City Council Workshop
Regular MeetingOakdale, MN · August 8, 2022
Minutes
WORKSHOP MINUTES
OAKDALE CITY COUNCIL
August 8,2022
The City Council held a workshop on Tuesday, August 8, 2022 at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley
Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota. The meeting began at 5:01 PM.
Present: Mayor Paul Reinke
Council Members: Jake Ingebrigtson
Susan Olson
Colleen Swedberg
Kevin Zabel
City Staff Members: Christina Volkers, City Administrator
Katie Robinson, Deputy City Clerk
Jason Zimmerman, Finance Director
Andrew Gitzlaff, Community Development Director
Lori Pulkrabek, Communications Manager
Nick Newton, Police Chief
Kevin Wold, Fire Chief
Shannon Reidlinger, Senior Community Development Specialist
Rachel Tierney, City Attorney
Mike Kothe, Utilities Division Superintendent
Prior to any presentations and/or discussion, Mayor Reinke reminded the Council, staff and guests
these workshop meetings are for information gathering, question clarifying, and no decision making
will be made as a Council body.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PARKS AND TRAILS AND RESILIENCY CHAPTERS DISCUSSION
Through a series of Council workshop staff has been providing a chapter by chapter overview of the
Comprehensive Plan and facilitating a discussion with Council on the following:
• Are the policies identifying the appropriate course of action to achieve the goal?
• Is anything missing, inaccurate or in need of further evaluation?
• Are there some policies that should be prioritized?
Chapters are sent out with the agenda packet for review in advance. Staff is tracking language
changes that will be made as part of a future Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Community Development Director Gitzlaff stated that Parks and Trails and Resiliency are the last
two chapters in the Comprehensive Plan to be presented to Council and upon feedback, the next
phase would be implementation. Mr. Gitzlaff met with Recreation Superintendent Julie Williams
prior to this meeting to review what Parks and Recreation has currently been up to in regard to the
goals of their CIP. Unfortunately, Ms. Williams was unable to attend the Workshop.
Mr. Gitzlaff proceeded to lead Council through a detailed reviewed of the Park and Trails and
Resiliency Chapters. The following questions / discussion rose from the discussion;
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE TWO
Goal 1: Recreation programming and park improvements shall respond to the needs and
preferences of a diversity of ages, cultures, abilities and incomes.
Policy 3; Purse the acquisition and development of the defunct Par 3 golf course into a
passive park.
Council Member Ingebrigtson asked if there is a chance to review or obtain any grievances that may
be in place with Par 3 regarding the neighbors?
Mayor Reinke asked Council Member Ingebrigtson if he is specifically referencing the green space
to which Council Member Ingebrigtson replied, yes, with the proposed development there, it’s
difficult to have a conversation in regard to that property without knowing the expectations of the
neighbors.
City Administrator Volkers shared the owners of Cedric’s Landing had several conversations with
the residents, neighbors and the City and while the green space is wanted, it is not a requirement
of the city or land owners.
Mayor Reinke believes there is a covenant in place with the property owners for the southwest side
of the property (Par 3) that needs to be clarified.
Council Member Olson, asked for clarification on ‘covenant’. Mayor Reinke stated there
there is an agreement in the deed (between the property owner and a developer) about each
property owner having the potential right to purchase the space should the area ever get developed.
Council Member Zabel reminded the Council that the area is a Planned Unit Development (PUD) at
some point a developer came in to design the whole area and went through the planning process;
those are the documents that we need to reference.
Mr. Gitzlaff stated that in regard to Cedric’s Landing, some people in the neighborhood are asking
questions about the space in question. At this point the City (Community Development) has had a
follow up meeting with them since the concept plan. Some of the legal work that was reviewed was
a covenant related to property remaining a golf course for the benefit of the residents around there,
however, covenants do expire. He will confer with legal on specifics of expired covenants.
Mayor Reinke mentioned he is supportive of having the policy within that goal if the wording was
changed a bit with the removal of the word “pursue”. Council Member Swedberg agrees that the
wording should be changed.
Council Member Olson asked if a passive park is the only thing we can do withthe old par 3.
Council Member Zabel confirmed, yes, due to the contamination in the land and the large amount
of wetland, a passive park is the best option for that specific area.
Goal 2: Recreational programming, park facilities, and open space shall be assessible to all physical
abilities and incomes.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE THREE
Policy 1; Develop a plan to ensure programming, parks, and open spaces are accessible for
all abilities and incomes.
Mr. Gitzlaff had a conversation with Ms. Williams in regard to this policy and at this time there is
not a more specific plan written and this is still an area for growth.
Policy 2; Develop a plan to ensure the public use of open space, including wetlands, is open
to all pedestrians and bicyclists.
Council Member Swedberg expressed her concern and mentioned maybe going forward, we do not
want all the paths open to both walkers and bicyclists, upon hearing from both pedestrians and
cyclists, they would prefer some paths to be designated to one or the other.
Council Member Zabel asked how would the City be able to restrict that. This policy was drafted with
the ordinance in mine. The ordinance states you can bike on all sidewalks, trails and paths.
Council Member Swedberg mentioned that the wording could be changed in the ordinance and that
there are other surrounding communities that do have these separate options on trails and
sidewalks.
Goal 4: Recreation programming shall engage the boarder community in program development and
delivery.
Policy 1; Evaluate the feasibility of establishing a recreation and maintenance volunteer
program.
Mr. Gitzlaff met with Ms. Williams in regard to this and she stated there were discussion in the past
about having one volunteer-based committee for this type of program. However, at this time it’s
more of an ad hoc approach and commitment.
Policy 3; Include a diversity of stakeholders, to include age, race, ethnicity, and income in
parks and recreation program planning.
Currently Parks and Recreation gather surveys from current parks users and that is one significant
way they get their information for future development ideas/plans.
Senior Community Development Specialist Reidlinger led Council through a detailed reviewed of
the Resiliency Chapters. She mentioned she will be providing examples of any goal/policy that the
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) currently has on its 2022 workplan. She also
prefaced the data source for the utility related information – it is from the Regional Indicators
Initiative (a tool funded by different organizations that compiles data from utilities usage across the
state).
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE FOUR
The following questions / discussion rose from the discussion;
Goal 1: Consistent with state-wide goals, community-wide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions shall
be reduced 30% by 2025, and 80% by 2050 from 2007 levels in order to mitigate the impacts of
climate change on the community.
Policy 1; Promote reinvestment in residential and commercial properties through energy
efficiency education technical assistance, and financing programs.
Ms. Reidlinger’ s example of this policy is that the EMC just hosted a solar power hour to tell
residents about the pro solar twin cities programming happening this year.
Policy 2; Connect low-income residents to home weatherization and energy efficiency
resources to encourage housing stock reinvestment.
Ms. Reidlinger shared that the EMC has a goal of hosting a citizen utilized board clinic to help
residents think through their utility bill and how they can minimize costs.
Council Member Zabel asked Ms. Reidlinger if there was a reason why this policy specially calls out
lower income residents?
Ms. Reidlinger explained that other than it could be just there are more programs to promote in that
area as there are a fewer resources for low-income residents from utility providers to help offset
some of those costs.
City Administrator Volkers stated this may be an area for a policy change as to not call out only low-
income residents.
Policy 3; Protect and encourage on-site solar energy development that maintains community
character while utilizing local solar resources to the fullest potential.
Ms. Reidlinger stated an example of this policy is the Community Developments creation of the
Business Retention, Expansion and Attraction (BREA) program. With the BREA program there is a
resource guide available for organizations that includes funding information for solar.
