Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024/05/20 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study SessionOfficial minutes City council special study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota May 20, 2024 The meeting convened at 6:57 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 attorney (Mr. Mattick), administrative services director (Ms. Brodeen), city clerk (Ms. Kennedy), community engagement coordinator (Mr. Coleman), communications director (Ms. Smith) Discussion items 1.Boards and commissions roles and responsibilities, appointment process and compensation. Ms. Brodeen presented the staff report. She reviewed the policy considerations that council is asked to provide direction on including how the council wants to provide policy direction to boards and commissions, does the council want to make changes to the appointment process and does the council want to offer compensation to eligible members. Council Member Rog asked how the council provides policy direction to boards and commissions when boards and commissions should be providing recommendations to the council. Ms. Walsh stated the boards and commissions need to know what to discuss. They would receive general direction from the council and then provide recommendations and direction back. Council Member Rog asked if the questions may be asked differently by the various boards and commissions, as they have different functions. Ms. Brodeen stated the policy questions for the purposes of this discussion are only directed towards the advisory boards and commissions. Ms. Walsh clarified there could be separate policy questions and discussions in the future related to statutory boards and commissions if the council wants to make changes. The questions tonight are how – and how often - council wants to get information relating to policy direction to the advisory boards and commissions. Council Member Brausen asked what the mechanism is to send policy direction to boards and commissions. Mayor Mohamed added that statutory commissions already have their set items to address, so those items do not change. Ms. Keller agreed, noting the statutory commissions already have a set scope of work. Council Member Dumalag shared that when she was on the planning commission, they were tasked with reviewing the comprehensive plan and accessory dwelling units, which are not in statute, and was directed by staff or council to review. She stated there are also times when a DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -2-May 20, 2024 commission does the work directed by the council, and the council will not accept a recommendation. Council Member Farris asked if there was a time when the council and commissions connected. Ms. Walsh confirmed this did take place and described how commissions presented to the council individually and as a group. Council Member Budd shared she has heard commissions preferred meeting individually with the council. Council Member Rog agreed and stated the challenge was there was no mechanism for follow-up when all the commissions met with the council together. Council Member Dumalag added when she was on the planning commission, she thought it was more effective to meet and present the work plan to the council as an individual commission and not in a large group. She added the group meeting was more of a celebration with a presentation. Council Member Dumalag stated a policy does not fit for all commissions and boards, so there needs to be a process that works for both advisory and statutory groups. Council Member Baudhuin stated the annual meeting is not enough and there needs to be a mechanism that improves communication, possibly using liaisons to both the council and commissions. Commissions should be responsible for staying informed via meeting minutes and bringing a report back to the council each month. He stated he would be willing to be a liaison to several of the boards and commissions. Mayor Mohamed noted this would take a lot of time for the council members, noting that some have time, and some do not. She would not want anyone penalized for not being a liaison, nor does she desire to create a culture that might be uncomfortable. Council Member Baudhuin stated he is not talking about attending every month, but possibly attending one or two meetings a year and creating more communication between commissions and the council. He added commissions generally do not communicate with the council unless they go through staff, which has created barriers. He stated reading emails and reading through minutes would be helpful in the communication process. Mayor Mohamed stated she keeps hearing the commissions cannot contact the council and questioned where that narrative is coming from. She stated her email is open and feels like they are allowed and do contact council members, so she is concerned about this perception. Council Member Budd stated the time constraint might be helped if there is a liaison between the council and commissions versus council members reviewing all the commissions’ agendas and minutes. Council Member Brausen stated he is not supportive of a council liaison to the boards and commissions because council members end up being an advocate for that group. He stated he does read all the minutes of boards and commissions in the packets, and it is important to read DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -3-May 20, 2024 all the material. He added he shares the mayor’s concerns about time constraints. He advised if a commissioner has an issue, they should contact council members. Council Member Rog stated she is concerned the council will return to its former practice with boards and commissions. Boards and commissions want more of the council’s time and it is concerning that this is not happening. The consultants stated these issues should be worked on over time. She asked if the liaison model can be attempted at this point by the council. She noted also that Council Member Brausen’s concerns about a council member being an advocate for a commission and stated that staff has functioned as an advocate for commissions as well. She stated board and commission members are residents and the council are residents also, and there is a special relationship that is different than with staff. Council Member Brausen stated he would not like the liaison model