Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024/05/06 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study SessionOfficial minutes City council special study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota May 6, 2024 The meeting convened at 5:35 p.m. Council members present: Mayor Nadia Mohamed, Paul Baudhuin, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd, Yolanda Farris, Lynette Dumalag, Margaret Rog Council members absent: none Staff present: City manager (Ms. Keller), deputy city manager (Ms. Walsh), city clerk (Ms. Kennedy), city attorney (Mr. Mattick), engineering director (Ms. Heiser), engineering services manager (Mr. Elkin), public works director (Mr. Hall), finance director (Ms. Cruver) Discussion items 1. City council meeting protocols. Ms. Kennedy presented the report. Council Member Rog asked for the rationale behind the proposal to change the city council’s regular meeting time. Ms. Keller explained this was originally proposed by council members at their annual retreat as a topic for future consideration. She noted many cities are moving to earlier start times for evening meetings, ranging from 6-7 p.m., and brought up staff and council considerations for starting and ending meetings earlier. Council Member Budd stated she is flexible on meeting start time. Council Member Farris stated her preference is an earlier start time. Council Member Dumalag asked how long staff works after meetings are completed. Ms. Walsh stated the communications staff stays an extra 30-45 minutes, noting schedules are coordinated with their supervisor and any extra time worked is either flexed or they receive comp time. Council Member Rog stated she is open to change but noted 6 p.m. feels like more of a barrier for the public as it is dinner time for many. She asked if there is flexibility to move the order of items on the agenda, such as public hearings, so folks do not have to be at a meeting for two hours before they get to speak. Ms. Kennedy stated the order of items on the agenda is set in the adopted council rules of procedure, which is under the council’s purview to amend. Mayor Mohamed stated she is in favor of an earlier meeting start time and concluding the meetings earlier. Council Member Baudhuin stated he is in favor of an earlier start time, but also has concerns about community engagement and asked if there is a way to gather data on what the community prefers. DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -2- May 6, 2024 Ms. Keller stated currently there is no data concerning the earlier start time and but generally it seems that people attend meetings when they have an interest in an item on the agenda. Ms. Keller asked staff and the city attorney if they had observed any impacts on meeting attendance in cities who have moved to earlier start times. Mr. Mattick shared the considerations of staff time and a general increase in the number of public meetings that take place in the evening. He stated in his experience, the agenda drives the public interest and attendees will come to a meeting if they feel compelled to do so. Mayor Mohamed stated that to truly engage people, meetings would not take place after work hours or on weekday. She stated with this current structure, it makes it difficult for folks to attend. She stated the earlier 30-minute start time probably would not make a difference. Council Member Baudhuin asked if staff could publish a predicted public hearing meeting time. Ms. Keller stated this becomes problematic if the meeting moves more quickly or slowly than anticipated or communicated. Council Member Brausen stated those that want to attend meetings do attend, and city council meetings are one way to see community government at work. Council Member Rog stated it would be helpful to give an approximate timeframe of public hearings. Council Member Dumalag stated that when working with an interested party, she usually presents the agenda and points out the public hearing, stipulating that she cannot give a precise timeframe of when the hearing would begin. She added she is in favor of an earlier start time. Council Member Brausen stated he likes keeping the meetings as is, but if the consensus is to change, he would agree to the Economic Development Authority meeting starting at 6:00 p.m. and the city council meeting starting at 6:15 p.m. He observed that special study sessions would then start at the end of the regular meeting, and those evenings could be very long. Council Member Rog shared that starting a meeting earlier than 6:00 p.m. makes it difficult for her to make it in time due to her job. She understands the rationale, adding it seems that there are more special study sessions recently, which makes the meetings longer as well. Mayor Mohamed asked what works for this council body, noting that future councils can adapt their meeting times. Ms. Keller observed that starting earlier than 6 p.m. is challenging for a couple of members. It was the consensus of the city council to proceed with a change so Economic Development meetings begin at 6 p.m. and regular city council meetings begin at 6:15 p.m. On evenings when only a study session is scheduled, the meeting would start at 6 p.m. unless otherwise noted on