Council Member Ingebrigtson asked in regard to the move to electric on everything, has anyone had
a conversation of what they might do if the power grid fails?
Council Member Swedberg replied stating the infrastructure is not here (she referenced a
presentation Xcel Energy had a previous Chamber meeting). She also shared that part of that
discussion/presentation was that farmers had to stop using their windmills because they could not
distribute the excess energy from windmills.
Council Member Zabel will send an informational link to Ms. Volkers to share with everyone else on
the topic of power infrastructure.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE FIVE
Ms. Reidlinger also brought up an article she had read in the Star Tribune back in 2021 about the
same topic. She will research this and get the information to Ms. Volkers.
Council Member Olson asked if Minnesota shares energy with other states?
Council Member Ingebrigtson replied yes and gave an example of Minnesota and North Dakota
sharing via powerlines running in concurrent with Interstate 94.
Policy 4; Adopt zoning regulations that will establish standards for renewal energy
technologies to ensure neighborhood compatibility and access.
City Administrator Volkers along with Council Members Olson and Swedberg, suggested there
should be a language change from “will establish” to ‘strive to’.
Council Member Olson asked Ms. Reidlinger for clarification as to where the 80% mentioned in Goal
1 was derived from and if it’s even achievable. Ms. Reidlinger replied that the information is an
exact copy of the goal by the State of Minnesota and whether or not it’s achievable is unknown.
However, the State does generate an annual report showing their results.
Council Member Zabel pointed out that some of these goals will happen naturally due to choices by
the utility provider.
Council Member Olson asked what impact does the global market have on a small city?
Ms. Reidlinger replied that the there are many factors out of a city’s control, so the policies are
written in respect to what the City does have control over when it comes to making a difference on
a global problem. She also shared an example of the recent adoption of amended ordinances for
Electric Vehicles with in the City.
Policy 5; Promote and encourage residential and commercial participation in green building
programs as well as renewable energy financing and purchasing programs include PACE /
other loan programs, community solar and wind power purchase programs.
Ms. Reidlinger shared an example of this policy is the promotion of Community Solar Garden.
Policy 6; Support private and public infrastructure that accommodates and encourages use
of electric and autonomous vehicles and explore options for City fleet use of electric
vehicles.
Ms. Reidlinger’ s example of this policy is the kick off of the upcoming fleet study.
Policy 7; Promote and encourage strategies that reduce waste generation and increase
options for reuse, recycling, and composting of items in City operations, residential and
commercial developments.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE SIX
Ms. Reidlinger reminded Council that the city does receive a grant from Washington County annually
for this.
Goal 2: The City shall be prepared to respond effectively to climate change by implementing
adaption and resilience strategies.
Policy 2; Utilize stormwater management areas as pollinator habitat and neighborhood
amenities.
Council Member Swedberg asked if this a policy we currently are acting on.
Ms. Reidlinger replied that other than the ones that were placed in Tanner’s Lake, she is unsure of
other locations throughout the city but will research this and share her findings.
Policy 4; Promote water conversation programs to protect groundwater resources.
Ms. Reidlinger sated the EMC is currently doing this through the Adopt a Drain program (EMC has
adopted a few drains at Walton Park).
Policy 5; Promote water infiltration techniques sch as raingardens and pervious pavers to
replenish groundwater resources
This policy is already promoted by the City by promoting rain barrels while they are being sold by
community retailers.
Policy 9; Adopt regulations that will establish standards for urban farming to improve
compatibility with neighboring properties.
Council Member Zabel and Ms. Reidlinger both gave examples of ‘urban farming’ that included;
residents having chickens, goats, bees in their yard along with residents who have subscribed to
the Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) to have a large garden on their property.
FUNDING FOR NEW PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY AND NEW POLICE FACILITY
Continued discussion has been held over the past three years regarding the need and subsequent
plans for these significant and critical building projects in the City of Oakdale.
During the 2020 legislative session, the city requested authority for Local Option Sales Tax (L.O.S.T.)
to fund a new Public Works Facility and a remodeled and expanded Police Facility.
Due to the pandemic, the legislature did not finish their business. Then during the 2021 Legislative
session, the city again requested to use of L.O.S.T. for these two capital projects which was
approved and enacted into law for $22,000,000 maximum for a Public Works facility and
$15,000,000 maximum for the Police facility.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE SEVEN
Due to many factors including supply chain issues and soaring costs of construction, the projected
cost of both projects is significantly higher than the most recent estimates from late 2020 and early
2021.
During the 2022 Legislative session, the city introduced further legislation to seek the authority for
increased amounts for these two projects, however the MN Legislature ended their session without
following through on our request.
Discussion was held at the July 12, 2022 workshop regarding current cost projections for the new
Public Works facility, which is estimated at $31,578,800 (plus all professional fees, FF&E, testing,
inspections, road salt building, and needed fuel island). Because the 2021 legislatively authorized
L.O.S.T. is maximized at an amount much less than what is needed, discussion must be held
regarding overall options for additional funding for both needed capital projects.
City Administrator Volkers prefaced this conversation with stating there have been many
conversations with the lobbyists regarding obtaining additional funds for the projects. She pointed
out to Council that if the City had to do a bond for the above stated projects, the information
Financial Director Zimmerman handed out is an approximate of what that would look like financially
for the City’s in the upcoming years.
Ms. Volkers asked the Council what number / amount they would be comfortable with if the city
were to bond for these amounts in property taxes.
Finance Director Zimmerman handed out preliminary information (documents created by Bakertilly
Municipal Advisors). The first document was a preliminary run for 10yr / $5M that would be
presumed for Willowbrooke Parks although it’s not decided as of yet. It calculated a $670K levy
need for the bond payment, which is about a 4% levy rate increase on a $16M general fund base.
The second document includes the additional needed for a Public Works facility beyond the
authority for L.O.S.T. based off estimated construction documents with a principal of only $28.49M.
There was another projection done on the $47M likely needed for both capital projects, which would
be presumed to be $28M for Public Works and $19M for the Police Department.
Council Member Ingebrigtson asked the group on their thoughts on what the next steps would be if
the sales tax levy does not pass?
Council Member Zabel stated the simple fact would be to levy to recoup north of $3M every year,
when the proposition is that half of that could be paid by non-residents through sales tax.
City Administrator Volkers clarified that at $3M a year, with each 1% tax levy is approximately
$143,000, that is a significant levy increase.
Council Member Zabel shared that the law / statute says we stop collecting sales tax when the
principal is paid off. For example, when the principal payment for Public Works is satisfied at $22M,
approximately in year 2045, that is when the revenue from L.O.S.T. shuts off, is that correct?
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE EIGHT
We would not keep collecting sales tax to cover interest after the $22M is paid, correct? Both Mr.
Zimmerman and Ms. Volkers replied, yes.
Council Member Zabel then asked, what would happen if our estimated sales tax revenue over
performs? Ms. Volkers replied that the City would pay ahead of schedule.
Council Member Ingebrigtson mentioned that as people tend to leave rural Minnesota and come to
the twin cities, our sales tax revenue could increase a little more. Ms. Volkers replied that yes that
could happen, this documentation provided is a conservative approach. Mr. Zimmerman explained
the method being used for this information is the U of M assumption of 3% for the first three years
and then an assumption 1.5% increase after that.
Mayor Reinke asked for clarification, if the information was stating that even with a successful half
cent sales tax, the amount of money that gets raised through L.O.S.T. is $37M, but we have $47M
of planned projects? Ms. Volkers replied yes, that is correct.
