City Council Workshop

AGENDA City Council Workshop Meeting March 26, 2024 Hadley Conference Room 5:00 PM 5:00 PM Discussion with Independent School District #622 Superintendent Christine Tucci Osorio, Assistant Superintendent Ty Thompson, and School Board Chair Kita Yang (no attachment – verbal discussion only) 5:30 PM Review of Pawnbroker License and Precious Metals Dealer License Restrictions within the City 5:45 PM Management Discussion – Acting Public Works Director / Fire Chief 6:05 PM 2024 Parks and Recreation Commission Work Plan & Future Activities of Parks and Recreation Commission 6:15 PM City Attorney Presentation: Open Meeting Law, Serial Meetings, More 6:35 PM Administrator Update 6:40 PM Council Topics 6:55 PM Adjourn for Regular Meeting  COUNCIL MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Christina M. Volkers, City Administrator Sara Ludwig, City Clerk Date: March 26, 2024 Time: 5:30 PM Subject: Review of Pawnbroker License and Precious Metals Dealer License Restrictions within the City BACKGROUND At a prior workshop meeting it was suggested that the City reconsider permitting only one pawnshop within the City. The following is a brief timeline related to pawnshop and precious metals dealer licensing within the City. 2010 At the July 13, 2010 City Council meeting, the Council unanimously approved the first Pawnbroker/Precious Metals Dealer License within the City. 2011 At the January 25, 2011 City Council meeting, instead of establishing a public hearing to consider the issuance of a Pawnbroker/Precious Metals Dealer License to a second applicant, the Council unanimously voted to establish a moratorium relating to pawnshops. At the February 8, 2011 City Council meeting, Ordinance No. 752 was approved 3-2, establishing a 12- month interim licensing and planning moratorium relating to pawnshops. The moratorium was requested as pawnshops were not listed as an approved use in the City at the time of the license application and the Council wanted the opportunity to review the matter in more detail. Also approved, by a 4-1 vote, was Resolution 2011-19, directing the completion of a study on the regulation of pawnshops and preparation of official controls based on that study. At the March 8, 2011 City Council meeting, Resolution 2011-27, denying the second pawnbroker license application, was unanimously approved. At the August 23, 2011 City Council workshop meeting, staff presented findings from the study on the regulation of pawnshops. The Council discussed limiting the number of pawnshops in the City and establishing minimum distance requirements. An excerpt of the minutes is attached. At the September 27, 2011 City Council workshop meeting, staff presented additional information for Council consideration. The Council discussed the differences between pawnshops and precious metals dealers, and the Police Department provided a recommendation. An excerpt of the minutes is attached. At the October 11, 2011 City Council meeting, Ordinance No. 758 was approved, repealing Ordinance No. 752, and establishing City of Oakdale Code of Ordinances, Chapter 9, Article 1, Section 9-12 (13) which states, “Not more than 1 pawn shop license shall be issued.” Also included in Ordinance No. 758 was Section 9-10 (3) (c) which states, “A pawnshop license can only be granted if the pawnshop is located more than 150 feet, as measured from the closest point of the property line where the pawnshop is located to the closest point of the property line of another pawnshop, currency exchange business, school, church, or residentially zoned property”; and includes a map depicting the areas in the City where a pawnshop license can be granted. 1 At the November 22, 2011 City Council meeting, the Council unanimously approved the renewal of the only Pawnbroker/Precious Metals Dealer License within the City. 2012 At the August 28, 2012 City Council workshop meeting, the Council discussed restrictions on precious metals dealers. At the September 11, 2012 City Council meeting, the Council unanimously approved the establishment of a public hearing to consider issuance of a precious metals dealer license. At the September 25, 2012 City Council meeting, Ordinance No. 768 was unanimously approved, establishing City of Oakdale Code of Ordinances, Chapter 9, Article 1, Section 9-12 (14) which states, “Not more than 1 precious metal dealer license shall be issued.” At the September 25, 2012 City Council meeting, the Council unanimously approved the first Precious Metals Dealer License within the City. At the October 23, 2012 City Council meeting, Ordinance No. 770 was unanimously approved, amending City of Oakdale Code of Ordinances, Chapter 25, Article 13, Section 25-74 (a), which allows for pawnshops and precious metals dealers in the Community Commercial (C-2) District. 