, Minnesota for the year ended December 31, 2022.  Professional standards  require that we provide you with information about our responsibilities under generally  accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards and the Uniform  Guidance, as well as certain information related to the planned scope and timing of our  audit.  We have communicated such information in our letter to you dated June 13, 2023.   Professional standards also require that we communicate to you the following information  related to our audit.  Significant Audit Matters  Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices  Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies.   The significant accounting policies used by City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota are described in  Note 1 to the financial statements.  As described in Note 16 to the financial statements, the  City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota adopted new accounting guidance for 2022, Governmental  Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 87, Leases.  We noted no transactions entered  into by City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota during the year for which there is a lack of  authoritative guidance or consensus.  All significant transactions have been recognized in  the financial statements in the proper period.    Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by  management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and  current events and assumptions about future events.  Certain accounting estimates are  particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because  of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those  expected.    Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 6 City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s   Communication With Those Charged With Governance  Page 2  The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements are the estimated present  value of the lease receivable and lease liability, and the estimates used to calculate the net  pension liability and OPEB liability, the pension and OPEB related deferred outflows and  inflows of resources, and pension and OPEB expense.  These estimates are based on the  City of St. Louis Park Minnesota’s estimated incremental borrowing rate as of January 1,  2022, rates stated in lease agreements and actuarial studies. We evaluated the key factors  and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they are reasonable in  relation to the financial statements taken as a whole.    Certain financial statement disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their  significance to financial statement users.  Determining sensitivity is subjective, however, we  believe the disclosures most likely to be considered sensitive are Note 7 – Defined Benefit  Pension Plans, Note 5 – Capital assets, change in estimate and Note 14 G – Subsequent  events.    The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear.    Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit     The completion of our audit was delayed primarily due to two factors:  1. The significant number of adjustments made during the audit to the financial  statement amounts.  2. Delays in the start of audit procedures due to the extended time the City required to  prepare information for audit. We initially expected to begin our audit on May 8,  2023, however we did not receive the City’s financial statement amounts for audit  (the trial balance) until June 18, 2023.     Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements    Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements  identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial, and communicate them  to the appropriate level of management.  There were no uncorrected misstatements that  have an effect on our opinion on the financial statements.  The uncorrected misstatements  or the matters underlying them could potentially cause future period financial statements  to be materially misstated, even though, in our judgment, such uncorrected misstatements  are immaterial to the financial statements under audit.  The material misstatements  detected as a result of audit procedures and corrected by management are described in the  Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs as items 2022‐001.      Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 7 City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s   Communication With Those Charged With Governance  Page 3  Disagreements with Management    For purposes of this letter, a disagreement with management is a financial accounting,  reporting or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be  significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report.  We are pleased to report that  no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit.    Management Representations    We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the  management representation letter dated September 26, 2023.    Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants    In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing  and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations.  If a  consultation involves application of an accounting principle to City of St. Louis Park,  Minnesota’s financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor’s opinion that  may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting  accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts.  To  our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants.    Other Audit Findings or Issues    We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles  and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as City of St. Louis  Park, Minnesota’s auditors.  However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of  our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention.    Other Matters    We applied certain limited procedures to the management’s discussion and analysis,  budgetary comparison schedules and schedules of OPEB and pension information, which  are required supplementary information (RSI) that supplements the basic financial  statements.  Our procedures consisted of inquiries of management regarding the methods  of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with  management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other  knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements.  We did not audit  the RSI and do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the RSI.  Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 8 City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s   Communication With Those Charged With Governance  Page 4  We were engaged to report on the individual and combining fund statements and  schedules, which accompany the financial statements but are not RSI.  With respect to this  supplementary information, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated the  form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information  complies with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the  method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and the information is  appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements.  We  compared and reconciled the supplementary information to the underlying accounting  records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves.    We were not engaged to report on the introductory and statistical sections, which  accompany the financial statements but are not RSI.  Such information has not been  subjected to auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements, and  accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on it.    Restriction on Use    This information is intended solely for the information and use of the City of St. Louis Park,  Minnesota’s City Council and management and is not intended to be, and should not be,  used by anyone other than these specified parties.        REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD.   St. Paul, Minnesota    September 26, 2023  Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 9 55 5th Street East, Suite 1400, St. Paul, MN, 55101      www.redpathcpas.com MINNESOTA LEGAL COMPLIANCE REPORT  To the Honorable Mayor and   Members of the City Council  City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota  We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United  States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government  Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial  statements of the governmental activities, the business‐type activities, each major fund,  and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as of  and for the year ended December 31, 2022, and the related notes to the financial  statements, which collectively comprise the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s basic  financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated September 26, 2023.   In connection with our audit, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that  the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota failed to comply with the provisions of the contracting  –bid laws, depositories of public funds and public investments, conflicts of interest, public indebtedness, claims and disbursements, miscellaneous provisions, and tax increment financing sections of the Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Cities, promulgated by the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statute § 6.65, insofar as they relate to accounting matters.  However, our audit was not directed primarily toward obtaining knowledge of such noncompliance.  Accordingly, had we performed additional procedures, other matters may have come to our attention regarding the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s noncompliance with the above referenced provisions, insofar as they relate to accounting matters. The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of compliance and  the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on compliance.  Accordingly, this  communication is not suitable for any other purpose.  REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD. St. Paul, Minnesota  September 26, 2023  Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 10 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA  SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS   AND INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORTS  For The Year Ended December 31, 2022  Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 11 - This page intentionally left blank - Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 12 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA  TABLE OF CONTENTS  Page No.   Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting  and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial  Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing  Standards 1  Independent Auditor’s Report on Compliance for Each Major Program and  on Internal Control over Compliance and Report on Schedule of  Expenditures of Federal Awards Required by the Uniform Guidance 3  Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 7  Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs 9  Summary Schedule of Prior Year Audit Findings 12  Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 13 - This page intentionally left blank - Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 14 55 5th Street East, Suite 1400, St. Paul, MN, 55101      www.redpathcpas.com INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING  AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS  To the Honorable Mayor and   Members of the City Council  City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota  We have audited, in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in the  United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in  Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the  financial statements of the governmental activities, the business‐type activities, each major  fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota as  of and for the year ended December 31, 2022, and the related notes to the financial  statements, which collectively comprise City of St. Louis park, Minnesota’s basic financial  statements, and have issued our report thereon dated September 26, 2023.   Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting  In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered City of St.  Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control over financial reporting (internal control) as a basis  for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of  expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing  an opinion on the effectiveness of City of St. Louis Park Minnesota’s internal control.   Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of City of St. Louis Park  Minnesota’s internal control.  A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow  management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent,  or detect and correct, misstatements, on a timely basis.  A material weakness is a deficiency, or a  combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a  material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and  corrected, on a timely basis.  A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies,  in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit  attention by those charged with governance.  1 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 15 Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of  this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be material  weaknesses or, significant deficiencies and therefore, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies  may exist that were not identified.  We identified certain deficiencies in internal control, described in  the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs as item 2022‐001 that we considered to  be a material weakness.   Report on Compliance and Other Matters  As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s  financial statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its  compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements,  noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the financial  statements.  However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not  an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.  The results  of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to  be reported under Government Auditing Standards.  City of St. Louis Park Minnesota’s Response to Findings  Government Auditing Standards requires the auditor to perform limited procedures on the  City of St. Louis Park Minnesota’s response to the findings identified in our audit and  described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs. The City of St  Louis Park Minnesota’s response was not subjected to the other auditing procedures  applied in the audit of the financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on  the response. Purpose of this Report  The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control  and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the  effectiveness of the entity’s internal control or on compliance.  This report is an integral  part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in  considering the entity’s internal control and compliance.  Accordingly, this communication  is not suitable for any other purpose.  REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD.  