Council Member Zabel stated the sales tax between the two projects would yield $37M, however
he believes there is a risk that may not meet that in 25 years and asked Mr. Zimmerman, what
would then cover the costs? He continued to say, there is $22M for Public Works and $15M for the
Police Department, however, if it comes in over, there would have to be a levy or some taxpayer
funded method to make up the difference. The U of M extension report estimates enough L.O.S.T.
to pay the $37M debt.
However, Mr. Zimmerman also explained to Council that in the event that a decline happens, there
needs to be reserves available and this would be included in the bond document. As time goes on
and the fund increases, there’s will be room for recalculation of the levy.
Ms. Volkers asked Mr. Zimmerman what his suggestion is as to how the City should move forward
at this time. Mr. Zimmerman responded that this is Bakertilly’s information / projections and when
they structure these types of deals they are looking at a 20% coverage and then over time
depending on what’s happened, there’s an ability to recalculate the levy, but what they are saying
is based off their recommendation for financial perspective the profit from the LO.S.T. is just shy of
$28M given all those conservative qualifications
At this point, Ms. Volkers asked Council, if the City has to go back to the legislature, what should we
ask for?
Council Member Zabel responded that $30M for Public Works and $18M for the Police Department
and a longer duration for the bond.
Council Member Swedberg agreed and suggested 40 years.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE NINE
Mayor Reinke recapped the discussion thus far stating, if we go to the voters on November 8 with
these asks and they say yes and we start collecting, then we go to the legislature to adjust the
amount, we take the risk of getting stood up by legislature and then we are either going to have to
stop the process/project or redirect to Parks (or something else) if we can continue to collect the
money until we go back the 3rd time.
Council Member Zabel reminded the group it is important to know there is no mechanism in the
statute that allows us or legislature to do this, they would have to create an exception and we all
agree the projects have to happen, it’s just a matter of how do we get there financially. Mayor
Reinke replied, that would be part of the story to our voters, explaining to them this has to be
regardless.
Ms. Volkers recommended not proceeding on asking the voters for higher amounts on the ballot
without having full authority by the legislature to do so.
Due to time constraints, Mayor Reinke stated the group has to move on to the remaining topics. He
stated the City will know more about the voter’s decision on November 9.
He then asked Ms. Volkers if there is a language question that needs to be to finalized? Ms. Volkers
stated, yes, we have to decide on the language tonight.
Council Member Ingebrigtson asked for clarification on what happens if there is a tie in the voting
process. Ms. Volkers clarified a tie would be a ‘no’ or fail in the vote.
INTERIM ORDINANCE IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON THE SALE OF CANNABIS PRODUCTS
Beginning on July 1, 2022, it became legal to sell certain products containing delta-9 THC (“THC
Products”) in Minnesota. The Act allows THC Products to be sold if certain requirements are met
including that there are not more than 5mg of THC per dose and 50mg of THC per container; the
purchaser is at least 21 years old; and the products are not marketed towards children. The
Minnesota Board of Pharmacy (“Board”) is the state agency with oversight of THC Products.
There is currently no state-level license required in order to sell THC Products and the Board does
not test or approve products prior to their sale.
City Administrator Volkers opened the discussion telling the Council we need to know their intent in
how to move forward. There is not currently a mechanism for enforcing this new law at the City level,
however, there is on a State level.
Council Member Olson expressed she is not supportive of a moratorium at all.
Mayor Reinke questioned if we are putting our police officers in a difficult spot if there is nothing
guiding them on how to react / act to issues that may arise if there are not restrictions / guidelines
with these types of sales.
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE TEN
Police Chief Newton explained to the Council that the Board of Pharmacy is the authority for THC
sales with this specific product and an issue of concern is that there is only one field agent for the
entire State to monitor/handle any issues that may arise from these types of sales. The bigger
concern is if the city does not do anything locally to regulate this there could be lasting impacts on
law enforcement, EMS, Community Development and Business Development. For example, if this
is a trend and it goes away in 3 – 4 years because marijuana happens to become legalized, then
there are businesses in the community that would end up closing.
The police department would like and recommends a moratorium to allow time to research and
make a more informed decision on how to best move forward for the safety of the community.
Council Member Olson stated, this is the ‘baby’ of marijuana and if we put a moratorium on it, we
are stopping business owners from selling a legal product and taking it away from consumers who
may need it for pain management, PTSD, and depression along with so many other medical
conditions when they may not be able to afford a doctor.
Mayor Reinke asked Police Chief Newton: in a scenario if push comes to shove you receive calls
about a reaction to THC, would it put the Police Department in jeopardy if we do nothing but make
a complaint to the Board of Pharmacy?
Chief Newton responded that if we license it, but would have to determine if background checks
and compliance checks will be done. There needs to be some due diligence on how to set this up.
There have been some bulletins that have come out to Police Chiefs to expect more EMS calls along
with more calls to the poison centers. A significant misfortune is that the product is made to look
like candy and thus may be seen as such by kids, so there is a high risk of children finding the
products in their homes and consuming them. The city just needs to somehow get ahead of it, it’s
new and we don’t have enough to decide right now.
Council Member Olson expressed that she understands the concerns for the safety of the children
in our community, however, there has to be some accountability with the consumer as well, much
like the accountability /responsibility of parents keeping alcohol and tobacco products out of
children’s reach. She continued to say that in her opinion, the community is not going to start seeing
people dropping on the sidewalks due to the ‘high’ they get for this product. Cost comparatively,
people could buy something much stronger for the same amount of money is costs for the bag of
gummies that are currently being sold.
Council Member Zabel acknowledged the public safety element to this as well and noted there is
also a zoning element to this that needs to be addressed. Currently, the product can be sold in any
retail establishment in any district across the city. There is nothing in the ordinance that says it’s a
permitted use and fits within a specific category. There needs to be a zoning conversation as to
whether it’s more appropriate in certain areas vs. other areas. Per the example Council Member
Olson gave about alcohol and tobacco, those are regulated and only allowed in certain zoning areas.
Council Member Olson responded stating she is supportive of zoning and the licensing the product,
however regarding she is not supportive of cutting consumers and business owners completely off
until those decisions are made (a moratorium).
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE ELEVEN
Mayor Reinke opened up the conversation with Council with a suggestion of a possible moratorium,
figure out the licensing process for this product and to do a moratorium to allow time to figure out
more details. A suggestion was to allow current sellers of the product to continue to sell, but to not
allow any expansion of their sales or new establishments to begin sales until the city has determined
the best way to regulate locally, noting the establishments currently selling would have to be
required to self-report and be compliant with the regulations the City eventually provides.
Council Member Swedberg mentioned that she had a conversation with the Director of Alcohol and
Gambling Enforcement Division and that person was in favor of the moratorium, but stated each
city needs to decide how to get their arms around it. Council Member Swedberg then confirmed
that she is in support of a moratorium, but for a shorter duration (6 months).
Mayor Reinke asked for confirmation of supportive or not supportive of a moratorium? Mayor
Reinke, Council Members Ingebrigtson and Olson stated no moratorium. Council members Zabel
and Swedberg support a moratorium. The preference appears to be not to proceed with a
moratorium, take steps to develop licensing and zoning criterial, require people to self-report, and
give them an adequate amount of time (whatever the city decides) to be compliant.
Council Member Zabel asked if phasing in is allowed in our statutes for those that are already selling
the product.