2013 At the April 9, 2013 City Council meeting, Ordinance No. 774 was unanimously approved, amending City of Oakdale Code of Ordinances, Chapter 9, Article 1, relating to the regulations of pawnbrokers, precious metals dealers, and secondhand goods dealers within the City. At the November 12, 2013 City Council meeting, the Council unanimously approved the renewal of the only Pawnbroker License within the City. 2014 At the November 25, 2014 City Council meeting, the Council denied a request to increase the number of pawnbroker licenses issued for the City from one to two, by a vote of 4 to 1. At the time, the Planning Commission favored the change by a vote of 4 to 2. PRESENT Currently, the only pawnbroker license is issued to Twin Cities Pawn, and the solo precious metals dealer license remains open. Staff researched pawnbroker license and precious metals dealer license information for surrounding cities, and below are the findings. Of note, Oakdale is the only city in Washington County that currently has a pawnshop. As for bordering Ramsey County cities, Maplewood has one pawnshop located on the far west side of the city on Rice Street. City Type of License Number of License Businesses Currently Licensed Cottage Grove Pawnbroker No Limit; Regulated by distance – Must 0 be 300’ from schools and churches. Precious Metals Dealer No Limit; License can be combined with 0 Pawnbroker License Woodbury Pawnbroker No Limit 0 Precious Metals Dealer No Limit 0 2  Hugo Neither Pawnbroker or N/A N/A Precious Metals Dealer Mahtomedi Pawnbroker Only; No No Limit 0 Precious Metals Dealer North St. Paul Pawnbroker Only; No 1 0 Precious Metals Dealer Maplewood Pawnbroker Only; No 1 1 Precious Metals Dealer POLICE DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION The Police Department has found no evidence or data to suggest having more than one pawnshop creates a negative impact to the community or drain on police services. In 2022, the Police Department responded to Twin Cities Pawn 13 times, one of which was a crime involving a burglary of the business. In 2023, the Police Department responded to Twin Cities Pawn nine times. Three of the nine calls for service involved a crime; two thefts and one burglary. COUNCIL DIRECTION REQUESTED Staff is requesting that Council discuss the City Code of Ordinances language related to pawnbroker and precious metals dealer licenses and other presented information, and provide direction and intent on any proposed changes. Attachments Excerpt of the August 23, 2011 City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes Excerpt of the September 27, 2011 City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes 3  CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES City of Oakdale August 23, 2011 5 p.m. Pawn Shops Administrator Waldron explained that as part of the 12-month pawnshop moratorium established on February 8, 2011, staff had been directed to compile information about pawnshops in the metropolitan area. Community Development Director Streetar provided an overview of a survey that had been conducted and a comparison of pawnshop regulations from other communities. He also reviewed possible options the City Council could consider: doing nothing, limiting the number, establishing a minimum distance, or limited the number and establishing a minimum distance. Community Development Director Streetar explained that pawnshops are not explicitly identified in the city’s zoning code, only as a permitted use in a C-2 district and pursuant to council approval. Based on the city not limiting the number of any other businesses, with the exception of adult entertainment stores, Councilmember Dotas did not support limiting the number of pawnshops. He added that consignment shops, thrift stores, and pawnshops have gained popularity due to the current economy. Councilmember Dotas commented that Twin City Tattoo appeared to be well run. He stated his preference of monitoring the quality of all businesses in the city. In response to a question from Councilmember Dotas, Community Development Director Streetar explained that should the City Council move to limit the number of pawnshops in the city, the Council could also increase that number in the future. Councilmember Karwoski suggested that the city’s expectations relating to pawnshops be detailed up front. Councilmember Dotas commented on how difficult it would be to pass up on the investment Max It Pawn would make at the site vacant service station in the northeast corner of highways 120 and 36. Councilmember Reinke supported allowing one pawnshop in the city and a setback of 500’ from residentially-zoned property. He stated that other pawnshops were available nearby. Councilmember Karwoski concurred with limiting the number of pawnshops to one. He suggested tightening up the distance from residential areas and churches. Community Development Director Streetar presented a map that depicted the C-2 zoning districts where pawnshops could be located, if approved, and noted that establishing a distance requirement would eliminate some of the areas. He commented on the various ways to establish distance. In response to a question from Councilmember Dotas on pawn shop applications, Community Development Director Streetar explained that if a license was available, the license application would first go to the police department followed by the site plan request going to the planning department for review. Acting Mayor Pulkrabek supported limiting the number of pawnshops to two and would like more information about minimum distance requirements. Councilmember Reinke supported limiting the number of pawnshops to one and to establishing a minimum distance. Councilmember Dotas supported limiting the number of pawnshops to two to allow for the city to consider the proposal put forth by Max It Pawn. He asked whether the City Council could decrease the number of available licenses should ownership change or other factors. Community Development Director Streetar replied that the city attorney would need to respond. In response to an inquiry from Councilmember Dotas about their concerns relating to pawnshops, Councilmember Reinke commented that one pawnshop would meet the needs of the community and Councilmember Karwoski stated that residents have not been requesting additional pawnshops. Councilmember Dotas requested that Police Chief Sullivan provide the City Council with a brief report on his experience with pawnshops. Staff was directed to develop maps based on the minimum distance scenarios from residentially- zoned property, churches, schools and other pawnshops in Oakdale and surrounding communities.  CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES City of Oakdale September 27, 2011 5 p.m. Pawnshops Administrator Waldron noted that staff had compiled the information requested by the City Council at the August 23 workshop. Community Development Director Streetar provided a map showing the C-2 zoning districts that would permit pawnshops as well as where pawnshops would be permitted with a 150 foot setback and a 500 foot setback from the zoning district boundary. He noted that the site being considered by Max It Pawn at highways 36 and 120 would not be an approved site with setbacks established. Mayor Sarrack supported setting a number of pawnshops desired in the city rather than defining setbacks. He also asked that this action be made on October 11 as well as ending the moratorium on pawnshops. Police Chief Sullivan noted that the license for the existing pawnshop would be up for renewal in the next few weeks. Councilmember Karwoski supported having just one pawnshop in the city and also supported establishing a setback to provide more control. Councilmember Pulkrabek supported a maximum of two pawnshops and a 500’ setback, the same as for the City of Maplewood. Councilmember Reinke commented that pawnshops are detrimental to the image of a community. In response to an inquiry, Police Chief Sullivan stated that the department wrote a letter of recommendation concerning the operation of the current pawnshop. Councilmember Dotas asked about the process should issues arise with a pawnshop. Community Development Director Streetar replied that the Planning Department would address maintenance code violations of the property. Police Chief Sullivan commented on the difficulties and expense in revoking or not renewing licenses. He agreed with setting the number of pawnshop licenses at one. In response to a question from Councilmember Reinke, Administrator Waldron explained that the City Council could chose to increase the number of licenses. In response to a question from Councilmember Pulkrabek, Police Chief Sullivan stated that pawnshops serve a good service, especially in the current economy, but that having only one license would be easier. The City Council discussed the differences between pawnshops (offer loans) and precious metal dealers. Mayor Sarrack noted that jewelry stores buy metal as well. In response to a question, Police Chief Sullivan explained that should the business be sold, the license transfer process would the same as for liquor establishments. In addition, he suggested that the city attorney review the part of the code relating to precious metal. Councilmember Dotas asked about approving a second license for the Max It Pawn request. Councilmember Karwoski supported just one license being allowed. Mayor Sarrack cautioned that another applicant other than Max It Pawn could apply for the license. In that light, Councilmember Dotas supported having only one pawnshop license. In response to a question from Councilmember Dotas, Community Development Director Streetar that interested parties would be told whether a license was available or not and if not, the party could make a request to the City Council to increase the number of licenses. Councilmember Karwoski noted that should Twin City Pawn move out of Oakdale, he would like a 150 foot setback in place for the next licensee. Councilmembers Dotas and Pulkrabek agreed. Community Development Director Streetar indicated that an ordinance would be developed setting the number of licenses at one and adopting a corresponding map depicting where pawnshops would be permitted. Staff was directed to have the City Attorney preliminarily review the portions of the city code relating to precious metal dealers and tobacco shops, including limiting the number of each.  COUNCIL MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Kevin Wold, Acting Public Works Director / Fire Chief Date: March 26, 2024 Time: 5:45 PM Subject: Management Discussion – Acting Public Works Director BACKGROUND The Acting Public Works Director (aka Fire Chief) will provide an update on completed Public Works projects over the last several months. Due to the changes and restructuring within the Public Works Department, the Acting Public Works Director would like to provide an update on hiring and the current reorganization plan within the department. Below are some additional accomplishments and items for discussion as time allows: STREET DIVISION • Slow snow season, but continue to plow and treat roadways as needed • Working on street sign change out and pothole patching • With the warm weather crews have started spring street sweeping ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION • Crews have worked and continue to work on Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) removals which includes stump grinding and restoration of these areas • Maintaining storm drains • Performed work on drainage pipe replacement on the grass trails in Oakdale Nature Park PARKS DIVISION • Brought in 118 picnic tables to replace and repair boards and frames, and re-painted all • Removed all park signs by sanding and repainting • Performed tot-lot/playground inspections and made the necessary repairs to all structures • Wood chipped the entire dog park entrance and trail system in December • Went through all mowing/ballfield drag equipment for the upcoming season • Put out all tennis and pickleball nets UTILITY DIVISION • Repaired the main valve at Well 9 • Well 3 has been pulled. Staff is waiting for parts so it can put back in service • Fewer water main breaks this winter season (only 5), mostly due to the unusually mild weather • Wastewater o Weekly inspections and cleaning of lift stations o The crew is trying a new method, as opposed to the chemical de-greaser that has been used in the past, to minimize FOG (Fats, Oil, Grease) in the lift station wet wells by using Bactodose. It is a treatment process that will hopefully lower maintenance costs • Street Lighting o Continue to replace HPS bulbs or LED fixtures as they come in • Gopher One Call o Crews had 680 locates from December to March. Many of the calls were for the Gold Line Project and Willowbrooke Development 1  COUNCIL MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Christina M. Volkers, City Administrator Date: March 12, 2024 Time: 6:05 PM Subject: 2024 Parks and Recreation Commission Work Plan & Future Activities of Parks & Recreation Commission BACKGROUND At the January 23, 2024 Council workshop meeting, the City Council requested that a summary report from each advisory body work plan and discussion between Council and the Parks and Recreation Commission be brought to a subsequent workshop meeting for final Council review prior to the advisory body formally adopting their work plan. The Parks and Recreation Commission met with members of the City Council at their February 20, 2024 regular meeting to discuss their 2024 work plan and future activities of the Parks and Recreation Commission. The attached documents relate to that discussion. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Staff is requesting that Council review the attachments and provide any additional comments for consideration by the Parks and Recreation Commission in regard to their proposed 2024 work plan. Further, Council should discuss their intent for the future of the Parks and Recreation Commission and their work. Attachments Draft 2024 Parks and Recreation Commission Work Plan February 20, 2024 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes Excerpt  Draft - 2024 Parks and Recreation Commission Work Plan Title Reference Document Description/Tasks 1. Conduct a Commission meeting once or twice a Community Member year at an outside picnic shelter to promote Outreach\Engagement N/A community engagement and participation. 2. Use community members to obtain feedback on topics under consideration. 1. Review proposed CIP drafts and if appropriate Capital Improvement provide comments for City Council’s Projects Parks CIP consideration. Promote New and Relevant Comprehensive Plan – 1. Continue to talk with residents seeking input in Recreation Programming Parks and Trails Chapter 5, regards to the needs and preferences of all Goal 1, Policy 1 ages, cultures, abilities and incomes. 1. Schedule and participate in the annual park tours to gain knowledge of current park Commissioner Education N/A conditions, projects, etc. 2. Each month, assign a Commissioner to attend a recreation program/special event and a park location to gain additional knowledge/exposure. 1. Each member of the PRC will attend an annual City Policy CC-002, 14 training session. Annual Commission Training 1. The City is undergoing an update to the Parks Master Plan. SRF has been chosen to lead the Oakdale Park System Plan project. The Parks & Recreation Commission is Update SRF Park System Plan the lead commission in this effort and will play Update an important role in providing input and City of Oakdale feedback on the planning process. The SRF team is scheduled to present to the Commission during the April meeting.  WORKSHOP PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION City of Oakdale February 20, 2024 The Oakdale Parks and Recreation Commission held a meeting on Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota. The meeting began at 6:30 PM with the Parks and Recreation Commission appreciation dinner hosted by the City Council. Informal discussion with the City Council occurred during the appreciation dinner regarding the annual work plan and future of the Parks and Recreation Commission. The following were present: Chair: Steve Meyer Vice Chair: Glen Giacoletto Commissioners: Glen Bearth Jan Cunningham Mark Giannini Kari Moore Jen Schorr Also Present: Jeff Koesling, Parks Superintendent Julie Williams, Recreation Superintendent Andy Gitzlaff, Community Development Director Andy Morcomb, City Council Jake Ingebrigtson, City Council Noah Her, City Council PURPOSE OF WORKSHOP Council Member Morcomb thanked the Commissioners for their service