St. Paul, Minnesota  September 26, 2023  2 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 16 55 5th Street East, Suite 1400, St. Paul, MN, 55101      www.redpathcpas.com INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE FOR EACH MAJOR PROGRAM AND ON  INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE AND REPORT ON SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF  FEDERAL AWARDS REQUIRED BY THE UNIFORM GUIDANCE  To The Honorable Mayor and   Members of the City Council  City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota  Report on Compliance for Each Major Federal Program  Opinion on Each Major Federal Program  We have audited City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s compliance with the types of  compliance requirements identified as subject to audit in the OMB Compliance Supplement  that could have a direct and material effect on each of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s  major federal programs for the year ended December 31, 2022. City of St. Louis Park,  Minnesota’s major federal programs are identified in the summary of auditor's results  section of the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs.  In our opinion, City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s complied, in all material respects, with the  types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material  effect on each of its major federal programs for the year ended December 31, 2022.  Basis for Opinion on Each Major Federal Program  We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally  accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits  contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the  United States; and the audit requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part  200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for  Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Our responsibilities under those standards and the  Uniform Guidance are further described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of  Compliance section of our report.   3 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 17 We are required to be independent of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota and to meet our  other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with relevant ethical requirements relating to  our audit. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and  appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion on compliance for each major federal  program. Our audit does not provide a legal determination of City of St. Louis Park,  Minnesota’s compliance with the compliance requirements referred to above.  Responsibilities of Management for Compliance  Management is responsible for compliance with the requirements referred to above and for  the design, implementation, and maintenance of effective internal control over compliance  with the requirements of laws, statutes, regulations, rules, and provisions of contracts or  grant agreements applicable to City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s federal programs.  Auditor's Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance  Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether material noncompliance  with the compliance requirements referred to above occurred, whether due to fraud or  error, and express an opinion on City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s compliance based on  our audit. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance  and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with generally  accepted auditing standards, Government Auditing Standards, and the Uniform Guidance  will always detect material noncompliance when it exists. The risk of not detecting material  noncompliance resulting from fraud is higher than for that resulting from error, as fraud  may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of  internal control. Noncompliance with the compliance requirements referred to above is  considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate,  it would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user of the report on compliance  about City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s compliance with the requirements of each major  federal program as a whole.  In performing an audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards,  Government Auditing Standards, and the Uniform Guidance, we:   •Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. •Identify and assess the risks of material noncompliance, whether due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding City of St. Louis 4 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 18 Park, Minnesota’s compliance with the compliance requirements referred to above  and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the  circumstances.   • Obtain an understanding of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s internal control over  compliance relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are  appropriate in the circumstances and to test and report on internal control over  compliance in accordance with the Uniform Guidance, but not for the purpose of  expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota’s  internal control over compliance. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.     We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among  other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and any significant deficiencies  and material weaknesses in internal control over compliance that we identified during the  audit.    Report on Internal Control Over Compliance    A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a  control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of  performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with  a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. A material  weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of  deficiencies, in internal control over compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility  that material noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program  will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency  in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in  internal control over compliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal  program that is less severe than a material weakness in internal control over compliance,  yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance.    Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described  in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance section above and was not  designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over compliance that might be  material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in internal control over compliance. Given  these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control  over compliance that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. However,  material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in internal control over compliance may exist  that were not identified.     5 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 19 Our audit was not designed for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of  internal control over compliance. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.     The purpose of this report on internal control over compliance is solely to describe the  scope of our testing of internal control over compliance and the results of that testing based  on the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Accordingly, this report is not suitable for  any other purpose.    Report on Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Required by the Uniform Guidance     We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business‐type  activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of St.  Louis Park, Minnesota as of and for the year ended December 31, 2022, and the related  notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise City of St. Louis Park,  Minnesota’s basic financial statements. We issued our report thereon dated September 26,  2023, which contained unmodified opinions on those financial statements. Our audit was  conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively  comprise the basic financial statements. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of  federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by the Uniform  Guidance and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information is  the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the  underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements.  The information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the  financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling  such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare  the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other  additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the  United States of America. In our opinion, the schedule of expenditures of federal awards is  fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole.        REDPATH AND COMPANY, LTD.  St. Paul, Minnesota    September 26, 2023      6 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 20 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA  SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS  For the Year Ended December 31, 2022        Federal Pass‐through Assistance Entity Listing Identifying Federal Federal Grantor/Pass‐Through Grantor/Program or Cluster Title Number Number Expenditures U.S. Department of Transportation       Passed through the State of Minnesota: Highway Planning and Construction (Highway Planning and  Construction Cluster)20.205 1030096 $268       Passed through the Metropolitan Airport Commission: Minimum Penalties for Repeat Offenders for Driving While  Intoxicated 20.608 None noted 6,406 Subtotal for U.S. Department of Transportation 6,674 U.S. Department of Homeland Security     Passed through U.S. Customs & Border Protection: Homeland Security Grant Program 97.067 None noted 9,917 U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development       Passed through Hennepin County: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG Entitlement Grants  Cluster)14.218 None noted 30,000 U.S. Department of Health & Human Services       Passed through Hennepin County: Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse 93.959 None noted 1,000 U.S. Department of Justice Direct Award: Bullet Proof Vest Partnership Program 16.607 Not applicable 7,608 U.S. Department of the Interior       Passed through the State of Minnesota: Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning 15.916 None noted 100,000 U.S. Department of Treasury Direct Award: COVID‐19 ‐ Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds 21.027 Not applicable 815,116 Total expenditures of federal awards $970,315   7 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 21 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA  SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS  For the Year Ended December 31, 2022        Notes to the schedule of expenditures of federal awards Note A ‐ Basis of Presentation The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards (the Schedule) includes the federal award activity of City of St. Louis Park,  Minnesota under programs of the federal government for the year ended 12/31/22. The information in this Schedule is presented in  accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost  Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Therefore, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the presentation of, the financial statements. Note B ‐ Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following  contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Note C ‐ Indirect Costs City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota did not elect to use the 10% de minimis cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. Note D ‐ Subrecipients City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota did not pass any federal funds to subrecipients during 2022. 8 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 22 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA  SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS  For the Year Ended December 31, 2022          SECTION I ‐ SUMMARY OF AUDIT RESULTS      Financial Statements      A. Type of auditors’ report issued: Unmodified  B. Internal control over financial reporting:        Material weakness(es) identified? X Yes  No   Significant deficiencies identified that are not  considered to be material weaknesses?   Yes X No  C. Noncompliance material to financial statements  noted?   Yes X No  Federal Awards      D. Internal control over major programs:        Material weakness(es) identified?  Yes X No   Significant deficiencies identified that are not  considered to be material weaknesses?   Yes X No   E. Type of auditors’ report issued on compliance for  major programs:  Unmodified  F. Any other findings disclosed that are required to be  reported in accordance with 2 CFR section  200.516(a)?   Yes X No   G. Identification of major programs:            Name of Federal Program  Assistance  Listing  Number    COVID‐19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery  Funds    21.027    H. Dollar threshold used to distinguish between Type A  and Type B programs:  $750,000  I. Auditee qualified as a low‐risk auditee:  Yes X No     9 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 23 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA  SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS  For the Year Ended December 31, 2022          SECTION II – FINANCIAL STATEMENT FINDINGS  2022‐001  Financial Statement Corrections     Criteria:  The City’s internal controls should allow management or employees, in the normal  course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements on a  timely basis.    Condition:  Audit procedures detected material misstatements in the City’s year‐end  accruals. Significant audit adjustments were made in the following areas:    Franchise fees and related receivables were adjusted by approximately  $1,360,000   Lodging tax revenue and the related receivable was adjusted by  approximately $48,000   Miscellaneous revenues and related receivables were adjusted by  approximately $106,000   Property tax revenue and related receivables were adjusted by  approximately $259,000   Waste disposal expense and the prepaid items accrual was adjusted by  approximately $368,000   Capital outlay expenditures and the related retainage payable was  adjusted by approximately $218,000   Capital assets and expenses were adjusted by approximately $51,000    Expenditures were adjusted between funds by approximately $202,000  to properly account for prepaid items     Additionally, the City implemented a new accounting standard – GASB 87 Leases – for  the year ended December 31, 2022. As a result of audit procedures, the City posted  three adjusting entries to properly account for the City’s leases under the new standard.      Cause:  The ledger accounts impacted by these adjustments were not fully reconciled  prior to audit.  It is our understanding that staff turnover within the finance department  was likely a contributing factor.     Effect:  Inadequate controls over the year‐end closing process results in an increased  risk that financial statement misstatements may occur and not be detected on a timely  basis.  As a result of the unreconciled ledger accounts, additional audit procedures were  performed which was a contributing factor to the delay in audit issuance.      10 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 24 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA  SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS  For the Year Ended December 31, 2022          Recommendation:  We recommend staff review the City’s year‐end‐closing procedures  for effectiveness and continue efforts to identify and correct any misstatements.       Views of Responsible Officials: The finance department is committed to improving year end  close procedures in 2023 and future years. The City has already completed a process  improvement analysis and is in the process of implementing more robust monthly and year  and close processes. Turnover in leadership positions within finance lead to a disrupted  financial year‐end for 2022. The City took steps to make the transition as smooth as possible  including engaging with external consultants to prepare and complete the 2022 audit. In  May 2023 through August 2023, The City hired new permanent leadership in the finance  department.  