City Council

Minutes Woodbury City Council Wednesday, December 13, 2023 Pursuant to the due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting was duly held virtually and at the Woodbury City Hall, 8301 Valley Creek Road, on the 13th day of December 2023. Call to Order Mayor Anne Burt called the meeting to order at 7:51 p.m. Mayor Burt noted that the agenda has been revised with the addition of item 7V in the Consent Agenda and 9B under the Discussion portion of the meeting. Mayor Burt welcomed those listening and attending. She said members of the public may attend the meeting but will be required to comply with social distancing parameters as determined by the City. Members of the public may also join the meeting using a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device. Public comments will be accepted during the meeting both in person and by using the link to the virtual meeting to join the meeting and then submit your questions via the online Q&A feature within the meeting. Questions regarding the meeting will also be taken between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. via email council@woodburymn.gov or call 651-714-3524 and leaving a voicemail message. Pledge to Flag Audience, staff, and Council pledged allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. Roll Call Upon roll call the following were present: Mayor Anne Burt, Councilmembers: Kim Wilson, Andrea Date, Steve Morris, and Jennifer Santini. Absent: None Others Present: Kimberlee K. Blaeser, City Clerk; Kevin Sandstrom, City Attorney; Clinton Gridley, City Administrator; Janelle Schmitz, Community Development Director; and Chris Hartzell, Engineering Director. Special Order of Business No items scheduled Open Forum The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting where a maximum of three persons will be allowed to address the Council on subjects, which are not a part of the meeting agenda. Persons wishing to speak must complete a sign-up sheet prior to the start of the meeting. Give the sign-up sheet to any staff person. Speakers are limited to two minutes each. The Council will listen attentively to comments but, in most instances, will not respond at the meeting. Typically, replies to the concerns expressed will be made via letter or phone call within a week. Discussion A. Truth in Taxation Public Meeting – 2024 Property Tax Levy and Budget City Administrator Clinton Gridley provided an overview of the upcoming budget. He noted that the Budget Manager, Lynn Haseleu is in attendance. He noted a tremendous time and energy were put into the budget. He explained that during his presentation he would review the budget development and background, the City overview, a budget video, provide a budget overview, the tax bill explanation, and the recommendation of Staff. Mr. Gridley explained that all meeting agendas are publicly noticed and available online. The public’s input is welcomed at each step of the process. The budget document is available at the library, City Hall or online. The annual City budget development begins in January during the new fiscal year. From February until June the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is developed and the Council reviews and adopts the CIP. In July the financial year-end results are presented, discuss the key budget considerations and get the preliminary tax levy guidelines from the Council. In September the preliminary budget workshop is held, and an adoption of the preliminary property tax levy/Truth in Taxation (TNT) meeting date is set. In November through December, the budget update is in the newsletter, the TNT public meeting is held and the Council adopts the final budget.  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 13, 2023 Mr. Gridley explained that the City represents 25% of the tax bill. The remaining portion of the tax bill goes to the school district (52%), the County (20%), Special taxing districts (3%). The City has strong fiscal health with a balanced budget, managed cash flow, high revenue collection rates, growth in property values, lower revenue risks, and strong general fund balances to expenditures. The City has transparency and accountability through the website by showing key performance indicators. The City produces a number of reports including an annual community development report, comprehensive annual financial report, community engagement resource guide, Parks and Recreation report, and the number of reports that are provided to the City Council and are all available to the public. Every other year the City performs a community survey. The past results are strong with the quality of life being around 94% and service ratings being strong across the board. Place to live, place to raise children, overall image/reputation, overall economic health are all over 90% satisfaction. Mr. Gridley reviewed the better Woodbury unemployment rates than national and State indicator chart. In the City, the unemployment rate is low. The population in the City continues to grow and expect to surpass 100,000 in 2040. The City has received the GFOA Certificate of Excellence in financial reporting since 2001, the ICMA Performance Management Award since 2011, 2022 Best Places to Live for Families, 2021 50 Best places to live, and 2020 Best places to Live in the U.S.. Mr. Gridley noted that key areas of risk include, labor market with recruitment, retention and safety; cyber-attack