We hereby call to order the Roseville City Council meeting for Monday, July 6th, 2026. Mr. City Man, would you call the role, please? >> Council Sharter >> here. >> B >> here. >> Here, >> here. >> Mayor Ro >> here. Uh and with us at the deis by way of introduction we have our city attorney Rachel Tierney who's on my right at the far end of the deis. Uh and our city manager Pat Trojan who's on my left at the other end of the deis. Uh we have uh staff who will be presenting items as those agenda items come up. We'll make sure to make those introductions uh and I hope I get them right. Uh and um want to also note that we do have a uh a complete set of all the meeting materials that are before us this evening in a three- ring binder on the table in the back by the back door under the big clock. Uh that's available for anyone in the public to share uh access to over the course of the meeting. Uh and then we also do have individual copies of the agenda available for you to follow along if you'd like to uh also in the same location. So feel free to uh grab one of those if you need that to help you follow along with the meeting. uh we would remind you to uh either silence your cell phone or otherwise assure that it doesn't disrupt the meeting this evening. Uh and with that, we'll ask folks to stand if you're able for the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. Next on our agenda is approval of tonight's agenda. And I'll check as always first with staff and Mr. Trejudon. Are there any changes that need to be made to the agenda from a staff perspective? >> No changes. >> All right. Uh and check with the council. Are there any changes that the council would like to make to the agenda this evening? We have a fairly brief agenda, so not too many opportunities. Are there any changes? All right. Seeing none, normally I would check with folks to see if there is uh anyone here for one of the items in our consent agenda, section 10 at the end of our agenda. There are only two items on that uh section right now, which is approval of our payments uh and then a uh consideration of a standby contract for EMS services for a Parkinson's walk. Uh if anyone is here for either one of those items, this would be the time to let us know uh and we can uh pull that item forward in the meeting so that you can either speak to or ask questions about either of those items. Uh it's totally your choice as a member of the public. Uh if you're not here for either of those items, we can leave them where they are. But I do always want to check at the beginning of the meeting if anyone is here for one of those items. Once again, in section 10 of our agenda under consent agenda, the approval of the payments or the EMS contract for the Parkinson's Walk. Does not appear that anyone is here for one of those items. Uh so I think a motion to approve the agenda as presented. >> Moved. >> Second. >> All right. It's been moved by Council Member Grath, seconded by Council Member Strong. Uh discussion on the motion. Uh hearing none. All those in favor of approving the agenda as presented signify by saying I. >> I opposed. That passes unanimously. The agenda is approved. Uh that brings us then to our first opportunity for public comment this evening. I will note that by council rule, we do always provide opportunity for public comment on agenda items as they come forward. Uh but we also do want to provide at the start of each meeting an opportunity for members of the public to speak to items that are not on this evening's agenda, but may either be related to city business or of interest to people in the community. Uh we do ask that you uh start your comments with your name and your street or address. uh direct comments or questions to the council. We may not be able to uh provide an instantaneous answer. We may have to do some follow-up uh but we're certainly willing to do that. Uh and then also we have a three-minute time limit per speaker. With that, we'll recognize our first uh public comment speaker this evening. Welcome, >> Roger H. Jr. I live on Wagner Place, so I recently moved one house north and uh >> Julie noted >> and sometimes I stay at my nephew's house, which is also a block away in Roseville. [laughter] So, >> also noted. >> Anyway, I have two things that I would like you to consider discussing in the future. The first one is I see that the police department is changing the design on the sides of the squad cars. I really don't like it. I like the nice big clean Roseville on the side that you could identify the cars from quite a ways away that it's a Roseville car and I thought it had a really clean nicel looking design whereas now you got this really big badge with a little tiny Roseville underneath it which it makes it very difficult to know it's a Rosville car from a ways away plus the big blob that's on the side really draws your attention to that rather than the word Roseville. I just I I think you should sometime take a look at both side by side and see if maybe you should stop this change and go back to the original really nice clean looking Big Roseville. And then secondly, I understand it looked like according to the city website that the Hamlin Avenue project you knew at least by June 24th it wasn't going to happen because that's when you posted something on the website. But it took like nine days to open up the side streets. I don't know why it took so long, but I think you should look at your policy about when you close side streets on road projects because it's very inconvenient to have it closed for weeks when there's no work actually going on. Like say you're traveling east on C2 and you come to Hamlin and it's closed, but there's no work going on anywhere near there. So it doesn't make sense to close C2 because they aren't doing any work there. So you should really have some policy about when a side street is closed, how close work has to be to that rather than closing this big huge long road for no reason. Just like you closed all three entrances to the church at C and and Hamlin, which I saw no reason why that was closed. There was no nothing going on there for work. So anyway, I think you should talk about when side streets are closed and you know before any work gets there. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Is there anyone else here for general public comment this evening? >> Hello and welcome. And you may have to grab a third chair. It looks like >> you guys one. [laughter] >> I'm in charge. [laughter] >> I'm glad someone always good. Go ahead. >> Hello and welcome. Uh good evening. Uh first off, uh we're representatives from the Junth uh uh committee and we'd like to thank the city for the donations that they made and the help that you gave us. I mean, we had a really good Junth this year. I think we had over 500 people that showed up. Uh without your support, this would not have been able to be done. Uh, I also like to thank you, uh, Councilman Grath, and you, Mayor Row, for showing up, for you, uh, opening us up, and Wayne, thank you so much for coming to my table and shaking my hand. [laughter] U,, we also like to thank uh, all the departments that helped us. Like I said before, without your help, it would have been an impossible thing to do. This was our eighth year, and it just ran smooth, and it was great. and hopefully we'll see all of you next year. >> All right. >> Yeah. At Ji part of the planning committee really wanted to express our gratitude for the support from the city over the years uh building one community where everyone feels welcome uh and feel one community is the goal of this committee and over the year we have been getting there. Uh again, good to see the mayor there always um being part of the welcoming uh team and we really appreciate that. Commissioner, Commissioner, Council Member Gruff, thank you for being there. It was so good to see that uh the community is coming together around one aspect of blackness that um uh we are all proud to celebrate. So, thank you all. Thank you for the city, to the police department. It was good to see for example the police department being there with kids or color playing with the police community policing an aspect of uh uh one thing we're hoping to achieve. CS says do not touch the micro. So I know you're fine. [laughter] So good afternoon. My name is Keith Allen, president of Roseville and also a member of this committee. And as you heard uh from my fellow committee members and brothers that we are very excited on how Junth went this year and the partnership that we have here with the city. I've lived here for eight years and I've come from a Rondo community that was established by black community in St. Paw and it was always a great thing to have community and always know that I can go somewhere and be seen and see something that reminds me of me and feeling safe and this year was one of those years where other cities are now asking how do you all do that here in Roseville and it's great to be known one of the best parks in the city but also one of the greatest junth events. That's something for you all to be very proud of that you all help establish here and that we can continue to grow on. So, I just wanted to thank you you all and the staff of this uh city that helped do that. This committee didn't do it alone. Um yes, we're doing the work in the meetings, but we did not achieve that um kind of environment alone. And so, we hope that that you all will see this as a a great way to welcome people in the June as well and also this community. And so, thank you. >> Thank you. >> And a special message from uh um the CEO of the Black Chamber of Commerce. She could not make it tonight and she's stuck at the airport. So, she asked that I present her >> apologies to you guys. >> Well, thank you. I'm glad you mentioned that. I should ask uh Mr. Sanders to >> Yes. Uh just for the record, my name is Rick Sanders [laughter] and I'm a Roseville resident South McCarron Boulevard. >> Thank you. Thank you. And I'm glad you mentioned the the Black Chamber of Commerce. I think they speaking as a bit of an an observer, I thought they were a good partner this year and a nice uh transition in terms of uh who you're working with in terms of the planning committee and and the support that they provided. And I think it was an excellent connection and hopefully that's something that that everybody would like to continue and obviously we'll leave it to the committee and the chamber to figure those things out. But I just thought that went well and I I don't know if I should mention this or not, but uh council member Grath forgot to bring a hat to the event [laughter] and it was a sunny day. We had excellent weather, which I'd love to take credit for. Um, and he he was assisted in choosing an excellent hat by one of the vendors there, and Council Member Grath has been sporting that hat ever since [laughter] at all the events I've seen him at. >> I've [clears throat] seen that. [laughter] So, if you're in the market for a hat, and hopefully that vendor will be back next year, but that [laughter] that is the place to go. >> A good saleserson, >> maybe a picture >> and excellent taste as well. >> Yeah. So, no, thank you all for all the work that you do and all the volunteers do to put on that event and and I think it, as you noted, it just keeps getting better every year. >> And wanted to say thank you to Noel and uh uh Devonte for their participation and help. >> For sure. For sure. >> Oh, and for the record, I was in charge of weather. [laughter] >> Exactly. All right. Thanks, Rick. >> Is there anyone else from the general public for general public comment this evening? All right. Doesn't appear to be the case. Uh then we'll proceed with our agenda. Uh next on our agenda, we have uh recognitions and donations. Uh and we have a proclamation uh that we do every year uh in uh support of our local Golden Kowanas uh folks. Um and I think it probably is appropriate if uh the representatives of Golden K want to maybe come up and have a seat at the table. Um, usually we uh give them an opportunity to introduce themselves and their organization and some of the work they do uh prior to uh the proclamation uh and then also uh a little follow-up activity that they're all fully prepared for this evening. Hello and welcome. >> Thank you. >> My name is Jim House and I've been a longtime resident of Roseville and uh enjoy being a part of it. The uh Northeast Golden K is uh made up of uh suburban active but retired professionals mostly and uh our major role is in support of community. We meet uh weekly on Tuesday at the John Rose Center and uh annually we distribute funds to a number of of charities mostly focused toward children. Uh Northeast Family uh youth services, community partners for youth, kids in need, Every Meal, Keystone, Railreeder, uh Kuanas International Children's Fund, and more. and do a lot of volunteer work at uh uh bridging and uh the other community activities that uh some of the more active and physically able people are able to do. [clears throat] Um but we have enjoyed our fundraising activity is uh soliciting from local businesses and professionals contributions to our mission. A and uh in addition to these volunteer activities focused on children, we present uh this year five,500 uh dollar scholarships for uh graduates at Roseville High School, uh Fairview Alternative School, Mounds View, Irondale, White Bear Lake. So, uh, we've had some, uh, additional extension, uh, into other parts of the of the community and, uh, the contributions to the community since, uh, in the last 15 years have exceeded $500,000, uh, from from many sources. So, we really appreciate the opportunity to to present to you and we've enjoyed your support and encouragement in in previous years and and uh we'll continue our program with box of peanuts distributed uh to donors as a reward for their thoughtfulness that they can hand out to their customers. All right. >> I'm Max the Long, co-chair of the of this year's peanut campaign, and we have uh Nancy Height, who is also on the committee here with us tonight. So, we've opened up our box of penises, peanuts, and we'll uh bring around up. >> All right. So, everybody in the audience, get ready to uh to help support the Kuanas if you're willing and able this evening. It's it's a low pressure uh sales tactic, [laughter] not sales, but solicitation tactic. Um if it's all right, then I will go ahead and read the proclamation and then a council motion and and hopefully a supportive vote will be in order and then we'll give you a copy of the uh proclamation as well as we always do. Uh so with that, the proclamation reads as follows. Whereas the Northeast Metro Golden Kuanas Club, headquartered in Roseville, is an organization dedicated to improving the lives of children and young people. And whereas the Golden K peanut campaign provides businesses, professional entities, and individuals the opportunity to help support community initiatives focused on children and youth and food insecurity. And whereas in order to help finance its many and varied programs, the Northeast Metro Golden Kowanas Club has requested today be designated as a kickoff for its annual peanut campaign fundraiser. Now therefore be resolved that the city of Roseville designates Monday July 6th 2026 as Rollersville Golden Kuanas Peanut Day. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. It's moved by Council Member Schwarter. Seconded by Council Member Grath. Uh discussion on the motion. >> I look forward to this every year, so it makes my donation easy. [laughter] So thank you for being here. >> Thanks for all the work you do. It's it's very greatly appreciated. I work a lot with NYFS and I know you've been a great supporter for years and >> the young people in the community appreciate it. >> And I seem to recall that that one of the activities uh that some of the members are involved with is also some tutoring in the schools if I'm not. >> Yes. I I failed to mention the tutoring in in two different schools, math and science and reading. And so it's it's been another volunteer role. >> Yeah. No, very much appreciated as well. >> Very much so. >> All right. Well, we probably should vote on the motion here. So, we've got the motion before us to adopt this proclamation. Uh, all those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. >> That passes unanimously. That proclamation is adopted. Uh, and we'll just pause for a moment uh for some peanut distribution and I'll give you your copy of the proclamation. >> Thank you so much. Would you like some peanuts? >> Uh, sure. Thank you. weeks. >> Thank you. >> I'll carry the >> Thank you. >> He wants the money. >> Yeah, [laughter] >> he wants the money. Thank you. >> Can you get it? >> All right. Okay. >> You're welcome. >> Is that dinner? [laughter] >> Oh my god. I contributed a part for you. >> You you contributed enough for me. [laughter] >> There you go. >> Maybe you can take that one to Jen. >> We should probably apologize in advance to the folks here and watching at home for all the crinkling sounds that you're going to hear [laughter] throughout the rest of the meeting >> and the munching. >> Yeah, exactly. We'll try to be as polite about our of our snacking as we can here. [laughter] >> All right. Uh with that then we'll uh we'll let that activity continue while we uh look to uh proceed with our agenda. Uh next under business items we have two items uh this evening. The first is item 7A which is to consider uh the uh draft I believe this is the final draft of the climate equity action plan. We have our sustainability specialist Noel Bachan uh with us this evening as well as a representative of our consultant uh to bring this back before the council. Uh, we had a preview. I believe it was in April. Yes. And now we're back, I believe, for the final draft. If I >> This is the final draft. Yes. >> All right. >> Well, thank you, Miss B. >> Thank you, council members. I'm so proud and excited to bring the final draft of this plan to you. Uh, we have been working on this plan for the past 10 months. >> Closer to you. >> It says do not touch. >> They said don't touch it. >> They probably just haven't adjusted it yet. >> Is this a little better? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, anyway, as I mentioned, we we've been working on this plan for the past 10 months or so. But really, this plan has been is the culmination of years of work at the city long before I even started here. There's been a lot of commitment to sustainability and climate work starting even from as early as the 2030 comprehensive plan, possibly earlier. So, um, I'm very, very pleased to bring it to the council today and just wanted to thank our consultant Ted Redmond for his work on the plan as well as our climate justice advisory group. We've got a couple members in the audience here today and also the members of Resilient Roseville who have been committed to climate work for years in the city as well and so I owe a lot of the work to them as well. So wanted to put some thank yous out there before we get started. But then oh I should pull up the presentation. I think that would probably be helpful too. So excited I couldn't bring it up. >> Thank you. Wonderful. So, uh, thank you very much for letting me be here tonight. I'm Ted Redmond with Pale Blue Dawn. And, uh, so we were here, uh, I think it was almost three months ago. I think it was three months ago. >> And, uh, so what I thought I would do is just give you a brief, uh, presentation kind of updating you what has happened since then. And then clearly I'm happy to answer any questions or get into anything deeper as you may wish. Um so uh the uh plan the uh climate uh equity action plan uh does align with the uh strategic plan goals uh go specifically goal number three which is city infrastructure supports uh the sustainability goals of the city uh success indicator uh was called out as being the climate action plan is created completed and implemented. So that's uh part of what drives us to to be here. The process for uh the plan development was a four state uh four-phase process. Uh context where we did a lot of uh background research and baseline documentation. Community engagement which had a range of engagement opportunities uh that were uh implemented giving people different ways of interacting with the plan giving feedback in different ways. um a very collaborative uh indepth uh planning effort that involved both volunteers as well as city staff and uh staff from allied agencies. It was a very uh collaborative uh effort and then the final completion phase which was of course having the draft plan bringing it forward uh for input um and then refining based on that input. So the uh there the uh plan goals we have a a near-term uh goal for 2036 which is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 54% below um baseline levels by 2036 and a long-term goal uh of reaching net zero emissions by 2050. Those goals both are in alignment with the uh state of Minnesota goals. the metropolitan uh council goals and Ramsey County goals. So, we're all kind of aiming in the same general direction, which is good to to know. Uh the plan uh framework has six uh sectors uh that uh focus on climate resilience and uh climate mitigation or reduction of GHG emissions and equity considerations are sort of baked within all of those sectors um as the goals and actions were uh developed. So with that uh as we started off saying that we were last in front of you on uh the 6th of April. Uh since that time uh there was a community input workshop in May. Uh we presented to the PWT commission uh in June for their review and input. Uh there was also a detailed uh review period for uh staff and uh for planning team members. They uh provided a lot of really great in-depth uh review commentary. And there was also a public uh uh review and input available through uh June 8th. Um and so out of all of uh and and for the public input, I'll just sort of highlight uh that uh we were able to track numbers of hits. We didn't track individuals, so we don't know who who who that is. We're not tracking uh too deeply, but we knew how many people were visiting the web pages uh so we could get a sense of traffic. Uh the uh projects uh uh and the plans web pages had over uh 400 uh total visitors uh during the public review period and we received a total of 23 um uh online reviews. Uh so we would have enjoyed receiving more reviews but we do know that it was being viewed that people were actually looking at it. So uh that's that's successful in itself. Uh in terms of the uh review comments uh received uh when we look at all the responses uh 53% were uh agreeing completely about 26% were agreeing mostly somewhat uh 6% were neither agreeing nor disagreeing and then uh there was 7% each uh that were disagreeing mostly somewhat or disagreeing completely. So just to give a sense of the overall tenor of uh the review considerations >> that's across all responses to all of the areas. >> Exactly. Yes. >> I mean is that of the 23 people correct >> or so that if you go back to that slide so what that's showing is that that's 12 people agreeing or agreeing completely. >> No not ne not necessarily that's a good question. So it is across all responses and because there are multiple sections in the plan, somebody might in this section disagree on uh >> an action >> on a goal >> uh and then in this uh section they may agree on a goal. >> So it isn't necessarily people but uh responses to the goal questions. >> So some people might not have responded to everything but they might have added comments for specific items that they had specific. >> What was the number of people? 23 total responses total, >> I think. So, yeah. >> And probably of those 23, I would say 10 or 15 people. >> I can't remember the exact number off hand. It was a fairly small. >> Yeah. >> Thanks. I Percentages always are difficult, right? >> It is. Yeah. We uh always struggle with because because there are multiple ways of asking. I mean, they're they're looking at multiple sections. Uh we decided in this instance we just show the total in terms of the resp uh responses received not the people. >> Appreciate it. >> Yeah. >> Any other questions before we move on? >> So from those uh different review uh inputs uh there have been some revisions, some tweaks made to the plan. Uh the first is that we uh added a two-page sort of infographic if you will of planet uh planet at glance. Uh it's intended here to just sort of summarize the plan, provide a sense of how it was created, what the plan orientation is, plan goals uh and uh long-term emission reduction uh values. Um we also added uh uh a full action uh which was is focused on establishing or helping to support establishing uh ordinance guidance around data center sustainability. there were some comments and input uh around data center concerns if you will and so uh it's just an action that could suggest how the city may explore uh establishing some guidance uh on that topic. Um we also had a wide range of uh edit inputs and comments from uh staff and uh others. So some uh issues that might expect the missing period words that maybe are better uh better phrases those sorts of thing. uh so substantive in terms of helping the documenting be better but not changing the intent of what you may have already seen uh if that makes sense. Um so the next steps uh uh after uh plan adoption uh the staff will uh develop annual implementation plans uh and that is intended to then help identify annual priority uh actions outline needed resources uh whether it's staff or or funding or some other uh consideration. Uh identify grant or funding sources if needed and recommending projects and budgets as needed for council consideration. So the intent is that would kind of happen on a recurring basis so that uh these topics would continue continue to come forth uh for the council for continued guidance and and input. So with that I'm happy to answer any questions or get into anything further. >> All right. Uh thank you. Are there questions uh from the council for staff or the consultant? Council member Schroeder. >> Uh yes. Um, I know earlier we were emailing back and forth and you know, of course, unfortunately with the holiday weekend, it kind of cut short the amount of time we could talk about it and I know there was like one change about the wording about like the no mo. So, I know you said this was the final, but I assume any changes that we talk about tonight then like what like we had discussed earlier today that would be incorporated into this. >> Correct. And we still have we're finishing up some storytelling projects both with the community and also with Roseville High School students. And so some of those items will also be added into appendices and we're going hoping to create a landing page for everything as well where everything will live. So there are a few remaining items that will be added in before the plan document itself is finalized. So So if you see other minor changes as you go through it, please let us know and we're happy. >> Okay. So there's still time. >> I I thought I got caught all the no maze and [laughter] Oh yeah, >> multiples. Two staff members had changed a couple less mame things and so >> there's a lot [laughter] of pages here. So it's good that you have a lot of eyes on it. >> I apologize to any community members who printed it out. It's [laughter] >> And then I I did want to say I really um like to see the implementation page too. I love to see like um the impacts, you know, could the action place unintentional burdens on lowincome residents or communities of color? how can the potential impacts be reduced or avoided and and how their shared benefits. So, I'm really pleased to see that that's in there because sometimes when we have really good intentions, sometimes you kind of go, "Oh, wait a minute." And and how that affects things. Um, so that Thank you for having that in there. And with with that said, I there's one um sentence that um I saw in here that I thought might be um worthwhile to remove >> um on 25. This is under the um you're talking about the ED ready ordinance um for low um for um um affordable housing in here which I and you you say in here um let's see we you know lack home charging and face higher pollution and then it goes updating the EV ready ordinance can help close these gaps which I think is a good thing to have in there because that also corresponds with one of your action steps. But the next sentence when you say EV ready requirements are lowcost easy wins that futureproof affordable housing by requiring a EV ready space per unit and low power level two receptacles. I think that's too specific because I know we have a number of our um staff are going to be looking at the EV requirements and in in under underneath our action it talks about doing that. And so I think I'd rather not have a solution that specific in here and just say yes, we need to make sure and look that it's the right way to go. So I would suggest we take that sentence out. >> I think that's fine. I'm actually I've been very closely involved in that. I was at the planning commission last week to discuss our EV ordinance and um really what came out of that research and discussion was the state building requirements are going to be changing and they're going to be introducing electric vehicle charging requirements for new developments. Yes. And so that's really going to nullify our existing ordinance. We're exploring ways to kind of make our ordinance a little bit more friendly to developers in the meantime. Um, but I think it's worthwhile to kind of take out that very specific and re-examine because we're not going to be able the state doesn't make any differential between residential versus non-residential anyways. And so >> Yes. Yeah. So that way that way it's I think it opens it up to more possibilities of solutions on that. >> Absolutely. >> And then so yeah, I do like that. And then when I was looking at the uh costs, of course I'm looking at the costs on the back, right? Um thank you for getting back to me because I had asked about some of the formulas and most of these costs are and and savings are for the residents of Roseville. Correct. This isn't this isn't for the city of Roseville. >> Exactly. Yeah. And it's they're estimated they're just trying to help provide sort of order of magnitude, but it is intended to be cumulative uh saving and cost on those uh categories that are spelled out. >> Absolutely. But and then the one piece we don't have in here which you talked about uh earlier was we don't have the cost of implementing our this plan. That's a separate piece from this. So this is more on showing what if this all goes through and this happens this is what it could look like. >> Correct. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. And this is includes everybody in Roseville, not just the city. I didn't want people to think that, oh, this is how much is the city is going to save. And I did, so I didn't want people to have the wrong impression of that piece. >> Exactly. Yeah. >> So, yeah, >> because I know these numbers are quite complicated and so to be able to dig through it, it I just I wanted to just clarify that. So, um, yeah, otherwise I think, yeah, you a lot of work in this and and it's like I I really wish we would have had a few more people respond to it. I know it's hard to get input, but you know, we have to work with what what we have. Correct. So, >> and we did I mean, we had three community meetings throughout the the duration of the plan development as well. So we did have people coming in to comment on first the goals specifically and then the actions that we drafted to meet those goals and then we also did a third prioritization exercise with the community to learn which actions would you like to see the community focus the city focus on most and so that's part of the implementation matrix that I included in the packet that kind of helps give us some of those priority but yes it's we the the rule with community engagement more is always better >> it's it's always hard and then I'm I'm pleased is that because I know with our um comprehensive plan coming up that this is a requirement and it's very nice to get ahead of that game and that we've actually aren't going to try to quickly put it together, you know, at that point. So, it's good to start it out earlier and I know this has taken a lot of um time and effort. So, thank you. >> Okay, that's it. >> Right. Other comments or questions? Uh council member Bower. >> Sure. Uh we can I had a you can leave that slide up actually. >> Sure. I had a bunch. Um so you know looking at as you note the potential economic savings and as noted none of these numbers actually have implementation cost in them. So um I guess one comment is I'm not so sure about these numbers. For example um we can pick any one of these but we'll pick the first one that's up there. you note the VMT saved per year on that one and you say the average operating cars per mile for example that study that you picked that's 77 cents per mile that's actually fact if you looked into and dig into it that's mostly for things like um depreciation uh registration uh maintenance of the vehicle actually maintenance would be per mile a bunch of other things that are not actually uh you would have if just purely by owning the vehicle and keeping it in your garage if you actually do the math on this correctly, it's actually the average cost per mile is actually down to less than 20 cents or right around 20 cents. So, the economic savings on this is significantly less, which you may want to redo that math because then on your page, what is this? Page uh one of 15 on the document, you show the economic savings of that as being like $182 million. It significantly changes those numbers. There was a lot of those miscalculations that I saw in this document. And so you may want to redo that because I >> Yeah, >> because at the end of the day doing this and and I guess that brings up my next question is you list I think 135 different things here but none of them have cost or implementation costs or how much it would cost to do this. For example, you're talking about EV charging at uh apartments or low affordable housing. Those are quite expensive when you think about the number of kilowatts or the number of amps you now need to pull, especially in a multif family if they're all charging at the same time as an apartment complex. It's an insane amount of service to be delivered to there. It's a challenge too because the the numbers that Ted put together for this cost savings is is kind of historical data versus if we were looking to adding something like EV charging to a site, the cost to the charging can vary dramatically based on what kind of, you know, transformers are already on site or if Excel needs to add additional transformers. So things like those costs kind of are going to be have to be brought up as on a case- by case basis as we move into implementation. It's just very difficult to project what each and every one of these 100 plus actions is going to cost. >> But then how do we prioritize which ones to do if I don't know what the costs are? I was really hoping with this that I would at least get some ideas of of cost and see what's reasonable. Some of these are going to be, >> you know, significant costs, right? And I don't know, >> I have a guess based on conversations and phone calls I get about residents and what their property taxes are, the appetite for that. And I know I asked at the April 6th meeting that hey did you ask like how much people are willing to have their property taxes go up to implement this and that was >> some of these you know may be more cost intensive to implement than others. Some of them are merely education programs that really cost only staff time volunteers to work out. So it's but the implementation with a prioritization and I'll I'll let you go in a second. Um, you know, it was really important for me to get the feedback from the community where they really want to see the city move first and then we can kind of look at those high priority items and say, okay, which of these are financially feasible for us in the next couple of years? You know, is there a grant program that we could apply to to offset those costs? So, I think because of just the volume of information and data in here, it's a little difficult to try to give a one single number for how much would it cost to implement all of this, >> but we'll have to do that eventually, right? per on a per action basis. Yes. >> And then also how do I figure out like I mean we can pick those lowcost ones but I'm guessing that's not going to achieve the goal that you had in the early part of the slide of 54% reduction in greenhouse gases. a combination will I mean that's why there's a combination of actions in there and so and part of the reason why uh we found the cities that tend to successfully implement will be looking at yearbyear what are the right actions to bring forward that year that is a combination of things both the vision that you're trying to create as well as hey what what other projects are we working on this year that then actions are a really good fit for uh and when you we think of them. That way there may be actions that uh the cost or challenge or difficulty of implementing them becomes lower because we're already doing a thing. Uh we're we're looking at ordinances this year. So, hey, this suggestion to review an ordinance is easy to do or it's the right timing for that or we've got an intern that's doing certain things and this action that we were thinking about now would be much easier to implement because of that. you know, these these kinds of operational uh questions that that help make sense about which actions to do in addition to seeking to achieve the the goal. So for that reason that's why the the intention and suggestion is that sort of annual sub plans these are the actions that we want to focus on this year come forward so that then whatever if there are costs associated with an action it can be based on both a timely dollar and also what is happening in the moment in terms of staff availability or you know is there support that's necessary because you know maybe right now we don't have the right staff contingent or whatever the issue might be for that specific action. >> And some of these also are multi- um government agency cooperative actions as well. So especially with transportation, we're talking about transit usage that really involves, you know, a lot of work on metrorransit side. There's only so much the city can really do as except for say, hey, metrotransit, we would love to see XYZ in the city. And so there's a lot of nuance to each of these actions that really does make it very difficult to forecast a long-term cost for each and every item. And some of these, you know, I can go to any one of these clean energy and efficient buildings. Let's look at um, you know, one of these is collaborate with partners to establish an incentive program for deep energy retrofits for low-income houses. That's not something that costs anything except for staff time for us to work on work with different agencies that work. >> You note incentive there, right? I'm assuming incentive is I mean short of just an education or knowing that the program exists. I'm sure there's some kind of fiscal >> there could be some funding involved but a lot of it is going to be research partnering with energy to pro promote household and participation in home energy squad. That's a program that our city is already promoting. So there's it's you know adoption and adopt an energy benchmarking ordinance. A lot of these are staff time intensive projects overall. >> Yeah. I just saw incentive a lot and I just saw a lot of dollar signs. >> Understood. >> There can be different types of incentives. >> Yes, that is true. Council member Strong. >> Um, yeah. First of all, I'd like to push back on uh Council Member Bowers um saying 77 cents a mile is very out of line and that it's 20 cents. The GAO current reimbursement rate is 72.5 cents and they do take all that information into um into consideration because um cars cost a lot of money and so you have to advertise that and you have to depreciate that over time and it just >> depreciation