guiding Council. The Mayor is travelling out of town and unable to attend the thank you dinner and workshop. Council Member Morcomb discussed that the workshop has no formal agenda, and that Council is seeking feedback with the opportunity to sit down together. Thoughts and ideas are welcome, as there is a unique opportunity to plan new parks at Willowbrooke and the 4th Street Rapid Transit development. The Commission will be involved this year in a parks study that will determine a strategic plan for the future of the City park planning. He received a 2018 Playground Book from former Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Maxine Bethke, which he shared with the Commissioners. He opened the discussion to hear what members like or may want to change. COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION OF NEW IDEAS AND GOALS Chair Meyer would like to continue to visit and open up parks. Televising live meetings at ice rinks may have been possible this winter if there were ice. Walton Park is the premier park; a televised meeting could first take place there. The community could give feedback. Councilmember Ingebrigtson noted that the City turning 50 years old has meant that the useful life of infrastructure is coming to an end for City Hall, the police building, public works, fire department PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION February 20, 2024 Page 2 (in 5 to 10 years), Walton Park, and several parks needing attention, preferably immediately. From a budget perspective, there is a limited amount to spend without increasing taxes to tackle projects at once. It will take several years to smooth out the City’s infrastructure needs. Commissioner Moore recommended a messaging campaign that City infrastructure is 50 years old, and recognizing that the community may have priorities. Council Member Ingebrigtson can bring the suggestion to City Administrator Volkers during Council Topics. The Willowbrooke development helps with added tax revenue but will be offset by a few years by the commitment to pay $3 million for the Willowbrooke Park. Council Member Morcomb discussed how Capital Improvement Planning has identified parks needing playground replacement prior to his service on the Council. Rather than jumping in on replacing playgrounds at Tilsen or Oakdale Park, the decision was made to hold off and develop a larger strategic plan. Superintendent Williams indicated that the parks strategic plan will be presented to Commissioners in April. Director Gitzlaff expanded that the parks strategic planning kicked off a couple weeks ago. Staff involved include himself, Community Development Specialist Hannah Dunn, and the project management team; Julie Williams and Jeff Koesling. Working together with the consultants, the project will take a year or maybe a little over. He continued that the Commissioners will play a big role in shaping and guiding the ultimate plan design for the next 20 plus years. At the April meeting, goals will be drafted, and the vision for the study will be based on guidance from the comprehensive plan. A robust engagement plan will include involving organized groups such as the Wellness 50+, Oakdale Area Chamber of Commerce, and schools for input, along with an online survey in a couple weeks. Commissioners can assist with distributing the survey. An online mapping component will allow city-wide comments on what amenities are desired, and not desired, by localizing the feedback by clicking on the park locations. Mr. Gitzlaff explained that the first phase includes data analysis, trends, and park inventory tours. The Council was clear that they wanted all 28 parks in the system studied, not just a couple. Some may just have grass and may change uses. Being deliberate about gathering public input and engaging with the Commission will help develop park plans for each park, prioritize where to start, and identify funding through grants at the federal and state level. As the City grows, the need for parks and amenities grows; how will the City realistically maintain them? The Parks and Recreation Commission will be the body to prioritize and make recommendations to Council. The Planning Commission and Environmental Management bodies will also be involved. City Council ultimately decides on plan adoption. Chair Meyer asked if any theme stood out as a problem facing the parks. Mr. Gitzlaff has been with the City for two years and has learned that there are a couple parks without programming, Americans with Disabilities Act challenges with the steep hill at Tower Park, that Tanners, Walton, Eastside and Willowbrooke are big community draw parks, and that the Parks PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION February 20, 2024 Page 3 and Recreation Superintendents are a resource for park knowledge and history. The consultant team takes notes and inventory and are the experts brought in for new ideas. Vice Chair Giacoletto noted that Armstrong Park is a good example of a park that the neighbors were unaware of. Council Member Ingebrigtson asked about parks being left passive and without amenities. He focused on crown jewels like Walton and Willowbrooke. Mr. Koesling has seen the traditional park with a playground changing toward planning for more open space. Commissioner Cunningham relayed that the neighbors of Eagle Ridge Park do not want the park