Assistant City Attorney Tierney explained to the group that you can phase it in, however the city
could face the argument that a use has been established and that is the difference between zoning
and licensing. There is no grandfathering in licensing, you must meet the required criteria to obtain
a license. However, zoning does have an option of grandfathering and that is where a location issue
may arise, but imposing a license would allow the ability to deny a location as they have would have
to meet the licensing criteria (with location being part of the criteria).
After a brief pause, the Mayor requested Councils decision, Council Members Zabel and Swedberg
are in favor of a limited moratorium, Council Members Olson, Ingebrigtson along with the Mayor are
not in support of a moratorium but do want to move forward with a licensing process.
COUNCIL TOPICS
Ms. Volkers referenced a letter received by Steve Willock, owner of Oak Marsh golf course asking
for an expansion of hours during the summer months to allow for early morning maintenance. This
will be discussed further by council at a later time.
Council Member Olson asked if anyone had clarification on foreign entities buying land in the
community? As she stated, some states are currently regulating the ability for foreign entities to
purchase land, the question is, can a city do the same and regulate the purchase of land (to foreign
entities)?
WORKSHOP MINUTES
AUGUST 8, 2022
PAGE TWELVE
City Administrator Volkers said she would seek Legal input on this topic and get back to Council.
ADJOURNMENT
The workshop was adjourned at 6:52pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Katie Robinson
Deputy City Clerk
Agenda
AGENDA
City Council Workshop
Workshop
August 8, 2022
OAKDALE COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5:00 PM Comprehensive Plan Parks and Trails and Resiliency Chapters Discussion
5:40 PM Funding for New Public Works Facility and New Police Facility
6:15 PM Interim Ordinance Imposing a Moratorium on the Sale of Cannabis Products
6:40 PM Council Topics
6:55 PM Recess for Regular Meeting
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Andrew Gitzlaff, Community Development Director
Date: August 8, 2022
Subject: Comprehensive Plan Parks and Trails and Resiliency Chapters Discussion
BACKGROUND
Through a series of Council workshop staff has been providing a chapter by chapter overview of the
Comprehensive Plan and facilitating a discussion with Council on the following:
Are the policies identifying the appropriate course of action to achieve the goal?
Is anything missing, inaccurate or in need of further evaluation?
Are there some policies that should be prioritized?
Chapters are sent out with the agenda packet for review in advance. Staff is tracking language changes
that will be made as part of a future Comprehensive Plan amendment. See attached comment tracker
form for reference.
The Introduction and the Land Use Chapters were discussed at the February 8, 2022 and February 22,
2022 Council workshops. The Housing and Neighborhoods Chapters were discussed at the April 29,
2022 special Council workshop. The Transportation Chapter was discussed at the April 26, 2022
meeting. At this meeting, the discussion began on the Economic Development Chapter and was tabled
until the May 24, 2022 Council workshop to complete the discussion. The Water Resources Chapter (4)
was discussed at the June 28, 2022 Council workshop.
At the August 8, 2022 Council workshop, staff will lead a facilitated discussion with Council on the Parks
and Trails (5) and Resiliency Chapters (8) of the Comprehensive Plan.
Future Council workshops will focus on the Implementation Chapter (10), reviewing the comment tracker
and proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment language.
Attachments
Comment Tracker
Summary Presentation
Parks and Trails and Resiliency Chapters of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan
Comprehensive Plan City Council Comment Tracker
Date Received Chapter Comment Recommended Action
2-8-22 Chapter 2 – Concerned about the preciseness of some of the Revise statement to say
Workshop Land Use policy statements in the Comprehensive Plan “consider an annual
including Goal 2 Policy 4 establishing an annual EDA levy along with the
EDA levy to fund predevelopment and other funding
rehabilitation activities. mechanisms”.
2-8-22 Chapter 2 – Council emphasized that the words that are used Noted.
Workshop Land Use are important.
2-8-22 Chapter 2 – Council wanted more information on the specific Consider updated the
Workshop Land Use parcels listed under Goal 1 Policy 1 and more list of sites based on
clarity on the Council’s role in preparing needs / interest from
redevelopment plans considering many of these landowners, add more
properties are privately owned. clarity to the City’s role
in preparing
redevelopment plans.
2-8-22 Chapter 2 – Council expressed a concern about references to Add more clarity in
Workshop Land Use public financing and how it creates a perception Comprehensive Plan to
that the City will provide public financing for where, when, how and
every project without additional evaluation of the why public financing
merits. Staff noted that the Comprehensive Plan would and would not be
is not the last word. It provides overall guidance considered.
but the City Council can direct staff to conduct
additional study and craft more specific policies
and programs to better define and interpret the
current Council’s position.
2-22-22 Chapter 2 – Our current TIF policy doesn’t separate Review the Baker Tilly
Workshop Land Use residential and commercial and is outdated. TIF Summary and
Council would like to see a comparison and update the City’s TIF
contrast of how it is now and recommendations Policy as a separate
from staff for how it could be improved. effort and reference the
updated TIF Policy in
the Comprehensive
Plan.
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – There are a lot of other subsidies such as Consider noting other
Workshop Housing Section 8 vouchers and mortgage assistance programs in the
programs that are not captured as publicly Housing Chapter and
subsided housing units in the existing local their contribution
condition chart. towards meeting the
City’s affordable
housing goals.
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – The Comprehensive Plan Area Median Income Reference current AMI
Workshop Housing (AMI) numbers listed in the plan are outdated. but do not include a
specific number
because it does not
change every year.
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – Desire to take a closer look at the Neighborhood Staff will review the
Workshop Housing Preservation and Enhancement Initiative’s NPEI, the process for
Housing Rehabilitation Strategic Framework approval and discuss
(NPEI). with Council if changes
should be made to
better reflect the Comp
Plan and the current
Council’s thinking.
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – What does it mean to develop plans under Goal Consider adding clarity
Workshop Housing 1 Policy 2? to the type of plans
referenced (finance
plan, management
plan).
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – What happens if you do not meet the Ensure the
Workshop Housing Metropolitan Council requirements? Ultimately it Comprehensive Plan
could end up in legal challenges or the City may remains legally
become ineligible to receive future grants under defensible, not in
the Livable Communities Act. conflict with regional
plan and fulfills our
requirements to be
eligible for funding.
3-29-22 Chapter 6 – How was the 791 units of affordable housing No change since the
Workshop Housing established? Staff clarified these numbers number is established
came directly from Metropolitan Council based by the Metropolitan
on a regional allocation formula. The Council.
Metropolitan Council does not require a City to
meet this number. The Metropolitan Council
does require (through review of the land use
plan conformity) that there is sufficient land use
and allowable densities programmed within the
City so that these units can feasibly be built. The
Metropolitan Council also will make sure that the
City has identified tools (within the housing
chapter) that could be used to accomplish the
goal.
3-29-22 Chapter 9 – There are multiple references to the City’s Remove references to
Workshop Neighborhoods emergency home rehabilitation loan program. this particular program
if discontinued by the
City and references
other active program
partnerships
3-29-22 Chapter 9 – City Council provided direction to consider Staff will work on
Workshop Neighborhoods adopting MN State Statutes 65A.50 Trust or adopting as a separate
Escrow Accounts: Insured Real Estate Property effort from the
Fire or Explosion Loss Proceeds into the City Comprehensive Plan
Code
3-29-22 Chapter 9 – How will our progress be tracked to meeting the Additional detail is
Workshop Neighborhoods adopted goals? provided in the
implementation chapter
which will be discussed
at a future workshop.
4-26-22 Chapter 3 – Goal 2 – Some of the policies seem outside the For additional clarity,
Workshop Transportation City’s ability to control such as burying suggest using words
powerlines along Highway 120 such as coordinating
with, advocating or
supporting the work of
others.