The City’s actively working on identifying weaknesses to the City’s financial  internal controls and correcting potential weaknesses that have been identified.      SECTION III – FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS  No current year findings.        11 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 25 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA  SUMMARY SCHEDULE OF PRIOR YEAR AUDIT FINDINGS  For the Year Ended December 31, 2022          FOLLOW‐UP ON PRIOR YEAR FINDINGS     FINANCIAL STATEMENT FINDINGS    2021‐001  Prior Period Adjustment    Condition:  Audit procedures detected a material understatement of Construction in  process capital assets in the amount of $580,643 as of December 31, 2020.  This  misstatement was corrected by prior period adjustment.    Recommendation:  We recommend staff review project costs and determine which  costs are eligible to be capitalized each year.      Status: Unresolved; see Finding 2022‐001 for a continuation of this finding relating to  material audit adjustments including capitalization of assets.    FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS    None.      12 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 1) Title: Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the year ended December 31, 2022 Page 26 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: December 12, 2023 Discussion item: 2 Executive summary Title: Discuss ordinance requirements for on-sale liquor licenses Recommended action: None at this time. Policy considerations: The council is asked to provide direction on the following policy considerations: • Does the city council want to amend the city code to allow restaurants to be located at breweries with a taproom license and micro distilleries with a cocktail room license? • Does the city council want to amend city code section 3-70(g) which requires at least 50% of the gross receipts of on-sale intoxicating liquor license holders to be attributable to the sale of food? If the council wants to move forward with an amendment, options include changing the ratio or eliminating the requirement. Summary: Chapter 3 of the city code governs the sale and service of alcohol in the city, including licensing requirements. Amendments to chapter 3 were approved by the council in early 2023 to align the code with the liquor rules and regulations outlined in M.S. Chapter 340A. At the time amendments were adopted, the council requested additional discussion regarding two city-specific requirements related to the requirements for on-sale licensing. • City code sections 3-57(m) and (o) state that restaurants are not allowed at taprooms or cocktail rooms. This is a city-specific licensing provision. State law no longer prohibits a restaurant being located at either type of establishment. The council has the authority to change this provision. It should also be noted that taprooms and cocktail rooms are not subject to the statutory requirement that on-sale establishments meet the definition of a restaurant to be eligible for licensure. • City code section 3-70(g) requires at least 50 percent of the gross receipts of an establishment holding an on-sale intoxicating liquor to be attributable to the sale of food. This is a city- specific licensing provision. The council has the authority to change this provision by either adjusting the ratio or eliminating the requirement. State law requires establishments holding an on-sale intoxicating liquor license to meet the definition of a restaurant to be eligible for licensure. The city retains the ability to be more restrictive than state law, although the preferred approach has been to provide as much flexibility as possible for licensed establishments while also maintaining the character and standards of both neighborhood and commercial districts. Next steps: If the council would like to move forward with amendments, staff will prepare a draft ordinance for consideration prior to the start of the next licensing period. Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Discussion, City code sections 3-57(m), 3-57(o) and 3-70(g) Prepared by: Amanda Scott-Lerdal, deputy city clerk Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Title: Discuss ordinance requirements for on-sale liquor licenses Discussion Why does the city code not allow restaurants at taprooms or cocktail rooms? • When the state first established licensing provisions to allow establishments to sell products they manufacture for consumption on-site, they specifically included a provision that prohibited restaurants at taprooms or cocktails rooms. Since then, the legislature has updated the regulations for this type of licensing and removed the prohibition. Does state law require taprooms or cocktail rooms to serve food? • No. State law does not require food to be served at either type of establishment. When was the food-liquor sales ratio established? • The ratio was established in 2000 primarily to ensure that no areas of the city turned into “bar districts”. It appears changing the ratio was contemplated by council at various points, though no change was ever made. Do other cities have requirements related to ratio of food to liquor sales for establishments holding an on-sale intoxicating liquor license? • Yes. Staff reviewed licensing provisions for neighboring cities and found the following: City Food sale ratio Food sale minimum percentage Bloomington No n/a Eden Prairie Yes 40% Edina No n/a Golden Valley No n/a Hopkins Yes 50% Minnetonka Yes 50% Richfield Yes 50% Robbinsdale Yes 40% Maple Grove Yes 51% Minneapolis Yes Restaurants to “derive substantial income” from sale of food St. Louis Park Yes 50% If the food to liquor ratio requirement was eliminated, would establishments holding an on- sale intoxicating liquor license be required to serve food? • Yes. State law requires establishments with an on-sale intoxicating liquor license to meet the definition of a restaurant, which means they must serve food. No specific sales ratio is provided in state law. How many establishments in St. Louis Park have not complied with the 50/50 requirement in the past 10 years? • Since 2013, there have been 3 instances of on-sale intoxicating establishments not complying with the requirement. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 2) Page 3 Title: Discuss ordinance requirements for on-sale liquor licenses St. Louis Park City Code Section 3-57. Types of licenses. m. Brewer taproom license. A brewer who has a license from the Commissioner of Public Safety to brew up to 20,000 barrels of malt liquor per year may be issued a license by the City for on-sale of malt liquor subject to the following conditions: Brewer taproom licenses may be issued to the holder of a brewer’s license under Minn. Stat. § 340A.301, subd. 6(c), (i) or (j) as it may amended from time to time and subject to the conditions of this chapter. A brewer’s taproom license authorizes on-sale of malt liquor produced by the brewer for consumption on the premises of or adjacent to one brewery location owned by the brewer. A brewer may have only one taproom license and may not have an ownership interest in a brewer licensed under Minn. Stat. § 340A.301, subd. 6(d) as it may be amended from time to time. A brewer taproom license may not be issued to a brewer that brews more than 250,000 barrels of malt liquor annually or a winery that produces more than 250,000 gallons of wine annually. Within ten days of issuing a brewer taproom license the city clerk will inform the Commissioner of Public Safety of the licensee’s name, address, trade name and the effective date and expiration date of the license. The city clerk will inform the Commissioner of Public Safety of a license transfer, cancellation, suspension, or revocation during the license period. (i) A restaurant is not allowed at a brewery with a taproom license. (ii) On-sale of liquor shall be limited to the legal hours for on sale pursuant to Section 3- 105 except an establishment that holds a brewer taproom license may sell malt liquor produced by the brewer on the licensed premises on-sale for consumption between the hours of 10:00 a.m. on Sundays and 2:00 a.m. on Mondays. o. Micro distillery cocktail room license. A micro distillery cocktail room license may be issued to the holder of a micro distillery license issued under Minn. Stat. § 340A.22. A micro distillery cocktail room license authorizes the on-sale of distilled liquor produced by the distiller for consumption on the premises of or adjacent to one distillery location owned by the distiller subject to the following requirements: (i) The city shall, within ten days of the issuance of a micro distillery cocktail room license inform the Commissioner of Public Safety of the licensee’s name and address and trade name, and the effective date and expiration date of the license. The city shall also inform the commissioner of a license transfer, cancellation, suspension, or revocation during the license period. (ii) No single entity may hold both a micro distillery cocktail room and taproom license, and a cocktail room and taproom may not be co-located. (iii) A restaurant is not allowed at a micro distillery with a cocktail room license. (iv) On-sale of liquor shall be limited to the legal hours for on-sale pursuant to Section 3- 105. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 2) Page 4 Title: Discuss ordinance requirements for on-sale liquor licenses St. Louis Park City Code Section 3-70. Ineligibility. a. No on-sale intoxicating liquor license, except a club license for a congressionally chartered veterans’ organization, shall be issued unless at least 50 percent of the gross receipts of the establishment will be attributable to the sale of food. This requirement shall be regulated as follows: (i) Each on-sale intoxicating liquor license, except a club license for a congressionally chartered veterans’ organization, shall have the continuing obligation to have at least 50 percent of gross receipts from the establishment during the preceding business year attributable to the sale of food. (ii) In the case of a new restaurant, the applicant must make a bona fide estimation that at least 50 percent of the gross receipts from the sale of food and beverages of the establishment during its first year of business will be attributable to the sale of food. (iii) For the purpose of this section, the term "establishment" shall include the food and beverage portion of a multiservice establishment. Financial records for the food and beverage portion must be maintained separately from the records of the remainder of the establishment. (iii) For the purpose of this section, the term "sale of food" shall include gross receipts attributable to the sale of food items, soft drinks, and nonalcoholic beverages. It shall not include any portion of gross receipts attributable to the nonalcoholic components of plain or mixed alcoholic beverages, such as ice, soft drink mixes or other mixes. (iv) The city may require the production of such documents or information, including, but not limited to, books, records, audited financial statements or pro forma financial statements as it deems necessary or convenient to enforce the provisions of this section. The city may also obtain its own audit or review of such documents or information, and all licensees shall cooperate with such a review, including prompt production of requested records. (v) In addition to other remedies that it may have available, the city may place the license of any on-sale intoxicating liquor license holder on probationary status for up to one year, when the sale of food is reported, or found to be, less than 50 percent of gross receipts for any business year. During the probationary period, the licensee shall prepare any plans and reports, participate in any required meetings, and take other actions that the city may require to increase the sale of food. Meeting: Study session Meeting date: December 12, 2023 Written report: 3 Executive summary Title: Systems year in review and 2024 preview Recommended action: None at this time. Policy consideration: None at this time. This report is provided for informational purposes only. Summary: Systems thinking is an approach that allows the city council to analyze and focus on how items and concepts are connected so they can establish desired outcomes that reflect the city’s strategic priorities. Making informed decisions requires an understanding of how a particular action is influenced or impacted by other parts within a system. The city council organizes their work into five systems, one system for each of the city’s strategic priorities. At the start of each system, a general outline is provided to the city council that details the items that will be addressed within the system. At the conclusion of each system, a wrap up report is provided that summarizes the outcomes of the discussions within the system. The city council systems calendar is developed by staff under the direction of the city manager and reflects different considerations related to timing of discussions, impact on other projects and leaves space for council’s regular blocks of business, such as developing and adopting the city’s budget or making decisions on development or street projects. 2024 system schedule: Timeline System February 2024 Community and civic engagement February - April 2024 Connected Infrastructure May - June 2024 Environmental Stewardship September – October 2024 Race, Equity and Inclusion October – November 2024 Housing and Neighborhood-oriented development The schedule may be adjusted if more or less time is needed in a system or to accommodate other items that may arise and require more immediate city council discussion or policy direction. The best ways to stay up to date on the city council’s work is by viewing their meeting agendas, subscribing to receive email notifications about the city council and contacting city staff or a council member. Financial or budget considerations: N/A Strategic priority consideration: The systems work reflects all five strategic priorities. Supporting documents: Race, equity and inclusion wrap up report (p. 99), connected infrastructure wrap up report (p. 76), community and civic engagement wrap up report (p. 91), , environmental stewardship wrap up report (p.10), race, equity and inclusion part 2 wrap up report (p. 40), housing and neighborhood-oriented development wrap up report (p. 30) Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Reviewed by: Cheyenne Brodeen, administrative services director Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager Meeting: Study session Meeting date: December 12, 2023 Written report: 4 Executive summary Title: Boards and Commissions program update Recommended action: None. Policy consideration: No policy considerations are being proposed at this time. Summary: Since March 2022, the city council has been discussing the city’s boards and commissions related to their structure, role, function and authority. This report summarizes the review background, program assessment, engagement, program options presented to council and staff’s recommendation that was presented during a council study session on Oct. 2, 2023. Though there was not consensus at that meeting and no final determination was made, staff received majority support for the recommendation and direction to continue to build out the proposal. Throughout the month of October, staff visited all five advisory boards that are subject to the proposed structure to discuss the proposal and answer questions. On Nov. 21, 2023 a conversation was held between the city council and current board and commission members. A summary report from consultant(s) Chad Henderson of Yellow Umbrella Coaching and Consulting and Lamar Shingles included in this report. The city council will continue discussing this proposal in early 2024. Between now and then, staff will continue to examine and consider revisions to the proposed structure based on the input and feedback received and provide a more detailed report at that time. Recognizing that this timeline will result in a period of uncertainty for the five advisory boards, this report outlines a recommended interim plan along with ways for current board and commission members and the public to stay up-to-date with information regarding this project. Financial or budget considerations: None. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Nov. 21, 2023 Event follow-up and summary Oct. 2, 2023 boards and commissions program: purpose and structure report (p. 276) Boards and commissions assessment Prepared by: Cheyenne Brodeen, administrative services director Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager Page 2 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Discussion Background: In March 2022, the city council heard an overview of the current advisory boards and commissions program. The discussion included challenges of the current system along with possible enhancement opportunities and requirements to plan for the program’s future. Due to the significant research and development required, staff recommended and council agreed, to hire a consultant to review and provide recommendations related to the structure, role, function and authority of the city’s advisory boards and commission program. Transformational Solutions and Wiesner Consulting began review and analysis work in January 2023. The review included a public engagement process with commission members, community leaders, council members and city staff. The analysis included themes that applied to many existing boards and commissions and an overview of opportunities to update the program. This included redefining or recommitting the program’s purpose to make the experience more meaningful and community-friendly and expanding the pool to create more opportunities for participation. Findings were presented to the city council on June 12, 2023. The overall recommendations from the consultant were to focus first on setting a clear and renewed purpose for the program, then to design program elements that support and match that purpose and account for available resources. On June 26, 2023, the city council identified the following themes related to program purpose: •Give members a rewarding experience •Use the program to connect with community •Center race, equity and inclusion •Integrate and listen to community perspective •Build and strengthen public trust •Ensure input is reflected in decision-making Throughout the months of July, August and September 2023, staff engaged stakeholders about the potential program purpose of the boards and commissions, as would align with the themes identified by council. Focus group conversations were held with stakeholders, including advisory board and commission members, staff liaisons, city leadership and other interested community members. Staff also attended community events, including National Night Out, the St. Louis Park Art Fair, and the St. Louis Park Fire Department Open House and Community Health Fair to spread the word about input opportunities, as well as held an open house for interested members of the public. Stakeholder input showed five common themes. •Address barriers to participation: Barriers identified included: 1.the formality of parliamentary procedures, 2.the need to commit to monthly meetings for a long period of time, Page 3 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update 3.lack of flexibility in options for participation, 4.no compensation for time, 5.lack of childcare options and 6.meetings held in the evenings during mealtimes. •Influence policy and have a meaningful impact: Stakeholders want their input to be thoughtfully considered and want to see how their input is used in the policy process. They identified instances where this occurred and said they felt like their time spent on those topics was useful and meaningful. •Leadership development: Participants believe boards and commissions serve as a leadership development opportunity. They stressed the importance of not only keeping leadership development as part of the new program but also strengthening those opportunities. •Connection to strategic priorities: Participants discussed the importance of a connection between the commission’s work and the city’s strategic priorities. •Cross-topic collaboration: Stakeholders shared that overlap in topic areas and working across topics more collaboratively positively impacts the quality and usefulness of input. Staff then began developing an updated purpose statement along with a series of options for council to consider. As the review below shows, the options, to varying degrees and in different ways, addressed both the identified goals and barriers of the program. On Oct. 2, 2023, staff presented a recommendation to city council regarding the program purpose and structure that reflected the input received through all of the stakeholder engagement. •Program purpose: To support community-informed decision making and develop leaders in St. Louis Park. Staff analyzed costs/benefits, barriers and race and equity impacts for five models. These models apply only to advisory commissions, not to statutory commissions which are not part of the proposed structural redesign. (Both advisory and statutory boards are slated for programmatic work to further remove barriers and improve the commissioner experience once structural decisions are made.) The five models most fully reviewed are outlined below. Model Challenges Benefits Race + equity impacts Current structure: Commissions report through council and advise on areas identified by the council. The opportunity exists to modify the current structure to better meet needs/address barriers Lack of clarity on relationship to council and role in work; large amount of staffing resources; lack of consistent, meaningful projects; inability to be agile in responding to needs due to meeting cadence; missed opportunity to conduct engagement on an ad-hoc basis; structure is not conducive to broader collaboration across topic areas. Structure is understood and used frequently in local government; current structure is in place and could be built upon; provides space for residents to weigh in on programs and services. Due to legal constraints, there is a lack of flexibility for commissions and commissioners (e.g. open meeting law, parliamentary procedures, quorum, etc.) which perpetuates system of inequities; selection could be biased to existing networks. Possibility exists to address some barriers (i.e. lack of food, transportation, childcare); opportunity exists to be intentional with selection process. No commissions: Public is involved through other engagement opportunities. Council could elect to refocus engagement into other methods No structured opportunity for community to weigh in on city programs and services. Staff time reallocated to other engagement activities that meet residents where they are at, instead of asking them to fit into a government system. Lack of opportunity for the city to create space for community to participate in the creation of city policy, programs and services; lack of leadership development opportunities for residents. Possibility exists to address some barriers (i.e. lack of food, transportation, childcare). Task forces: Staff establishes timebound groups to discuss specific topics and/or projects. Council could elect to have the city stand up ad-hoc taskforces around issues and projects No formal structure creates lack of coordination (who gets selected to participate, how groups collaborate); increased staff time to solicit for community participation; limited leadership development; lack of coordination built into program in how collaboration with other groups occurs; lack of accountability for staff to utilize task forces. Legally, task forces can have more flexible structures and procedures; residents able to influence policy; residents have exposure to city decision making and some leadership development; ad-hoc nature helps ensure work is meaningful; easier to stand up task forces that work across topic areas. Selection could be biased to existing networks; lack of sustained leadership development opportunities for residents. Alternatively, could open opportunities for additional people to become involved on specific topics that impact them/they care about; possibility exists to address all identified barriers. Five strategic commissions: Advisory commissions are established to match the Similar format to current structure; continued necessary use of Influence policy; timebound to the decade-long visioning/comprehensive Due to legal constraints, there is a lack of flexibility for commissions and Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 4 Page 5 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Model Challenges Benefits Race + equity impacts city’s adopted strategic priorities and are refreshed each decade in conjunction with the comprehensive plan and community visioning. Council could elect to rescope the five existing commissions to align with the five strategic priorities. parliamentary procedures; continued logistical challenges around work that does not fit neatly within a single strategic priority; similar use of staff capacity in current structure plan cycle; tight connection to adopted city priorities; strong opportunity for leadership development. commissioners (e.g. open meeting law, parliamentary procedures, quorum, etc.) which perpetuates system of inequities; selection could be biased to existing networks. Possibility exists to address some barriers (i.e. lack of food, transportation, childcare); opportunity exists to be intentional with selection process. A single strategic board (staff recommendation): Developed as a hybrid of the task force and priority-based strategic commissions models, this recommended option consists of a single, large strategic board made up of approximately 25 community members that meets two to three times per year as a full body for the purposes of training and workplan development. Members from that board would then participate in smaller, project and topic-based groups throughout the year in alignment with the board’s established workplan and policy work being brought to the city council. Moving commission reporting to city manager and utilizing task forces opens up flexibility around remote meeting, quorum and use of parliamentary procedure. Potential lack of consistency in participation; need to manage a board with a large number of people; significant change management inside and outside of the city government. Influence policy; alignment with strategic priorities; flexibility in participation; strong opportunity for leadership development; allows for cross topic collaboration; possibility to address lack of food, transportation, childcare; depending on how established, meetings of smaller, topic-based bodies likely not subject to open meeting law or parliamentary procedure; creates agility in how groups can respond to short notice needs. Potential to address all identified barriers; opportunity exists to be intentional with selection process for commissioners; opportunity to offer additional seats on specific task forces to residents as determined by relevant commissioners and staff member. After weighing all the options and input during the process, staff felt like the proposed structure directly aligns with the recommendations from the consultant analysis and stakeholder engagement. It represents a significant change which should not be taken lightly. Staff believes it also 1) provides the most opportunity to meet the updated program purpose, 2) allows us to address each of the barriers to participation that have been identified and 3) most fully responds to the additional themes identified through the process engagement. The other most feasible model of five strategic commissions would allow us to align the program directly to our strategic priorities. Ultimately, adopting this option would mean that we are keeping the same structure, with its built-in advantages and disadvantages. It also would not allow for flexibility around remote meeting, parliamentary procedure, etc. Though a final decision was not made, on Oct. 2, 2023, the majority of the city council supported advancing the recommendation for program purpose and structure. A few council members expressed reservations and asked for more information about a deeper race, equity and inclusion analysis and rationale for the proposed changes. The city council also requested more discussion and an opportunity to hear feedback from stakeholders. In October 2023, staff attended meetings of each of the advisory boards and commissions that would be impacted by the proposed structural changes to discuss the recommendations and outcomes of the Oct. 2 council meeting. Present considerations: What we have heard Since the Oct. 2, 2023, city council study session discussion, staff attended each of the five advisory board meetings to discuss the proposed structure and answer questions. This provided an opportunity for board and commission members to ask questions regarding the proposed structure. Staff heard the following from these discussions: Benefits of the recommended model: •Cross-topic collaboration. •Flexibility to participate in interested topics. •Ability to reduce barriers to participation. Concerns about the recommended model: •Removal of topic specific boards. •Loss of expertise. •Reducing the number of seats to 25. •Why doesn’t what we have work? General comments: •Wanting to ensure there is a connection to council. On Nov. 21, 2023, a conversation was held between the city council and board and commission members, facilitated by Chad Henderson of Yellow Umbrella Coaching and Consulting and Lamar Shingles. The purpose of this meeting was for the city council to hear directly from board and commission members regarding the Single Strategic Board proposal. All members of the city council were in attendance along with 20 board members and five members of the public. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update The conversation was facilitated by external facilitators and the following questions were asked: 1.What are the opportunities, or areas of concern, regarding the new proposed structure? 2.What are the tweaks that could be made to the proposed structure that would make you feel better about the proposal? 3.What are strengths of the new proposed structure? 