Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024/11/18 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study SessionOfficial minutes City council study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota Nov. 18, 2024 The meeting convened at 8:04 p.m. Council members present: Paul Baudhuin, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd, Yolanda Farris, Lynette Dumalag, Margaret Rog, Mayor Nadia Mohamed Council members absent: none Staff present: City manager (Ms. Keller), city attorney (Mr. Mattick), deputy city manager (Ms. Walsh), community development director (Ms. Barton), administrative services director (Ms. Brodeen), finance director (Ms. Cruver), facilities superintendent (Mr. Eisold), legislative and grants analyst (Ms. Ferris), public services superintendent (Ms. Fisher), recreation superintendent (Ms. Friederich), public works director (Mr. Hall), engineering director (Ms. Heiser), building and energy director (Mr. Hoffman), economic development manager (Mr. Hunt), city clerk (Ms. Kennedy), police chief (Mr. Kruelle), zoning administrator (Mr. Morrison), financial analyst (Ms. Stephens), HR director (Ms. Vorpahl), planning manager (Mr. Walther), sustainability manager (Ms. Ziring) Guests: Momentum Advocacy - Natalia Madryga, Amy Koch, Alysen Nesse Discussion items 1. Revised budget Ms. Cruver presented the report related to the revised 2025 budget. Ms. Cruver asked if council supports the proposed 2025 budget as revised. She noted the balanced budget consists of an "all-inclusive” preliminary levy increase of 7.52% and includes the following components: 1. $48,598,532 for core government services and debt payments (general and debt service levies) 2. $1,194,133 for housing projects and programs (HRA levy) 3. $187,000 for economic development projects and programs (EDA levy) Ms. Cruver also asked if the council supports the revised five-year Capital Improvement Plan. Council Member Baudhuin asked if capturing new revenue will still take place, assuming the city does not establish any new TIF districts. Ms. Cruver stated a new TIF district will keep paying into city revenues. Council Member Rog stated the same-year investment does not seem to be a same-year-only decision. Ms. Cruver stated yes and added the increase in property values is an ongoing thing. Council Member Rog asked with all this development, why are property taxes not lower, especially with more TIF in the pool. Ms. Cruver stated some taxes are going down and the city could choose not to increase or do modest increases, and then more people would see a decrease in property taxes. However, she added the larger TIF districts will not decertify until 2028 and 2030. Docusign Envelope ID: AFBC3F62-0817-4D90-A6B4-6110F5D71FA3 Study session minutes -2-Nov. 18, 2024 Council Member Budd asked with decertification of TIF districts, has funding been rolled back in. Ms. Cruver stated yes, and added some funds have been moved into the affordable housing trust fund. Council Member Budd asked if the HRA and EDA levies adjust for inflation. Ms. Cruver stated this year, all staff supported by these levies were moved into the general levy and typically that is the driver in inflation, along with salaries and benefits. She added in 2025, the HRA and EDA will fund projects only and not salaries, but this could be reviewed each year and adjusted based on economic conditions. Council Member Rog asked if the new forestry position was in the last budget or was it just an investment in trees. Ms. Cruver stated in the 2024 budget, there was an additional investment in trees, and this is on top of that and specifically for the urban forest. Council Member Rog confirmed this is not the first time council has seen this new position reflected in the budget. Ms. Cruver stated that is correct. Council Member Rog asked if business licensing includes rental. Ms. Cruver stated yes. Ms. Keller added this was a reset year on licensing. Council Member Rog asked if with the housing and social services grant program, it was a reduction from general fund expenditures as the city shifted monies to the affordable housing trust fund. Ms. Cruver stated senior services funds come out of the development fund. Council Member Rog asked if the amount was $60,000 for housing. Ms. Cruver stated yes, and noted this was for housing and general support. She added rental housing support is an eligible item that can also be funded by the affordable housing trust fund. Council Member Rog asked about the status of Webster Park. Ms. Heiser stated staff is waiting for an appraisal on Webster Park from MnDOT in January 2025 and at that time, the council will be updated. Ms. Walsh stated staff is hopeful this will be a project in 2025. Council Member Brausen asked if the EDA levy can be used to build up the assets within the development fund in future years. Ms. Cruver stated that she believed this could be done. Council Member Rog stated some neighbors are not happy with 7.52% levy. She stated some would like to see the increases at a lower rate, but she is supportive of staff’s recommendations. Council Member Dumalag stated she is also supportive of staff’s recommendations and appreciated the forecast and the discussions that have taken place. Council Member Brausen added he is also supportive of staff’s recommendations on the levy. Council Member Baudhuin stated he is also supportive and appreciated the work staff did to reduce the levy from an earlier projection of 9%. He appreciated the presentation’s thoroughness and succinct information. Docusign Envelope ID: AFBC3F62-0817-4D90-A6B4-6110F5D71FA3 -3-Nov. 18, 2024 Council Member Farris added she is supportive as well and added it was nice to see the levy come down from 9% to 7.5%. She thanked staff and added times are changing and things are more expensive. She shared her opinion that people will need to learn if they want to live in a nice area, they will have to pay. Council Member Budd stated she is supportive and liked the bar chart included in the agenda packet. She added the 4D NOAH credits speak to preserving naturally occurring affordable housing. Mayor Mohamed added she is also supportive and thanked staff for their work on the revised budget report. 