4-26-22 Chapter 3 – Goal 3 – Policy 5 states support for jurisdictional Consider removing
Workshop Transportation roadway transfers, Council discussed whether entirely or adding
we really wanted to support future jurisdictional additional explanation
transfers. It is unclear what the benefit would be that the transfer must
to the City for taking on the additional roadway be in the financial
responsibilities. interests of the City and
to the benefits of
residents
4-26-22 Chapter 3 – Goal 4. Consider adding a policy to support the Consider adding this
Workshop Transportation addition of a pedestrian walkway adjacent to the policy to the
40th Street bridge over I-694 improving access Comprehensive Plan.
from existing neighborhoods on the west side to Having this policy in
the Willowbrooke neighborhood on the east side place will help support
future funding requests
at the state and federal
level
4-26-22 Chapter 3 – Goal 5. Question about the City’s role in Policy Statement 3
Workshop Transportation collaborating with Metro Transit. Clarification could better specify
was provided that Metro Transit operates the that Metro Transit is the
regional system but the City can provide input on service provider
where routes can go
4-26-22 Chapter 7 – Goal 2. Question about whether this should be Unless causing harm
Workshop Economic two separate Goals, one focused on jobs and suggest leaving as one
Development other on quality of life Goal recognizing that
these Goals were the
result of a public
engagement process,
the policies under the
Goal could be better
aligned.
4-26-22 Chapter 7 – Goal 1 – Concern about the term Living Wage Consider adjusting the
Workshop Economic and how it might be misinterpreted as the city Goal to remove the
Development supporting a mandatory minimum wage word shall and replace
with encourage or use
an alternative term
other than living wage.
4-26-22 Chapter 7 – Policy 3 – ensuring adequate supply of land for Consider updating to
Workshop Economic new and expanding commercial and industrial reflect current realities
Development development may be out dated with the limited
amount of land remaining in the City
4-26-22 Chapter 7 - Policy 1 – Question about if the City really want Consider updating to
Workshop Economic to be spending a lot of resources attracting reflect current priorities
Development specific businesses?
5-24-22 Chapter 7 - Goal 2 – Policy 2 concern with the phrase Suggest adding
Workshop Economic “provide financing options” general consensus specification to clarify
Development from Council that we do not want to be in the that the City will not be
business of being a financial lender but are open a lender but will explore
to being a funding conduit in certain other conduit financing
circumstances options
5-24-22 Chapter 7 - Goal 2- Additional clarity needed between Clarify in the text that
Workshop Economic purpose of Policy 1 and Policy 2 Policy 1 focuses on
Development resources that others
provide and Policy 2
focuses on resources
potentially provided by
the City
5-24-22 Chapter 7 - Goal 2 – Policy 4 consensus remove reference to Remove the word
Workshop Economic affordable daycare because the City has no adorable
Development control over affordability of daycare
5-24-22 Chapter 7 - Goal 2 – use of the word shall for this goal is not Consider alterative
Workshop Economic appropriate since the City does not have direct word such as
Development control over the outcomes encourage, softening
language for other
goals and policies
should also be
considered
5-24-22 Chapter 7 - Goal 4 – Policy 2 concern that the Oakdale First Revisit the Oakdale
Workshop Economic Policy is actually enforceable by the City or if it First Policy as part of a
Development places too much burden on employers separate discussion
with Council
6-28-22 Chapter 4 – Goal 1 (Water Supply) – Policy 1 what is included Staff provided a
Workshop Water in a wellhead protection plan? summary, no changes
Resources requested
6-28-22 Chapter 4 – Goal 1 (Water Supply) – Policy 2 why do we only Staff clarified that those
Workshop Water reference MN Dept. of Public Health standards? standards are the most
Resources restrictive, no changes
requested
6-28-22 Chapter 4 – Goal 3 (Water Supply) – Policy 2 some concern Continue to evaluate
Workshop Water that utility rate differential is not great enough to utility billing rate
Resources encourage conservation structure
Comprehensive Plan
Parks and Trails and Resiliency
Chapters Overview
Oakdale City Council Workshop
August 8, 2022
Parks and Trails Chapter
Adopted Goals and Policies
2
Goal 1: Recreation programming and park improvements shall respond to the needs
and preferences of a diversity of ages, cultures, abilities and incomes.
Policies:
1. Continually evaluate the relevancy of
current recreational programming and
park amenities.
2. Deliver park programming directly within
Oakdale’s neighborhoods and continue
the Recreation Department’s pop-up park
program.
3. Pursue the acquisition and development
of the defunct par 3 golf course into a
passive park.
Goal 2: Recreational programming, park facilities, and open
space shall be accessible to all physical abilities and incomes.
Policies:
1. Develop a plan to ensure programming,
parks, and open spaces are accessible for
all abilities and incomes.
2. Develop a plan to ensure the public use of
open space, including wetlands, is open
to all pedestrians and bicyclists.
Goal 3: Parks shall be integrated into the City’s pedestrian
system.
Policies:
1. Develop a plan to connect parks to each other via the City’s trail
and sidewalk system.
Goal 4: Recreation programming shall engage the broader community in
program development and delivery.
Policies:
1. Evaluate the feasibility of
establishing a recreation and
maintenance volunteer program.
2. Evaluate opportunities to develop
service delivery and/or financial
partnerships with other
organizations.
3. Include a diversity of
stakeholders, to include age, race,
ethnicity, and income in parks and
recreation program planning.
Discussion
Resiliency Chapter
Adopted Goals and Policies
8
Goal 1: Consistent with state-wide goals, community-wide greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions shall be reduced 30 percent by 2025, and 80 percent by 2050 from 2007
levels in order to mitigate the impacts of climate change on the community.
Policies:
1. Promote reinvestment in residential and commercial
properties through energy efficiency education,
technical assistance, and financing programs *.
2. Connect low-income residents to home weatherization
and energy efficiency resources to encourage housing
stock reinvestment *.
3. Protect and encourage on-site solar energy
development that maintains community character while
utilizing local solar resources to the fullest potential *.
4. Adopt zoning regulations that will establish standards
for renewable energy technologies to ensure
neighborhood compatibility and access *.
* Indicates policy included in the 2022 Environmental Management Commission (EMC) Work Plan
Goal 1: Consistent with state-wide goals, community-wide greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions shall be reduced 30 percent by 2025, and 80 percent by 2050 from 2007
levels in order to mitigate the impacts of climate change on the community.
Policies (continued):
5. Promote and encourage residential and commercial
participation in green building programs as well as
renewable energy financing and purchasing programs
including PACE/other loan programs, community solar,
and wind power purchase programs *.
6. Support private and public infrastructure that
accommodates and encourages use of electric and
autonomous vehicles and explore options for City fleet
use of electric vehicles *.
7. Promote and encourage strategies that reduce waste
generation and increase options for reuse, recycling,
and composting of items in City operations, residential
and commercial developments *.
* Indicates policy included in the 2022 Environmental Management Commission (EMC) Work Plan
Goal 2: The City shall be prepared to respond effectively to climate change
by implementing adaption and resilience strategies.
Policies:
1. Ensure adequate stormwater system capacity to protect
property owners from localized flooding.
2. Utilize stormwater management areas as pollinator
habitat and neighborhood amenities.
3. Explore opportunities for creative re-use of stormwater
in the right-of-way to irrigate boulevard trees and other
landscaping.
4. Promote water conservation programs to protect
groundwater resources *.
5. Promote water infiltration techniques such as
raingardens and pervious pavers to replenish
groundwater resources.