4.General thoughts, current structure thoughts, and do you feel you have been listened to in the process? Participants sat at round tables and each of the city council members rotated tables for every question. This allowed council members to hear from as many participants as possible. Staff were present but did not participate in the conversations. The facilitators complied and themed all comments and included them in an event follow-up and summary. That summary is included as an attachment to this report. Interim plan for current advisory board and commission work In the meantime, staff plans for boards and commissions to continue to meet in their current structure. Typically, December meetings are used to plan and develop work plans for the next year. Since conversations around the proposed structure of the boards and commissions program are continuing into early 2024, staff will continue to use the 2023 work plans as a guide and bring any pertinent work to the bodies. Additionally, staff will use the following criteria with their boards to determine if a specific meeting is necessary: •Is there a project or item that they are working on that is a directive from council? •Is there a project or item from staff in which their input is needed? •Is there a project or item that could be carried over into a new structure? By using these criteria to guide the work of the advisory boards during this interim period, staff can keep boards engaged and ensure the city does not lose the opportunity to hear from commissioners. This also provides everyone with the ability to keep aspects of work going that are necessary and track where board and commission work originates. How members of the public can stay informed Current board members and members of the public can stay informed by visiting the city webpage dedicated to this project. This webpage includes background information and all relevant reports. This webpage will be the place where additional information gets added as it becomes available, including any additional meetings and/or council reports. Next steps: As noted above, final decisions have not been made regarding the future structure of the city’s advisory boards and commissions. Staff will continue to examine and consider revisions to the proposed boards and commission’s structure based on the input and feedback received from the city council, current board and commission members and members of the public. When the city council considers and discusses this topic again at a study session in early 2024, staff will provide additional analysis and any proposed revisions to the proposed structure at that time. On Tuesday, November 21, 2023, an event was held in the City of St. Louis Park in order to provide the opportunity for the city council to hear from board and commissioner members regarding a proposed change to the boards and commissions structure. During the event, facilitators held a feedback activity in which table participants had the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed structural changes of the City of St. Louis Park boards and commissions. During the small group activity, attendees were asked to share their thoughts on specific question prompts with the city council member(s) that were seated at their table, as well as to write down a summary of their thought(s) on sticky notes. Those sticky notes were collected, compiled, and organized into themes. The raw data of what was written on each sticky note can be found in an attached file, or by clicking here. The following summary provides an analysis of the data collected during the small group activity, including the grouping of data into themes. Opportunities and Positives in the Proposed Structure Cross-Topic Collaboration and Engagement: Opportunities for cross-topic collaboration and increased engagement. Ability to connect across different areas of interest. Flexibility and Inclusivity: The structure is diverse, broad, and flexible. Opportunity for more people to qualify and be involved. Streamlined Communication and Project Creation: Opportunity to streamline communication paths. The ability for the commission to create its own projects, is balanced with city council initiatives. Event Follow-Up & Summary Event Date: Tuesday, November 21st, 2023 Summary Question 1: What are the opportunities, or areas of concern, regarding the new proposed structure? Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 8 Community-Driven Approaches: The ability for the board to propose topics and ideas, ensuring community-driven initiatives. Opportunities for a large group to come together and hear diverse perspectives. Empowerment and Youth Involvement: Concerns about the lack of youth empowerment in the proposed structure. Questions about where youth fit into the new structure. Concerns about the proposed structure Lack of Clarity and Direction: Unclear roles and responsibilities in the new structure. Concerns about undefined aspects and lack of clear direction. Loss of Expertise and Knowledge: Loss of specialized knowledge and experience of volunteers. Concerns about the lack of specific expertise in the new structure. Risk of losing granular expertise and depth of knowledge. Risks of devaluing current board and commission members. Meeting Frequency and Effectiveness: Concerns about the effectiveness of meetings with 25 people. Reduction in engagement points and opportunities for community involvement. Staff Influence and Firewall: Staff as a perceived firewall between council and community. Concerns about giving staff even more influence. Diversity and Representation: Concerns about the potential reduction in diversity and representation. Worries about limiting community engagement and opportunities for public service. Transparency and Accountability Appointment Process: Concerns about transparency in appointments to committees and task forces. Suggestion to make the appointment process more clear and less susceptible to manipulation. Expertise and Representation: Emphasis on requiring expertise among applicants. Calls for diverse representation and a separate forum for youth members. Question 2: What are the tweaks that could be made to the proposed structure that would make you feel better about the proposal? Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 9 Maintaining Trust and Cadence: Desire to retain commissions that are working well and strong. Keeping a certain number of commissions in line with city strategic priorities for trust and comradery. Hybrid Approaches: Support for hybrid approaches, combining certain commissions while keeping others independent. Proposals to maintain the current structure in conjunction with the new strategic board (Hybrid #1 and #2). Communication and Meetings Council Interaction: The need for the board to have a direct line of communication with the city council. Formalizing channels for communication with the council. A call for council to listen directly to commissions at least every three months. Meeting Frequency and Format: Calls for more regular meetings to reserve time for workgroups. Suggestions for a more frequent meeting schedule, shorter meetings, and regular forums to discuss priorities. The advantage of meeting monthly is for a more flexible and manageable schedule. Concerns about the challenges of missing meetings in a quarterly setup. Selection Process Clarity: Emphasis on clarity in the selection process, seeking out multiple profiles or expertise. Concerns about the clarity of the recruitment process for traditionally underrepresented communities. Structure and Changes Size and Structure: Suggestions to have more than 25 people in the new version of the commission. Proposals for structural changes, including retaining current chairs/vice chairs, using members for formal work groups, and keeping advisory roles for council. Targeted Work and Focus: Support for commissions targeted to strategic priorities, especially if moving away from the current structure. Advocacy for more targeted or focused work at the direction of the council. Accountability and Reporting: Suggestions to have the group report directly to the city council, expressing concerns about staff filtering information. Support for more accountability with regular reporting to the city council. Miscellaneous Theme Youth Involvement and Diverse Voices: Recognition of the need for a separate forum for youth members. Encouragement to bring in more diverse voices by engaging with other commissions. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 10 Positive Aspects of the Proposed Structure Increased Attention to Forgotten Issues: Potential to bring more attention to issues that have been overlooked in the current structure. Staff Involvement and Relationships: Staff involvement in the selection process and engaging with residents. Leveraging staff relationships to increase public involvement. Diversity and Collaboration: Opportunity for a more diverse and integrated approach. Bringing together a diverse group of minds to discuss city initiatives. Working in coalition with other commissions for new projects. Efficiency and Effectiveness: Greater staff involvement leading to increased efficiency and effectiveness. Extra staff person providing more attention to boards and commission work. Unified Entity and Collaboration: A more unified entity as opposed to siloed commissions. Allowing areas with overlapping issues to work together more easily. Impact and Input in City Council: Having a bigger impact/input in city council and having ideas heard. Increased ability to dialogue with and have a closer connection to the council. Engagement and Flexibility: Improved engagement, with people attending fewer meetings since there would only be 2x meetings per year. Increased flexibility to act, with the ability to get things done through subcommittees. Innovations and Resources: Something new for the city with the single strategic board. Possibility for innovations like a citizens academy with a dedicated staff member. Availability of additional resources to support the proposed structure. Cross-Functional Collaboration: Encouraging cross-functional collaboration within a diverse group. Feedback Loop and Administrative Ease: Possibly a better feedback loop with sharing of information among diverse audiences. Administrative ease from a city staff perspective. Concerns and Criticisms Question 3: What are strengths of the new proposed structure? Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 11 Although this category was supposed to focus on strengths, we saw a theme appear in these comments that were more concerns and criticisms of the proposed proposal. Impact on Community and Power Structure: Concerns about the proposal giving city staff even more power at the expense of community impact. Assertion that there is no strength without direct city council involvement. Resource Utilization: Suggestion to discuss how additional resources could be used to fix the current structure. Park and Rec Perspective: Doubts about the plan benefiting the city, apart from adding more bodies. City Council Involvement: Concerns about staff not being equivalent to the city council in terms of direct involvement. Standardization and Well-Defined Processes: The city should have a well-defined process for involving commissioners. Emphasis on standardized application and award processes. This question was added after a conversation between consultants and city council on what information they felt they still wanted to get. This question made up a variety of questions and really symbolized the city council’s desire to ensure they heard all concerns and ideas before they left. Commissioner Representation Empowerment and Voice: Positive feedback on feeling heard as a youth commissioner. Concerns about not feeling heard and the need for more community input. Diversity and Engagement: Acknowledgment of larger engagement from the community but a concern about the lack of diversity. Recognition of the need for more engagement and diversity in commissions. Expertise and Passion: Recognition of the current system allowing for expertise development and the pursuit of passion topics. Concerns about losing expertise, education, and leadership development opportunities in the proposed structure. Communication and Collaboration Communication Challenges: Acknowledgment of communication challenges between council, staff, and commissions. Desire for better communication, including a feedback loop and understanding council responses. Question 4: General thoughts, current structure thoughts, and do you feel you have been listened to in the process? Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 12 Engagement with City Council: Desire for council to take commission suggestions and more engagement with city council. Lack of engagement and communication with city council as a concern. Collaboration and Connection: Positive aspects of the current structure include joint meetings with other commissions and liaison visits from the council. Recommendations for joint meetings, updates to commission purposes, and better connections with city council. Structure and Flexibility Current Structure Appreciation: Appreciation for the current structure's regular meeting time, history of action, and credibility. Positive aspects of the current structure include the ability to build trust, relationships, and a regular cadence of meetings. Concerns about Staff Recommendations: Surprise and concern about staff recommendations not addressing key issues brought up by consultants. Desire to better understand staff recommendations and explore alternative solutions. Efficiency and Effectiveness: Concerns about the efficiency and effectiveness of the current structure, including challenges in advancing projects through monthly meetings. Acknowledgment of limited staff involvement potentially impacting efficiency and effectiveness. Recruitment and Engagement Recruitment Challenges: Concerns about recruitment and engagement, including limited resources for commissions. Recognition of recruitment and engagement challenges, with a desire for more equity outreach. Vacancies and Community Input: Concerns about vacancies, lack of community input, and feeling unheard. Suggestions to have a wider range of community input in the commission. Improving the System: Recognition of the need to fix the system rather than removing it. Recommendations for improvements, such as cross-pollination between commissions and regular scheduled meetings. Specific Commission Concerns Police Advisory Commission (PAC): Positive feedback on PAC's effectiveness in bringing mandated updates but concerns about losing this in the proposed structure. Recognition of the importance of community oversight for police and concerns about losing PAC's role. Flexibility and Learning Opportunities: Recognition of the learning opportunities as a citizen in the current structure. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 13 Concerns about limited flexibility for meetings and the need for a Zoom option. Niche Expertise and Topics: Recognition of the valuable niche topical expertise in areas like human rights, policing, tech, sustainability, and parks. Suggestions to match each commission with city strategic priorities. This report was compiled by Chad Henderson, Co-founder & Consultant at Yellow Umbrella Coaching and Consulting. If you have any questions please reach out directly to me at chad@yellowumbrellaconsulting.com. Follow-Up Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 14 City of St. Louis Park Boards and Commissions Assessment June, 2023 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 15 . Why does the program have limited participation from certain demographic and community groups? How might the application process be limiting participation? How can time spent serving through this program feel meaningful to participants? How can program support staff be most effective in their role? Overall, better align with the city's vision and strategic priorities. Overview Learning Questions Approach Survey (30) Listening sessions and One-on-One Interviews (45) Review of charter, commission bylaws, city organizational structure Peer city review (3) 1 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 16 Topline Messages There are great building blocks in place. St. Louis Park has the potential to stand out as a leader in this kind of engagement. Many cities are taking a look at their Boards and Commissions for much the same reasons as St. Louis Park--wanting to update, ensure relevance, be responsive to new demographics and community trends. The program has evolved over many years, as have community needs. As things have changed, gaps have emerged. This is normal and to be expected. Adjustments to the program can realign goals and practices to more accurately reflect current strategic priorities. The themes, implications, and recommendations are things to be worked through over time, not decided on today or all at once. 2 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 17 What We'll Cover Today . Themes gleaned from community and staff input Themes are things that came up consistently across respondents. While outliers can be interesting and important, themes are those things around which there appears to be substantial concensus. Implications Recommendations Questions/Discussion 2 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 18 Themes & Implications 3 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 19 Respondents see serving as a fruitful way to advance their careers, develop new skills and job prospects, or get involved in local public office. Respondents are enthusiastic about the opportunity to learn the inner workings of governing and city functions. People want to help and have been hanging on and hoping for things to gel. People have stuck with it even through the pandemic. There’s a strong sense of community identity and community service. Theme # 1: We want to help, and we see value... 