or data breach; legislative mandates and regulatory requirements; economic slowdown; natural disaster; and political risk to brand or reputation. Mr. Gridley showed the Council the budget video. Mr. Gridley reviewed the six property tax and utility bill factors which include: Inflation on labor, goods, products and services; service demands from a growing population; infrastructure liabilities to be funded, changes in market and property values and classifications; State legislative changes and mandates; and taxes of other units of local government. The 2024 major new investments include the Central Park Project, resurfaced or new roads and trails, public safety vehicles, park infrastructure and playground equipment replacement and the Eagle Valley Golf Course renovation. Mr. Gridley stated that the total City revenue is $134 million with a 31.4% change. The City and HRA tax levy is $48.4 million with a 8.2% change and the non-levy revenues are $85.6 million with a 49.5% change. The expenditures include operating costs at $75.7 million with a 10.3% change, Capital expenditures at $59.5 million with a 13.7% change and debt service at $5 million with a (.1)% change. Mr. Gridley mentioned that the personnel positions is currently at 15.04 net full-time equivalent (FTE) increase. 3.37 FTE approved hire was in 2023 and 11.67 FTE are proposed hires for 2024. The property tax system is calculated by taking the expenditures, subtracting it from the non-tax revenues which equals the property tax levy. The levy is the numerator over the taxable market value denominator. The taxable market value is multiplied by the class rate to equal the tax capacity. The tax rate is multiplied by the property value and then divided by $1,000 to create the tax bill. Mr. Gridley stated that the statutory property tax system is a conversion of market value to tax capacity. It includes 62 various property tax classification rates. The class rate changes for homes over $500,000 assessed value. For 2024, the tax burden shifted from commercial and industrial to residential, effecting the median value home impact. The homestead market value exclusion is for under $413,800.There has been a steady increase in property values in the City. He displayed a graph of the taxable market value and total tax levy growth. 2024 will have the highest levy since 2010. Mr. Gridley reviewed the property tax allocation. The various allocations include the general fund, capital improvements, street reconstruction, parks and trails replacement, central park building project, debt service and the HRA. The general fund revenues include net taxes, licenses and permits, intergovernmental, recreation and services, transfers in/other, and use of fund balance. There is an 8.7% change in the general fund revenues. The debt service funds have dropped by half. However, there will be a change in that due to the Central Park and water system improvements requiring debt issuance. The property values exceeds the levy increase; when that happens the tax rates drop. The property tax rate for 2024 is 27.533. The estimated impacts of the levy increase is $51 more for next year or a change of 4.2%. It is going up 4.2% because the growth of the commercial has been surging compared to residential. Mr. Gridley explained where the money goes, stating 30% goes to police protection, 7% to fire protection and emergency medical services, 24% to public works operations and street reconstruction, 14% to parks, trails and recreation, 7% to debt service and 18% to administrative services. The total costs per month is $106.33 for residents. He reviewed the annual property tax impacts per year since 2015. He also reviewed the impact on various homesteads and demonstrated that the impact is not always even since it is based on the property. 95% of the population in the City will see a tax increase. Mr. Gridley provided a property tax summary and noted a $51 median value home impact and 4.2% of the levy. There will be a 4.3% reduction for the change in total tax rate. The City has the second lowest tax rate within the County. There are a number of various user fees which include: Water Administrative fee increase of $.70/quarter, water tier rates (Tier 1) increase of $.23/1,000 gallons, MCES fixed fee increase of $1.75/quarter, MCES >8,000 gal. increase of $.23/1,000, City sanitary sewer operating increase of $1.35/quarter and irrigation (Homeowners Association and commercial) increase of $.48/1,000 gallons. The storm water fee is increasing $1.55/quarter, street lighting (group 5) will increase $.60/quarter and the Ambulance rate will increase $73/ALS 1. Page 2 of 11  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 13, 2023 Mr. Gridley noted that the most common question is “If my property value has gone up, will my property taxes automatically rise, too?” He replied that they will not. Property values are used to distribute the tax burden; it does not create the tax burden. Property values are set independently by Washington County. The City Council controls only the City levy. The levy amount is fixed and does not grow or fall based on changes in property valuation. Each home’s characteristics and valuation are unique; it is hard to compare home-to-home. The degree of change in property taxes will be impacted by the level of increase or decrease in home value compared to the average. Property value sets your proportionate share