and prefers to meet with commissions at council meetings and create more engagement that way. Council Member Farris stated she would not like the liaison model either and would prefer commissions to come to the council to present and discuss their work plans. Mayor Mohamed asked if the liaison model would pertain to the statutory commissions or just the advisory bodies. Council Member Baudhuin clarified that he was speaking of advisory commissions only. Mayor Mohamed asked if the liaison model is adopted, what happens if not all council members can participate, leaving all the commissions to a few council member liaisons. Council Member Rog stated she would like to give the liaison model a try to see how it goes and see if it takes as much time as they think it will. Council Member Brausen asked if the liaison model is used, would the liaison be the person providing direction instead of the city council. He asked how the model would affect the full council setting policy and hearing back from boards and commissions. Council Member Rog gave an example of how the liaison role could benefit a board or commission. She provided an example of the Housing Authority board and her understanding is that they do not hear what the council is doing. She offered that if she were the liaison to them, she would work to inform the board and work with staff to help them have an awareness of what is happening. Council Member Farris asked why staff cannot do that work and furthermore, why do council members need to take it on. Ms. Keller stated there are potential unintended consequences in a liaison model. There is a possibility that the group forms a special relationship with the liaison, when ultimately, boards and commissions need to have a special relationship with the council and not just with one individual. She said this would also make direction from the council very unclear. Council Member Dumalag stated the council can look at priorities for each commission and then when the council meets with each commission, they can discuss their work plans. DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -4-May 20, 2024 Mayor Mohamed stated she likes the idea of meeting about priorities at the beginning of the year. She added there is also a lack of relationship and communication because the council has not met with boards and commissions for so long. This policy direction should come from the entire council, adding this model works best for her. Once there is efficiency again in communication and closing informational gaps, then the city council can add to the basic process. Council Member Baudhuin stated he understands the concerns with the liaison model, but would like staff to investigate the concept and think about the pros and cons. He does not know how this can all be decided if the council does not get into the “small bowl” details. Mayor Mohamed pointed out that the last time the council asked for staff to work on this policy question, staff put a great deal of time and effort into the work and council did not accept the recommendations. Council Member Dumalag agreed. Council Member Baudhuin asked how then the council makes decisions if they don’t get into the details. Council Member Brausen observed that four council members do not want to pursue the liaison model, so he does not want staff to put more work into it at this point. Council Member Baudhuin questioned if the council did not come to consensus on the liaison model, what alternatives there are. Council Member Rog added she is also frustrated and noted it is a heavy lift for the council to be asked to move forward without more information on how to address the policy recommendations. Ms. Brodeen clarified that staff proposed this policy question to the council based on the direction from council; the council previously stated they wanted to play a bigger role with boards and commissions. Staff needed more information from the council on what they wanted their role to be. Ms. Keller added that staff have provided a great deal of data in previous reports and presentations; staff recommendations were not accepted, and council asked for more discussion. Council Member Budd stated she is hearing the options are the liaison model, the annual meeting model, and the model meeting individually with boards and commission. She also shared the option of doing a session like the legislative sessions where priorities are discussed. Council Member Dumalag asked if the city website portal can be used for boards and commissions to submit items also. Council Member Baudhuin stated he does not want one council member to speak for the entire council but thought of the liaison model as a way to bring commissioner’s questions forward to the council. He asked if commissions could submit study session topics and questions. Ms. Brodeen confirmed that a general request form is currently available to any member of the public on the city website. DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -5-May 20, 2024 Council Member Rog stated it is important that commissioners have a connection to the council and a way to communicate with them. She agreed that having a board and commission study session item request form that goes to the council - the same way as council member study session item request forms go to the full council - is important and would be very helpful. Council Member Brausen shared that the sooner the council can have an annual meeting with boards and commissions the better and bringing them into the discussions will be helpful. Ms. Keller observed that a majority of the council agrees on an annual meeting with boards and commissions to discuss priorities. The majority of the council also agree on holding one-on-one meetings with commissions to discuss the systems approach and their work plans. She added there is also interest in commissions and boards utilizing an existing tool on the city website portal; using the request forms as a way to elevate items directly to the council. Council Member Baudhuin added he believes requests made by the boards and commissions should have higher priority than general requests. Mayor Mohamed asked Council Member Rog to clarify an earlier comment, and asked if there is more information she is aware of with the Housing Authority. Council Member Rog stated the board has expressed a desire for more support for housing