doesn't. >> You know what? I'm not talking to you. Well, >> actually, let's allow council member Strong to make her comments. >> Council member Strong, >> I wanted to say um I think this is a very um welllaid out plan. I appreciate all the actionable items. I found that it was very frustrating in the 2017 vulnerable populations report, which I really appreciated um having be there and have that as an option. um that there weren't a lot of actionable steps and that a lot of people didn't know it existed even now. And so I appreciate um that this has a public facing piece to it and that it does have actions. I think it is a lot like a path review or other things. When things come up, the priorities shift based on funding and other options. Um I know that I have been to at least several two to three meetings regarding this myself having missed the last one. I don't know how um >> it was a Monday night. >> Oh, [laughter] that's um but I'd say I I don't want to diminish the amount of time and um effort and the um swath wide swath of people that were involved in part of it. It this isn't 23 people making a recommendation. This has been over time hundreds of people with input. So maybe on one particular thing, but I think this is not just three people who have an agenda. This is a lot of people who care deeply about it and who have worked and many of whom are here because they still care very deeply about it and so I don't want to diminish their input or the um passion that they have about it. I did want to um ask a question about the revision based on input that's found on page 13 of the presentation the 3.6 um about the data centers. We've gotten a lot of questions about data centers and um I can you just speak to kind of what the intention or how that um what the goal or what that is about more fully. >> So when we received the public feedback of the draft review that was online during the month of May into June um that comment came up a couple of times from two separate commenters about data centers and concern both about energy usage and the impact on energy rates as well as water usage. I mean, there's a lot of information flying around right now about the impacts of data centers and especially seeing that, you know, the city of Minneapolis has recently had some small centers go in in their downtown area. Roseville has a larger industrial area, we're not necessarily immune to the fact that there's a possibility that that could come to our city. So, um, I agreed with the folks that brought up data centers and felt it would be we would be remiss if we did not include an a mention of data centers in the plan and start thinking about it a little bit because it seems like matter more a matter of when we may see this come to our city versus if and so I wanted to make sure that the staff and council were at least had it in the back of their heads and could start kind of thinking about it a little bit if this does come into play. >> Does that answer your question? >> Um, yeah. Uh, I guess I wanted to make sure that just because it got added, that doesn't check off the box. We already did it. We're good. We It's going to be a pretty invasive um process to make sure that we engage people. I'm assuming that most people are going to probably be against it, the ones who are vocal, but there's going to be people who are for it. And so there's going to and some of them may have very deep pockets. So, we would have to really be conscious of our decision and how we would put that out there so that we would make sure we got that. Um, and I think this is a great example of just kind of how these actions are playing out in general is that we really intend that when we decide to move forward with any of these actions or you know work with we're planning on having a staff implementation group to discuss all these things as we move into it as well as work with the climate justice advisory group in going forward to talk about implementation a couple times a year. Um depending on what types of projects we move forward with, there will always be a community engagement aspect. So that the you know just because it's in the plan now and the community had their time to comment and doesn't mean that this is their last opportunity that like it'll be brought back to the community so we can have a time to discuss this a little bit more in depth because as you can imagine when you come to these events and you know you see 80 plus actions it's a little hard to kind of wrap your head around all of these and I understand that and so we'll we'll take it at a stepbyst step basis to make sure our voices are heard. I just had one last comment. Um there was another comment about how much are people willing to have their taxes go up to have climate action plan and I I don't think we can continue to look at things like that. Um I think we have to say how much are people willing to reduce on road repairs and other things that only con um conform to a an autodriven society and that we make sure we are planning for the future and that our dollars are going to sustainability. And so it is not just about um we don't blink an eye when we look at the PMP money for the year to replace roads or to and it's not because we don't think they need to be done. We do. But it is a matter of priorities that we have to continue to take into consideration. And so I think how much are people willing to have their taxes go up? I think it's how much are we willing to to reook at things with a with a wider lens. And so thank you. >> Right. Other comments, questions. Council member Grath. >> Noel, you sort of stole my thunder with your last comment because I look at this a little differently. I look at it as a plan. It's a climate equity action plan. It's something we're looking at to put in place. It's a value we have as a community >> and we would like to move forward with this. I really like the detail in the end where you actually broke it down where individuals could choose things >> in their own lives >> to do like put up a rain bell or a rain garden or consider other things that would would affect the environment. So that was really effective. I think all the research was really good. >> I appreciate the people in the community who put uh information forward. I see this as something that as you said when something is coming up that's a project in in Roseville it could be added in if it's it could be added in cost effectively or uh when it's going to be done then we'll need to look more carefully at what the costs are to predict out to 2050 what the costs are going to be is I know we try to do that sometimes but it is not very effective the further out you go the less information it is it works and it doesn't it isn't very accurate so I think the plan is good and I will be supporting it. >> Thank you. Appreciate that. >> Um and I did want to just for my own benefit on the 77 cents per mile to go back to that as I understood it and I could be wrong. Uh so please correct me if I am. Um that the idea there was that we're reducing vehicle miles traveled and so fewer miles traveled equals lower cost theoretically. And so the whole cost per mile is what we're talking about eliminating. So that's how that's calculated. And if that's either wrong or oversimplified, you know, let me know. But that's how I understood that as I was looking at that. >> Um, the other thing I wanted to note too is that as far as implementation, I think we may we need to make sure as a city, well, first of all, stepping back, um, certainly a lot of what's in here is things that individuals and businesses and other entities in the community would have to do to have this impact. There's there is there's sort of a couple of different categories of what the city can do. Certainly we can change how we do our business, types of vehicles we purchase, uh how we use energy in our in our facilities, whether we add more solar and those sorts of things. Uh all those things certainly have costs uh andor savings and so you have to look at the balance of of of both of those. U then there are regulatory things where we can require certain aspects of uh new developments. Certainly the the the state building code that kind of helps because that lays the foundation but where other where we have other requirements I think that's where we need to be mindful of of impacts but at the same time you know if it is something that's in form of incentives I think about especially if it's incentives for implementation as it relates to for instance affordable housing developments you know we're still looking for ways to spend some of those uh affordable housing sales tax dollars that we are getting routinely from the state and that are timelmited and so if we don't come up with ways to use those and assuming and I don't know the facts for sure but I mean if that was something that could be a source of funding um it is something that we're getting already and we need to figure out how to use it and so it may have a a way to match with some of those types of incentive programs and so I don't want to say that everything's you know wonderful and that incentives don't cost money but we may have opportunities to look at the sources of the funding for those whether it be grants and those types of things or other entities as was mentioned and or even funds that we have coming in that we're trying to figure out how to use more appropriately. So, so just some feedback on that. But then the other piece of it uh like I was talking about is that a fair amount of this is going to be people doing things outside of what the city itself does. >> Um and so those certainly are going to have to be decisions that have to make sense for uh businesses and individuals and other entities in the city as well. And so, um, I think it's it's good to have this framework to provide sort of an overall idea of of these things both for this organization and what we can do and as well for the broader community because it's going to have to be everybody that that sort of makes makes all those decisions and takes those actions uh to make the difference that we need to make. Um, and so I think this is important to have. Um, as Council Member Gra said, I definitely look at this as a as a guideline and as a as a decision-making document. uh to help as we go forward. The one thing I wanted to say about implementation, especially annual plans, is that we really need to sync that with our budget process. >> Yes. >> So that we're not getting to the point of, you know, the city manager has recommended his budget in August, and oh, by the way, here's the, you know, in September, here's our plans for implementation next year on on that because that's that's not going to work. And and I'm sure staff is fully aware of that. But I I wanted to just kind of emphasize that for the benefit of the public as well is that we have to make sure that our process and our implementation whether it's our strategic plan in general or this specific plan uh that we are timing things with our budget decision-m because ultimately that's where those discussions about resources and and how we how we decide uh those uses of our of our limited resources because they are coming from the public uh you know how those decisions and discussions will be made. If I may add a comment, um, when we developed our equity criteria with the climate justice advisory group, um, TED gave us 15 12 or 15 different criteria that the group could choose from to measure all the different goals and actions against. And one of the criteria that they selected was actually how feasible is this for the city and other entities related to implement. So kind of feasibility and that funding piece is actually part of the something that the group did look at very closely. Um and as we move into implementation later this year where the group is not going to move us forward and say okay we're ready for our first multi-million dollar project. We understand that budget is already in flux and so and we're used to operating lean. Um we didn't have a city budget for sustainability for a very long time. Um up until this plan was developed. Really this is the first time we've had really dedicated funds. And so, uh, we're looking forward to seeing how we can, um, selectively use funding in a helpful way for the community. >> Great. Thank you. Um, other questions or comments from council members? I do also want to provide an opportunity for members of the public. Council member Bower, >> everyone follow. And so if we're thinking about like the affordability and sustainability, so say we have an affordability uh development that wants to go in and then we have for example some of these sustainabilities like the EV charging or um some like the gardens that you talked about those things those additional costs. >> How would you recommend balancing that? because you know those additional things are going to increase the cost of that development which the developer I'm assuming is going to have to recover those expenses which is going to generate increased rent which is kind of >> you know against the whole idea of affordability so >> and given the priorities of those looking for where to live uh on the scale of needs home housing is seems to be more important uh that but like I'm curious to know what how do you want us to do that or what would you use in that analysis >> I think that's a really great question and I think um having you know seen the proformas of some of these developments I understand how tight those margins really are and there were incentives in the past that some of those developers could take advantage of that would help. I know I believe the um Edison building was one that had was able to take advantage of a lot of incentives to get their solar carport involved and that kind of thing. Um, but I think it would take, you know, one thing that Janice mentioned when I was at the planning commission meeting last week was that really every development is a little bit different. And so I think one thing that the city's done a really great job at is working with developers to try to work with them to make sure that our requirements are still in alignment with the the needs of that development. And so I think the variance that recently went through with the the large medical company that's coming in on um the road near Latapatia is a great example where we you know they put forth some information about here's why we don't need as many chargers and so we're going to reduce that amount. And so in the case of an affordable housing development if adding electric vehicle chargers was cost prohibitive you know there might be other ways. A rain garden is a much less expensive installation relatively. Um, you know, there's also I would also recommend working with our car does multif family um, hub processes. The Edison is actually a hub for that program right now where they um, install the chargers and have a place for car share, electric vehicle car share vehicles to come back and forth from that location, which is another more affordable way to get into electric vehicles. Um, really that's that's an issue I've had with electric vehicles for a long time is that they're just very the barrier to entry is very high for a lot of folks and until the used market starts to really catch up, it's hard for people who are qualified for affordable housing to really get into an electric vehicle, much less maybe any vehicle. So, you know, what's the most appropriate solution at that time? And so, I think that's a a good example of how we would probably have to just massage, you know, whatever we're working with a little bit. >> You mentioned I did do the same thing. I went and looked at the used EV market and I the cheapest one I could find in the US was $20,000 and that was already approaching the warranty and looking at 80% EMI here in Ramsey County that's $72,000 and yeah that's where I started wondering like well if we put these ordinances in for these we're going to put you know these things in and we we didn't really solve the problem because they just can't access these EV vehicles. And so there were some things in this >> and if I may uh in terms of the how the plan is organized so uh there's kind of layers to the kinds of actions that are being suggested and uh for instance with EV uh one layer is to uh explore adopting and uh modifying EV ready uh requirements which at that point in time you're not necessarily you could uh depending on how the city actually ended up creating a revised ordinance it could say all sorts of things but typically an EV V ready ordinance is not saying put in chargers necessarily. Uh it's saying let's make sure that chargers can be installed readily and easily which does actually bring down the costs for putting in those uh chargers. Um it typically especially for new construction uh doesn't really add much cost because you're thinking about it in advance. So, it's it's as easy as making sure you've identified where you would put EVs and that you're uh piping conduit so that uh you can pull the wire uh when you do install very easily and that you've got some dedicated space for your panels etc. Same thing for solar ready uh where uh for a new construction uh solar ready would typically say as you're designing how the building is laid out are you thinking about solar and how does where would solar make sense for this building? How can you think about uh solar being an easy ad? Um, and how would you uh wire solar down to a panel? Do you have enough panel space, etc. >> Is the roof supportive? >> Exactly. And so doing that to an existing building can have cost to it, a fair bit of cost depending on what the existing building is. For new construction or an uh significant renovation, it usually is not very uh costly. There may be a little bit of panel cost, but it's usually not that much. It's more about thinking and planning which then drives down the cost in the future. And in the instance of an affordable housing, uh that actually I think ends up offering a potential benefit because if there's a grant that comes about uh maybe there I mean there's been rounds of state grants around solar for instance. Maybe there's some other sort of funding source as the mayor was pointing out that could actually offer partnership with an affordable housing owner to actually get installed, you know, EV stations, uh, EV chargers or solar or something like that or another entity that that says, "Hey, we can put EV chargers in your on your property uh, if you can give us a space." Well, if they've already got the space, that's easy. So in that instance, the actions that are in there can be supportive uh in the long run to help make sure that those affordable housing uh uh homes can become more and more affordable as those elements could become added in the future. Um so uh there are other actions that would try to help promote, encourage and incentivize etc. But by and large, the way the actions are designed is intended to help create a framework to support folks moving forward. >> Great. Council member Schroer. >> Um, yeah. And actually, and and you know, back to what I was talking about earlier, too, is I that the affordable housing thing was was one of my concerns that we weren't going to add additional costs to make it more burdensome for the renters then because then it's added to them. And that's why I was talking about making sure that you have in this implementation that the potential impacts that you know could cause unth thought you know some of these consequences and so I'd want to make sure that some of this sounds very black and white and so I think that's kind of a little bit where some of this is coming from that yes you know boom boom boom and I think that's that's what I when I first was I was having trouble with it but then when I got to this point where it says what? Well, yeah, this is what we said we were going to do. We still need to do an analysis of it. And does it makes really does it make sense to do it or not? Because I want I want to make sure that this isn't just so black and white that we blindly go ahead with something that could cause harm. And you know, you talk about low-income people and people