City Council Workshop

WORKSHOP MINUTES OAKDALE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 8, 2025 The City Council held a workshop on Tuesday, April 8, 2025 at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota. The meeting began at 5:00 PM. Present: Mayor Kevin Zabel Council Members: Andy Morcomb Kari Moore Gary Severson Susan Willenbring City Staff Members: Christina Volkers, City Administrator Brian Bachmeier, Consulting City Engineer Hannah Dunn, Community Development Specialist Jake Foster, Assistant City Administrator Andy Gitzlaff, Community Development Director Melanie Lee, Human Resources Director Lori Pulkrabek, Communications Manager Kyle Stasica, Finance Director Cory Tietz, Public Works Director Kevin Wold, Fire Chief Others Present: Stewart Crosby, Project Manager, SRF Consulting Group Shaunna Newton, Landscape Architectural Designer, SRF PARK SYSTEM PLAN UPDATE Community Development Specialist Hannah Dunn explained the scoring system used for the existing conditions assessments of City parks. The updated assessments were used to inform the updated phasing and prioritization matrix. Ms. Dunn was looking for Council support of the finalized matrix which will be used to develop the final Park System Plan. Shaunna Newton, Landscape Architectural Designer with SRF, went over the restructuring of the phasing and prioritization matrix, the updates to the existing conditions scores, the phasing adjustments as it relates to short-, mid-, and long-term categorization, and lastly the total cost for each phase which includes a 40% contingency. Mayor Zabel thanked the staff and consultants that worked on these significant changes as they provide clarity that will help the Council make more informed, strategic decisions. Council Member Morcomb expressed his excitement about the larger vision the Park System Plan provides to current and future Councils, and pointed out that aspects of the Plan lend themselves to grant opportunities and partnerships. WORKSHOP MINUTES APRIL 8, 2025 PAGE TWO Mayor Zabel asked about next steps especially as it relates to funding and aligning the Park System Plan with the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). City Administrator Chris Volkers replied that staff will be presenting on the Long-Term Financial Plan and City fund balances at the next two Workshops which will give the Council a big-picture view of possible funding. Mayor Zabel added that this does not fit neatly into the City’s current budgeting process, and the Council will likely have to have a separate, intentional conversation about long-term parks funding, as well as establish a starting point to begin mapping realistic implementation timelines, recognizing that, like the CIP, the Park Plan can evolve each year. Council Member Severson expressed support for the roadmap and the clarity the Park System Plan provides, but emphasized that without knowing how much funding is actually available, it is difficult to take meaningful next steps. Council Member Moore applauded the work of staff and the consultants and shared that her biggest priority is to ensure equitable distribution of improvements throughout the City’s park system. Finance Director Kyle Stasica clarified that as part of the fund balance agenda item at the May 13th Workshop, the Council will discuss Park System Plan funding. Mayor Zabel suggested that staff categorize elements of the Plan based on realistic funding sources, such as grants, to better guide future discussions. Ms. Volkers asked Ms. Dunn to identify which park projects have potential for grant funding. Council Member Morcomb suggested that each Council Member think about their priorities ahead of time and bring them to the May 13th Workshop. In terms of the Park System Plan, it was confirmed that it is complete. Staff will present the final version to Council for formal approval at a future regular meeting. Mayor Zabel added that the next step would be expanding the Parks CIP spreadsheet that outlines 5-20 years of projects. DISCUSSION ABOUT EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN (EOP) Fire Chief Kevin Wold gave a brief overview of the history of Oakdale’s EOP and how it has evolved over the last 20 years. Currently, the City is transitioning to a new template provided by Washington County, designed to better reflect current capabilities and resources for responding to all types of incidents whether it be weather-related, civil unrest, or other emergencies. Chief Wold stated that the City has used components of the Plan throughout the years, but has never activated it in its full capacity. In response to Council Member Severson’s question about the need to create anything additional for the new template, Chief Wold indicated it is merely a formatting change. Due to the Plan’s sensitive nature, there is a public-facing version vetted by legal counsel and an internal version that includes full operational details for staff use. WORKSHOP MINUTES APRIL 8, 2025 PAGE THREE Council Member Severson asked if all cities in Washington County are going through this same exercise, to which Chief Wold confirmed. Chief Wold stated that once the EOP is updated, the City will implement a new level of staff training and preparedness that has not been done before. This includes training City staff on the EOP itself, running emergency exercises, and requiring staff in certain leadership roles to complete National Incident Management System (NIMS) training. In response to Council Member Morcomb’s question about incorporating an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in the remodeled Police Department facility, Ms. Volkers confirmed that is part of the architectural conversations. HOUSING STUDY GOALS DISCUSSION Community Development Director Andy Gitzlaff went over the primary goals of the housing study which include: 1) establishing a baseline understanding of Oakdale’s housing needs and market demand, broken down by housing type (e.g., single-family, multifamily, affordable, senior housing); 2) analyzing the age and condition of the existing housing stock; and 3) leveraging both public and private data sources to build a more complete picture of the local housing landscape. In response to Mayor Zabel’s question about the practical value of vacancy rate data, Mr. Gitzlaff explained that this data can be helpful for identifying trends in housing stability and investment, shed light on absorption rates of new developments, and provide insight that is valuable for long-range planning. He added that another goal of the housing study is to localize broader regional or County-level housing data and create the most accurate picture possible of Oakdale’s unique housing market to help inform where the City Council may want to focus future policies, programs, or funds. Council Member Morcomb emphasized that broader macroeconomic trends are critical for local planning and service delivery. Council Member Moore expressed support for the housing study, citing the importance of using data to drive smart, strategic decisions, especially as the City begins to shift