of the City’s tax dollars. Mr. Gridley advertised some State of Minnesota Target Property Tax Relief Programs. The property Tax Refund (PTR) is based on income and property tax due. The Special property Tax Refund has no income requirements and is for property owners whose taxes increased more than 6% and the increase was at least $100. Information is available on the M1PR State Tax Form or call 651.296.3781. Roger Bacchus, 10293 Fox Run Road, stated he would like to discuss the valuation of his property and had discussion with Staff earlier. He asked if the City was a nonprofit. Mr. Gridley replied that it was a nonprofit. Mr. Bacchus noted that the City imposes taxes in order to provide services to the citizens. He quoted Winston Churchill “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place.” He asked if there had been a shortfall or a surplus in the City in the past five years. Mr. Gridley replied that the costs have increased and as costs have increased, the revenue to support those costs have also increased. The City has not spent more than what has been taken in. The City has a fund balance which is required by the bonding services when debt was issued. Mr. Bacchus asked if there has ever been a surplus. Mr. Gridley replied that there have been revenues above expenditures, and in those situations the surplus primarily goes into the Capital Improvement Fund and is used to pay for large projects. Mr. Bacchus asked what the total budget was for 2024. Mr. Gridley noted that the information was on the website and that the total is $156 million. Mr. Bacchus asked if he could receive a breakdown of the percentages for each category. Mr. Gridley suggested that he speak with Lynn Haseleu to discuss all the resources he would like. Mr. Bacchus replied that he would like the dollar value sorted with each percentage of the pie chart. Mr. Gridley noted that the pie chart was from the County. Mr. Bacchus displayed to the Council photos of the road in front of his home and noted that the roads have not been fixed but is paying taxes on them. Mr. Gridley stated that it is a painful situation and have spent years analyzing and making programmatic changes. City Engineer Chris Hartzell added that there is a roadway rehabilitation project coming up in the next few years and will be in Mr. Bacchus neighborhood and would be able to provide more information after the meeting. Mr. Bacchus asked what the debt payment was referring to. Mr. Gridley gave an example of a mortgage on a house issuing debt for expenses that are beyond savings in order to pay for it. In the same way, the City will issue debt in order to pay for larger projects and pay interest on it. The City has some of the lowest debt levels in the State. Mayor Burt thanked Mr. Gridley for his presentation. Councilmember Wilson noted that while the levy is 8.2% she saw something on the website where the League of Minnesota Cities mentioned that the City was at 8.8%. Mr. Gridley explained if the HRA levy is not considered, it is 8.8%. Councilmember Wilson stated that there is not HRA levy in 2024 and asked if that is why it was different. Mr. Gridley replied that it is 8.2% when it is in comparison to the previous year. Councilmember Wilson asked to clarify. Mr. Gridley explained that the base levy compared to last year, it is going up 8.8%. The total levy is the base levy plus the HRA levy which is going up 8.2%. Councilmember Santini added that since there is not HRA levy it is considered 0. Mr. Gridley explained that the expenditures have not changed and are still doing programming. The funding source is not needed this year since the fund balance is so strong. City is not getting out of the HRA business. City Clerk Kimberlee Blaeser noted that Muna Abdi, 405 Lakeview Alcove, made a comment online and asked if the budget could be added to the Community Resource Center for low income families. Councilmember Date replied that she did not think the City could since the Council set the not-to-exceed levy in September but it is something that can be discussed in the future. Councilmember Date moved, seconded by Councilmember Santini, To adopt the following resolution Resolutions 23-204 through 23-231 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota approving the various fund budgets, sets the tax levies and cancels various debt levies for next year. One resolution has been prepared adopting the twenty-seven resolutions so the resolutions may all be adopted at one time. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – nay Andrea Date – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Page 3 of 11  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 13, 2023 Consent Agenda All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion and an affirmative vote by roll call of a majority of the members present. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered a separate subject of discussion by the Council. Item A Approval of Council Minutes – November 29, 2023 Item B To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-232 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota awarding the Sourcewell Purchase Order Agreement to Kraus-Anderson Construction Company for the Eagle Valley Golf Course clubhouse renovation project, with a net bid of $810,561.77 and authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to sign the contract. Item C To approve to extend the project approvals for Sham’s Place, Project Nos. 10-2020-00421 and 10-2021-00469 subject to the conditions of approval listed in Council Letter 23-279. Item D To approve the Sienna Grove, Final Plat, Project No. 26-2023-00531. Staff further recommends Council authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to execute the Development Agreement with all approvals subject to the conditions as outlined in Council Letter 23-280. Item E Dale Road Improvements from Radio Drive to Copper Ridge Drive; Authorize Preparation, Acquisition, and if necessary, Condemnation of Easements for the Properties. This item was removed the Consent Agenda and moved to the Discussion portion of the meeting. Item F To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-233 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing execution of the agreement with the University of Saint Thomas and the Work-Study Program. Item G To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-234 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota accepting Metropolitan Council’s Water Efficiency Program Grant Amendment and approving the associated budget amendment. Item H Affirming Council’s November 15, 2023, Workshop Direction to not Assess Property Owners for Road Improvements Associated with the Water Treatment Pipeline Infrastructure. This item was removed the Consent Agenda and moved to the Discussion portion of the meeting. Item I To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-235 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota approving a budget amendment to the Water and Sewer Utility Fund (Enterprise Fund) for water treatment plant warm storage and cost share portion of operational space design. Item J To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-236 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing acceptance of the Toward Zero Deaths (TZD) Traffic Safety Enforcement Grant from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic Safety. Item K To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-237 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing acceptance of grant funds from the U.S. Department of Justice – Office of Justice Programs – Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program. Item L 1. To adopt the following ordinance Ordinance 2048 Page 4 of 11  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 13, 2023 Ordinance of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota amending the Code of Ordinances of the City of Woodbury, Minnesota by Amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article I in General, Section 2-3, Fees for Various Services. 2. To Authorize staff to publish the Summary of the Fee Ordinance in the City’s designated official newspaper, the St. Paul Pioneer Press. Item M To adopt the following ordinance Ordinance 2049 Ordinance of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article II City Council, Section 2-22 Meetings-Generally to the Code of Ordinances. Item N To adopt a motion approving the 2024 City Council meeting schedule as listed in Council Letter 23-290. Item O Approval to Rename and Revise CD-Council-2.5 City Council and Advisory Commission Roles and Guidelines Council Directive to CD-Council-2.13 Advisory Boards and Commission Roles and Guidelines. This item was removed the Consent Agenda and moved to the Discussion portion of the meeting. Item P To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-238 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota discontinuing Council Directive CD-PUBLICSAFETY-8.1 Accelerated Recruitment Program/Educational Assistance Plan. Item Q To adopt a motion designating the St. Paul Pioneer Press as the City’s official newspaper for the year 2024 effective January 1, 2024. Item R Approval of Amended CD-ADMIN-1.1 Authorizations and Procedures for Personnel Management. This item was removed the Consent Agenda and moved to the Discussion portion of the meeting. Item S To adopt a motion to renew the cannabinoid product license of the businesses on the attached list for the period of January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. Item T To adopt a motion that the member (City) does not waive the monetary limits on municipal tort liability established by MN Statute §466.04. Item U To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-239 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota approving change of polling locations, in the City of Woodbury, for Precinct 10 and Precinct 16. Item V Special Counsel - Authorization of Agreement. This item was removed the Consent Agenda and moved to the Discussion portion of the meeting. Item W The abstract of bills includes payments made from the operating or project budgets for expenses of the city. The expenditures are from all funds of the city. Any purchased contracts requiring signature of the mayor and City Administrator is hereby approved. Staff recommends approval of the abstract of bills for November 22, 2023 in the amount of $851,314.61 and December 1, 2023 in the amount of $1,245,831.19. Councilmember Date moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, to approve the Consent Agenda items with the exception of items 7E, 7H, 7O, 7R, and 7V. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Andrea Date – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Public Hearings No items scheduled Page 5 of 11  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 13, 2023 Discussion A. Approval to Revise CD-Council-2.5 City Council Roles and Guidelines Council Directive Mayor Burt noted on November 4, 2023 there was a discussion regarding the item and noted that the changes are in the Agenda Packet. Councilmember Wilson noted that there are a number of additions from the Council directive. She added that she was not in attendance at the November 4, 2023 meeting but had a meeting with Mr. Gridley to go over her thoughts. She expressed her appreciation that some of the changes she noted were in the Council Agenda Packet. She mentioned section 3, letter D and asked if there was discussion on that section. The section states “to refrain from political activities which could undermine public confidence in the nonpartisanship of the City Council.” She asked what it meant to the Council and what it looked like during campaigns and speaking engagements at political events. She added that she would like to see that portion removed in its entirety. Councilmember Morris noted that the removal of the word “all” was discussed because it is a political body and the Council participates in political activities. He explained that his personal opinion is that the Council has a protection of the body that they are elected to hold. It means to do it in the best interests of the community. If any member of the elected board is taking action or doing things that would negatively reflect the community than that is the standard that the Council should hold themselves to. He added that his take is that the Council should have an ethical standard that reminds the Council that they are representatives of the community. Councilmember Date stated that everyone on the Council can act however they want in their private life; however, the City Council is statutorily nonpartisan. It is important to make it clear when representing themselves as a private citizen or in an official capacity as a City Council member. Personally, and privately it is allowed to participate in political activity but should not participate as an elected official. Councilmember Santini noted that the language was not added but it was already currently there. Councilmember Morris added that the only language changed was the word “all” and “could”. Councilmember Wilson explained that in the packet that she received during the November meeting, the entire section was highlighted which indicated that there were changes. She asked if the entire section was added. Mr. Gridley replied that there was a restructure which created the concept of the code of conduct and ethics. There was some language that was removed from parts of the policy and placed into the guidelines. There was some language that was new based on research done that compared to what other cities have done. Councilmember Wilson expressed her concern over the language since Councilmembers could be asked to attend things to provide updates or because of their position on Council. She noted that a lot of things are considered political now and provided an example of holding a flag for the Wounded Warrior Bike Ride and how she received negatively for it. She explained that she did not know how it would be possible to refrain from political activities which could undermine the public confidence in a nonpartisanship of the Council. Councilmember Date mentioned that she understood Councilmember Wilson’s concern and added that she worries about how partisan this nation has become. The City has functioned well for so long because the nonpartisan nature has been honored. She added that the language could be as simple as “refrain from activities which could undermine the public in the nonpartisanship of the City Council.” Councilmember Morris agreed and added that it would be up to the individual Councilmember to determine what that looks like. Mr. Gridley commented that by removing the language of political activities, it actually broadens the language. Councilmember Morris mentioned that the intent is to preserve the nonpartisanship and likes the change to language. Councilmember Wilson explained that there are a lot of items in the guidelines that she is having a difficult time with since while it is nonpartisan, all of the Councilmembers have their own personal beliefs. She noted letter J under section 3 “to not apply political, personal, religious, or other convictions in place of the defined responsibilities of their public offices” and asked for an explanation on it. She expressed her understanding in creating the guidelines but expressed her concern of losing freedom as Councilmembers. Councilmember Date expressed her appreciation for Councilmember Wilson’s comments and added that it was discussed at length during the workshop in November. She added that it is not the time to rewrite the guidelines during the Council meeting. Councilmember Wilson stated it was the second meeting she had missed in three years. Mayor Burt added that it is difficult to rewrite the guidelines in an official City Council meeting and is best to do it at a different workshop meeting. Councilmember Wilson stated it is difficult to bring up the item during the workshops since new conversations cannot be brought up after a certain time at night. Mr. Gridley added it is a document reviewed each year and is an item that can be brought up again for discussion. Karen Bauman, 7894 Dunmore Road, stated that the statements in the document are