programmed there. Council Member Ingebrigtson guessed that the City would purchase the land of the old Par 3 course if the owners would reduce their cost, however it does not seem likely. The neighboring residents have been unhappy when a fence was suddenly put up on the property. Mr. Koesling identified that some of those neighboring residents encroached 40 to 50 feet onto the property, building a shed and every other use, for 30 years and have gotten away with it. Council Member Morcomb, noting that money is already allocated for CIP projects, sought ways to promote, celebrate, and engage park improvements. Chair Meyer would like to inform residents what projects are coming. The Commission has been very focused on parks but not as focused on recreation. He would like locations found to place volleyball and pickleball. Council Member Ingebrigtson argued that he believes private enterprise will fulfill the need for pickleball. Any building capable of housing pickleball courts is getting leased right now. Players are willing to spend $40-50 an hour for play time. Why offer for free when the market bares that? Vice Chair Giacoletto added that The Burrow in Oakdale has four courts. Mr. Koesling replied to a question made by Commissioner Cunningham and said that the trees at Eastside were removed due to Emerald Ash Borer and will be replaced in the spring. Commissioner Giannini is involved with the Oakdale Athletic Association (OAA) and expressed that the organization is looking to partner with the City to improve football and ballfield field areas with money to spend. He replied to Councilmember Ingebrigtson that he was unaware of the OAA requesting to do pull tabs at Summerfest. Mr. Koesling recalled there only being pull tabs at Summerfest once. He thought there may have been talk of the OAA wanting to do pull tabs but there may not have been staff. Pull tabs make money. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION February 20, 2024 Page 4 Commissioner Moore began marathon training this week for Grandma’s Marathon. She suggested creating a route map that connects parks so runners may have a 10-mile route that features visits to get to know local Oakdale parks. Council Member Ingebrigtson liked the 4th Street Bridge route and guessed it would be about 10 miles running up 4th Street along Helmo Avenue to 34th Street and back to Hadley Avenue. Commissioner Shore would like to have a more user-family online parks map. She was unable to filter playgrounds or shelters to see the locations featuring the amenities on a city-wide map, and only able to view a single park at a time. She has a three-year-old and would like to find playgrounds. She wondered if grass lots need to be kept a park, such as Wilkerson Park nearby where she lives. Council Member Ingebrigtson agreed and suggested offering the land for purchase to adjacent landowners. Commissioner Shore continued that she felt uncomfortable visiting Bethke Park because walking through the park felt like walking along someone’s private driveway. Council Member Ingebrigtson asked if the City was any closer to acquiring the Brockman property. The time allotted for the meeting had ended. Council Member Morcomb closed the meeting at 6:58 PM. The Parks and Recreation Commission moved to the dais for continuation of regular business and broadcasting. [Remainder of minutes to be completed by staff liaison] NEXT MEETING: Tuesday, February 20, 2024, 7 PM, Oakdale City Hall  COUNCIL MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Christina Volkers, City Administrator Date: March 26, 2024 Time: 6:15 PM Subject: City Attorney Presentation: Open Meeting Law, Serial Meetings, More BACKGROUND At Tuesday’s workshop, City Attorney Thomson will provide the annual overview of the Open Meeting Law, discuss serial meetings, and provide additional information pertinent to elected officials. Attachment Presentation Slides  Open Meeting Law • 1983 Court Decision (Moberg v. Robbinsdale School District) Serial communication between members can also defined “meeting” as a gathering violate the Open Meeting of a quorum or more of the City Law! Council at which they discuss, decide, or receive information as Is this a group on matters relating to meetin g open? city business • “Electronic gatherings” did not exist in 1983 1 Quote From 1983 Court Decision “Of course, serial meetings in groups of less than a quorum for purposes of avoiding public hearings or fashioning agreement on an issue may also be found to be a violation of the statute depending upon the facts of the individual case.” 1  Definition of “Serial Meeting” Gatherings of less than a quorum for the purposes of avoiding public meeting or fashioning agreement on an issue and done with the intent of avoiding the requirements of the OML Serial Meeting Determination  Whether a “serial meeting” has occurred depends on two factual determinations: – What was the purpose of the meeting; and – What was the intent of the elected officials who participated in the meeting? 2  1996 North Mankato Case  Applicants for city administrator were serially interviewed by all five members of the City Council in one-on-one closed interviews  The five city councilmembers were present in the same building, but each conducted separate interviews in five different rooms.  