in the city, and that there was a board or commission specifically for housing. She stated they have indicated to staff and the consultants that they want more from their roles and they see themselves as being underutilized. She noted Thom Miller did email staff and has discussed this with her as well, and stated the council needs to discuss this further. Mayor Mohamed stated she is aware of the Housing Authority’s priorities and noted if they were elevated, then it would show favoritism to the Housing Authority, adding the importance of perception. Ms. Keller asked if the scope of work could be changed for some of the statutory commissions. Mr. Mattick stated the scope cannot be changed on statutory commissions; subjects outside of defined limits cannot be addressed. Ms. Keller asked if there is interest from the council to discuss the scope of statutory commissions. The council’s consensus agreed on further discussion. Mayor Mohamed asked if the council is interested in changing the process for appointments. Council Member Brausen stated he would like to change the process and would like staff to recommend who should be interviewed. Council Member Budd stated it is a very good process and she appreciated the council was able to narrow down the applicants and then make recommendations. Council Member Bauduin stated he has not been through the process and does not have a firm stance on it. DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -6-May 20, 2024 Council Member Rog stated she would be interested in term limits, diversity, expanding membership, having diversity targets, holding board seats open until diversity targets are met, and clear criteria such as diversity or experience. She added she would like to see publicizing the racial and gender component of boards and commissions and holding the council and city accountable to the composition of commissions. Council Member Dumalag added she likes the idea of term limits to give others a chance to participate and give people opportunities for leadership. She also expressed support for showing our demographic breakdown as it relates to our racial equity policies and who the commission serves. Mayor Mohamed agreed with the comments made, but noted she does not support the current rating system because it has not worked in the past. She supports people of color serving on boards and commissions opportunities but is not in support of targets or holding a spot open for a person of color. She noted concerns that it may diminish a person of color if someone is perceived to be chosen solely to achieve a diversity goal. Mr. Mattick stated he would need to understand more about holding a spot open for certain appointees. He stated professional qualifications and racial analysis are two different things. Council Member Rog suggested holding an application process open until diverse candidates have applied, ensuring persons of color can be included in the candidate pool. Mayor Mohamed agreed with this versus holding a position open for a diverse candidate. Council Member Farris shared her concern that any process needs to be fair. Council Member Brausen felt staff should screen applicants, but Council Member Dumalag did not agree. Council Member Rog stated she would prefer the council to screen applicants and require resumes as well. Council Member Brausen stated the council needs to decide the criteria used before agreeing to staff doing all the screening. It was the consensus of the council that staff do the initial screening of applicants using criteria determined by the council, then council conduct scoring and further review. Council Member Rog shared that her work in grants and scoring criteria has taught her that applicants need to know which scoring criteria is part of the application process. She stated this information needs to be discussed before applications go out. The resume should also be included, though she noted this can be a barrier. Council Member Dumalag stated she is also interested in an applicant’s experience. A resume or body of work should also be included. DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -7-May 20, 2024 Ms. Keller stated it was the consensus of the council that staff would establish application criteria, screen applicants and provide recommendations on who to interview. All applications would be passed on to the council as part of the process. Mayor Mohamed noted the final question the council will need to address related to providing compensation to eligible board members. She does agree with the option of $25 per meeting with 22 meetings per year, or $49 per meeting with 12 meetings per year. Council Member Brausen stated he is in favor of a stipend and stated $49 per month is acceptable for all members of commissions and for all monthly meetings. Council Member Rog stated she would like to pay more, although she understands the tax implications. She stated there is a lot of work, research as well as other prep work that happens outside of the meeting itself. She added the Maple Grove model is paid per quarter. Council Member Baudhuin agreed. Council Member Brausen added if a commissioner misses more than three meetings, they should have a conversation with staff. Ms. Keller and Mr. Mattick determined that more information was needed on any legal or HR factors impacting on the salary and stipend models. Ms. Brodeen summarized that staff would bring edits on the boards and commission policy as next steps. Council Member Budd asked if virtual attendance is allowed. Mr. Mattick stated it is allowed but must be scheduled in advance, conducted from a public place, and the address of the location where the member will be appearing from must be included in the legal notice of the meeting. Ms. Keller stated that communications staff are not currently assigned to boards and commissions meetings, which would be needed to provide the level of tech support needed for virtual attendance. 