HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009/02/03 CCM - RM1
1
ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING PROCEEDINGS
FEBRUARY 3, 2009
CALL TO ORDER
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the Rosemount City Council was
held on Tuesday, February 3, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 2875
145` Street West, Rosemount.
Mayor Droste called the meeting to order with Council Members DeBettignies, Shoe
Corrigan, Weisensel and Bills in attendance. Staff members present included City
Administrator Johnson, Community Development Director Lindquist, Communications
Coordinator Cox, City Engineer Brotzler, Assistant City Administrator Foster and City Clerk
Domeier. The Pledge of Allegiance was said.
ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA
City Administrator Johnson stated that item 6.g. Expenditure Approval from the Donation
Account Parks Recreation Dept. had an extraneous extra page at the end of the staff
report. He noted the motion in the staff report was correct as stated.
Motion by Droste. Second by DeBettignies.
Motion to adopt the Agenda as it stands.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0. Motion carried.
CONSENT AGENDA
Motion by DeBettignies. Second by Shoe Corrigan.
Motion to Approve the Consent Agenda as presented.
a. Minutes of the January 14, 2008 City Council Work Session Proceedings
b. Bills Listing
c. Appoint Directors Dakota Communications Center
d. Appointment of SKB Class I Trustee (Resolution 2009 -07)
e. Budget Encumbrances (Resolution 2009 -08)
f. Receive Donations Parks Recreation Dept.
g. Expenditure Approval from the Donation Account Parks Recreation Dept.
Ayes: DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Weisensel, Bills
Nays: None. Motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS
8.a. An Ordinance Amendment Creating Minimum Material and Construction
Standards for Fences, 08-43 -TA
Community Development Director Lindquist summarized the revised language to the
proposed amendment. She stated that proposed ordinance amendment now provided that
temporary or seasonal fences shall not be in place longer than six months and must be
removed within 15 days after receiving notice in writing from the City that the fence no
longer serves its originally intended, temporary or seasonal, purpose. The ordinance also
1
clearly states that temporary or seasonal fences are allowed without a permit provided the
fence conforms to the standards outlined in the ordinance.
Motion by Shoe Corrigan. Second by DeBettignies.
ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING PROCEEDINGS
FEBRUARY 3, 2009
Motion to Approve an Ordinance Amendment Creating Minimum Material and
Construction Standards for Fences.
Ayes: Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Weisensel, Bills, DeBettignies
Nays: None. Motion carried. (Ordinance B -198)
NEW BUSINESS
9.a. Consider notice to Minnesota Valley Transit Authority to withdraw from
membership at the end of 2009
City Administrator Johnson provided an overview of the information provided in the staff
report. Discussion points addressed by Mr. Johnson included financing, current services, the
City of Prior Lake's withdrawal, rescinding the notice, City concerns, possible MVTA
responses and the impacts on Rosemount residents. He added that because the MVTA will
not be able to give an official response to our concerns until February 11 he suggested
postponing an immediate decision on withdrawing and holding a special meeting on
February 12 to consider the results of the MVTA meeting and any new information available
at that time.
Council Member Bills questioned the ridership level for the local express route from the
Community Center. Mayor Droste stated that Beverly Miller would provide an answer
during her presentation.
Commissioner Branning provided his history on working with transit over the years. He
wanted the MVTA to continue working with the City but asked for flexibility to making
requests happen. Council Member DeBettignies stated that he appreciated and admired
everything Commissioner Branning has done for Rosemount.
Beverley Miller, Executive Director of the MVTA, provided the City Council a hand out
with information related to MVTA's operating funding process, capital funding process and
the funding of transit facilities. She explained the changes from using property tax funding
to receiving MVST funding. She pointed out that some transit facilities are owned and
operated by MVTA. In order to have the transit station, funding was required through
partnerships. Ms. Miller also stated that over time receiving funding for transit projects has
become more complex. She added that MVTA does not use its operating fund to fund
projects.
Ms. Miller stated that she has really enjoyed working with the City of Rosemount. She added
that the MVTA has tried really hard to make service grow in the south metro with a lot of
input from governing agencies. Ms. Miller stated that the express route started this fall in
Rosemount was just the start even though it may not be ideal for the residents. MVTA is
faced with severe budget shortfalls.
1
ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING PROCEEDINGS
FEBRUARY 3, 2009
Council Member DeBettignies questioned Apple Valley and Burnsville funding their own
portions of project and receiving grants. Ms. Miller explained the funding that was used for
the Apple Valley and Burnsville projects. She further explained the MVTA budget
breakdown and talked about the severe shortfalls the MVTA faces. Ms. Miller also explained
that the Met Council has stated they would share in the regional funding solutions and
shortfalls. She added that the MVTA board has met to discuss its operating budget and cuts
to existing service. Mr. Johnson added that at the Met Council State of the Region Address
on February 2, Peter Bell stated there was 23 million dollars lost in MVST funds in the
region. Ms. Miller stated that it was not easy to bring the bus service to Rosemount in
September because the Met Council said the use of funds was not sustainable.