of color and you have senior citizens and you have, you know, people with disability. I mean, there's all kinds of different groups that could be harmed by some of these things um if we're, you know, so that's why I want to make sure um as we're going forward, we have it in here and understand that um this will not be cast in stone and that we will um think about not doing something or changing something at once we had an opportunity to look at it. So I think that's really important for me because again I don't want any any harm to come from people for people that we're not thinking about and we and today we don't know >> and so as we walk you know as we go into this because we're talking you know you know some of this plan we're talking to 2050 even and so some of that things can change dramatically then. So, I just want to make sure that that is an understanding that it's not just it's it's a guideline and it's something we're trying to strive for, but it's not in concrete. >> Correct. I mean, as we've mentioned, the electric vehicle ordinance landscape, it has already changed a little bit since this was drafted. Um the intent with putting the climate justice advisory group together was specifically to make sure that nobody we weren't actively harming any specific groups through these actions. And that was some of the work that they did reviewing every single action, every single goal to make sure that it was aligned with centering equity and making sure vulnerable groups are going to be hit harder by rising utility rates, you know, hot summers and things like that. Um aren't going to be overly burdened. And so, you know, and as Mayor Ro mentioned, it is a guideline. We we plan to use this as, you know, a road map, but we can take a turn off somewhere else if we need to based on changing technology, based on changing incentives, based on changing intents of the residents as well, what people would like to see us do. >> Great. because we're strong. >> I'd just like to point out that there's a little seems like it'd be a little false narrative on the affordable housing, deeply affordable housing is 30% AMI and according to the study that I found from 2023, 72% of that is constructed by nonprofits. um most builders can't get into. We've talked about this before with um community direct uh community development director or gunlock that um there it's not a it's not a place that private equity funds are going to step in and look for to make money. And so if someone qualifies at 30% AMI, they're not going to bear the burden. It's the developer who's going to. And so um and they're going to find a different source. And I think we're saying that we're hoping to find grants and other things like that. But I just want to make sure this isn't a capitalist venture. We're looking at um anyone who would be willing to step in and we've been looking since I've been on council and no one has offered to come in at 30% AMI because of the costs no matter who they are. >> Um generally they have to be mixed um mixed ratio um and even that they have to be a really solid model um with supportive housing services having worked in this field. But I just think it's really important to know that 72% of the developers um in this study from a couple years ago were nonprofits and that we're not putting that burden onto those folks at least in this regard. That it's not going to change how much of their um their income has to go toward housing. It's going to come about how it's going to work as an overall project. And I think it would be silly to get stuck on that piece because we're hoping that over time we're going to find we'd have no idea what incentives might be in the future. Uh changes in leadership at the state or federal levels could really impact how we see things and how we review climate change and other things. And I think we just I think we take it at face value. We do our very best not knowing exactly what it's going to cost, but knowing that something will change. No matter what it is, something will change. and that uh hopefully we'll be ready for it. >> I'll be the first person to say if there if something that we are requiring is making introducing affordable housing to this community cost prohibitive, I'm the first person to say let's get get rid of it. I would rather see people housed and be able to afford their housing versus, you know, splitting hairs over we want solar panels or we want, you know, XYZ, excluding, you know, maybe skimping on things like insulation and, you know, safety and that sort of thing. Well, and I think that's an important thing to note is that no affordable housing at any AMI level is going to be built unless it works financially, whether it's a for-profit developer, a nonprofit developer, or anybody. And so the whole point is is that if a requirement is not going to make a project work, the key is finding financial ways that if a requirement is important because certainly it can't be denied that improving uh how much greenhouse gas emissions are happening in our community has a benefit to everybody in the community or who potentially could live in the community. Uh and so that that's a very good thing to sort of has have as the top level goal. And then it's just a function of how we figure out ways to accomplish that. And we definitely there's not going to be a project built that doesn't work financially. And if if if there's a requirement to have a certain, you know, environmental sustainability aspect and it's not supported financially through through uh assistance to the project, the project is not going to happen. And so it definitely as council member Stron said it won't be passed along to renters because the project won't be built in the first place. Um but I think one of the challenges is is that even market rate housing is is cost challenged. And so sometimes incentives may have to be applicable to market rate housing or other types of de developments as well. And so that's a broader discussion outside of this specific city and and what we can do. Uh but certainly it's on the table uh for all the decision makers that are involved in that sort of thing. Um I do want to provide an opportunity for members of the public to speak to this as well. So maybe Miss Bach and uh and Mr. uh Renman if you can have a seat for a moment and and hopefully we won't make you sit down and then find out nobody wants to speak [laughter] but it's happened before. Um so we'll open it up for uh anyone from the public who wishes to weigh in on this final draft of the um climate equity action plan uh this evening that we're considering. Uh once again, we just ask that you have a seat at the table in front of one of the microphones. Uh state your name and street or address for the record. Uh and we have a threeminut time limit, which I will try to enforce gently but generously or vice versa. >> Well, I'm Donna Peterson and you may have noticed that I actually did submit comments for all of you on a couple of different topics. And it's a little hard for me to be here and hear a lot of concerns, negative concerns, I guess, because I worked for 20 years in a program at the University of Minnesota where our our goal was helping companies reduce waste, reduce emissions, and uh we saw all of the benefits. And I I still remember a printer that came to me one time and he said, "I can't I can't be a great printer because if I if it cost me if I save money, then how can I say I basically he was doing environmental good environmental stuff, he was also saving money, but he didn't think because of that that he should be could be a great printer. So, I think uh what I'm thinking is the city needs 10 interns to go out one each a summer and have specific projects and you might be amazing to see what could happen. >> Thank you. Thanks for your kindness. >> Are there members of the public who wish to speak to this? >> Hi there. I'm Allison Jensen. >> Well, welcome. >> I live on Eldridge. I'm also a member of the planning commission, but I'm not speaking in that uh role right now. I'm just speaking as a person who lives in Roseville. And I've been watching this climate equity project. Uh I know Noel, I'm on a small group. It's not incorporated or anything. Resilient Roseville. And our goals are to help Roseville meet the requirements of the future, which means addressing climate change every day. So I think this is a great touchstone the climate ac equity thing you know as we're talking today oh we're going to take out this sentence do that I'm an editor and writer by training yeah we can take out this sentence but if we keep the sense of what we're trying to do I think is really admirable >> thank you >> thank you for your comments is there anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to this item this evening all Right. If there's no one else, we'll go ahead and close the opportunity for public comment and thank people uh both for their participation this evening, but also for participation throughout the process. As was noted, we do have the the advisory group or groups that are participating and and certainly have been invaluable to this process. Um, so we've got the requested action this evening, I believe, if I can find my uh notation here, is to receive the presentation and adopt the climate equity action plan subject to any final nonsubstantive uh improvements that may still be uh made, including input this evening. Okay. Moved by Council Member >> Stron, second by Council Member Grath. Uh discussion on the motion. Council member Stron is the maker of the motion. >> I don't think anything further. Thank you so much for your work. >> Right, Council Member Grath is the seconder. >> I'm going to reiterate, I look at this as a plan. I've been on the council almost eight years now. Nothing goes forward without being touched again by this entire council. We're going to have further discussions over the years. Definitely next year, definitely the year after, before 2050 comes, there will be many discussions about this plan. This plan will be changed many times as technology changes, as funding changes, as grants come in from different levels from the federal government, from the state government. This is an intention that we have as a value for the city of Rosville and the residents here. We want to reduce these gas emissions so that we can improve our climate change. That's how I look at that this and that's why I'm supporting this fully. >> Other discussion of the motion, Council Member Sher. >> Um, yes. And I, you know, I I think everyone can get on the page about clean air and clean earth. And I mean, so I think that I think we want to continue to remember that. I think that's not at all the issue, you know, because I think it's important that we we you know, take care of our our planet. Um, but a clarification, so we talked about a couple of changes tonight. So what so we're voting on the final but not necessarily the wording of this correct that you're going to incorporate some of the changes we talked about. >> I think some of the things that have been brought up this evening as well as through our conversation >> so I just wanted to clarify that that's part of the motion then >> right yes it is. >> Okay. >> That's correct as the maker and secondary. Yeah I thought I clarified that. >> Well I just wanted to double check. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. No problem. Uh council member Bower. >> Yeah I like your point about thinking of this as a guide. I think I don't know if I would go as far as a we call it a plan, but I think you know the goal that we we have for you know 2036 that's just not that far away. Uh, and I think a plan just needs to be a little bit more spec, you know, detailed, which I mean you agree with council member Grath that we'll get there. But, you know, if I think about this as a guide, I'm okay with that. As far as all my concerns about cost and whatnot, we have incentive throughout this. But if this is actually going to really work and continue on uh well beyond 2036 all the way to 2050, it needs to be done in such a way that um economically it makes sense. That'll make it the easiest to achieve this. It'll also be the best way for developers, residents, and others to actually implement these things. And so when thinking about as dollar in terms of dollar dollars, that's my reasoning for that, you know, to ensure success of this, not just now, but in the future. And if we can make the dollar side of it work, then it just works so much easier than trying to constantly figure out how to source it and come up with those funds year after year. other discussion. Um and I did want to note too if I remember uh correctly in in the plan uh there is that uh plan impacts uh section which talks about something like 40% of the goal by 2036 if I'm not mistaken either has already been achieved based on policies or already has been projected to be achieved by policies that are in place and or the business as usual and so I want to make sure that I wasn't uh >> wasn't misreading that or or trying to sell things in an incorrect way. So, um, but I I did want to point that out that we have we have a lot of of a tailwind behind us, if you will, at least, especially for the 2036 goals. I I don't think there's any question that we have a fair amount of work to do to get to the 2050 goal. >> Uh, but, uh, as as has been referred to a number of times, this is a guide post, uh, a road map, a plan, whatever whatever [laughter] metaphor you'd like to use. But uh the the the the thing that goes with that is that you can never get to where you want to go if you don't point yourself in the right direction. And I think that that is that is what we as an organization as the city government for Roseville have been missing uh more broadly as a strategic plan which we you know took care of in our last couple years with a lot of you know foundational input from the community. This builds on that and helps point us in the right direction specifically in this area. And so I'm supportive of the motion. >> May I make one comment before? >> Certainly. >> Um I just wanted to say that I I remember when we had our first discussion about this plan. One thing I mentioned is that since we haven't had a plan, we've really been kind of picking and choosing projects opportunistically as they come up. And with this plan in place, we can really be very intentional and you know more selective about the type of work we try to do as and make sure that it's economically feasible. works with our city budget and so we're not kind of grasping at shiny objects where we can really move forward with a lot of intention and you know use our limited funding wisely and so I think I'm really excited to have all these different options of items we can explore and expand on and shift as needed. So thank you. >> All right, thank you. And with that then we have the motion before us to uh accept and adopt the final climate action climate equity action plan. uh as was noted subject to some final uh modifications as based on the discussions uh this evening and prior to this evening. Uh with that if there's no further discussion all those in favor uh signify by saying I >> I opposed. >> That passes unanimously and once again thanks to everyone. >> Uh now in relation to sustainability and environmental impacts we have a a related topic which is uh to consider the future of the Roseville Leaf Recycling Center. And as our uh public works director Jesse Fryhammer comes up to begin to be prepared for his presentation, I just note that this is an item that was before the council as well as the public works environmental transportation commission uh sort of last late summer and fall. Uh the council sort of delayed a decision at that point to provide an opportunity to get more information another sort of season of operation under our belts and and measure some impacts. And so I'll turn it over to Mr. Fryhammer to fill in the details uh that I have left out in that brief summary uh and bring the conversation back to the council for us this evening. >> Uh thank you mayor and council. Um as you mentioned we we did talk about this before. So I have a presentation. There's a lot of slides but I'm going to kind of just highlight more what we've kind of updated or changed uh and do little less focus on what we focused on last year I guess. So um so background as we mentioned so we did bring this to council um at the September 8th meeting last year. Um this was a proposal on staff after reviewing ways to save costs related to the city budget process. Um the main reasons at that time identified were it was a cost savings. It was a duplicative service to Ramsey County. Um and with and with some of the existing site issues. Uh this was referred to the public works commission. Um at the September 30th meeting uh received additional public comment. Um then at the October 13th meeting, council postponed the decision to get more information. Uh we did collect more information, presented that to the public works commission uh at the June meeting um and they recommended uh closing the lease site on a four four to three vote and then obviously we're here tonight for the vote. So um little bit of background, the site was built around 1971. Um it was originally used for maintenance only and then part of the leaf pickup program in the 1980s. Um it is supposed to be for residents only. Um, it used to be staffed by police, but it no longer has been that for over 10 years, probably at least 15. Um, and I just want to mention, so this site was created before Ramsey County did it. Ram, from what our records, talking to the county, it sounds like they've been in the the the uh yard waste business for about over just over 30 years. So, this has been uh ongoing in Roseville for uh almost 50. Um, current operation, we are only a leaf site. We don't collect yard waste. So, that's really the big differentiation. And then we the the yard gates are really open for vehicles in the spring and fall. There is open uh all year round. Um the main the big the one thing we offer that Bramsey County doesn't we can we do deliver compost to residents for a fee. We did increase that this year from $50 to 75 to help recuperate cost a little more of the costs. Um but as you can see we've only had 46 deliveries to date which is the majority of them are in the spring. So it's it's not a super high service. um operation. We collect between 30 and 35,000 years annually. Historically, that was about 25,000 yards, but um we consider the site maxed out at about 30. Um but we uh I'll get into it later, but we did collect about 35,000 and then we we turn that into compost throughout the year um with about make about 17 rows or about 5,000 yards of compost that residents pick up uh pretty continuously throughout the year. So, just some observations we made from the last fall. Um, so we we did a lot more documentation of just day-to-day activities. Um, had a did kind of a log as well as set set cameras up a few specific weekends. Um, so we opened the leaf site on October 13th. Um, the first couple weeks it was very very minimally used. We actually used that time to regrade the site and put a lot of uh actually effort into it because it was very hazardous to vehicles with uh um the poor soils underneath. So it was the first time we'd done that in about four or five years. um no the week of November 4th through 18th. That was the the peak season judging by the amount of cars and the work we put into that. Um and then we did have to close the site on November 23rd which was early for us. We usually try to close it um the la the end of the day Wednesday before Thanksgiving break. We actually had to close it Sunday night because of uh the capacity. So we like I said we think we're pretty confident we collected about 35,000 yards which staff is very confident that's the most ever. Um, and then just a couple of the observation from the cameras. So, we did set up a a camera to count. Um, and then we just had staff just try to judge if there were contractors. Usually, if it's a a tip up wagon, that's how we determine that. So, as you can see, it picked up. We did have a peak day on a