2.City council meeting protocols Ms. Kennedy explained this is a continuation of a previous discussion. Mayor Mohamed addressed the council’s protocols when a member needs to be absent. She stated protocol has generally been to email her on an issue if a council member needs to be absent from a meeting so they can have their input shared with the group. Someone who is absent cannot cast a formal vote, but the council member’s position will be in the record of minutes and colleagues have an opportunity to hear their thoughts. Council Member Dumalag stated she summarized statements from absent council members at the last meeting as Mayor Pro Tem and thought it went well. Delaying the meeting was not an option and the council did their best to include input from missing members. DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -8-May 20, 2024 Council Member Rog gave the example of the Dakota Park Bridge issue and other ward-specific issues where a council member’s comments have a case to make. If that ward representative is absent, it would be beneficial to explore if it would be legally allowed to delay a vote, especially on a longstanding issue. In some rare and important cases, it would be beneficial to hold off a vote or decision until the council member could be present at the meeting. Council Member Brausen stated except for land use issues, there is a chance to go back and discuss further and revisit an issue. Mr. Mattick stated it is legally possible to delay but there might be constraints in some cases on land use. Ms. Keller added there may be constraints also when a project is going out for bid. Council Member Baudhuin stated the council members need to note planned absences from meetings so staff can adjust the agenda. Ms. Keller confirmed that staff do adjust meeting agendas for when council members have communicated in advance that they will be absent. Council Member Baudhuin stated it seems to be a rare occurrence to miss an important issue, but added he would like to see how the process can be more accommodating. Council Member Farris stated that she was aware of Council Member Rog’s opinion before the meeting and so did not feel the need to postpone the vote. Council Member Rog stated she just wanted her voice heard at the Dakota Park Bridge meeting and to be able to ask questions about some new information that was provided. She asked if there was openness to requesting that an item on an agenda be postponed if needed. Ms. Kennedy stated that opportunity exists currently, and each item needs to be considered on a case-by-case basis, depending on the circumstances involved. Ms. Keller stated the process would be to ask for a delay at the meeting if the council needs more information, but to delay an issue for one person who may be absent from the meeting introduces variability and can also be weaponized. She stated the criteria should be ‘does the council need more information before they can make a decision.’ Mayor Mohamed stated the city council does not generally make a decision based on what one person wants. The council makes decisions as a group, based on many factors. She noted if someone is out sick and misses a vote, then they miss the vote. She added even if one ward member is out, residents of that ward still have three people representing them, including the mayor and two at-large council members, so there is no way someone will not be represented. She added she does not want to set a precedent for future city councils either. Council Member Baudhuin asked about tabling an issue at a meeting or a study session. Mr. Mattick stated that can be done at either meeting if there is consensus by the council. Council Member Baudhuin stated he is comfortable with that process. Ms. Keller asked the policy question of offering a call-in option for residents and asked the council for their input. Ms. Smith reviewed the practice that was implemented during the pandemic, noting why the city stopped the practice once the council was able to safely conduct DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -9-May 20, 2024 meetings in-person. She clarified that there are numerous considerations, not the least of which is that technology sometimes can fail and this creates significant issues if a person is told they can participate remotely and then are unable to do so. Mr. Mattick added the legal concern that if technology fails during a public hearing, whether the public hearing was valid is called into question. Mayor Mohamed added some people are more comfortable speaking on an issue remotely than coming in person. Council Member Rog added she would like to receive any comments staff receives after the agenda packet goes out earlier than at the. Ms. Kennedy stated staff can both email comments and print them out to have at the meeting for the council members. Council Member Brausen stated he is in favor of the public hearing protocols listed in the report and feels that people get ample opportunity to speak. Ms. Keller stated an updated protocol is quarterly mandatory training before regular council meetings. For these training sessions and council meetings or study sessions that start at or before 5:30 p.m., food will be available for attendees. She noted there likely will be fewer meetings going forward that start at or earlier than 5:30 p.m. Mayor Mohamed noted that sharing a meal after the council meeting has always been an important way for council members to connect. Council Member Brausen added that council members do not discuss city business at these dinners after council meetings, but they are a good way to team-build, and he would be interested in doing these once per month. He stated it is understood that the council members would need to participate at their own expense. Mayor Mohamed offered to coordinate shared meals after meetings if the council members are interested. Council Member Rog stated it does not fall within staff’s responsibility to get the council members together socially, but if the council members want to go out after an early meeting is over, that is fine and should be optional. She asked how staff became involved in coordinating events for the council. Ms. Kennedy stated the council had asked staff to help coordinate dinners or social events at a previous council retreat. Written Reports – none. Communications/meeting check-in (verbal) Ms. Walsh provided an update on staff recommendations regarding a consultant for the next phase of the council retreat that was requested by council. The general consensus of the council was to proceed with staff recommendations. DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443 Study session minutes -10-May 20, 2024 The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor DocuSign Envelope ID: F73E08BE-C794-4992-9482-F7C8EB296443