Mayor Droste requested an explanation on how Lakeville benefits on transit and it's not part
of the transit district. Ms. Miller stated that a lot of cities are asking the same questions. She
added that Lakeville negotiated and was able to use their leverage. She noted that the Met
Council would be the agency to answer those concerns. Mayor Droste stated that the
Rosemount residents have been at the table for 18 years and currently paying 1.1 million
dollars per year. He added that according to surveys, Rosemount residents are driving to
other cities to get on the bus. He questioned whether any other city has had the growth like
Rosemount and does not have a transit facility. He further questioned how the City Council
can justify the expense to its residents.
Ms. Miller stated that Rosemount needs to partner with Dakota County and the MVTA to
recognize the resources available and put all the cards on the table to see what we can afford
to do together to reach the goal on constructing a transit station in Rosemount. Mayor
Droste stated he thought the City has been doing that all along. Council Member
DeBettignies concurred. Mayor Droste questioned what more the City could do in
partnering that it has already done in the past. He added that the City also has a transit plan
incorporated into its transportation plan.
Ms. Miller stated that the MVTA has gone twice for federal solicitations and was not
successful. She stated that another application will be sent in April and a back up plan is in
place should funds not be received again. She suggested meeting with the Dakota County
and the Met Council to find out where Rosemount ranks in priority. She stated it would be
good to have plans with goals, objectives and timelines in place. Mayor Droste stated that
the strongest voice should be through the JPA. He cautioned having an individual City
going outside the JPA because it would create mixed messages. Ms. Miller stated she didn't
imply for the City to go on its own but to work as a partnership.
Council Member Shoe Corrigan questioned how CMAQ awarded points and the City's
score. Ms. Miller explained that CMAQ scores cities based upon congestion noting it was a
highly competitive process.
Council Member Weisensel questioned whether a master plan has been developed over the
past 18 years. He expressed concern as to where Rosemount falls on the list and stated he
did not see a benefit to belonging to the MVTA. Ms. Miller stated that MVTA was not the
1
ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING PROCEEDINGS
FEBRUARY 3, 2009
lead component for bringing transit facilities to the area. She added that there was not
enough money or ridership to guarantee a facility in Rosemount.
Council Member Shoe Corrigan questioned the fund balance of the MVTA. Ms. Miller
replied that MVTA's policy was to have four months worth equaling about eight million
dollars. Ms. Miller stated that if the MVTA had the funding then the City of Rosemount
would have a transit station. Council Member Shoe Corrigan stated that Ms. Miller advised
the City Council to partner with Dakota County and the MVTA; resubmit for grants; and to
have goals and objectives in place. Council Member Shoe Corrigan stated that the City has
already done all of the items Ms. Miller suggested. She further questioned why Rosemount
residents are forced to travel long distances when Rosemont could have something more
convenient and equitable for what we have paid into the system over 18 years. She added
that Rosemount is now being a partner with agencies and has a plan. The City already does
both and still does not receive any equality.
Council Member Shoe Corrigan stated that according to the MVTA representatives there is
over three million dollars in their fund balance above the amount needed for operations.
She then questioned the cost to build a park and ride. Ms. Miller responded approximately
$300,000 $400,000.
Council Member DeBettignies stated he wanted to see equability in the process.
Commissioner Branning stated that funding programs will allow all the agencies to work
together. Mayor Droste stated that Ms. Miller suggested that the City partner with MVTA
and bring a proposal before the County. Commissioner Branning stated that Dakota County
only has so much man power to bring to the table. He added that the 35W and Cedar
corridors are a hefty load to fund.
City Administrator Johnson recommended that the City Council await the outcome of the
February 11 MVTA Board meeting and hold a special meeting on February 12 to discuss the
options moving forward.
Motion by DeBettignies. Second by Shoe Corrigan.
Motion to hold a Special Meeting at 6:45 p.m. on February 12, 2009 to discuss the
full report from the MVTA.
Ayes: Droste, Weisensel, Bills, DeBettignies, Shoe- Corrigan
Nays: None. Motion carried.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Droste stated that the next regular City Council meeting would be held on February
17, 2009.
1
1
1
ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING PROCEEDINGS
FEBRUARY 3, 2009
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council and upon a motion by
Droste, second by Bills, the meeting was adjourned at 9:08 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Amy Domeier, City Clerk