2.First council discussion of 2025 legislative agenda Ms. Ferris presented on 2025 legislative agenda priorities along with Natalia Madryga, Amy Koch, and Alysen Nesse, representatives of Momentum Advocacy, the city’s legislative consultants. Council Member Brausen asked if there will be able a focus on direct appropriation or bonding. Ms. Koch stated bonding. Council Member Budd asked if the Wayzata Boulevard project is new. Ms. Keller stated it is in the city’s CIP, but it is new for the legislative agenda and expenses are eligible for bonding. Council Member Rog stated since the bonding bill most likely will pass, should the city be asking for more funding. Ms. Koch stated generally two bonding projects is appropriate. Council Member Brausen asked why public safety funding is being asked for related to light rail stations. Ms. Keller stated this is because city police support the safety of the light rail stations. Council Brausen stated he is supportive of the legislative priorities and noted with climate and energy, whether building performance standards should be a priority. Ms. Koch stated it can be a priority, and conversations are continuing to develop here. She stated mandates and regulations will not be a focus, but incentives will be more part of the conversation. Council Member Brausen stated he would like to see this moved into the priorities list. Ms. Fisher stated she would like to see it as well especially since Rep. Kraft has been working on this for three years and St. Louis Park staff are on the stakeholder group as well. Council Member Budd asked about housing policy and about the “missing middle” housing bill by Rep. Kraft. She asked for more information on this. Ms. Barton stated the city is looking for more affordable housing in the “missing middle”, so the city is not looking for a one-size-fits-all all mandate with affordable housing and is looking for options that are flexible. Council Member Budd stated since this would not be mandated, the cities that are looking for this type of housing would be the ones to fund it, and asked if that summary is correct. Ms. Barton stated the city is a leader in this area, however, there are things that would be problematic including density. St. Louis Park’s infrastructure may not be able to support that Study session minutes Docusign Envelope ID: AFBC3F62-0817-4D90-A6B4-6110F5D71FA3 -4-Nov. 18, 2024 much density. She stated they are looking for ways to make changes statewide and allowing flexibility in other areas in city by city. Council Member Budd asked if this bill would address the large housing crisis that Minnesota is experiencing. Ms. Madryga stated there is great tension around this issue, and preserving local control is the question, so the one-size-fits-all approach will not be politically feasible. Council Member Budd asked if Rep. Kraft’s bill would align with the city’s priorities. Ms. Madryga stated this will be up to Rep. Kraft, but this does support what the “missing middle” is trying to do and also provides flexibility. By taking this position, the city joins a small group that works to preserve local control. Council Member Rog added all the work the city has done on updating zoning code would go away if the state were to have control here. Council Member Rog asked which general government priorities are included on the list. Council Member Budd stated she is a proponent of Family Medical Leave (FML) and asked if the city is pulling back on this position. Ms. Koch stated it passed in 2023 and was adjusted in 2024. St. Louis Park would like to incorporate more discussion about flexibility and making (FML) more workable for cities. Council Member Rog stated she would like to see open meeting law added to priorities, including the opportunity to expand access for public hearings, and also for when council members are sick or out of town. Ms. Madryga stated for general government positions, it was looking at where St. Louis Park wants to be a leader here. She stated it’s important but if the city wants to be the lead on this, then it becomes a priority. Council Member Rog stated there seem to be fewer priorities than in past years. Ms. Keller stated that the number of priorities were about the same as last year. Mayor Mohamed agreed to focus on the battles that the city can win. The political field has changed now, so we will need to find commonality in addressing issues. She stated she agrees with the priorities presented. Mayor Mohamed stated with the Republican party majority elected to federal legislative branches, there may be substantial changes. Ms. Koch stated the city will have to be mindful of that and it is a matter of crossing the aisle and finding support in most cases. Council Member Budd referenced source of income discrimination and asked about how this is being handled. Ms. Madryga stated this is being handled by the Department of Human Rights as an agency priority. She stated there was a plan for this, but progress has not been made. She added it is a position, but not a priority. Ms. Keller stated we will have greater progress with a quieter influence on this one. Ms. Keller confirmed the final priorities and that the building performance standards and the construction and demolition debris diversion positions be added to the priorities. Study session minutes Docusign Envelope ID: AFBC3F62-0817-4D90-A6B4-6110F5D71FA3 -5-Nov. 18, 2024 Council Member Baudhuin stated he is in favor of the positions and priorities and we should not worry as much about political losses as much as just getting the right messages out. He stated this looks good for this year. Written Reports. 3.2025 proclamations and cultural observances. 4.Racial equity and inclusion system wrap-up. Communications/meeting check-in (verbal) The meeting adjourned at 9:37 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor Study session minutes Docusign Envelope ID: AFBC3F62-0817-4D90-A6B4-6110F5D71FA3