* Indicates policy included in the 2022 Environmental Management Commission (EMC) Work Plan
Goal 2: The City shall be prepared to respond effectively to climate change
by implementing adaption and resilience strategies.
Policies (continued):
6. Continue to coordinate with Washington County and
other relevant emergency service agencies in the area
of hazard mitigation planning.
7. Continue programs which increase the tree canopy in
the City with disease-resistant species for air quality
and cooling benefits to the community.
8. Support the establishment and maintenance of
community gardens throughout the City to provide
residents with easy access to healthy food.
9. Adopt regulations that will establish standards for urban
farming to improve compatibility with neighboring
properties.
Relevance to 2022 Environmental Management
Commission (EMC) Work Plan
2022 EMC Work Plan
2040 Comp Plan Action Description
Promote energy efficiency and
Chapter 8, Goal 1, • Host a Solar Twin Cities Power Hour.
renewable energy in residential
Policies 1 & 5 • Promote Xcel Energy Rebate Programs, PACE, and Trillion BTU.
& commercial properties.
Connect low-income residents
Chapter 8, Goal 1,
to weatherization and EE Host a Citizens Utility Board (CUB) Bill Clinic.
Policy 2
resources.
• Analyze opportunity to reduce barriers to solar for businesses and residents through suggested implementation of
Chapter 8, Goal 1,
Increase access to solar. recommended solar best practices.
Policies 3 & 4
• Research SolSmart bronze level designation.
• Pass suggested zoning and subdivision ordinance amendments.
Chapter 8, Goal 1, EV-Ready Community Study • Analyze opportunity to transition one or more City fleet vehicles to an electric alternative.
Policy 6 priority action implementation. • Coordinate opportunities for electric vehicle and EV charging station education.
• Streamline EVSE permitting requirements with suggested process updates.
Chapter 8, Goal 1, Reduce waste generation and
Leverage funds from the Washington County Recycling Grant to promote recycling and waste reduction programs.
Policy 7 increase recycling.
Chapter 8, Goal 2, Promote Adopt-a-Drain (including EMC’s adoption of drains at Walton Park) through communication channels and at
Promote water conservation.
Policy 4 community events.
Chapter 3, Goal 4, Implement GreenStep Cities Complete the bike and pedestrian plan update to identify and remedy trail-gaps between city streets and off-road trails/bike
Policy 1 Best Practice Action 11.5. trails to better facilitate walking and biking.
Chapter 3, Goal 5, Implement GreenStep Cities Complete the bike and pedestrian plan update to increase active transportation and car travel alternatives (i.e. transit;
Policy 1 Best Practice Action 12.3. paratransit/Dial-A-Ride; ridesharing/cab services; rental cars; bikes; airports).
2021 GreenStep Cities metrics
Update metrics to reflect 2021 data and maintain GreenStep Cities designation.
reporting.
Discussion
CITY OF
OAKDALE 2040
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CHAPTER 5
PARKS AND TRAILS
Parks and trails are extremely important to
establishing and maintaining the quality of life
in a community, ensuring healthy lifestyles, and
adding to its economic and environmental
well-being. Parks provide gathering places
for social groups and families, as well as for
individuals of all ages and economic status.
Recreation programs and parks contribute
to the health of children, youth, adults and
seniors of all abilities. Parks improve the local
tax base and increase property values. Parks
are also proven to improve water quality,
improve the quality of the air, produce habitat
for wildlife, and provide a place for all to
connect with nature and recreate outdoors. An
active system of parks, trails, and recreation
programs is key to a healthy and vibrant City of
Oakdale.
48 Parks and Trails
GOAL 1 GOAL 3
Recreation programming and Parks shall be integrated into the
park improvements shall respond City’s pedestrian system.
to the needs and preferences of a POLICIES:
diversity of ages, cultures,
1. Develop a plan to connect parks to each other via
abilities and incomes. the City’s trail and sidewalk system.
POLICIES:
1. Continually evaluate the relevancy of current
GOAL 4
recreational programming and park amenities. Recreation programming shall
2. Deliver park programming directly within
engage the broader community
Oakdale’s neighborhoods and continue the in program development and
Recreation Department’s pop-up park program.
delivery.
3. Pursue the acquisition and development of the
POLICIES:
defunct par 3 golf course into a passive park.
1. Evaluate the feasibility of establishing a
GOAL 2 recreation and maintenance volunteer program.
Recreational programming, park 2. Evaluate opportunities to develop service
delivery and/or financial partnerships with other
facilities, and open space shall be organizations.
accessible to all physical abilities
3. Include a diversity of stakeholders, to include
and incomes. age, race, ethnicity, and income in parks and
recreation program planning.
POLICIES:
1. Develop a plan to ensure programming, parks,
and open spaces are accessible for all abilities and
incomes.
2. Develop a plan to ensure the public use of open
space, including wetlands, is open to all pedestrians
and bicyclists.
Parks and Trails 49
LOCAL PARKS AND TRAILS
Oakdale offers a variety of active and passive parks and recreation facilities to meet the needs of residents of all
ages, abilities, income, and cultural background.
Community Parks (Active): These parks provide for more intensive recreational activities, such as tennis courts,
ballfields, swimming, and ice skating rinks.
Trails (Active): Oakdale has an existing infrastructure of trails and bike lanes throughout the City. The majority are
located in roadway right-of-way and parallel to local streets. Active trails are paved for biking, roller blading, strollers,
and walking.
Preservation Parks (Passive): These parks are set in natural areas of the community where preservation of the
natural environment is the primary emphasis. Interpretive signage and educational features are found throughout
the park to promote the public awareness of natural systems. Hiking trails, wildlife sanctuaries, and picnic facilities
would be among the primary uses of such a park, which, in turn, would benefit natural wildlife, nature enthusiasts,
and related educational programs.
Open Space (Passive): Open Space areas have been designated throughout the City in order to preserve significant
natural features such as wetlands, wildlife habitat, and wooded areas. This land use is not utilized for recreational
purposes but provides aesthetic beauty and protects important natural systems that benefit the City in numerous ways.
Wildlife Corridors (Passive): These greenbelts are a dedicated strip of contiguous land ranging from 30-100 feet in
width, preferably in a native, undeveloped state, that maintains a “safe and secure” route for plant species, as well
as animals and birds to travel and migrate within the community and throughout the region.
Trails (Passive): Nature preserves and wooded areas have passive trails that are less invasive on the surrounding
environment. These soft surface trails utilize natural materials such as wood chips or mulch that typically need to be
maintained each year.
REGIONAL PARKS SYSTEM COMPONENTS
There are no Regional Parks System Components within Oakdale as
identified in the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan.
An Oakdale Recreation Pop-Up Parks event.
STATE LANDS
The Gateway State Trail connects
Oakdale to St. Paul and Stillwater
via 18 miles of paved trail.
Residents enjoying a program held at the Discovery Center’s outdoor amphitheater. A bicyclist travels on the Gateway Trail.
50 Parks and Trails
REGIONAL PARK
Regional Parks System SYSTEM
City of Oakdale, Washington County
White White Bear Lake Grant
Bear Mahtomedi
Twp. Pine
Springs
North St.