20 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 20 Theme #2: We don’t know what we’re supposed to be doing. Respondents report that the way the program is run shifts depending on city leadership (Council and staff). Respondents wonder what their role is in relation to the Council, City Manager, City Staff, and community. They wonder if they are supposed to be giving input, and if so to whom and how. This uncertainty sometimes results in preventing or slowing momentum. Lack of clarity hinders the ability of community partners to promote the program and help recruit new commissioners 5 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 21 Theme #2: We don’t know what we’re supposed to be doing (continued). Respondents (staff, commissioners) connected to Planning/BOZA and the Housing Authority are very clear on their purpose and scope, as a result of clear parameters and statutory requirements. The rest of the respondents are less clear. There is lack of clarity about Council expectations, needs, and motivations for engaging community through this program. While many respondents said it was nice to have latitude, the lack of guidance or structure from Council also makes people feel rudderless or without focus. 4 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 22 ...It's frustrating that we simply don't have a purpose. We have no power or responsibility. ...The most challenging thing is understanding what’s expected of the commission and how we could better help the city. 6 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 23 Theme #3: We get mixed messages. Respondents describe confusion about what they view as mixed messages. For example: "You're here to advise council" but they rarely interact with Council, aren't consistently asked for advice, and there is no reliable mechanism for interaction or workflow--staff is the conduit. "You're an ambassador for the city" but they don't have authority or mechanisms to communicate with the community on the City's behalf. "Commissions are for community input, commissioners represent community perspective" but there are no resources or mechanisms for getting input from community 7 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 24 Commissioners only interact with Council once a year (if that), and for a very limited time and purpose. For the most part Commissioners don't interact with other Boards/Commissions, even though some of the issues overlap. Commissioners feel discouraged from communicating with each other due to perceived limitations of Open Meeting Law Theme #4: We feel disconnected. 8 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 25 What's frustrating is the poor communication flows between the three players (the commission, [city staff], and the City Council). We could get a lot more done if there was more transparency. ...I think that commissions are a great way to get people involved, they provide opportunities for Council to be able to delegate things to commissions...But to be effective they need to be tended to by City Council. They need to give us direction. While we are independent, we are desperate to hear what we can do for them. Without their authority, we are less impactful. 9 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 26 There is no standardized onboarding/training The workplan process doesn’t support the charge of advising city council There is not a reliable system in place for being proactive and supporting Council's required needs Nor is there a reliable system for being reactive in a timely way as community issues emerge Regular evaluation and updating the purpose and relevance of commissions does not occur in a systematic way Theme #5: There aren’t systems in place to support us sufficiently. 10 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 27 ...Our committee serves no actual purpose. Without any actual guidance from the city, we literally make things up as we go along. Every time someone leaves, there is a brain drain as there is no centralized location to save documents, contact, resources, etc. Worse, we have no way to communicate our work with fellow commissions, nonprofits, like minded groups, potential partners, or curious residents. ..I am in a room full of capable people who have no official structure to serve this city in a meaningful way. 11 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 28 Theme # 6: We don’t see our impact. Respondents believe they have a lot to contribute, but they don't feel they are being utilized well. 12 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 29 ...I feel like we plan and discuss a lot of things, but there is not much happening. ...We haven’t done much of action or community work. ..We share our input with staff, but we don't know where that goes or if it's used. ...It feels more like I’m just being told what’s happening as opposed to being a part of any decision making. More of a rubber stamp than a part of the process. 13 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 30 Theme # 7: Staff is amazing, but they don’t have capacity. Universally, Commissioners rave about their staff liaisons and feel that they go over and above in terms of effort. However, staff and commissioners alike note that this is a tiny piece of the staff liaison's overall job, and they are stretched thin. In terms of supporting staff liaisons, they don't have consistent onboarding when they start the role, they don't have mechanisms for connecting with one another to compare notes, and there are not opportunities to think broadly about how Commissions can serve the strategic priorities of the City. 14 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 31 ...Staff is incredibly organized. As someone who is usually the organizer in my professional and personal life, it feels really good to just be able to show up and have really competent people organizing things for us. ...It is so much work: attending 2 hour monthly meetings at night, plus workgroups meetings; logistical recording, coordination, contacts list, reserving meeting spaces, tracking attendance, orientation, annual 4 hour retreat, draft agendas... 15 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 32 There is not cohesion or sense of connection across Boards and Commissions. There is not consistency in how commissions operate. There is not a well articulated overall strategy. No one is responsible for seeing the whole, bringing it all together, and directly linking it to strategic priorities of the city. How Boards and Commissions are managed shifts based on the inclinations of whoever is on Council and whoever is city manager. This is natural, but there is not a sense of what needs to remain consistent. Theme # 8: It’s not a cohesive program. 16 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 33 Respondents believe that appointment to commissions is based on who you know, and that the people that are most actively recruited are the people Council and staff already know. This mutually reinforces a limited demographic. There is little active engagement or relationship-building to widen the pool. Theme # 9 It’s who you know…and you don't know us [community members of groups currently underrepresented] 17 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 34 I will put in my time, because you are giving me time. 25 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 35 Virtual participation is prohibited by law. There is no food, transportation, or child care considerations. The way the meetings are run and set up are not community centric. Open Meeting law is cited as a reason for obstacles. The overall expectation of the city is that residents should and will come to them, and if they don't, it's assumed that it's because they're not interested or able. Theme # 10: Participation is not easy… 18 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 36 ...Robert's Rules [standard parliamentary procedure] is exclusionary and confusing and makes it difficult to know when and how to speak up. I don’t always know when is appropriate for me to challenge or ask questions. ...It's frustrating that there's no virtual option. ...I'm guessing some people don't participate because of the time of the meetings (mealtimes, evenings), they have kids and need child care. 19 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 37 Investing in community relationship building. Housed with community engagement manager with dedicated staff Full-time staff dedicated to supporting commission and liaisons Going to events and community gatherings Run meetings in rounds to ensure equal participation. Cities we spoke with were actively seeking to build programs that are relevant and compelling for the social and demographic shifts that are underway across the country. Unified, systematic, and consistent way to run the selection process, including a standard scoring rubric. Peer City Reviews--Promising Practices from Robust Programs 22 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 38 Work closely with school staff--for instance, a government class teacher includes board/commission service as an option for satisfying class requirements Chair takes active role in mentoring youth--orients, answers questions, seats on either side of the chair at every meeting. Youth members are voting members Youth terms are synchronized with school year, terms are one year Peer City Reviews--Youth Engagement 22 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 39 Implications 23 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 40 Engagement requires resources--human and financial. Engagement is not transactional or passive—it’s personal and relationship- centered If you’re not getting people with a variety of backgrounds, you’re not asking people with a variety of backgrounds. They aren’t going to come to you. Programs require: Overarching purpose Cohesive strategy Clear, regular communication lines Action and impact Implications 24 Action & Impact Communication Strategy Purpose Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 41 Implications Community-centric programming requires community-friendly practices, using methods that don't feel intimidating, with supports that make it easy to participate. There is a tremendous opportunity for St. Louis Park to stand out as Best in Class when it comes to leveraging Boards and Commissions to engage residents in the strategic priorities of the city. 26 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 42 Recommendations 27 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 43 In addition, the City should develop a set of considerations that guide their decisions about creating, combining, sunsetting, or changing the purpose of all of the Commissions on a regular basis. Focus On Purpose 28 What is the purpose of engagement? Why does the city want residents engaged?1What is the 1What is the purpose of1purpose of engagement1engagement? Why does the1? Why does the city want residents engaged?1city want residents engaged? What is the purpose of a Boards and Commissions Program? How does it tie to Strategic Priorities?2Boards and Commissions2Boards and Commissions How does it tie to2How does it tie to Strategic Priorities?2Strategic Priorities? What is the purpose of each Board or Commission?3 purpose of each3 purpose of each3Board or Commission3Board or Commission Changes and adjustments should be grounded in answers to the following questions; These questions should be revisited at regular intervals. How can a Boards & Commissions Program tie together/ feel cohesive for staff, Council, and residents? 4Commissions Program 4Commissions Program together/ feel cohesive4together/ feel cohesive staff, Council, and residents?4staff, Council, and residents? Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 44 For example, if you want them to…Then you need to…. Advise council, research issues council is considering, provide input on policy Have regular interaction with the commissions, identify priorities that you want them to give input on, and resource the commission to do the legwork they need to do to be effective; have mechanisms for regular dialogue Act as a bridge/ambassador to community members, both providing information to community and getting input from community on priority issues  Resource and support commissioner activities that give information and gather input on a regular basis; build in regular feedback loops directly between commissions and Council  Come up with their own activities and implement them  Provide clear parameters for what fits in their scope, resource and support their activities sufficiently  Design Supports That Match Purpose (Form Follows Function) 29 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 45 In order to have a pool of candidates from diverse communities, it is necessary to be intentional about and committed to building relationships with them. Consider: Tabling at community events and school open houses Partnering with school and community leaders who are connected with communities to build awareness of the program; work with school cultural liaisons Establish clear measures for tracking diversity (race, gender, age, occupation, location in the city) at each point in the recruitment and appointment process. You measure what you treasure. Establish a common appointment rubric that demonstrates the need and value of having better representation and reduces unconscious bias (who you know, favoring those who are most like yourself). A rubric could include a combination of characteristic related to the purpose of the commission, along with racial and economic diversity considerations. Expand the Pool 30 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 46 Provide support for communities to participate. This can include providing child care or child care stipends for parent participation; snacks; transit cards; or honorariums to help reimburse participation related expenses. Include money in the city budget for the program and be clear and transparent about the resources available. Be explicit about these supports during recruitment and appointment. Make meetings more welcoming and comfortable by running them in ways that put people at ease, such as: Explore other facilitation methods such as consensus methods and round robins to ensure equal participation Establish mentoring between commissioners, especially youth members Revisit meeting times, dates, and locations on a regular basis Develop standard orientation process, that includes training on how the city functions. Make The Experience Comfortable and Community- Friendly 31 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 47 Create a structure for the work that elevates its profile and positions it to support city work across departments and levels. Creates synergy between strategic priorities and relationships with residents Aligns Boards and Commissions with other community oriented aspects of the city's work Hire dedicated community engagement staff who: Supports Boards and Commissions and staff liaisons Cultivates relationships in the community and personally recruits Board and Commission candidates Supports the recruitment and appointment process, including streamlining the steps; builds consistent onboarding and training practices Ensures that the program is cohesive, impactful, meaningful, and tied to strategic priorities Establish a budget that includes funds for both