the agenda based on need. Council Member Brausen stated he is comfortable with the current protocols in place for public comment. He is not in favor of adding a public comment period at every meeting, and added DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -3- May 6, 2024 this is a representative democracy and there are adequate opportunities for citizens to reach out with concerns to the council directly or to staff. He observed that this time can become performative or ineffective if attendees have expectations that cannot be met. Council Member Rog asked for more information on first amendment considerations. Ms. Kennedy stated the consideration refers to the inability to limit or control what a person chooses to say during a public meeting. Mr. Mattick stated public comments have become much more complex in terms of a productive meeting versus a forum to yell. The amplification of comments has ramped up and, in some cities, council members have observed public comments that come across as hate speech. Mr. Mattick advised that by law, cities are not required to have an open public comment process for residents to petition the government. In St. Louis Park, the ability for a person to address the council on any item that is on the agenda is adequate. Residents also have the right to contact council members directly. Open meeting law grants people the right to be present at a meeting, but the first amendment does not give attendees a right to speak at a meeting unless it is part of a public hearing item. Mr. Mattick added that in Minnesota, there used to be a provision under law that allowed a person who disrupted a meeting to be arrested and charged with disorderly conduct. That law has been removed as it was found by the court to be unconstitutional. He noted there is no mechanism to prevent people from speaking their mind, no matter how hateful. In the event of a comment like this, some cities take a recess or adjourn the meeting and come back later. Mr. Mattick observed that St. Louis Park is one of the most open meetings in the state. Council Member Dumalag stated the school board has an open forum during their meetings, once a month at the end of the meeting. Council Member Budd stated members of the public can request time on a council agenda using the form provided on the city website. She noted there has been only one submission since the form was published last year. Mayor Mohamed stated she has spoken to her colleagues around the country about the issue of open comment periods at public meetings. She shared there have been instances of conflict in other cities when people would bring their comments and concerns forward and found their issues were not in the city’s purview to handle or the council was not prepared with information to respond or assist at the meeting and referred people back to staff for follow-up. This makes a city council meeting and the practice ineffective, and she would prefer not to go down that road. Council Member Budd stated members of the public can request time on a council agenda using the form provided on the city website. She noted there has been only one submission since the form was published last year. She stated that she is comfortable with the opportunities the city currently offers for people to participate in meetings. DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -4- May 6, 2024 Council Member Rog agreed that an open public forum in this day and age is generally ineffective. She would like to see the process for participation made even clearer, particularly around how to elevate an idea or topic to the full council for consideration. Council Member Dumalag stated public forums can be disruptive and it becomes very challenging for council to maintain productivity. She stated she is in favor of keeping things as is versus putting an open public comment period into city council meetings. Council Member Baudhuin observed that public comments can go bad very quickly but can also be powerful and beautiful at times. He noted a difference between public comments and speaking privately with a council member. When the comment is public, there is greater accountability as it is publicly stated, and not simply communication via an email or a call. He noted this gives residents more voice and he is in favor, on occasion, of having public forums. However, he noted that this opportunity can be abused, can derail productive discussion, and keeps the council from conducting the business of the meeting. Council Member Baudhuin pointed out that it is also part of the council’s role to listen to residents. He concluded that he has seen disruption happen with the school board meetings at times and he is torn on this issue. Recess and Reconvene It was moved by Council Member Brausen, seconded by Council Member Rog to recess the special study session meeting at 6:20 p.m. The motion passed 7-0. The meeting reconvened at 7:43 p.m. Council Member Baudhuin referenced city staff videos that have been placed on social media recently. He added this platform would be helpful in sharing city council topics and agenda information for upcoming meetings. Ms. Kennedy stated staff is working on this and developing other tools based on previous conversations around civic engagement. She acknowledged staff is also being mindful of the fact that not all residents follow social media for city information. Mayor Mohamed stated in the interest of time, the remaining operational topics on the list will be discussed by council at a future study session. 