vague. She wondered how the Councilmembers would be held accountable if the language was vague. Councilmember Date replied that it would be up to each individual to determine how they would fulfill the code of ethics on the Council. The Council could censure another Councilmember if it became extreme. Ms. Bauman asked if it the language was changed to “all activities” who would determine what that looked like. Councilmember Date replied that the language could remain how it was. Ms. Bauman asked who would determine what inappropriate behavior would look like and added that there should not be vague statements when the public could remove people. Councilmember Morris replied that the public cannot remove people. He added that Staff took a considerable amount of time to create a document of guidelines for the Council. It does not allow for the public or any Councilmember to remove another Councilmember. The only way to remove a Councilmember is through a recall vote. Due to having a code of ethics, it can allow for the public or a member of Council to raise concern if they believe the guidelines or code had not been followed and could be by censure or by discussion if the Council decides. Page 6 of 11  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 13, 2023 Ms. Bauman expressed her understanding and stated that she would like to see the language not be so vague. Mr. Gridley provided an example of the United States Constitution having aspirational and values and that the code of conduct is written in a similar way in order to provide a philosophy. He added there will always be multiple interpretations since it is not a literal document. Councilmember Wilson expressed her concern that it is open for interpretation. She provided an example when she attended a community event at Woodbury for Options which is the pro-life clinic in the City and posted about it on her Council website. She received backlash. She asked if that was political and could be censored on. Councilmember Santini replied that it is up to each Councilmember to have weigh the options when deciding what events to attend. She emphasized the importance as it relates to the City and policymaking that the Council does to show that they are not allowing certain things to guide the decisions since it is nonpartisan City. The guidelines are an affirmation that the Council is committed to the nonpartisanship of the governing body. She added that it is not to judge the other Councilmembers, but to have a standard to weigh individual standards. Ms. Blaeser noted a comment online from Muna Abdi who stated “As a community member, I would love to see our City officials Councils engage more with the City residents such as showing up to community events and standing by the community in their difficult times.” Councilmember Date noted that there are a couple of options for Councilmember Wilson. She could abstain since she was unable to attend the November workshop, she could vote a different way, or she could suggest having further detailed conversation at another meeting. Councilmember Wilson replied that anything that is open to interpretation is often dangerous and will be voting differently on the item. She mentioned that there is nothing that talks about what happens if somebody believes they are violating it, or what happens with censuring. Councilmember Wilson moved to table “Approval to Revise CD-Council-2.5 City Council Roles and Guidelines Council Directive” for further discussion. Councilmember Santini asked if it would be something for the strategic planning meeting. Mr. Gridley replied that the Council could provide whatever guidance they wanted to and would find room for discussion. He added that the Council could decide where it landed in priority and when they would want to discuss the item. Councilmember Morris noted that he understood Councilmember Wilson could not attend the workshop but the majority of the Council discussed and reviewed the item. Mayor Burt declared Council Member Wilson’s motion failed for lack of a second. Councilmember Morris moved, seconded by Councilmember Date, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-240 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota revising Council Directive CD- Council-2.5 City Council Roles and Guidelines with guidance to bring the item back to discussion in a year during a workshop. Councilmember Morris suggested providing direction to come back to the workshop with the Commission Interview in a year to make any changes. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – nay Andrea Date – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye B. 2024 Legislative Priorities Mayor Burt explained that there is no PowerPoint presentation for the item because the information is provided in the Council Agenda Packet. Councilmember Wilson asked why the City is not just asking for bonding for the Public Safety building. Councilmember Wilson explained that it would alleviate the burden of the sales tax. Mayor Burt noted that the City went through the effort to ask for the opportunity to local option sales tax and the permission was granted. She added the City needs to weigh the pros and cons on where they will have the most success. Right now, water and pfas are a big issue. It has been deliberated by Staff, Council and lobbyist to determine the priorities. Page 7 of 11  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 