Paul
l
ai
Tr
te
S ta
y
wa
te
Ga
Maplewood
Oakdale
Lake
Elmo
St. Paul
Central
Greenway
Landfall
Battle
Woodbury
Creek
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5
Miles
Regional Parks Regional Park Search Areas and Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge
Existing Regional Trail Search Corridors State Parks
In Master Plan Boundary Adjustments State Wildlife Management Areas
Planned Parks and Reserves (Publicly Accessible)
Regional Trails Search Areas Scientific and Natural Areas (SNA)
Existing Regional Trails Other Parks and Preserves
Planned Regional Trails Regional Trail Search Corridors Existing State Trails
Regional Trail Corridor Land Street Centerlines (NCompass)
Regional Trails - 2040 System
Additions Lakes and Major Rivers
Parks and Trails 51
PARKS/TRAILS/PED’S
Parks & Trails Parks / Trails / Ped’s
GOLFVIEW TOT LOT
NORTHDALE PARK
FURLONG PARK
OAKFIELD PARK
OAKDALE PARK
Parks
OAKDALE DISCOVERY CENTER
PRESERVATION PARK
OAKDALE NATURE PRESERVE
Paths & Trails
Bikelane - Planned
Bikelane - Existing
GOODWIN PARK
Bikepath - Planned
GOOSEPOND PARK
EBERLE PARK
Bikepath - Existing
GARDEN BLVD PARK
Bike Route - Planned
Sidewalk - Existing
TILSEN II PARK
Pedestrian Sidewalk - Planned
TILSEN I PARK
Oakdale Nature Preserve Trails
Bituminous
Boardwalk
Grass
ARMSTRONG PARK
MEADOWS PARK
BETHKE PARK
EAGLE RIDGE PARK
EASTSIDE PARK
RICHARD WALTON PARK
HORSESHOE PARK
GUTHRIE PARK
OAK MARSH GOLF COURSE
TANNERS LAKE PARK
TITAN PARK
52 Parks and Trails CITY OF OAKDALE
_
CHAPTER 8
RESILIENCE
A resilient city is an environmentally, economically,
and socially healthy community that provides
residents with a high quality of life. Resilience is
important so cities are positioned to respond, adapt,
and thrive under changing conditions. The City’s
role in resilience is to protect the qualities that are
valued in the natural and built environments, and
to conserve the resources that make a functioning
society possible for future generations. Additionally,
increasing economic opportunity provides for a high
standard of living for residents. Lastly, resilience is
strengthened in cities with strong social capital that
are inclusive and facilitate the building of support
networks between residents.
64 Resilience
_
GOAL 1 GOAL 2
Consistent with state-wide goals, The City shall be prepared to
community-wide greenhouse gas respond effectively to climate
(GHG) emissions shall be reduced change by implementing adaption
30 percent by 2025, and 80 and resilience strategies.
percent by 2050 from 2007 levels POLICIES:
in order to mitigate the impacts of
1. Ensure adequate stormwater system capacity to
climate change on the community. protect property owners from localized flooding.
POLICIES:
2. Utilize stormwater management areas as
pollinator habitat and neighborhood amenities.
1. Promote reinvestment in residential and
commercial properties through energy efficiency
3. Explore opportunities for creative re-use of
education, technical assistance, and financing
stormwater in the right-of-way to irrigate boulevard
programs.
trees and other landscaping.
2. Connect low-income residents to home
4. Promote water conservation programs to protect
weatherization and energy efficiency resources to
groundwater resources.
encourage housing stock reinvestment.
5. Promote water infiltration techniques such as
3. Protect and encourage on-site solar energy
raingardens and pervious pavers to replenish
development that maintains community character
groundwater resources.
while utilizing local solar resources to the fullest
potential.
6. Continue to coordinate with Washington County
and other relevant emergency service agencies in
4. Adopt zoning regulations that will establish
the area of hazard mitigation planning.
standards for renewable energy technologies to
ensure neighborhood compatibility and access.
7. Continue programs which increase the tree
canopy in the City with disease-resistant species for
5. Promote and encourage residential and
air quality and cooling benefits to the community.
commercial participation in green building
programs as well as renewable energy financing
8. Support the establishment and maintenance of
and purchasing programs including PACE/other
community gardens throughout the City to provide
loan programs, community solar, and wind power
residents with easy access to healthy food.
purchase programs.
9. Adopt regulations that will establish standards
6. Support private and public infrastructure that
for urban farming to improve compatibility with
accommodates and encourages use of electric and
neighboring properties.
autonomous vehicles and explore options for City
fleet use of electric vehicles.
7. Promote and encourage strategies that
reduce waste generation and increase options
for reuse, recycling, and composting of items
in City operations, residential and commercial
developments.
Resilience 65
Gross and Rooftop Solar Resource Calculations
1: Gross Potential 2: Rooftop Potential 3. Gross Generation 4. Rooftop Generation
(Mwh/year) (Mwh/year) Potential (Mwh/year)2 Potential (Mwh/year)2
16,462,184 1,555,032 1,646,218 155,503
Source: Metropolitan Council
The gross and rooftop potentials in columns 1 and 2 are expressed in megawatt hours per year (Mwh/
year) and represent the gross potential resource before removing areas unsuitable for solar development or
factors relating to efficiency of conversion. They are not intended to demonstrate the amount of solar likely
to develop in the City.
The gross generation and rooftop generation potentials in columns 3 and 4 are estimates of how much
electricity could be generated using existing technology and conversion factors; however, they do not
consider building-specific structrual limitations or other factors. The rooftop generation potential is the
equivalent of 78 percent of the electricty used community-wide in year 2016.
66 Resilience
50TH ST N
Washington County 1 0T H ST N
DIVISION ST N
GROSS SOLAR POTENTIAL
7TH ST N
40TH ST N
694
GENEVA AVE N
HUDSON BLVD
HADLEY AVE N
34TH ST N
1/4/2017
0 0.5
GRANADA AVE N
Extent of Main Map
36 Oakdale
VD N ANOKA
R BL
ATE G
I LLW
ST
50TH ST N (W
WASHINGTON
HENNEPIN
RAMSEY
DIVISION ST N
15TH ST N
CARVER
1 0T H ST N
DAKOTA
SCOTT
HELMO AVE N
7TH ST N
40TH ST N
Source: Uni
694 4TH ST N
GENEVA AVE N
HUDSON BLVD
HADLEY AVE N
1/4/2017 34TH ST N
0 0.5 1 2 3 4
Extent of Main Map Miles
GRANADA AVE N
ANOKA
Gross Solar Potential
(Watt-hours per Year)
OakdaleWASHINGTON
HENNEPIN
High : 1278919
N
BLVD
ATER RAMSEY Low : 900001
I LLW
ST
CARVER Solar Potential under 900,000 watt-hours per year
County Boundaries
DAKOTA
SCOTT City and Township Boundaries
Wetlands and Open Water Features
Source: University of Minnesota U-Spatial Statewide Solar Raster.
15TH ST N
1 0T H ST N
HELMO AVE N
7TH ST N
4TH ST N
HUDSO N BLV D
Resilience 67
0 0.5 1 2 3 4
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Christina Volkers, City Administrator
Date: August 8, 2022
Subject: Funding for New Public Works Facility and New Police Facility
BACKGROUND
Much discussion has been held over the past three years regarding the need and subsequent plans for
these significant and critical building projects for the City of Oakdale.
During the 2021 Legislative session, our request to use Local Option Sales Tax (L.O.S.T.) for these two
capital projects was enacted into law for $22,000,000 maximum for the new Public Works Facility and
$15,000,000 maximum for the New Police Expansion and Remodel.
Due to many factors including supply chain issues and soaring costs of construction, the projected costs of
both projects is significantly higher than the most recent estimates from late 2020 and early 2021.
During the 2022 Legislative session, we introduced further legislation to seek the authority for increased
amounts for these two projects, but the MN Legislature ended their session without completing their work.