from development to redevelopment. In reference to a past housing study completed in 2015, Mayor Zabel inquired whether the upcoming housing study will build upon this existing framework or if it will capture different data. Mr. Gitzlaff indicated that the 2015 housing study will be used as background data for the upcoming study, but is not currently guiding policy decisions. Mayor Zabel expressed concern about doing another housing study without clear action resulting from it. He emphasized that if this new housing study is going to be done, it must become a cornerstone of future decision-making. Ms. Volkers agreed that the Council should expect that from staff for all studies. WORKSHOP MINUTES APRIL 8, 2025 PAGE FOUR Regarding the process of the housing study, Mr. Gitzlaff noted that the first step is the data collection phase with an initial Council check-in to review the data and understand the findings. The second step is the recommendation phase, where Council input and values will help shape what policy or program directions get emphasized. The Council agreed that any funding decisions related to the housing study would be made down the road to give Council time to digest the information and avoid reactionary spending. Council Member Moore was supportive of using the data to guide the Council’s priorities and strategies especially when it comes to concept plan reviews. Mr. Gitzlaff stated that the study will provide data to establish a baseline for decision-making, including details on housing types, age, and affordability; however, it is up to the Council to use this data, layered with data from other studies and sources, to make informed decisions regarding housing in Oakdale. Next steps include conducting the study, bringing the results back to Council for discussion, and then identifying potential ideas to address the findings. Council can provide intent, and from there, staff and the consultant will further explore and refine the feasible solutions. REVIEW OF CITY OF OAKDALE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE 6 – DISEASE CONTROL/TREE TRIMMING Public Works Director Cory Tietz explained that the goal of this discussion is to get Council direction on how to proceed with the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) abatement process and timeline, specifically whether the current 20-day removal deadline is appropriate, how to prioritize removals (e.g., public versus private trees, trees near infrastructure), and how to better educate residents about EAB. Mayor Zabel brought up the City’s long-standing EAB treatment subsidization program through Rainbow Treecare, and the fact that many residents do not take advantage of the program despite the City’s efforts to advertise it. Council Member Willenbring requested a comparison of the open market treatment rate versus the treatment rate given to Oakdale residents. Council Member Moore mentioned that she was unaware of EAB until she became involved with the Oakdale Tree Board. Council Member Severson was also unaware of the threat of EAB or the resources the City provides. Mr. Tietz continued, a major barrier for private property owners dealing with EAB is not necessarily resistance to removing infected trees, it is the unexpected financial burden (anywhere from $1,100 - $3,200) and the short 20-day removal deadline. In response to Council Member Moore’s question about the effect an infested tree has on a neighboring tree, Mr. Tietz stated the tree itself does not directly affect others, but the insects living in it emerge and move on to other trees. WORKSHOP MINUTES APRIL 8, 2025 PAGE FIVE Regarding the current complaint-based Code language, the Council was supportive of leaving the process as is in that regard. Council Member Willenbring pointed out that although the City Forester typically makes the initial nuisance determination, especially when responding to a complaint or inspection, arborists from private services can also assess and confirm if a tree is a good candidate for treatment rather than removal. Mr. Tietz asked for clarification on prioritizing trees that pose a safety risk, as this can be a helpful tool when discussing removal with private property owners. The Council discussed the balance between fairness and feasibility when it comes to removing infected ash trees on both private and public property. Council Member Moore expressed intent to table the agenda item on the subsequent regular meeting agenda which asks the Council to confirm an EAB nuisance exists on three identified private properties, and start the abatement process. Mayor Zabel clarified that the current Workshop discussion will not impact this agenda item because those cases are being handled under the existing City Code language. He reminded the group that Council had already directed staff at a previous Workshop to enforce the Code as written until the language could be reviewed by Council. In terms of mitigating the financial burden on residents, the Council agreed to offer a three- year property tax assessment option with the interest rate being equal to the City’s rate on its most recent bond sale. This option is available to residents who choose not to abate the nuisance tree themselves. Regarding the abatement timeline, the Council agreed to a 45-day timeline with a 45-day grace period, for a total of 90 days. Staff will develop an internal process to execute this direction. If abatement by the City is needed, then staff will bring those cases to the Council. The Council agreed that when determining the presence of EAB, the City Forester should determine whether treatment is appropriate, which is the preferred first course of action when possible. Additionally, the City Forester should only address the property identified in the complaint. Staff was asked to get a cost estimate for 9,000 (approximate based on number of properties in Oakdale) informational EAB direct mailers that would be sent out to single-family homes. The Council agreed that as part of the abatement process, stump removal is not required. Circling back to the agenda item on the subsequent regular meeting agenda which asks the Council to confirm an EAB nuisance exists on three identified private properties, Mr. Tietz was asked to talk to the property owners (2743 Granada Ave N and 2763 Granada Ave N) to let them know that the abatement timeline will be extended. WORKSHOP MINUTES APRIL 8, 2025 PAGE SIX WORKSHOP RECESSED FOR THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 6:51 PM WORKSHOP RECONVENED AT 7:15 PM AFTER THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADMINISTRATOR UPDATE The City Administrator asked who will be attending the Arbor Day Tree Giveaway from the City Council. Everyone except Council Member Willenbring will be attending and participating. COUNCIL TOPICS Council members discussed topics of interest including whether to pause the Economic Development Commission effective June 30. 2025. All Council members were in agreement to do so. ADJOURNMENT The workshop was adjourned at 7:40 PM. Respectfully submitted, Sara Ludwig, City Clerk