2. Utility risk assessment update. Ms. Heiser and Mr. Elkin presented the report. Council Member Dumalag asked for details regarding the pipe that was assessed. Mr. Elkin stated the pipe is made up of 20-foot sections and a break can happen at any point. Council Member Rog asked whether it is more common to see a sanitary sewer break or be blocked. Mr. Elkin stated roots can get into and block the pipe and also that pipes can develop DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -5- May 6, 2024 cracks, but typically pipe sections can be spot-repaired, cleaned and lined inside. He added condition is key to the risk assessments. Council Member Rog asked if breaks take the effects of corrosive soil into consideration. Mr. Elkin stated they do not, since there is not a record of this. . Ms. Heiser stated that there is not a comprehensive soil inventory everywhere in the city, and we only have records of the soil when breaks do occur, or for construction projects. Council Member Rog stated 26% of pipes are of unknown material. She asked if staff knows how many might be lead pipes. Mr. Hall confirmed that there are no lead pipes or lead services left within the city. Council Member Rog asked for confirmation that the city identifies lead pipes when they go out to do work, and Mr. Hall confirmed. She asked about those who have had no work done at their home. Mr. Hall stated all water meters were changed in 2015-16, every service was checked, and there are no lead pipes left. Ms. Heiser confirmed the city has not used or installed any lead pipes within the city since September of 1951. Council Member Rog asked about the 26% of pipes that are of unknown material, and how they are factored into the risk analysis. Mr. Hall stated that it is more than likely those pipes are cast iron, based on age. Council Member Rog asked if this information is available to the public. Ms. Keller stated yes, the presentation is available to the public on the city website. Council Member Rog asked if there are any situations where the city would replace the sewer instead of lining it. Mr. Elkin stated that the city would replace the sewer if the section collapsed and was past the point of repair. Council Member Baudhuin noted lining can only be done once and at 10% of the cost of replacement. Ms. Heiser confirmed this was correct. Council Member Budd asked if new buildings developed in the city could impact the sewer system. Ms. Heiser observed that it depends and noted that a redevelopment on 36th Street brought the city to the edge of capacity and the proposed development at Nash Frame put the city over limit, along with the future redevelopment of the Burlington Coat Factory site. Council Member Budd asked if, in general, the city has 200% capacity. Ms. Heiser stated no. Council Member Rog asked about pavement management and costs. She stated Ward 1 has a lot of areas coded in red, yellow and orange as per the report’s color code. She also asked about critical areas to review and if the information in the presentation supports continuing with pavement management plans for 2027. Ms. Heiser stated that it will take time to understand how the risk assessment will be incorporated into the CIP. When performing pipe replacement, a road still needs to be dug up. There are costs in the long term and lots of things to consider in replacement plans. DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -6- May 6, 2024 Council Member Budd asked if this conversation pertains to the 2026 budget. Ms. Cruver stated the risk assessment data will not be incorporated in the 2025 budget, since she will be presenting the 2025 budget to the council this summer. Ms. Heiser added that any changes would be approved in 2025, designed in 2026 and implemented in 2027. Council Member Rog asked about the privately-owned utilities at Knollwood. Mr. Elkin stated when a private pipe is replaced, they are responsible for paying, but they will need permits from the city to do the work. He added, however, the city is not financially responsible for the private utilities at Knollwood. Council Member Brausen asked about the West End and if that is private utilities. Mr. Elkin stated it depends on where it is, if it is on public right of way, it is likely public utilities, but utilities in the Costco area and the developments along Highway 394 are private land. Written Reports 3. Letter of no-default Beltline Station development – Ward 1. Communications/meeting check-in (verbal) Council Member Dumalag referenced the Parktacular parade and asked how the council should attend, noting that funds are subject to public purpose. Council members discussed further details and possibilities for their presence at Parktacular and Ms. Keller confirmed public purpose guidelines. Ms. Keller stated she will forward the information pertaining to this issue to the council. The meeting adjourned at 9:02 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443