Commission activities and community outreach. Staff and Structure for the Long Term 32 Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 4) Title: Boards and Commissions program update Page 48 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: December 12, 2023 Written report: 5 Executive summary Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update Recommended action: No action at this time. This report provides responses to the questions presented by the community and council at the Nov. 13, 2023 council meeting. This item will be brought back to the city council during the first quarter of 2024 as a part of the connected infrastructure study session series for a more in-depth policy discussion prior to council being asked to act on Three River Park District's recommended route. Policy consideration: None at this time. Summary: Three Rivers Park District's Canadian Pacific (CP) Rail Regional Trail is a planned 21- mile regional trail corridor that traverses six communities in Hennepin County – Bloomington, Edina, St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, New Hope and Crystal. At the Nov. 13, 2023 special council meeting, Three Rivers Park District presented an overview of their planning process and provided their recommended regional trail route through St. Louis Park. They identified and studied four routes to determine the route that best met their metrics of feasibility, cost, private property impacts, safety and community feedback. They are recommending route SLP 4 (referred to as the Dakota Avenue route) through St. Louis Park. This route starts at the trail bridge over Highway 394 (near Hampshire Avenue) and runs along Wayzata Boulevard, Dakota Avenue, 18th Street, Edgewood Avenue, Dakota Avenue and Wooddale Avenue to connect to the Cedar Lake Regional Trail at the Wooddale Light Rail station. The public was able to comment during the Nov. 13, 2023 council meeting. The questions from the public and from council members fall into two categories: questions for city staff and questions for Three Rivers Park District staff. The discussion section includes the questions and responses from city staff. Three Rivers Park District questions and responses are attached. Financial or budget considerations: There are no budget considerations for the city for the recommened route. Three Rivers Park District is funding the long-range plan and would fully fund construction of the recommended route. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Discussion Nov. 13, 2023 Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail: Route recommendation Three Rivers Park District responses Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, engineering project manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 2 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update Discussion Background: Three Rivers Park District's Canadian Pacific rail regional trail is a planned 21-mile regional trail corridor that traverses six communities in Hennepin County – Bloomington, Edina, St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, New Hope and Crystal. The trail fills a critical north-south gap in the regional trail system and provides a highly desirable recreation amenity to adjacent communities and the greater region. The regional trail corridor was originally centered along the CP rail line; however, this is not feasible for much of the corridor. A north-south regional trail through St. Louis Park is identified in the city's 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the Active Living Sidewalk and Trail Plan, and complements the Connect the Park implementation plan. Three Rivers Park District is completing a long-range planning study for the CP Rail Regional Trail Segment C in St. Louis Park and Golden Valley. This segment will connect the Cedar Lake Trail in St. Louis Park to the Luce Line Trail in Golden Valley. Information on the route identification, public engagement and selection of a recommended route can be found in the Nov. 13, 2023 council report. Community feedback: The public was able to comment during the Nov. 13, 2023, council meeting. The questions from the public and from council members fall into two categories: questions for city staff and questions for Three Rivers Park District staff. The following is a summary of questions and responses from city staff. Three Rivers Park District questions and responses are attached. 1. Why isn't Louisiana Avenue in the city's capital improvement plan (CIP) for roadway reconstruction? Louisiana Avenue between the bridge over the North Cedar Lake Trail and Walker Street is not programmed due to roadway condition and funding availability. The city receives an annual allocation from the state (gas tax) in the form of construction funds for our state aid eligible roads. These roads are a collection of higher volume roads that are used not only by our residents and businesses, but by many others to travel through St. Louis Park. Louisiana Avenue is eligible for these funds. In 2023, the city's annual construction allocation was $1,420,241. This allocation is projected to increase by about 3% annually due to the 2023 legislature indexing the gas tax. The city's 10-year CIP has $16.1 million in state-aid funds designated to be spent on roadway reconstruction. The Louisiana Avenue pavement is in better condition than the roadway segments in the CIP, which is why it is not included. Based on projections, there will be funding available starting in 2034-35 to add state aid eligible road reconstruction projects to the CIP. In total, there is an additional $45 million in state aid eligible roadway reconstruction projects not programmed in the 10-year CIP (2023 dollars). Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 3 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update The estimated cost to reconstruct Louisiana Avenue, between the bridge over the North Cedar Lake Trail and Walker Street, is $11.3 million. This cost is for roadway reconstruction only. It does not include costs for bikeway, sidewalk, sanitary sewer, watermain or right of way acquisition. Staff is committed to pursuing outside funding for eligible projects to assist with regional projects such as Louisiana Avenue. 2. Dakota Avenue received a bikeway improvement recently; why isn't the regional trail being designed for SLP1 to improve biking on Louisiana Avenue? An on-street bikeway on Dakota Avenue was identified in the city's Connect the Park implementation plan and constructed in 2019. Connect the Park is the city's implementation plan to create more bikeways, sidewalks and trails throughout the community. The individual segments in the plan were identified by a community advisory committee as a part of the Active Living Sidewalk and Trail Plan. The location of the segments included in Connect the Park was finalized with community input through a process that took several years. The city council approved the plan in 2013 and construction began in 2015. The purpose of the plan is to develop a comprehensive, citywide system of bikeways, sidewalks and trails that: • Provides local and regional connectivity • Improves safety and accessibility • Enhances overall community livability The plan identified north-south routes through the community, including a bikeway on Louisiana Avenue from I-394 to Excelsior Boulevard. Three Rivers Park District used the city's plan to identify preliminary regional trail routes. During the Three Rivers long-range planning process, city staff took a closer look at what it would take to build a trail along Louisiana Avenue. Some of the design challenges identified were the need to modify the Louisiana bridge over the BNSF railroad, removal of all existing on-street parking in the corridor, signal reconstruction and significant private property acquisition. The city's bikeway on Louisiana Avenue is currently programmed for construction in 2026/2027. Building an all ages and abilities bikeway (cycle track) will have similar design challenges as a trail. Due to this, staff determined that improvements to biking on Louisiana Avenue are best achieved by integrating the bikeway into a Louisiana Avenue roadway reconstruction project. This will provide flexibility in design, economy of scale and minimize impacts to the community. In addition, the sidewalks on Louisiana Avenue are currently at the back of curb. Due to the high traffic volume, staff recommends removing them and constructing a pedestrian facility with a grass boulevard to separate users from traffic. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 4 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update The high-level estimate for pedestrian and bicycle improvement construction along Louisiana Avenue is as follows: Estimated cost (2023 dollars) Bicycle and pedestrian improvements $6.4 million Right of way $3.0 million Total $9.4 million Like our Cedar Lake Road/ Louisiana Avenue Improvements project, there are several options for the design of the bicycle and pedestrian facilities. They could be cycle track/ sidewalk, multi-use trail or a bikeway alternate route/ sidewalk. Specific recommendations for this project will require significant design efforts and public input. This process that has not occurred. As a result of the additional analysis, staff recommends that the schedule for bikeway construction be delayed until a road project can be programmed. This will be discussed as a part of the 2024 CIP update. 3. Is a roundabout still proposed at the intersection of Cedar Lake Road and Louisiana Avenue? Yes, the city is planning to build a roundabout at the intersection of Cedar Lake Road and Louisiana Avenue in 2026. 4. How were the findings and planning work for the bike facility on Dakota Avenue considered in the planning for this regional trail? The city shared information about the planning and implementation of the Dakota Avenue bike facility with Three Rivers Park District during route identification. This included a parking study, traffic data and the existing and proposed changes to the roadway to accommodate the bike lanes and share the road segments. 5. What is the status of the proposed development at the southeast corner of Louisiana Avenue and the BNSF Railroad? The development at 2625 Louisiana Avenue has been approved by the city. The development has not proceeded with building permits. A small sidewalk connection to the regional trail is planned as part of the project. However, this connection is not designed to accommodate a robust connection between two regional trails. Financial considerations: There are no current budget considerations for the city. Three Rivers Park District is funding and completing the long-range plan. The plan will identify a high-level cost estimate for future funding considerations. Initially, Three Rivers Park District was considering applying for federal funding in December of 2023 as part of the Metropolitan Council's regional solicitation program. However, they will not be applying for funding, in order to take more time to discuss the regional trail and route options to ensure that all the questions are answered. Funding responsibility for the trail project itself will be borne by the Three Rivers Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 5 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update Park District. Funding responsibility for potential additional infrastructure improvements, such as a road reconstruction, are the responsibility of the city. Schedule: Three River Park District's CP Rail regional trail long-range plan schedule for the segment in St. Louis Park has been extended to allow additional time for the community and council to discuss the regional trail long-range planning. The anticipated schedule. Dec. 12, 2023 Study Session report to provide answers to the questions from the community and council. First quarter 2024 Discussion as part of the connected infrastructure study sessions series. Early summer 2024 Draft long-range plan and 30-day public comment period. Summer 2024 Long-range plan adoption, including final city council approval. A timeline for the development of final plans and construction of the regional trail has not been identified and is dependent on Three Rivers Park District securing the necessary funding. Next steps: Three Rivers Park District will be posting these questions and responses in this report to their project website and using their communication channels to share this information. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 6 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update Attachment – Three Rivers Park District responses A. What is the timeline of long-range planning and why is the council being asked to support a route now? Three Rivers is planning on completing the Long-Range Plan for this trail segment in 2023-2024; however, this schedule could be adjusted. The current phase of the planning process is to obtain municipal support for a preliminary preferred route through each city that the trail will travel through – it is high-level and not a detailed engineered design. Once the preferred route is identified, Three Rivers will prepare a long-range plan document, which the city would be asked to formally support via resolution. This document would also be reviewed and approved by Golden Valley, Three Rivers, and the Metropolitan Council. Trail design and construction are likely 5-10 years out, pending funding. B. Why is Three Rivers Park District recommending route SLP4 (Dakota Avenue route)? After extensive public engagement, technical analysis of the route options and coordination with city staff and commissions, SLP4 is being recommended as the route. 1) Public support. SLP4 was preferred by 57% of the people we engaged with personally. When you compare the preference percentages of the two routes that include Dakota Avenue south of Cedar Lake Road to the percentages of the two routes that include Louisiana Avenue, the Dakota Avenue routes are favored by a 2:1 margin. Dakota Avenue is viewed as a much safer and more desirable route for a trail than Louisiana Avenue. 2) Safer, less congested route. Compared to Dakota Avenue, Louisiana Avenue has 2.5 times the traffic volume. 3) Leverage existing infrastructure. SLP4 would utilize the newly constructed pedestrian bridge over the railroad at Dakota Park, trail along Edgewood Avenue and rapid flashing beacon at the Cedar Lake Road crossing. 4) Connection to North Cedar Lake Regional Trail. SLP4 has a robust and direct connection to the North Cedar Lake Trail. SLP1 along Louisiana Avenue does not have a connection to the regional trail due to limited right of way and significant elevation change. 5) Less private property impacts. A trail route along Louisiana Avenue would likely require private property acquisition and removal of all existing on-street parking. 6) Timing/constructability. Trail construction along SLP4 can be a Three Rivers stand-alone trail project, thus happening much sooner (5-10 years out) and with comparably less disruption than Louisiana Avenue options. A trail along Louisiana Avenue would likely require roadway and bridge reconstruction. Due to this it would be a city-led street and bridge reconstruction project with Three Rivers as a partner for the trail portion – likely 10 or more years out based on the city's current Capital Improvement Plan and anticipated costs of the project. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 7 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update C. What impacts to trees are anticipated with route SLP4 on Dakota Avenue? Specific impacts will not be known until the design phase of the project (5-10 years out). Dakota Avenue tree impacts between 27th Street and Minnetonka Boulevard Two preliminary concept layouts were developed between 27th Street and Minnetonka Boulevard to better understand potential impacts and opportunities along the corridor. 1. One of the options preserved all trees within the right of way on both sides of the street but eliminated parking along one side of the street. 