Friday. Uh, or the peak weekend was the 13th through the 15th, and we had over 1,700 cars that week. Um, about 42 were contractors. I will note we didn't really do a study during the weekday of con of of vehicles. The site is used during the weekday as well. Um, obviously the weekends are more peak when people have off. Contractors more likely did stuff on the on the week weekdays, maybe a little bit on Saturday, but typically aren't on Sunday. Um, general observations from from the 25 collection. Um, highest use ever. The site use has continued to grow year after year. Um, we did close it three days early because of that. Um, we saw more activity on Tuesdays and Thursdays, which we are very confident because Ramsey County is closed Tuesdays and Thursdays. So, some of that's obviously Roseville residents, but we're also pretty confident uh some non-residents are doing that. Um, more contractor use, very confident we had more contractors year after year. Some of that is just hearing directly from contractors. Oh, yeah. I I heard from my buddy I can dump there. So, um, very confident that use has increased. Um, as I mentioned before, we just have a lot of site issues with that. The location isn't necessarily the greatest. Access isn't well necessarily well designed for with all the stacking on Dale Street. Um, we do get a lot of legal dumping. Um, certainly the non-resident and contractor use. >> Um, and then some water and noise complaints. And then there's some pictures of kind of the historic issues we've had. Um, then just other opportunities that the site could be used for. As I mentioned last year, we with uh Ramsey County no longer taking specifically um, uh, uh, wood material from cities, we used to be able to take it to them directly. we've incurred our costs go up because we now either have to dispose chip basically on site because we don't have a place to store it um or pay to haul it away. So if we actually had a a spot if we could use parties this site we could probably save some cost on our our leaf or vegetation management. Um certainly we do a lot of chipping right now but sometimes if you could put have a spot to store it and chip it later that makes it a little better. We don't have a lot of space in our current yard. Um but that would be one opportunity. Um especially if we had a large debris debris storm or something as well, it would give us more opportunity. Um other uses, emergency operation and temporary uses for like water breaks. We do have one site, but it's no guarantee that we have it because it's a Ramsey County site. And then certainly we could use it for some minor staging. Um other potential uses, it could be used for temporary storage during the Civic campus project um or expansion of the nature center. And then I just wanted to mention the organic dumpsters. Um, with all these proposals, we would still propose keeping them on site and just moving them outside the gates. Um, not proposing to move move them or get rid of them at this time. Um, and then just want to highlight we did find there was a report done in the it is a dated report. I'll I'll certainly acknowledge that, but there was a report back done in the 80s about the nature center. Um, had recommended closing the lease site with concerns of runoff and potential expansion for the nature center. We did it was more related to that. We we're pretty confident the um we we contain the runoff. So I some of the the concerns about that were have already kind of been mitigated or at least not as a big a concern, but certainly there is opportunities that that site could be used at least for different uses related to the nature center. Um cost of operation. Um [clears throat] this entire fund is basically funded out of the storm sewers uh fund. So all cost savings or cost increases would would go go against that fund. Um CIP cost as we mentioned last year. Our compost turner is definitely due for replacement. Uh it was we it's a 1997 that we bought and um we put a lot of money into it to maintain it and we will have to continue to keep doing that. So there is funds in the 2027 CIP to replace that equipment but certainly we want to make if it's it makes the timing to to have this discussion if we don't have to make that investment we can save some money there. Um, but in terms of equipment and fuel, we spend about uh 775 uh uh hours of equipment use on it. Um, and that equates to about 61,000 of equipment use. And and then we have about $8,700 in out-of- pocket fuel costs. And then staff, there's about 720 hours of staff, which is about u 18 uh weeks for a staff person. And certainly if we closed this site or or changed the operations at it, it would provide us to to do other opportunities with that staff either doing more most likely doing more uh storm sewer uh maintenance work. Um alternatives to the lease site certainly it's a duplicative service to Ramsey County. That's the big key that we started last year when we we looked at the budget. Um Ramsey County provides this as well as other yard waist sites to all residents in Ramsey County. Roseville is the only um city in Ramsey County to have basically a duplicative service and have that additional option for lo uh leaves leak lo locally. Um residents can also get compost at the site. The only service the Ramsey County does not offer is compost delivery. Um their site is open year round. They do have some modification hours unlike ours being open all the time with the walk-in gate. They do shut their their doors so it isn't as convenient in that sense. um they're clos during peak season or the summer season. Um they're closed on holidays and every Tuesdays and Thursdays and then their hours are are a little bit shorter. So there is not near as many hours certainly, but um that's also how why they have some of the controls in place. Um and then certainly curbside pickup is an option for residents. All all vendors in Roseville are required to offer that service. Certainly that is a pay as you go service. So that is an additional cost to residents, but it is an option that's available. Um, as I mentioned last year, um, proximity. So, um, we do want to acknowledge certainly the Roseville site is the closest for about 76% of residents. So, if if the site is closed, residents for sure if they're driving their leaves are going to be impacted on that. But, um, the distance isn't like uh, astronomical. Your average trip would go from 1.33 miles to 2.79. Um, some residents already in Roseville, it's already closer to go to the Arn Hill site if you're on the north side of Roseville. Um, so we did want to lay out a few new options. Um we've had some discussions with uh Ramsey County as well as just other agencies or other ideas other cities have done in the past. So um option A we're proposing is basically just operate the site as we currently have. Um staff would highly recommend against this option due to all the issues. If we didn't went with this option, nothing changes. It probably only gets worse. Um option B is modify operations. Um basically what that is is limit hours uh add staffing to the site and additional security more or less operated how Ramsey County operates their sites. Um, option C is to collect leaves but compost offsite. Um, we'd also, similar to option B, limit hours, add staffing, additional security, but then we'd basically transfer leaves offsite for a third uh for third party composting. Um, option D is close the leaf site as last year, like similar to what last year we would and we would recommend closure at the end of the 2026 leaf collection season. And then option E is to make a request to Ramsey County to operate the site. I'll get into a little more details on each of them. Um, like I said, option A, no changes. Uh, kind of pros and cons. Uh, pretty self-explanatory. Residents can use it exactly how they did today. Cons, we still have a lot of the existing same site issues. >> So, options B and C, there are similar in a lot of ways because we'd have to do some investments upfront as well as continue investments in terms of temporary staffing. So, um, security, uh, basically we'd have to do closure of the lock the the the gates, the walk-in gates. So, we don't do that. So basically modifications to site security so people can't get behind the fence so we can truly have a controlled site um and certainly add cameras for illegal dumping. So we we anticipate that would be about a onetime cost of about $25,000 with some annual costs for camera maintenance about 2,000. Um the big cost would be adding seasonal staff. Um this would really be to to limit non-resident use but also commercial vehicle use. Um certainly the with the way the county does that that works well. They do not allow dump trailers or obviously if you're marked they they used to be they made it very clear it's just they have they have a cut and dry rule. It eliminates all the problems. That's why we know they've come to us because we don't have that and they've the county knows that as well. They when they really started enforcing it that's when we saw it here because they used to be contractors used to be able to get away with it a little bit. Um but it would also really help eliminate other illegal materials being dropped. If you go to the county site, they will check and say, "Hey, what are you bringing here? If we only collected leaves be, hey, oh, you got a load of brush, you can't drop that off here." So, it controls a lot of things doing that, but it does cost money to have staff. So, um, we would propose reducing the hours to the site when it's open. We would mimic Ramy Ramsey counties during the peak season, but we would we're not proposing having availability throughout the season since we're only leaves. Most people tend to only do leaves in the fall and then some people do leave cleanup in the spring. We know some other people will do lees but in throughout the year and that's why the walk-in gates open but it's not very high. Um it didn't seem very cost effective to have staff monitor site with very minimal usage because we're not collecting grass like the county does. Um and then overall our our cost we estimate would be about $32,000 for that temporary staff. And we kind of listed out kind of assumptions on the hours that we'd have. Um the cost per hour we we did update that from the county. we I think they're they pay their uh attendants like between 20 and $27. So that the cost keeps going up to to hire that staff. So option B, um this is basically like I said, operate it like Ramsey County, limit the hours during peak season, uh staffing of the site, additional security. This would involve having to replace the compost equipment and with the with the 2027 budget. Um pros, residents can still drop leaves off. Um solves most the contractor issues. uh probably a little decrease in traffic because we have less contractors showing up to the site and maybe less non-residents. Um obviously the cons the site still we still have some of the other site issues. There's increased costs and a little bit of reduced hours to residents. So option C is very similar to option B other than we're not going to compost leaves on site. We're going to collect them in the the fall and then one time a year we'll we'll either haul them away or hire a vendor to haul them away and they'll compost offsite. So the big difference there is we don't have to we don't have to replace the compost equipment and then staff frees up some time and availability of the site for basically the summer season. We're not sending crew out there every 3 weeks to turn the leaves, move compost. Obviously some of the biggest cons there is we know a lot of the residents love Roseville compost that is no longer available. So, um, so that would go away. And then there is some cost cost savings, but there we do it there's not near as much cost savings as option B because we or there's more cost savings in option B. Um, but we still do have to pay pay to haul it away instead of manage it on site. And then there would be some increased truck hauling, but that would be probably like one or two days to get it out of there. So, I'd say that's relatively uh not very high. it'd be it'd be a pretty small impact. So, option D is uh close the site. Um obviously residents would then have to use Ramsey County for a free option or other alternative options. Um we would note we would have to replace the compost equipment. We could get rid of that. Um pros, it's the biggest cost savings. Uh we don't have any cost increases related to that. Uh save a lot of staff time which we could put to other use. Uh particularly storm water maintenance. It resolves all the site issues. Um and then uh certainly reduce vehicle traffic in that area. Obviously the biggest con is there no leaf disposal or compost availability or a availability to Roseville residents within Roseville. They'd have to use a Ramsey County site either in Ardin Hills or Maplewood or St. Paul. So option E um would be to request the county to manage the site. So, we did meet with Ramsey County uh staff who manages their yard waste to get an idea of what um how this could potentially work or what what what they could offer or what minimal we'd have to do. So, they mentioned they in order to get a final detailed version of if they could or couldn't do it. Um they're certainly been monitoring if we would close the site, they know if we close it, they will have to take up that slack. Um they currently manage um I can't remember if it's nine or 10 sites. So certainly if we requested them to offer it, they'd have to evaluate would is it better for them to manage one more site or do they increase their operations potentially at their other sites. So um but they did indicate they did give us a few kind of um minimums. They would operate very similar to the other sites. They don't operate all their sites with the exact same hours. So they we wouldn't be able to say well take over the Rollsville site, but you can only operate on these certain hours. They want they'd have they want to operate exactly like that. seemed like they would operate it similar to their other transfer type sites, smaller sites where they would collect the leaves and then they would haul them away differently for composting. They would bring back compost to the residents. They they they try to determine how much they have from the compost they make at their large site. Once it's there, they use it. It's gone. They don't replace it continually like Roseville does. So, it it would operate a little differently. Certainly, the hours would be um you wouldn't be able to pick it up outside the gate. it would all be inside the gate. Um, but the county would basically run the site just like their other operations. So, pros, obviously, it gives residents an option to run the site. I guess the big the big key is the county would not operate as a leaf site. They would operate it as a yard waste site. Not saying they would collect all yard leaf stuff, but they would collect leaves and grass. Grass being the big difference. Um, our site only operates really big for about 10 weeks a year. This would be all summer and fall if the county took it over. Um, so there would be obviously be a cost savings to the city. Um, staff would have extra our our staff time would be saved. So that would be a benefit to us. Um, it would potentially have some availability to use that site because they wouldn't need all the room for composting. They would just need a collection site. OB cons. The biggest one talk with uh community development staff. Um, it is a would be a zoning issue. The the overall parcel is actually one giant parcel. It's part of um the nature center. So, it's zoned parks and open space. It's currently a pre-existing non-conforming use. Um, but if the county's operations based on it, the way it's described with leaf collection and then all the hauling they would do, they would probably have to haul that site every two to three weeks. Um, that would be considered uh a change in use. So, that would have to go through a zoning uh a plan, which there's a process to do that, but that would have to that would that there'd be a whole process have to go through. Um the big the big cons would be increased vehicle traffic. It would be open to all Roseville. We wouldn't be able to restrict it to Roseville residents. It'd be all the counties. So if you're a Shore View resident, this is closer. You're going to come here. So we know we'd have increased use and certainly the grass drop off would drive everyone's use up. Most likely if you're driving your grass to Arn Hills right now, you're probably going to drive to Rose. The 76% that is closer will will bring it to Roseville. And then truck hauling. As I mentioned, the county closed their sites Tuesdays and Thursdays. that's they close them because that's the days they haul out of their sites. So, it wouldn't be probably every Tuesday and Thursday, but it would probably be some sort of rotation. Um, and then organics, I just wanted to mention we we're not proposing to um eliminate this location as organics. We'd probably just move it outside the gate under any of the options. Um, and then certainly that could change as as the organics program within the county. Hopefully, their system goes online. We keep hearing it's going to be coming shortly. So, um, anything we would do would be temporary, but we're not proposing to eliminate this as a current site. So, phase out plans just, um, and certainly this could be subject to change, but our proposal was if if option B, um, we would put, which is just the modifications operated similar to Ramsey County, we would propose doing that, putting those restrictions on in the spring of 2027, give us time to up, um, hire staff and get stuff in place for that. So, we would not do that this year. Option C, the no compost. Um, we would put that in uh 2027 and then um we would most likely um not make compost from the 2026 leaves. We try to get that out and get that message out. Um option D, if it was closed, we'd probably op collect the materials and then compost this last year and the compost would be get basically we'd make compost in 27 and that would be the last year we make compost, but we would not collect leaves the following fall. And then option E, we'd have to certainly discuss with Ramsey County. Um I I should mention if if the the way they they they currently have a similar agreement with uh Mounds View on one of theirs, that's like a joint powers agreement is how they operate on that. And most likely I'm they didn't really give us what their terms would be, but I'm assuming if they they would operate all the costs associated with if they had to put security things. So most likely they probably have at least some minimal term in there because they're not going to want to put a bunch of money in if that agreement goes away real shortly. So there probably at least some sort of minimal buy in. Um so just kind of a little bit about equity. Um we did do an equity inclusion toolkit. Um the um certainly some of the notings where it'd be a slight increase burden for users since they have to travel further. um cost savings related to um some of the changes on the site could uh see a reduction or at least lessen future rate on storm water. Um and then reducing this cost does align with the strategic plan goal of ensuring resources meet uh operational needs. And then just to try to highlight all the options and give a little bit of a a chart since I like charts and I know some of you do as well. Uh we did do a little bit of color coding just to highlight what maybe some of the pros and cons of one versus the other. So I won't go in detail but green being obviously generally more positive to red being more negative and we tried to look at it both from a city and a resident perspective on that. So I can certainly go into that more detail if uh council has questions. Otherwise as I mentioned uh the public works environment and transportation commission did recommend on a split vote to uh approve option D to close the leaf site at the end of the 2026 season. Um staff's recommendation is the same to approve closing of the op of option D to close the