13, 2023 Councilmember Morris moved, seconded by Councilmember Date, to adopt the proposed legislative priorities. Voting in Favor: Wilson, Date, Morris, Santini, Burt Absent: None Consent Agenda 7E. Dale Road Improvements from Radio Drive to Copper Ridge Drive; Authorize Preparation, Acquisition, and if necessary, Condemnation of Easements for the Properties. Councilmember Wilson pulled this item for discussion and stated she is in favor of improving the road. She asked if the Dale Road project would coincide with the Radio Drive project. Mr. Hartzell replied that Dale Road is scheduled for 2025 and that the projects are being coordinated with the County but may not happen at the same time. Councilmember Wilson noted that she did not like the condemnation of easements for the properties. She asked to clarify what the condemnation meant for this project. Mr. Hartzell replied that the preliminary design for the roadway has been completed. There are a couple of properties along the corridor where the City will have to acquire right away. Staff have spoken with property owners and they are aware that the road is being built. Staff anticipate everything will be done through negotiation but just about every road project has similar language in it. Councilmember Morris clarified that it is not the entire property but is a portion of the right away. Mr. Hartzell agreed and added that the reason the language is in there is because it is a procedural step that allows the project process to continue to develop and keep to the timeline. Authority from the Council is needed in order to condemn properties. He explained that the process cannot begin until the Council gives authority and then the City works with property owners to negotiate. If property owners are not interested in negotiating the process takes longer. Staff has no intention to condemn properties. He explained that the language is simply there because it is typical for roadway projects to include it. Councilmember Wilson asked if the condemnation would be for the easements. Mr. Hartzell replied that it would be the easement that is abutting the roadway so the full extension of the roadway could be built. Councilmember Wilson asked if the City already had possession of the City easements. Mr. Hartzell replied that the City does not have possession of anything which is what the resolution would authorize. Councilmember Wilson asked if the City was looking to go past the easement. Councilmember Santini replied no and that it was the limitations of what can be done on the easement. City Attorney Kevin Sandstrom added that it is for the City to acquire additional easement to make the roadway easement a little wider. Mr. Hartzell added that most property owners own to the center road right of way but the City has an easement that goes to the right of way line. Councilmember Wilson asked if it would require a condemnation if the City already has the authority for the easement. Mr. Hartzell replied that it requires the condemnation because the City does not have the authority to acquire property without Council approval. Mr. Sandstrom explained that the resolution is intending to authorize Staff to take the necessary steps to acquire the easement. There are different steps that include mandatory appraisals of what that easement is worth, and trying to negotiate with the property owner. Councilmember Morris moved, seconded by Councilmember Santini, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-241 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing preparation, acquisition and, if necessary, condemnation of easements for the Dale Road Improvements from Radio Drive to Copper Ridge Drive project. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – nay Andrea Date – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Consent Agenda 7H. Affirming Council’s November 15, 2023, Workshop Direction to not Assess Property Owners for Road Improvements Associated with the Water Treatment Pipeline Infrastructure. Councilmember Wilson pulled this item for discussion and noted that she made her thoughts known during the workshop. Councilmember Morris moved, seconded by Councilmember Santini, Page 8 of 11  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 13, 2023 To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-242 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota affirming Council’s November 15, 2023, workshop direction to not assess property owners for road improvements associated with the water treatment pipeline infrastructure. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – nay Andrea Date – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Consent Agenda Item 7O. Approval to Rename and Revise CD-Council-2.5 City Council and Advisory Commission Roles and Guidelines Council Directive to CD-Council-2.13 Advisory Boards and Commission Roles and Guidelines. Councilmember Wilson pulled this item for discussion and stated the only reason she pulled the item was because it said to approve and revise CD-Council 2.5 the Council and Advisory Commission but there had not been a discussion on both of them. Councilmember Morris moved, seconded by Councilmember Santini, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-243 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota renaming and revising Council Directive CD-Council-2.5 City Council and Advisory Commission Roles and Guidelines to CD-Council- 2.13 Advisory Boards and Commission Roles and Guidelines. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – nay Andrea Date – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Consent Agenda Item 7R. Approval of Amended CD-ADMIN-1.1 Authorizations and Procedures for Personnel Management. Councilmember Wilson pulled this item for discussion and expressed her concern was an addition to the document which is on page 4, letter I stating “the City Administrator may adjust employees rate of pay based upon changing market, circumstances, retention purposes or other needs of the City not exceeding 5%. Changes under this section shall not exceed more than one time per calendar year.” She noted she does not agree with that. Councilmember Morris wondered if a sentence could be added that says “and after the adjustment may not exceed the budget allocation as approved by the Council without a budget amendment.” He explained that the Council schedule may not allow for quick decisions to be made and could be important for the City Administrator to act in order to keep valuable employees. Councilmember Wilson stated she understood and explained that there was one instant where it was brought back to the Council and a couple of new engineer positions had been created in retrospect. Mr. Gridley replied that he did not have the authority to exceed the budget anyway. Councilmember Morris stated the language would be so that the general public has an understanding. Councilmember Morris moved, seconded by Councilmember Santini, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-244 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota amending Council Directive CD- ADMIN-1.1 Authorizations and Procedures for Personnel Management. Page 9 of 11  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 13, 2023 Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – nay Andrea Date – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Consent Agenda Item 7V. Special Counsel - Authorization of Agreement. Councilmember Wilson pulled this item for discussion and noted that it was the first time she had heard about the item. She explained that she does not have a problem with hiring an attorney if it is contingent. She added they could discuss the background and the City’s thinking behind it. Mr. Sandstrom mentioned that they are class action lawsuits. Councilmember Wilson asked why the Council has not heard about this until now. Mayor Burt stated she thought there had been previous discussion. Mr. Gridley added that it has been long coming. This would establish the Council’s authorization to utilize a special Council for the pursuit of the class action lawsuits under the contingency arrangement and to the extent that it is used. It is complicated because the City does not always know everything and has to do a risk assessment. The City could be frugal and do it in house but could then be overwhelmed. Each class action could present different situations. Councilmember Wilson asked if there were any fiscal implications. Mr. Sandstrom replied that there were not. The exact amount that the City may get under the settlement is undefined at this point. Therefore it is unknown what the amount would be for the contingent fee for the law firm. Councilmember Wilson asked if Mr. Sandstrom was referring to the contingency dollars that would be paid to the firm not anything new or above. Mr. Sandstrom agreed. Councilmember Morris moved, seconded by Councilmember Santini, To adopt the following resolution Resolution 23-245 Resolution of the City of Woodbury, Washington County, Minnesota authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to execute an agreement with Taft Stettinius & Hollister, LLP; Law Office of Kevin Madonna, PLLC; SL Environmental Law Group PC; Douglas & London, P.C.; Levin, Papantonio, Rafferty, Proctor, Buchanan, O’Brien, Barr, Mougey, P.A. (collectively the “Firms”) for legal representation. Voting via voice: Kim Wilson – aye Andrea Date – aye Steve Morris – aye Jennifer Santini – aye Anne Burt – aye Transportation Report (2nd meeting of the month, May-October) No items scheduled City Administrator’s Report Mr. Gridley stated that the rental licensing program has finally kicked off. There are a number of environmental stewardship items that are included on his report. The executive director of Washington County Telecommunications Commission, Mark Martinez, is leaving on Friday. There are a number of recreation programs happening. Mr. Gridley noted the pfas working group will be meeting on December 20th. The federal portion has not emerged yet in setting health standards but the State will be taking some action. Staff will be coming back to the Council with a 60% design process and is close to submitting it to the State. Mr. Gridley gave a verbal update of upcoming City meetings.  January 10, 2024 – Council Workshop Page 10 of 11  City Council Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 13, 2023 He thanked the Council and community for their support and wished everyone a happy holidays. Adjournment Mayor Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Morris, to adjourn the meeting at 9:49 p.m. Voting in Favor: Wilson, Date, Morris, Santini, Burt Absent: None Respectfully submitted, _________________________________________ Kimberlee K. Blaeser, City Clerk Amended and Approved by the Woodbury City Council on January 24, 2024. Page 11 of 11