Discussion was held at the July 12, 2022 workshop regarding current cost projections for the new Public
Works facility, which is estimated at $31,578,800 plus all professional fees, FF&E, testing, inspections, road
salt building, and needed fuel island. We do not yet have projected costs for the Police Facility.
Because the 2021 legislatively authorized L.O.S.T. is maximized at an amount much less than what is
needed, discussion must be held regarding overall options for additional funding for both needed capital
projects.
COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED
Staff is seeking Council direction for additional funding of the future capital projects of a new Public Works
Facility and a new Police Facility.
1
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Christina Volkers, City Administrator
Date: August 8, 2022
Subject: Interim Ordinance Imposing a Moratorium on the Sale of Cannabis Products
BACKGROUND
Beginning on July 1, 2022, it became legal to sell certain products containing delta-9 THC (“THC Products”)
in Minnesota. The Act allows THC Products to be sold if certain requirements are met including that there
are not more than 5mg of THC per dose and 50mg of THC per container; the purchaser is at least 21 years
old; and the products are not marketed towards children. The Minnesota Board of Pharmacy (“Board”) is the
state agency with oversight of THC Products.
There is currently no state-level license required in order to sell THC Products and the Board does not test or
approve products prior to their sale.
RECOMMENDATIONS
After consultation with the City Attorney, staff recommends the City Council consider adopting an interim
moratorium ordinance to allow staff time to study the topic.
In addition, staff would determine if there is a need to study current City regulations regarding retailers with
a significant portion of their products and sales being of tobacco-related products.
Attached within is a draft of the interim moratorium ordinance for review and consideration. Given the
sensitivity of the matter, staff would be required to submit a public hearing notice for first reading and
anticipated adoption of an interim moratorium ordinance at the August 23, 2022 City Council meeting,
Additionally, at the August 23, 2022 City Council meeting, we would conduct the first reading of the proposed
interim ordinance authorizing studies and imposing a moratorium on the sale of Cannabis Products and on
the establishment or expansion of Tobacco Shops in city limits if the proposed draft is not revised.
Attachment
Proposed Interim Cannabis Moratorium Ordinance
1
CITY OF OAKDALE
ORDINANCE _____
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE IMPOSING A
MORATORIUM ON THE SALE OF CANNABIS PRODUCTS AND AUTHORIZING STUDIES
REGARDING SUCH PRODUCTS
The City Council of the City of Oakdale ordains:
Section 1. Legislative Findings and Authority
(A) There is a great deal of uncertainty regarding the effect of Minnesota Laws 2022, Chapter
98 amending Minnesota Statutes, section 151.72 (the “Act”) to allow the sale of edible
cannabinoid products (“Cannabis Products”).
(B) Because the proposal to allow the sale of Cannabis Products received little publicity until
the Act went into effect on July 1, 2022, the City of Oakdale did not have an opportunity to
study and consider the potential impacts of the Act or to engage in policy discussions
regarding the potential regulation of the sale of Cannabis Products in the City.
(C) The Act authorizes the Minnesota Board of Pharmacy to enforce the Act, but the Act does
not provide for any licensing of businesses that manufacture Cannabis Products or of
businesses that sell Cannabis Products and is also silent regarding the enactment of local
regulations related to Cannabis Products.
(D) The Act does not expressly prohibit or limit local regulations, but the regulations established
in the Act clearly do not constitute the Legislature having occupied the field of regulation
regarding the sale of Cannabis Products.
(E) The City Council finds the uncertainties associated with the sale of Cannabis Products, as
well as the options of local regulation, strongly suggests the need for a study to develop
information the City Council may use related to potential regulation of the sale of Cannabis
Products through the adoption of licensing and zoning controls.
(F) Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 462.355, subdivision 4(a), the City Council is
authorized to adopt an interim ordinance “to regulate, restrict, or prohibit any use . . . within
the jurisdiction or a portion thereof for a period not to exceed one year from the date it is
effective.”
(G) The City Council is also authorized as part of its general police powers to adopt business
licensing requirements related to the sale of Cannabis Products.
(H) The Minnesota Supreme Court in Almquist v. Town of Marshan, 245 N.W.2d 819 (Minn.
1976) upheld the enactment of a moratorium despite the lack of express statutory authority
as being a power inherent in a broad grant of power to municipalities. The enactment of
business licensing requirements is based on a city’s police powers, which is the broadest
grant of power to cities. Inherent in that broad grant of authority is the power to place a
temporary moratorium on a business to study and potentially implement licensing
regulations on that business.
1
(I) There are both licensing and zoning issues associated with the sale of Cannabis Products.
The City Council determines that it needs time to study the matter and to consider the
development and adoption of appropriate local regulations. To protect the planning process
and the health, safety, and welfare of the residents while the City conducts its study and the
City Council engages in policy discussions regarding possible regulations, the City Council
determines it is in the best interests of the City to impose a temporary moratorium on the
sale of Cannabis Products.
Section 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this Ordinance, the following words, terms, and phrases shall
have the meanings given them in this section.
(A) “Act” means 2022 Minnesota Session Laws, Chapter 98 (H.F. No. 4065), amending
Minnesota Statutes, section 151.72.
(B) “Cannabis Products” means Edible Cannabinoid Product and any other product that became
lawful to sell for the first time in Minnesota effective July 1, 2022, as a result of the adoption
of the Act.
(C) “Edible Cannabinoid Product” has the same meaning given the term in Minnesota Statutes,
section 151.72, subdivision 1(c).
Section 3. Study. The City Council authorizes and directs the city administrator to conduct a study
regarding Cannabis Products and provide a report to the City Council on the potential regulations relating
to the sale of such products. The report shall include recommendations on whether the City Council
should adopt regulations and, if so, the recommended types of regulations. The study shall consider, but
is not limited to, the following:
(A) The potential impacts of the sale of Cannabis Products within the City; and
(B) Licensing the sale of Cannabis Products and related regulations; and
(C) Zoning regulations related to the sale and distribution of Cannabis Products; and
(D) Enforcement Procedures.
Section 4. Moratorium. A moratorium is imposed within the City regarding the sale of Cannabis
Products. No business, person, or entity may sell Cannabis Products to the public within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City during the period that this Ordinance is in effect. The City shall not accept, process,
or act on any application, site plan, building permit, or zoning or other approval for a business proposing
to engage in the sale of Cannabis Products during the period that this Ordinance is in effect.
Section 5. Exceptions. The moratorium imposed by this Ordinance does not apply to the sale of medical
cannabis or hemp products that were lawful to sell prior to the effective date of the Act.
Section 6. Enforcement. Violation of this Ordinance is a misdemeanor. In addition, the City may
enforce this Ordinance by mandamus, injunction, or other appropriate civil remedy in any court of
competent jurisdiction.
Section 7. Severability. Every section, provision, and part of this Ordinance is declared severable from
2
every other section, provision, and part of this Ordinance. If any section, provision, or part of this
Ordinance is held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such judgment shall not invalidate
any other section, provision, or part of this Ordinance.
Section 8. Effective Date and Term. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after
its adoption and publication, as provided by law. This Ordinance shall remain in effect for one year after
its effective date, or until the City Council expressly repeals it or until the effective date of an ordinance
amending the City Code to address Cannabis Products, whichever occurs first.
AYES:
NAYS: None.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Oakdale this __ day of August, 2022.
________________________________________
Paul Reinke, Mayor
Attest:
_________________
Katie Robinson, Deputy City Clerk
3
Get email alerts for Oakdale
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.