site. With that, um we're [clears throat] looking for action from the council, but consider approving one of the four one of the options for the future use of the leaf site. I can answer any questions the council may have. >> All right. Thank you for the presentation, the information uh and the work from last fall to now that uh that was involved in in getting us to this point. Um I did want to start the questions with just a couple of things um only because I think they may be helpful to the process if we have that clarification. So, one of the things I had asked you offline was uh if we looked at the reduced operations, uh like in option B for instance, and we still did the turning, did we need the full 500,000 to 900,000 turning equipment cost because we only have about 450 in our CIP plans? And I think your response was you thought that there potential for less expensive equipment. Yeah, we're pretty confident if we went with um added security so we collect less le we will collect more traditionally what our 25,000 is. We think we could figure out the site and work with a vendor to get more of a mid-grade option. So we we think that would be between 300 and $500,000. So um we do have in the 2027 budget um that we did update the CIP. So I think there's like $450,000 in that CIP for that. So, we do we don't think we're going to be that 900,000 which was one of the options which is more for um a site like what Ramsey County has or some of the other uh county agencies. We're we're certainly not a county level large site. We don't need that big a use. Um there's a lot of complications with our site, but we've talked with a couple other vendors and they're very confident we we could find something that would right right size our site without having to be spend the close to a million dollars. If I remember from the fall, the close to a million dollars was because there was the turning equipment, which was really more than we needed for our site, >> but then there was also the tractor that had to go with it because we don't have the equipment to to to pull it or whatever. Um, the other thing is, um, if I understand the Ramsey County process correctly, all of their collected materials generally go to a centralized composting location. I think it's up in White Bear Township or something like that. And that's their trucking. And then what they have available at their sites for compost is then trucked back from there for those limited opportunities to >> um yeah we did clarify that with them. So we did learn a little different than last year. So they use their their big light wiper lake site as um that's certainly their largest site a lot of people collect and that's probably more northern residents and that's site has all the uses. But all the compost they collect there they compost there. The compost they they collect there that gets distributed out to their smaller sites. Mhm. >> The smaller sites, um, like the one on Energy Park or basically all the really small sites, they they hire vendors to collect those, but those leaves are brought to their own internal sites. They do not bring them up to the Ramsey County >> to the vendors >> to the vendor site. They compost and they use what they want. Yes. So, they're all still getting composted. It just it doesn't that that material does not come back. The only material that the county brings back is from their White Bear site. So, that was a little nuance that we did learn from them. So, if we turned it to the county, they have two vendors that they use. The county said most likely they would put put this site under one of their two contracts and then um certainly they would haul it, but the compost would actually be coming from uh the White Bear Township site. >> And then for our option C, if we're only at a transfer site essentially, we'd be working with potentially one of those contractors or somebody else. >> Correct. Correct. It would be very similar to take we Exactly. We'd either work with I mean we'd probably they the county has two vendors. We would reach out to those two vendors, do an RFP to have them pay to haul um away and like I said they would compost on their site. So >> and is is there the potential that something could be brought back for Roseville res >> potentially but that cost is going to drive your cost up because >> there's then you got you got to truck back. So the county m I I believe the county does their own hauling of the the compost back to their sites. So I mean it's certainly an option. It just it will add cost to bring compost back. >> Okay. Yep. No, I wanted to understand that. >> Yeah. I think my understanding is the county has so much of it at their White Bear site, they they need to get rid of it and certainly they know there's demand for people wanting it, that's why they do it, but I I don't know exactly where the the their two vendors take their materials. So, got it. >> It could be cost prohibitive. Um, and then as far as uh a you said that this summer or sometime uh between last fall and now, we've had an opportunity to try to address some of the soil concerns and vehicles getting stuck. >> Yeah. Late last fall after the leaf site opened, but before it got busy, we did do a lot of soil. We basically filled the puddles in more or less. >> So, I mean, is that really a long-term solution or >> That's a short term. It is. We We It was overdue for corrections. We had last done major work either in 2019 or 2020. So, I mean, it's something that has to happen every 5 years, but um more or less we had two staff pretty much work for a week and uh put a bunch of gravel in. So, but it just the material just pumped. So, it's short of doing a major major improvement that's just the cost of operating that site. >> Sure. And is that sort of if we went forward, it would just be every so many years we're doing >> correct. We we'd probably be try to be more proactive um to not let it get as bad as it did, but um it there's no no way you're ever going to make that site perfect short of paving it. um that would be very cost prohibitive for that site. >> Is there I mean I I know there's sometimes that like as as part of uh building sites they'll do what they call search charging where they kind of pile a bunch of heavy material and theoretically that helps >> could be. I still think it would be very cost prohibitive knowing the conditions underneath that. >> Yeah, that's the the bottom line is >> we we used a bunch of when the last upgrade was I was right after they did the Dale they milled and overlaid Dale Streets. We got millings. You would never know that we ever used millings on that site. it just all gone. >> Yeah, [laughter] that's No, that's a good thing to note. Um, and then just on terms of the the the budget for the facility, I think uh the numbers in your presentation I think added up to um I hadn't done the addition. It was like 60 roughly 69,000 for equipment and fuel costs and 65,000 for personnel. So that's going to be >> Yeah. So our estimate was like 120. So I I'll just note the the um and then I know we one of the bench handouts it's more like 100,000. So the the real difference there is we in the budget um the budget part that doesn't show up is uh equipment costs. So we put anytime we use equipment we charge an equivalent dollar amount to it to kind of show that cost because it tries to account for some of that wear and tear on vehicles that you don't if you didn't do it you don't >> so it's an internal cost. >> It's kind of an internal cost. So yes it's not a true budgeted cost. So that's why the one slide we tried to show what was out of pocket or what's in the budget. So that's why there'll be a little bit of discrepancy is we are trying to account for that equipment cost. We don't try charge your a huge rate on it but we do try to account for long-term operation of that equipment because you the wear and tear makes it a lot less sellable or you're going to have to repair it 10 years from now a lot more. >> So it's but it's all within the storm water department basically or the the three departments that share equipment in a lot of cases. So, I did note that the 2026 budget, at least in terms of that bench handout, was down fairly significantly from prior years. And I just it caught my attention. I'm not sure if there was a an explanation you were prepared to provide for that, but I I did note that. So, that was that was interesting. >> I circled that too. >> Yeah. So in in uh 2025 budget the expenditures were about 152,000 and then for the 2026 budget uh just for the stormwater leaf site operation page uh the total budget expenditures were like 51,000 as far as what was budgeted under the city budget. So um like I said I don't expect that you have to have an explanation this evening especially since this was provided late today. Yeah. >> Um, so but it was just interesting. >> Um, I think that answered the questions. Oh, the the only other question was in terms of using the site for other purposes. What sort of like acreage or square footage is anticipated to be needed for things like the the typical um storage of of wood debris from typical operations andor sort of your waterline breaks and things like that? Is it like 100% of the site? Is it a quarter? Oh, we [clears throat] we would certainly never need the full site for any of those operations. Um, our general thought was um certainly if like the county took it over, we turned into a a leaf site, if we could just carve out like a third of the site for for that use was kind of our thought. And certainly there's more flexibility if you have more sight. It just gives more room for operations. But we certainly don't need the whole site for um like water breaks and whatnot. We're trying to we a lot of times now with our water breaks, we try to manage that in a lot shorter time frame. It's just we do need a spot. >> We do have a spot right now, but if that spot goes away, we still need a spot. >> Shell game, right? >> Um but we we don't try to let it accumulate like we maybe historically used to when we had a lot of room. Um but same thing, it's it's just more of a flexibility option. We we certainly know the Civic Campus project will give us more yard space, but it's still not a ton of yard space compared to other agencies. And if you get those weird storms or just kind of odds and ends where you just need more land to put stuff, it just gives you more flexibility. So, >> okay. And and if we did option B, for instance, with the 27,000 cubic yard, you couldn't do that. >> Correct. Option B, we're going to have to keep the site pretty much as as is. >> Okay. Um, and just one more thing I just thought of related to that. Do we still have any access to any uh space at the Kent Street? >> Yes. So, we have an in a kind of very informal agreement, but they've more or less carved out a basically a 100 by 100 foot space for us to put our water brakes spoils, which >> it's sizable, but we used to have probably like four acres that we used. So, it's definitely smaller. Like I said, we manage it a little differently. It works. We're very grateful to have what we have. Um we were originally working with it. Um St. Paul was St. Paul Regional Water was also going to do that but they they were a little concerned with some of the restrictions. So they end up doing their own site um that they had. But you know we we still do have >> 100 by 100 which works but um it's there's no guarantee if the county has a need for it in the future that will go away. >> It's the county's project. >> It's the county's project. Got it. But we are it's it's rentree to us. So it it is a great it is a great site. I'm not going to lie. >> Sure. Sure. Okay. No, I appreciate that information. I think that was my questions as far as I had them. Other council questions if there are any left? Council member Schroer. >> This has been quite the project. Um, and actually I have the same question of the mayor with the um budget number. So, that'd be great. If we can eventually get that answer, that would be helpful. Um, I have a few questions. uh you know and you in some of these like option C you're talking about matching the hours of Ramsey County um what's the basis for matching those hours and days? So, we think it'll be less confusing um overall and certainly if we if if if we operate on different hours, say we want to operate on, you know, Monday or close it Monday and Wednesday, then we think we're going to get more counter traffic to to come our way because they go to the county site and that will cause issues. So, it'd be nice to be more consistent. Certainly, we could set our own hours. It's our own site, but that was kind of our baseline that works for the county. We could certainly reduce the hours even more >> um to different hours. You know, we thought potentially you could also maybe eliminate the spring collection. >> It's not near as busy. So, I I didn't really mention that in my presentation. So, >> okay, >> the general spring observations were it's used, but it's nothing like the fall. There's nothing really we don't have the contractor dumping in the spring. People just come and go and drop off lees. So, um but it's nothing like the fall. um because more the people in the spring are the ones who have either didn't do their their yard work in the fall or they have so many leaves that fell um in the spring or they they're cleaning out their garden beds or what accumulated around the house. So um so certainly the hours could be changed but we're trying to mimic Ramsey County as much as possible because we think we mimic Ramsey County the site would will generally collect less if we open it up more. I was thinking less but that's >> but or less. I mean but yeah certainly the less we do the less we'll collect residents might go more to Ramsey County. So but that's why we just thought as a baseline we'd start with mimicking Ramsey County. >> All right. And then um I know years ago I believe the Rice Street community gardens used the compost and I think other community gardens use the compost too. Do you have an idea of >> So we roughly make about 25 deliveries at no cost to those agencies for compost. >> Okay. So, um I don't know where I I confirmed that with the street superintendent because I knew I was wondering if that question was asked, but yeah. So, we >> most of it is either to the Rice Street one or the Oasis. Um I don't know if there's a >> the Oasis the the community park by the there. That's the majority of them. Every once in a while, we'll do one to like the the high school or something like that, but on average it's about 25 a year. >> And we've been doing that for quite a few years. So, they >> I don't know when we started that, but ever since I've been here, we've been doing it. Actually, I I I believe the I believe I I remember seeing an email today actually. I think the rice street one start in about 2015. Okay. So, it's been at least 10 years since we >> So, yeah. So, that so that they they would be affected if we didn't have compost, which is I think is something to consider. And then if we did um close it or um use it for different u use, how would we stop this illegal dumping and other stuff that people, you know, you close it and they still dump stuff. So, how do you control that? So, our biggest issue is the we we have a walk-in gate right now. Um, and so you can basically pull anything in there. Um, certainly we would propose and the gate is set back right now. So, you can have a little bit of staging to move in, which isn't really adequate staging, but it's a little bit of staging as well, so you can load up stuff. If you can move that gate all the way out, it just the you basically only will have the the if we can put the the gate at the property line, that will greatly reduce it because there's less of a cove to go hide in. It's still a somewhat busy road. I'm not saying it's going to eliminate it, but it will greatly reduce the the chance. I mean, anytime you have a you can look like you're loading compost and then you could also be dropping off I mean, you can be legitimately picking up compost, but at the same time, you dropped off a mattress. Yeah. So there it just we're it I'm not going to say eliminate it, but it certainly lessen the likelihood. >> So okay, those are my questions. Thank you. >> Other questions from council members? >> Council member Grath. >> So on the um on the hours open, what I've heard is that people want us open on Tuesday and Thursday because of the convenience. If the other sites are closed, they want to be able to drop off stuff. So I I'm concerned about that. Uh, also if we have someone there at the gate to check, would they be able to like check spa IDs or something or at least >> that was so that's how the county traditionally has operated. So yes, we would require IDs. Um, we would probably have it staffed with two people at a time. We know people are not going to be happy. They get rejected. They made their trip all the way here and oh, you're a St. Paul resident. Nope, you have to you're not allowed to dump here. Or, oh, you brought leaves, you can't dump here. So, >> but then they learned that. But yes, that was and certainly the first year would be the worst year. Have no doubt about that because people would learn real quick. Oh, you know, contractor the first time he does it, they're not going to come back again theoretically. Um but yeah, it it would um IDs would be the best way to to track that. So the the county they they've backed I I delivered I go to one of the county sites. They don't ID near as often as they used to, but they used to the one I went to was right on the Anoka border. So they used to ID to make sure you were a Ramsey County resident, not a an Oka or Washington County resident. >> I go to the the one in Ardan Hills because that's more convenient to my house and they check your ID the first time you go through but then they recognize >> Y [laughter] don't anymore. But like I said, similar to how we'd operate similar to how we got to keep working could not [laughter] resist. But yes, I think that was well I I just think that that is an important point though because this is a a taxpayer funded site and I think if we're Roseville tax taxpayers are paying for it, we need to be uh >> or a storm water fee payer supported. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Council member Strong, >> I was wondering if we had considered would there be any advantage to closing the facility in the spring um or potentially reducing the cubic yards to 20 or 25 in a year. >> I mean we if if we went with like option you know B where we mimic the hours we could certainly the hours is completely up for I mean that could be really changed whatever. So yes, if we want to try to save more cost, you completely eliminate the spring. That could be an option where you only do a fall pickup. You will reduce the leaves some, but it's not we don't collect I don't know what our yardage we collect in the fall is, but it's or the spring. Yeah. But it's very small compared to most of it is collected in the fall. Probably 90 to 95% is collected in the fall. Would there be um a way to I mean would there be a situation or something that if we were able to reduce it to like 20 to 25,000 cubic yards, would that be able to get us into a smaller machine? Would that be able to have less than 17 rows so we're not losing equipment in the mud? >> We'd have to probably to go really small, we'd have to probably cut the volume over half. I don't know how we would do that. I mean, I think if if we put restrictions on, it kind of goes back to normal. Like I said, I think it'd be at the 25,000. I think to get so you could use the site for other options or to go really really small on equipment, you'd have to get the volume down to about 15,000 yards, which I just don't see that practical. >> And have you noticed um I know there was some concern in the last few years about jumping worms and other things. Have you seen do you think that has contributed to the cut in the amount of um compost deliveries you've seen or >> um that I don't know. I mean it's compost would heed up a little bit but um that I I don't know. I don't know if people wanted it less. Like I said we've slowly increased the cost because our cost is not accounted for right now. else. We've been trying to recuperate the cost because um it it it's been way too good of a deal for way too many years. Let's put it that way. [laughter] >> And so currently the 46 paid deliveries are in addition to the >> correct the free >> deliver for only 46 people have paid for deliveries and then like I said roughly 25 a year to >> and then you said if there was any left over at the end of the year you're selling it. Who would it who is who is your market for that or? >> Um, usually it's contractors or other compost people that just want to supplement their stuff. So, but usually we we we don't sell a lot of it. There's only been a couple years we've had to sell bulk, but usually it's less than a thousand yards. >> Okay. I'm just surprised because it's pretty dirty. >> Well, if a lot of those vendors will screen it before they or and then they'll mix it with their other stuff, but they're just looking for additional material. We've depends upon the year. We've had local contractors are doing it. They're just looking for a little bit to to do something with. But yes, it's it's not going to be a certified mind dot so they can use it like on a mindot job or or anywhere that's gotten any certification. But >> okay. Yeah, there's just a lot of stuff in it. Lots of plastic and trash. >> I did want to clarify a couple things. So, uh, deliveries not a lot and down, but the resident pickup is probably the biggest. >> Correct. the majority the vast majority of compost is done through resident pickup there. There's no doubt about that. Um but we've the reason we've been open to deliver to obviously some of the local nonprofits is we do have some we almost always have extra at the end of the year and certainly our volume's gone up. >> Um and then certainly that benefits those those community members. >> Right. And just one last question on the uh the 450,000 that's in the 27 CIP. Uh do we feel confident that we have those funds available in the fund because we've been saving up for 30 years or whatever? >> Yeah, so we have we have >> I think I've been here for 11 years now I think and we've delayed the compost turner every year and so it's it should be uh definitely in that fund. Um we have upped that cost a little bit but yeah that that we've always pushed it out a couple more years push it out a couple more years but I can assure you >> fund balance was >> um there is a lot of uh there's significant needs for repairs to we don't want to go any further on that one. >> Got it. See if I have the fund balance. Uh I don't have that. Oh nope. I don't really have that available. All right. If there's no further questions from the council, I do want to provide an opportunity for members of the public to speak to this or ask their own questions. And so, uh, maybe Mr. Frymer, if you can, uh, relax off to the side here for a moment. Uh, we'll open it up for public comments and questions. And just note again for the benefit of folks. I think everybody's been here long enough to have heard this before who still here, but uh, we do have the three-minute time limit per speaker, which I'll try to always enforce generously but gently. Um, and then also when you uh begin your remarks, if you could just state your name uh and your street or address for the record. And as this gentleman is doing, if you have a name that may not be obvious to spell, although I think that might not be the case here, uh we [laughter] we ask that you write it down on the clipboard just so we can have it spelled correctly in the official record. So, welcome. >> Good to see you again. >> Yes. Uh you guys have a topic that gets me out of the garden in the summer, which is uh hard to do. Mhm. >> Uh, in fact, I spent my weekend and I harvested about a 100 pints of delicious black >> your name for the record. >> Oh, sorry. Yeah, I'm Andy Johnson. I live over by Acorn Park on Kard. Uh, and I harvested 100 pints of delicious black raspberries this very weekend. Uh, and partially uh helped along by the compost that I get from the city all the time. Uh, not as much now. I think I'm kind of in a like every other year I get six yards of compost type situation. Uh, but I one year I got like 40 yards of compost and they just keep driving those trucks and you can get a Bobcat. You can move it around and do your whole yard super cheap. Uh, you could probably raise the cost on the delivery. It sounds like they got there. Um, that doesn't sound unreasonable. Um, so yeah, I mean like sort of a big battle with gardening, right, is I'm taking stuff out, I got to put stuff back in, right? Like that's the big sort of battle is the taking out and the putting in. and you all make it really easy for me. It's actually certainly my number two favorite thing about Roseville, but possibly even number one parks. I only go to the one park quite a bit, but they are good parks. I like them. I go there a lot. But the compost is really, really good. So, obviously speaking in favor of the recycling center. Um, option B sounds fine. I don't really feel bad about contractors not being able to go in. You could also charge them, but that sounds like a pain in the butt. So, maybe you don't want to do it. Um, and I think like maybe I I didn't watch the previous video. I read the Roseville Reader article. I'm not that hard about the game, just somewhat about the game. And I feel like we're like not really appreciating just like how much value it really creates for people in the city. And uh, so I I pulled up the Menard's website uh, and they they said they make like four to 5,000 yards of compost. And Menard's will sell me 75 cubic feet of compost for like three bucks. You can get the 11% discount or whatever, right? But long story short, Menard's is going to charge you like a $100 for a yard of compost. Maybe you can do and that's not deliberate. That's me picking it up. Maybe you can do better if you're buying in bulk. Maybe there's some landscaper where you could get, you know, six yards cheaper than $100, but I don't like maybe $70 or something. None of that factoring in delivery. Right now, if I'm getting it delivered, someone to drive a dump truck to my house. Like, I've already got mine. I'm not going to get 40 yards of compost in a year. I'm going to keep getting three a year or something. So, it's fine. But like, it's pretty insane value. And I actually math it out for me. And I think you guys have saved me like 30 or $40,000 on compost, right? At you know, whatever call $80 a yard. I've got probably roughly a hundred yards in in eight years. Uh and it just feels like uh in the presentation we're not really appreciating the fact that you are making sort of black gold in large quantities that people are getting and we're talking about how busy the place is and people are showing up and loading up and you're using three 4,000 acres of or yards of compost. It's just, you know, it really feels like an incredible benefit, right? like if we're doing the $100 a thing, you know, it's $400,000 of compost a year. So, I just I wanted to highlight that and sort of my own personal benefit with that and sort of imagining more people. Um I would say I've never brought a leaf. I don't know how to use a leaf rake. It's not really my thing. They just stay in the ground. But >> you may want to try to wrap up at 3 minutes and 30 seconds. >> Yeah. Yeah. Right on. Uh just so just to say, you know, I appreciate the service. I think you should keep doing it. I think option B works great. Um you know, back at stop dumping and all that. So, yeah, vote on hopefully keeping it open. Option B seems fine. >> Thank you for your comments. Uh, anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to this? >> Hey, Roger. H again. >> Welcome. >> And um let's see. So if you got rid of the program, would that be save enough money you could lower the storm rate storm sewer rate? So you can think of that question. And then have you actually figured out what would need to be done to refurbish the current piece of equipment? I assume it's all mechanical that it's not computer-driven very much. So, I would think every part, whether it's a gear or a chain or piece of sheet metal or whatever it might be, can be replaced somehow. So, I would think you could make the refurbish it just like it was new. And they say that the current equipment doesn't work as well as what they have now. So, I would think it'd be better to fix that than to buy something new when it doesn't work as well. And uh it used to have that the city actually came to people's houses and picked up the leaves for free. And I would think at that time everyone in our neighborhood had you guys pick up the leaves. So I would think they picked up more leaves back then than now. So I'm not quite sure why we run out of space now. But we didn't run out of space when you guys went around everywhere and actually picked up the leaves. But anyway, and also I don't really ever see you guys advertising that you sell compost. I don't have don't recall seeing on the website or in the newsletter that you guys sell it. So you probably would sell a lot more if you let people know you had that service. So anyway, I think for the little bit of money it costs and the large number of people are using the service, I think you should keep the leaf site. No, even if you modify how it works, but I think it's a service that everyone that people really like. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to this? >> Hi. >> Hello. Welcome. >> I'm Norma Jurgensson. Um I'm a 8year resident of Roseville. Moved into the new town houses that are off of Dale Street. I'm on level. We are really close to the leaf collection site and we love it. Um, not just my husband and I with gardening, but the people in our townhouse development. We go there in the fall and drop off leaves and we go and pick up wonderful compost to add to our gardens. I really think that we're uh making Roseville more beautiful by being able to drop off leaves there and collect the compost. When I go, I'm amazed at how many people are there and we end up talking about gardening and talking about how wonderful Roseville is. So, please don't close the collection site. You have several options that look really good. Um, option E, if we are able to work with Ramsey County and they adopt our site, that would be ideal, but otherwise B or C. I liked the greenness in the chart that you had. Um, C had a lot of green with the pros for um, keeping it. And when we're looking at the budget too, I'm wondering all the contractors that come, would it be possible for us to charge them to drop off, you know, they've got their big trailers full of leaves. Um, what if we said, "Okay, we're going to charge you 50 bucks per trailer." That might help a little bit with the budget and with being able to have enough money to refurbish the composting turning machine. So, Thanks for listening. >> Thank you for being here. Thanks for your comments. Uh, other members of the public who wish to speak to this item. >> Everybody can have a chance. [laughter] >> Okay. My name is Cynthia Warzeka. I'm going to write my name for you. [laughter] >> Glad you didn't even have to have me prompt you. I'm not counting that against your time. [laughter] >> Okay, great. Um, so my name is Cynthia Warzeka, 2700 Oxford Street North. And I've been a resident for about 10 years. And when I moved here and I saw that site, man, I thought that was one of the coolest things ever. I I mean that people would actually go there and dump off all their leaves. And I I was very impressed by it. Um, I only recently found out about the potential closure of the site uh from a person at the compost site >> and I think that I'm pretty well informed, but I was like, "Whoa, wow. I didn't know anything about that." Um, so I before the meeting went and read 70 pages of public comment, high level content analysis shows that probably uh only two or three out of all the people who commented supported closing the site. So, I mean, there's vast support for keeping it. Um, I I would just echo what some of the other folks are saying. How many people use that? I I go there twice, probably twice a week, and use it mostly for um organic waste recycling. But when I go there, there are always either two or three people there shoveling compost. I mean, it's amazing. Last time I went to I did go to the public works meeting on June 23rd, a young uh gentleman from Roseville High School talked about how they got a load of compost for their pollinator garden and how that was just fantastic and it is turning out great. And there are benefits that maybe we you know on a on a personal level we don't know the value of that. Mr. Johnson helped clarify that a little bit just how valuable that that compost is. Um and also I I don't know I just think it would be a significant loss to our community to lose that site. And um reading through those comments I guess one of the things I would like to reiterate is one of the commenters said the compost site is a place where residents gather as they recycle their kitchen waste and leaves. We greet each other as we go about our chores and efforts to beautify and maintain our properties. And I'm not sure about you, but I think that's um the kind of community I want to live in. And I think that's pretty exciting. And that said, I want to thank you. And I just want to also say that I felt so passionate about this that I sat here for a long time to wait to comment and I'm missing the World Cup game. [laughter] So that's what I'm gonna say. and I'm going to go see if I can catch the end and hope for the best. >> Thank you for that sacrifice. [laughter] >> Other members of the public who wish to speak. >> All right, we'll then close the opportunity for public comment. Um and uh I there were a couple of questions that came up so I did want to double check those. Um, so as to the impact on uh storm water uh rates, my guess is that we're really sort of talking about shifting some resources around and that we wouldn't necessarily be making a notable change to the storm water rates to the residents. >> Yeah, I I would anticipate if if anything it might prevent a future increase, but I can't imagine we it's not a gigantic savings that we'd be able to do some significant thing, but certainly we'd work with the finance director to re analyze that. But I it's it most likely would prevent maybe future in rate increases, >> especially probably the biggest chunk of dollars associated with it is the capital cost for the Turner. And if we don't do the Turner anymore, we would probably use that money for storm water projects in the community. >> Okay. Uh let's see. Charging the contractors. I think the challenge we have there is that if we if we charge one, we got to charge anybody who shows up and then we run out of capacity on the site pretty quickly. I would say it's it would make it capacity wise would be an issue and I think just managing that would cost a lot of money to manage a relatively small amount of transactions. So >> the billing and payment >> and then if we if we collect one like you said we collect all and we will most likely run out of room. We'd have we'd have to merely make sure our price point was correct. >> Might be the most expensive collection charge out there. Yeah. Uh I think those were the questions unless council noted any others that needed to be addressed from residents comments. I know there was some comment about the the equipment about repairs. I can assure you um we have spent $30,000 just in parts in the last five years to keep that thing running. Um the mechanics estimate we have to replace some major components like the drum and some bearings. That is at minimum of 70 thou or $40,000 repair. And then we know we have to reheat metal the entire skirt. So we're probably spending at least 70,000 if we have to do another major rehab. So it's served its life. We've gotten good value out of it. We keep it. We most definitely need to replace the equipment and eventually with some younger mechanics most likely in the future, we will also that some of that uh need newer technology. I guess it's going to be hard to keep fixing something that's really old. >> And just on the um the sort of mid-range uh numbers that you had talked about three to three to 500,000 that is not inadequate equipment for the lower. Yeah, we are pretty confident talking to vendors that we can get equipment that could serve the site with three to 400 three to $500,000 investment that would right serve it. We might have to make some modifications on our end, but especially if we rightsize the site and we're not taking in 35,000 yards of compost, we're we're confident we can manage that. >> Right. Right. That's the questions I think that uh asked for followup. Uh council, we have received the information. We have the uh admittedly split vote recommendation from the public works environment transportation commission. Um we've heard from members of the community. I think uh we should see if we can uh provide some direction on a on a way to go here and I'll look maybe for a motion from the council. Council member Strong >> not sure it's a motion at this point. I I guess I would really like harder numbers on where where we're at. Following up on council member Schroeder's suggestion, if we were to oper off offer more limited hours, if we were to not operate in the spring, if we were to [clears throat] think about it, so there's a way to have it open when 95% of the people are utilizing the space. [cough] I do con have the concern about the um sorry [clears throat] about the uh equity issue with the rice street gardens and such and other nonprofits and such that are taking advantage of that. But also I do concern have concern about duplicating services when it is eventually it's your tax dollars that are being used and it might not come out. you may not get it back, but it's some other time when you're not paying as much. And so, um, obviously it's really important, but there are a lot of other ways that people could compost at home. We could encourage people to we could have composter sales. We could have classes on how to compost. We could maybe find a way to partner with the uh haulers and see if they could offer some type of deal. I mean, I don't know. I feel like there's still I so appreciate the expansion of ideas to five and I hate to ask for more but I feel like I still don't know that I am comfortable with it either closed or not closed. I feel like there needs to be something in the middle and I don't know what it is. So I don't think I have a motion but I'm not comfortable really with any of them exactly as listed. If I may suggest depending on the direction the council may want to go uh that we uh choose a direction option D or another option and if it's another option that we provide some direction to staff if we need more information or suggestions as looking at uh different hours or different plans or things like that to give us some some further refinement of of choices if that's the direction the council wants to go that may address council member Strong's concerns and questions. Um, >> I would make a motion to consider option B with modifications for 2027 and make a decision based on additional information before an additional purchase of the CIP. >> I would second that motion. >> All right. It's moved by Council Member Strong, second by Council Member Grath. Um, basically to uh initiate consideration of option B, if I may paraphrase um and and look at some alternatives. And I guess my suggestion would be that maybe the decision-m happens through the 2027 budget process if that makes sense for the maker and seconder the motion so that we can consider some of those gives and takes in terms of options. >> I appreciate that. >> Second okay with that. >> Yes, absolutely. >> Council understand the motion. >> Can I get a point of clarification? What do we do? So we go with that. What happens if uh said machine completely fails like you know throw throws a piston through the rock? >> I I think my understanding is that option B includes a plan to buy new equipment in 