Because there was no quorum present in any of the rooms, the trial court found there was no meeting 1996 North Mankato Case  Court of Appeals reversed and sent the case back for the trial court to make a factual determination on whether the council members used the one-on-one interview process in order to avoid the requirements of the OML  Trial court found that the private interviews were not conducted for the purpose of avoiding a public meeting.  The case was again appealed, and the court of appeals upheld the trial court’s decision.  Conclusion: Gatherings involving less than a quorum of a public body held for the purpose of avoiding the requirements of the OML constitute “serial meetings” and violate the OML. 3  E-Mails and Open Meetings  Can e-mails constitute a “serial meeting”?  A 2012 Unpublished Court of Appeals Decision (O’Keefe v. Carter) said no  2009 and 2017 IPAD Advisory Opinions said yes O’Keefe v. Carter  Recently defeated town board member sued for open meeting violations  Claims were based on email exchanges between town board members  Email exchanges are not “meetings” because the OML does not apply to written communications, like email 4  IPAD Advisory Opinion No. 09-20  Newspaper reporter sends email to a board member asking for comments on a previously published newspaper article  Board member sends a proposed statement to other board members  Seven board members respond with comments and cc all other board members IPAD OPINION 09-20  Emails among members of joint powers board (Metro Gang Strike Task Force) concerning contents of press release violated the Open Meeting Law 5  IPAD OPINION 09-20  Commissioner concluded that a quorum or more of the board commented and provided direction to the board member regarding the statement  The group emails were the functional equivalent of a “meeting” IPAD OPINION 09-20  If the board member had taken action without consulting a quorum of the board, no violation would have occurred  A “one-way communication” is permissible 6  Social Media In 2014, the OML was amended to state that “use of social media by members of a public body does not violate the open meeting law as long as the social media use is limited to exchanges with all members of the general public.” Emails are not considered “social media” for purposes of the new law. Hypothetical #1 • Mayor learns that a legislative committee is having a hearing in two days on a bill that she believes will adversely affect the City. • Mayor contacts all council members, and they gather at her house that night. The mayor gets authority to send a letter to the chair of the committee opposing the bill. • OML Violation? YES 7 • Instead of scheduling a gathering at her house, the mayor schedules a Zoom session with all of the council members. During the Zoom session, the mayor gets authority to send a letter to the chair of the committee opposing the bill. OML Violation? YES • Instead of holding a Zoom session, the mayor drives to each council member’s homes. Each council member gives her approval to send a letter to the chair of the committee opposing the bill. OML Violation? YES Instead of meeting individually with each council member, the mayor calls each of them individually. Each council member gives her approval to send a letter to the chair of the committee opposing the bill. OML Violation? YES Instead of calling each council member individually, the mayor emails each council member seeking approval to send a letter to the chair of the committee opposing the bill. Each council member individually emails the mayor and gives her approval to do so. OML Violation? YES 8 • Instead of individually emailing each council member, the mayor sends a group email to all council members seeking approval to send a letter to the chair of the committee opposing the bill. Each council member individually emails the mayor giving her approval to do so. OML Violation? YES • Same as above, except that each council member copies all other council members on their reply email to the mayor OML Violation? YES • Instead of the mayor individually meeting with, calling, or emailing each council member, the mayor askes the city administrator to do so. After doing so, the city administrator tells the mayor that each council member has authorized her to send a letter to the chair of the committee opposing the bill. OML Violation? NO • What should the mayor and council members have done? Call an emergency meeting 9  Hypothetical #2  Council members receive their packets. One of the items is a controversial matter that the council has not previously discussed at a meeting. - Council Member A contacts Council Member B to discuss the matter before the council meeting. OML Violation? NO - Council member A then contacts Council Members C and D to discuss the mater. OML Violation? Probably - Council Member A does not contact any council member other than Council Member B, but Council Member B contacts all the other council members and tells them about her conversation with Council Member A. OML Violation? Probably ADVICE  Don’t rely on O’Keefe  With respect to the OML, treat emails (or tweets or text messages) like phone calls  Do not engage in email conversations, serial or otherwise, between more than one other council member  Even a “one-way” email can quickly turn into a series of emails  Work through the city administrator  Remember that emails between council members will almost always be public data 10