2. Alternatively, the other preliminary concept layout preserved parking on both sides of the street but removed all trees within the right of way on one side of the street to provide space for the trail. It is possible that one block could have one design solution and another block could utilize the other design solution. Tree impacts south of Minnetonka Boulevard • No boulevard trees would be impacted on Dakota Avenue between Minnetonka Boulevard and Lake Street. • There might be two trees impacted on Wooddale Avenue between Lake Street and the Cedar Lake regional trail. D. On which side of Dakota Avenue is the regional trail proposed to be placed? The final decision for the side of the street will be made during the design phase. Preliminary analysis indicates that the east side of Dakota Avenue is a stronger candidate due to the direct access to Dakota Park and the Dakota-Edgewood bridge, being the St. Louis Park High School staff preference, and the connection to the Wooddale LRT station which is on the east side. The east side also minimizes trail/road crossings, which is preferred for safety and better maintains existing traffic flow. E. Will the sidewalk along Dakota Avenue remain or be removed with the regional trail construction? Two preliminary concept layouts were developed for Dakota Avenue between 27th Street and Minnetonka Boulevard to better understand potential impacts to the existing sidewalk. • If parking is eliminated along one side of the street, the existing sidewalk would not need to be removed to construct the regional trail. The sidewalk could remain to create dual facilities to allow separate use types (i.e., walkers on the sidewalk and people biking on the trail). • If parking is preserved on both sides of the street, the existing sidewalk would need to be removed to construct the regional trail. On Dakota Avenue between Minnetonka Boulevard and Lake Street the sidewalk would be removed on the side of the road where the trail is proposed. The sidewalk would remain on the other side of the road. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 8 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update F. Can there be additional information provided comparing right of way and tree impacts on SLP1 (Louisiana Avenue) and SLP4 (Dakota Avenue)? The public right of way along Louisiana Avenue south of Cedar Lake Road varies between 66 and 80 feet. There are no existing trees along the west side of Louisiana Avenue and many newly planted trees and a few mature trees on the east side, south of Minnetonka Boulevard. Given the existing roadway geometry, high traffic volume and parking needs, it is likely that the entire roadway would need to be reconstructed and private easements obtained to include a trail along Louisiana Avenue. This would likely result in the loss of all existing trees and replanting. The public right of way along Dakota Avenue south of Cedar Lake Road is 66 feet. Between 27th Street and Minnetonka Boulevard, there are 28 existing trees on the west side (8 of which are Green Ash) and 33 trees on the east side (13 of which are Green Ash). South of Minnetonka Boulevard to Lake Street along Dakota Avenue, there are no trees in the boulevard that would be impacted. Along Wooddale Avenue, between Lake Street and Cedar Lake regional trail, there may be two trees impacted. G. Why isn't the existing bike facility on Dakota Avenue acceptable for Three Rivers Park District? The current on-street facility was designed as a local bikeway (low volume, local destinations) to serve the local neighborhood. Through the engagement process, community members expressed a strong desire for facilities that are off-road and separated from vehicles. Several cited their discomfort with an on-street facility on Dakota Avenue specifically due to the congestion associated with the schools. Community members expressed a desire for a higher level of facility that provides a greater level of safety and comfort than on-street facilities provide. This is especially important to those new to biking and walking for recreation or transportation purposes – many of which come from disenfranchised community groups. As a regional recreation provider, Three Rivers is responsible for providing recreational opportunities that serve the greater community and region. As such use volumes are typically greater, connectivity with regional destinations and adjacent communities are essential. To best meet these responsibilities, Three Rivers designs and builds its trails to meet all current State, Federal and Three Rivers trail design guidelines, as well as ADA guidelines. In general, this means a 10-foot wide, off-road, two-directional, multi-use trail. This design solution supports safe, welcoming, and comfortable travel experiences for people walking, biking, and rolling regardless of their age and ability, as well as motorists and transit users. The off-road location of the facility provides the safest shared-use design for bicycles and pedestrians and, in doing so, serves the greatest percent of the community who prefer and are most comfortable with off-road walking and biking facilities. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 9 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update H. Who will be responsible for removing snow on the trail? Where will the snow be placed if the sidewalk is replaced with a wide trail? Currently, regional trails in St. Louis Park are maintained via agreement by the city at the Three Rivers' expense. This allows the city to coordinate its snow removal/plowing in a manner that is as efficient as possible. Snow removal and storage for the proposed regional trail would be similar to current practices. I. Would Three Rivers Park District consider modifying the trail standard, such as leaving sharrows on Dakota north of Minnetonka Blvd or reducing trail width, to limit impacts? Three Rivers will consider design modifications of its typical regional trail design provided that it remains an off-road trail and meets Federal and State standards (i.e., trail width – 10 ft preferred, min. 8 ft; clear zone width – 3 ft preferred, 2 ft min.) during the design phase. However, Three Rivers is reluctant to accept or pursue the sharrows as an acceptable design solution for a regional trail due to the concerns community members raised about the existing road configuration/uses generally associated with the schools (i.e., traffic congestion, buses/trucks) as well as anticipated regional trail use volumes which tend to overlap with school arrival and dismissal times. J. The interchange of Wooddale Avenue and Highway 7 is already a busy area. How will the traffic at this interchange be addressed to provide a safe regional trail? How will the trail cross the RR tracks? The bridge over Highway 7 has adequate space to accommodate trail users, potentially with only minor modifications. As for the railroad crossing near the high school, there is currently a sidewalk crossing of the railroad tracks. The trail would cross at- grade like the sidewalk condition now. Additional safety enhancements may be made, such as gate arms for the trail. That will be carefully evaluated during the design phase and in partnership with the railroad and city. K. What is the status of the Golden Valley segments and how will that influence the St. Louis Park route? Three Rivers and Golden Valley staff will be recommending a route that includes the trail crossing over I-394 into St. Louis Park at the Florida Avenue pedestrian bridge. There are route flexibility/multiple options on how the route will connect the two communities should one community prefer a more easterly option and the other prefer a more westerly option. The Golden Valley City Council is anticipated to discuss the trail routes at its work session on December 12 and potentially consider identifying a preferred route at its December 19, 2023 meeting. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 10 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update L. If route SLP4 is selected, would the existing bike lanes south of Minnetonka Boulevard remain? No, the bike lanes would be removed and that space would be re-allocated for the new trail. To do this, the curb line would be adjusted (brought into the street) along one side of the roadway and travel lanes would be shifted. These adjustments would provide adequate space for the trail within the existing right of way and likely provide a wider boulevard in which trees could be planted. M. How is the project anticipated to be funded? Will there be tax implications? Three Rivers Park District is fully responsible for funding construction and operations costs associated with the trail. Three Rivers intends to seek federal funding for the construction costs and no special assessments are made to residents. N. Can this project reinstate parking along Dakota Avenue between Lake Street and Minnetonka Boulevard? Parking is not anticipated to be reinstated along Dakota Avenue between Lake Street and Minnetonka Boulevard. O. How would the regional trail work with the proposed roundabout? Trails are routinely designed through roundabouts and would be like the trail network at the roundabouts at Louisiana Avenue and Walker Street/Highway 7. Due to the design of roundabouts, trail users only have to navigate traffic from one direction at a time. A refuge island sized to accommodate the length of a bicycle provides a safe place for people crossing to wait until traffic coming from the opposite direction is clear so they can cross safely. Because trail users are only crossing traffic approaching from one direction at a time, roundabouts are often safer than intersections with similar traffic volumes and multi- directional traffic. P. How would traffic and parking be addressed to limit the congestion at Peter Hobart Elementary School? Drive lanes, lane widths and parking at/immediately adjacent to the school will not be impacted as the trail is proposed through Dakota Park near the school and outside of the roadway. On Dakota Avenue South of 27th Street, the number of drive lanes will remain the same, and the drive lanes width is anticipated to be similar to the current width. As such, there should be no changes to access or traffic associated with the school due to the regional trail. If parents are utilizing this area to park during drop off/pick up – which was observed during field visits, they may need to walk an extra block or two if the trail option eliminating parking is pursued. Q. How would on-street parking for Parkway Pizza be impacted (both north and south of Minnetonka)? A preliminary review of this area indicates that there is sufficient right of way width to retain parking for Parkway Pizza if the bike lanes are removed from Dakota Avenue. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 11 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update R. How would school and park uses be addressed during construction? Construction would primarily occur in the summer months when schools are not in session or have more limited services; however, construction could overlap with the start and end of a school year. During the design phase, phasing plans, detouring, staging, and/or start and completion dates would be established in partnership with the city and affected schools to help alleviate possible conflicts during trail construction. S. Is there an ability to change the recommended route in the future? Minor adjustments to the route are expected and common, especially as a project moves through the design phase. If the city requests a significant change to the route after providing a resolution of support for the long-range plan, it will trigger a more robust process, which could include additional community engagement, Metropolitan Council review and approval, reimbursement for any completed trail work, and, potentially renegotiating a regional trail cooperative agreement should one be in place at which time the route change was requested. A possible exception to this would be if the CP Rail corridor was abandoned. Three Rivers intends to prepare a long-range plan and subsequent regional trail cooperative agreement to allow for this flexibility should that become a potential option in the future. T. How much control and influence will the city have during the final design of the trail? The regional trail is proposed to be located predominately within the city's right of way. As such, the city will retain a high-level of design control and approval authority throughout the project. This control/influence is established via a regional trail cooperative agreement, which outlines the roles and responsibilities of each party. As part of the agreement negotiation and approval process, the city would have an opportunity to craft and propose language that meets their expectations. Generally, the entities and their staff work hand in hand throughout the design and construction process to ensure both parties' interests are satisfactorily addressed without issue. U. Will additional lighting be included? Three Rivers typically does not provide pedestrian-level lighting along its regional trails. If the city is interested in having lighting along the corridor, it could be considered a part of the project. However, the installation and long-term maintenance costs would be the responsibility of the city. V. Why was only one option considered south of Minnetonka Boulevard? One option was developed for illustrative purposes only during the engagement phase to simply show how the right of way could be reconfigured to accommodate the regional trail without the need for additional permanent private property easements or loss of parking. Study session meeting of December 12, 2023 (Item No. 5) Page 12 Title: Three Rivers Park District CP Rail regional trail - Update If the proposed option is not satisfactory, additional options can be developed. This level of concept development typically occurs during the design phase after a route is selected and construction funding is secured. W. What is the status of other planned segments for the CP Rail RT – Segments B and D (outside of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley)? Given the length of the CP Rail Regional Trail corridor, Three Rivers has opted to utilize a phased planning approach to allow for a more inclusive engagement process and more thorough evaluation process for each segment. The status for the other segments is outlined below. Segment A is located between the Minnesota River and Nine-mile Creek Regional Trail within Edina and Bloomington. Planning for this segment is completed and Three Rivers is actively seeking funding to construct missing segments. Segment B is located between Nine-Mile Creek and Cedar Lake Regional Trails in Edina and St. Louis Park. Planning for this segment is anticipated to commence in 2024 or 2025. Segment D is located between the Luce Line and Crystal Lake Regional Trails in Golden Valley, New Hope, and Crystal. Most of the community engagement occurred over the summer of 2022 and a preferred route was identified by the affected cities. Three Rivers is finalizing planning for this segment and actively seeking construction funding. X. How would a trail on the east side of Dakota Avenue impact driveways and visibility while backing up? The exact design would be determined during the design phase; however, a preliminary review of the area south of Minnetonka Boulevard indicates that one option would be to locate parking on the opposite/west side of the street from the trail (east side/side with driveways). This would improve sightlines for people backing up as they would not be doing so between parked cars. North of Minnetonka Boulevard, homes have alley access with only a couple of driveways on the street. Similarly to south of Minnetonka Boulevard, if the option to eliminate parking is pursued, those people with a driveway on the east side would have improved site lines as they would no longer be backing up between parked cars.