2027 using CIP funds. >> That's where I want to get clarification of >> that's my understanding. I think that's what staff's plan for option B would be. >> Correct. I I guess if um certainly if council goes with any option where we keep the compost operation, um staff would most likely bring you guys a purchase order request in the over 10,000 uh probably in the next two months so we get that on order so we'd have it for when we start doing compost in the spring. So, um, yeah, we wouldn't we won't want to delay that too long because we want to make sure we have that so we don't jeopardize our equipment because one of the issues we have is we can fix the equipment eventually. But if we're out of the equipment for two months, compost doesn't get turned and we can't make compost and then we're stuck with it. So, so that that's another criticality aspect of the equipment. So, >> right. What what do we if we're going with option B then? What is the subsequent decisions that we need to make in the future then? >> Specific hours I think um >> maybe closing in the spring >> potentially different operational model. Yeah, >> maybe. >> I just want to know what the list is that we have to decide on that. I think if it's a foregone conclusion that we are purchasing the Turner as immediately, I think I'd more comfortable withdrawing my motion at the moment just uh because I I don't know that I'm ready to um commit to that outlay. >> Right. That sounds like you're withdrawing your motion. Then >> is 100% we have uh the the possibility of uh somebody else making a motion either similar to or the same as that. >> Um I would move I I I guess I would still move for uh for B. Um, I just thinking about the you're hearing about the composting and how that brings the community together and the and the community gardens and and that this is this isn't just a place for um people to drop stuff. It's actually a it's a community thing and and um you know the more I hear people the more I think about it because when I first started looking at this I was trying to decide which way to go. I wasn't had a foregone conclusion but um I I think it's you know hearing people that this this is more valuable than and I think people have said this in the past you can't always run the city like a business that you need to run it that so the people [laughter] that you have to do you know things for the community and so it just seems that there's a lot of voices that would like to keep this open and um to me It's like if we can modify it, keep the um illegal dumping and keep the you know contractors out of there and make it into an a manageable s we have the money in the budget for the equipment so that it's not like it's going to go up and and as as he said even if we didn't do this they would spend it on other so it's not like we're saving the money there. So where you're seeing is some some staff time. So to me it seems I feel like it's it's a fairly important community amenity. So I think I'll I'll move to go with options. >> I'll second it. >> And just to be clear, are you renewing the original motion as clarified with the discussion about you know looking at options for timing and and and etc. >> Um >> as part of the budget decision-making process. >> Yeah. you know, and and but I was change aware that if we're going to buy the equipment, I think we just need to commit, >> you know, and we can figure out how to modify the timing and the hours and all that as well of it. But I think what I'm saying is we, you know, if we we should still go ahead with the equipment and then also then figure out how to modify the the expense side because I want to make sure people can still come and get compost and all that and you know, and a lot of people do that in the spring. So I want to make sure if we say close it in the spring, I don't want that to be that the gardeners can't get in and get compost. >> Yeah. I think right now the plan would be is that the pickup can happen pretty much anytime. >> Yeah. Yeah. But I mean so we can clarify that. So >> I do have clarify something on the purchase too. >> I'll I'll just clarify that we when the gate the gates are closed right now and people get compost. The compost is outside the gate. So I just >> it's in the bin. So I the >> the difference would be we would the walking gate would be closed. So you could not go drop off leaves in the summer. The compost would still be outside. >> Okay. >> So we still need to make modifications, but >> the compost would be available outside. You you can never go inside to get a >> you you theoretically could walk in to grab your compost and keep have a walking through the gate >> because I wasn't sure if you were going to modify the gate or something to change that. That's why I wanted to make sure that that was important for that. So, >> and and just to clarify, I know we've got the the second to the motion, but to help clarify the motion in terms of the process of ordering a new compost turner. Um, can you talk about like timing of of ability to cancel an order or when we would need to get something on order and and how that all kind of works in the sense of if we need to pull back on a decision, what when when do we need to >> be able to [clears throat] do that? Most likely if you guys give direction to go with B, we will in the next two months we will solicit quotes from vendors, put together a proposal, put that on a council >> agenda for you guys. So most likely you guys would per you wouldn't approve a purchase probably till end of August, early September at the ear. You guys have time in that sense. >> Okay. >> But obviously once we put the PO in, the PO's in. So >> then we could get more information for um council member Straw and hopefully to get her a little more comfortable around things too then. Well, and I think it would be nice as part of bringing any kind of purchase request to the council at that point is to have an understanding of what some of those terms are in terms of when when when is our absolute, you know, drop dead, we got to, you know, cancel without penalty or there is a penalty after a certain time or those sorts of things. So, we can understand that as part of the bidding or quoting process as well. >> We can always say never mind at that point, >> right? And we and we could certainly once we reach out to vendors, I mean, we we talked a little bit with them, but without knowing which direction like what the lead time is. We know there's lead time on this, but it's not like it's a year lead time. >> It's fully >> it's probably like four to six months. So, um, >> you know, that's why we're trying to shoot for a decision like I say September, we put the order in, it's available for us in March type thing, >> right? So, if I may attempt to clarify the motion, [laughter] the motion is is essentially the the option B with the discussion about timing and open hours and things like that. >> Also authorizing initiating the process to go ahead with the capital purchase on the Turner >> subject to the subsequent decisions that the council will have to make. Yes. >> At those future dates. >> Yes. >> Have I got it? >> You got it. >> All right. Secer is cool with that. >> I'm cool with that. >> All right. We've got our motion. Uh discussion on the motion. And I know council member uh Schroeder as the maker of the motion, you kind of uh made your case as a part of that. >> I did. >> Okay. You certainly can have another bite of the apple if you wish. Council member uh Grath is the seconder. >> Yeah. Well, the reason I'm supporting this one is a couple things. It's going to be a secured site now, more or less, >> and we will not be having it'll solve the problem of having commercial dumpers coming in there. It'll also be a service for Roseville residents, uh which I think is important. The other thing is as uh council member Schroeder said from the discussion here especially from Norma Jorgensson stating it's a community value and also from other people. I shouldn't just say you but it's a community value. And one of the things that people tell me in my day job about Roseville, the reasons they move here is because we have things that other places do not have. We have snow plowing that gets done and the alleys or they have access to their homes and they and they can get out in the morning for work which doesn't happen in some other areas around here. So this is another amenity that we have here that no one else has. I mean I know that no one in Ramsey County does this another city but maybe that's a good thing that we have something like that and it's also a community builder for the Rice Street Gardens and other the gardens that you're talking about. Those are things that are important values in my opinion in Roseville and from what I hear from the residents. So that's why I'm supporting this. Great. >> And council, did you want to make a clarification? >> I just No, I had an additional question um for Mr. Fryheimer if possible about the commitment. So if we um purchase this item, what do you see as like the time frame of like does this mean we're committed for the next 20 years to having a leaf or do you see this as a resellable piece? >> Yeah, you'd be able to sell it. I mean it certainly you would lose value on the sale but you'd be able to sell it if you only did it in five years want to get rid of the leaf site it's certainly an option you're just not going to get you buy for 500,000 you might only get 100,000 back or something >> right >> so it's it but it's so it's a longer term commitment I mean we're not going to want to sell it over in a year we'll lose everything we'll lose >> if we get we got we've got over 30 years of our last one I mean it's it's a valuable piece of equipment it's heavy equipment it'll hold its it'll generally hold its value but you're just not going to get as much on a resale as you a new model. >> And as far as the pack, you said, do you you feel like as long as we keep track, I know when you mentioned it originally was the amount of trucks and stuff that were getting stuck in the space. Do you see that being somehow different with the way things are being proposed? >> Certainly, if we manage it a little more, I mean, we more or less we put about $20,000 worth of material in a last year. If we spread that out and spend about 5,000 annually, we think we can keep the site up. And if we reduce if we reduce contractors in there, that's less people in the site, especially with larger trucks and dump trailers, that will help. It's not going to solve it. I mean, the the site will never be a great site because of the materials, but certainly if you keep putting money into it, it it'll be adequate. And you didn't think that the concerns that um were brought up about the leaf site impacting the um the groundwater for the >> So we years ago there was improvements done. I don't know exactly when before my time to minimize what's going in there. We've worked with MPCA to do studies. It does not appear like we're adding excess nutrients to the site. So >> okay, >> it's been at least that it's been at least minimally addressed and we certainly keep an eye on that. We're not we're not pushing the piles right up to the wetland. Um, you know, back when it was operated in the 80s, people treated wetlands a lot differently. In fact, it was probably all filled wetland. There was probably minimal management. We just probably pushed to the wall. So, it the site is certainly managed a lot better than it was probably in 1980 when that report was created. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Any other discussion on the motion? All right. We've got the only thing I was going to add uh just to sort of complete the loop on the financial side of it. So our annual budget uh for the storm water drainage fund alto together is about 3.7 3.8 million over the last couple years. A big chunk of that is uh is capital. So it's maybe more like a million in operating costs more or less each year. And so we're talking about something that is like 100,000 out of a million. So about 10% of the storm water operational type budget. Um so it seems like good value for dollars uh in terms of what the benefit is for the community. Um and I think the improvements we're talking about in terms of staffing and security are going to help uh the operation overall. And if we're more proactive in terms of some of the maintenance on the site, this will be better. I think we're getting a a a more appropriately sized and costed uh turning equipment through the process of limiting that access to Roseville residents and other things along those lines. And so that's why I'm supportive of this. U and I want to say that I appreciate all the work that has been done especially by staff uh but certainly the consideration by the public works environment and transportation commission because I know we're going against their recommendation here and I know that's something we don't necessarily take lightly uh because we value all the input from our citizen advisory commissions and so um still in the end I think through this process we've come to sort of once again that uh pretty darn good compromise solution that seems to work uh and so I'm supportive of the motion. With that, we have the motion before us. Uh, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. That passes unanimously. And that action is directed. Thank you again to everyone. Uh, council, we've got just a couple items. Do we want to take a break or proceed to the remainder of our business? >> I think we can finish. >> All right. Proceed it is. >> All right. Uh, that then brings us to uh consideration of a couple sets of uh council minutes. We have council minutes from our June 8th meeting and from our June 15th meeting. Uh and those have been provided to the council. There's been uh feedback provided to staff and those updates are incorporated in the drafts under our consideration this evening. Are there any other changes or corrections to those minutes or a motion to approve as presented? >> Move approval. Second. >> All right. And that's both. >> Yes. >> Council member Grath uh move. Council member Bower seconded approving both sets of minutes as presented. Any discussion on that motion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I opposed. That passes unanimously. Those minutes are both approved. Uh that then brings us to consideration of our consent items. As noted before, we have two items on our consent agenda. Although I see three there. >> Uh yeah, I think [laughter] that we only have two. We only have two. >> We only have two. Okay. Good. Good. Good. Good. Uh Mr. Trean, you will summarize whichever two are the two that are remaining. >> It will be A and C. My thought. Get back close enough. U so uh first item is to approve payments in the amount of $2,251,422 and the second item listed and C is to approve a contract uh to uh have uh two EMTs assigned to the Parkinson's uh walk um in Central Park in September 19th. and the um Parkinson's Association will be paying for the cost for those two two MTS two EMTs to be stationed there during that event. And that is the consent agenda. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Trojan. Is there a motion on the consent agenda? >> So moved. Second. >> All right. It's been moved by Council Member Grath, seconded by Council Member Schroeder. Discussion on the motion. Uh hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes unanimously. Those items are approved. Uh that then brings us to our future agenda review. First among the items in this uh agenda item, Mr. Trean. >> Yes. Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh our next council meeting is next Monday. Just a reminder, this is going to be uh focused around the 2027 budget. We'll start earlier at 4 p.m. We'll deal with the fire station like we did in uh April. Um roughly budgeting about three uh hours or so, but that that can go longer as needed or shorter as needed. uh and at the opportunity we're going to take a look at what the department head budget budgets were submitted and I just want to make sure it's very clear that I have not gone through there and started vetting through some of those ask I did want to have the opportunity for department has to talk about what their asks are and certainly would love any input that you can give as part of the process as you know it's kind of an interactive process so we're looking forward to that so that's uh next Monday the 13th on the 20th we do have an EDA meeting uh well we'll discuss the preliminary EDA budget. We'll be talking a little bit about the EDA budget in in in general on the on the 13th, but uh the 20th we'll kind of get dive deeper into what those costs are on that. Uh we'll also provide an update in the emergency rental assistance program that we created a few months ago and then also received some recommendations about uh using the LA funds and it's really just for discussion and consideration. So >> and those are the uh the sales tax funds from the state for housing, right? Yeah. Uh then also after that uh EDA meeting, we'll then have city council meeting. We'll we'll have a couple bigger items. One would be a joint meeting with the PWAT commission. We also received a presentation of Victoria Street pathway project from Ramsey County. And also we expect we'll have the results from our 2026 community survey which we'll have a presentation and review that. Uh just a note in our August meetings, we have an August 10th meeting. We do have uh August 19th as a tenative date for any uh commission interviews that we need to have. At this point, we don't have any vacancies. So, most likely that won't happen, but we'll keep you informed. Then the 24th uh August, we'll have a meeting that's present my city manager recommended budget. That's uh the rest of the summer. >> Wow. >> September. >> Let's count September as part of the summer, too. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> Maybe October, right? >> Uh whatever it takes. Uh I did want to note on the 20th I think we city manager Trean and I went to a meeting of all the communities that have been involved in that coalition of cities that was related to operation metro surge and some of the >> legislative priorities and things like that and there's been a proposal by the the working group uh from that uh coalition to continue that in in a limited form and so I think a decision from the council will be needed to do that and there's limited cost associated but what I think that's something Pat and I talked about bringing back on 20th as well. >> It may have happened tonight, but uh didn't. So, the 20th will be that. >> Anything else from council members as far as uh either uh council member reports, announcements, communications, or future agenda items? Council member Strong, >> I just wanted to thank all of the staff who were who worked so hard to make sure that Rosefest was a success. >> Um I was at many events, not all, but um parade, the weather was beautiful and um it was really lovely. Uh the fireworks were just calm and uh really appreciated the handicap parking in the Lexington um side of Central Park. Um the people who are utilizing it really appreciated it. So little things like that really made a big difference. There was a lot of extra bike racks which I'm always complaining about. So it was really lovely. >> Well, we'll try not to have as many next time. >> Thank you. [laughter] >> If that's what >> council member No, it was great. >> It was great. No, but it was really lovely and so thanks to all who worked so hard um in so many capacities and Wayne was there with his great time. >> The theme of the evening. >> All right. Well, echoing all those thanks and the compliments again to Wayne on his hat. Uh any other council member n initiated items or announcements, communications? >> All right. The only other item on our agenda this evening is adjournment. >> So moved. >> Second. >> It's been moved by council member Straw, second by Council Member Schroer to adjurnn. There is no discussion on a motion to adjurnn. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. That passes unanimously and we are adjourned at 8:37 p.m. Thanks everyone.