hereby call to order the Roseville City Council meeting for Monday, January 26th, 2026. Uh, Mr. City Manager, would you call the role, please? >> Council member Sharter >> here, >> council member Grath >> here, council member Bower >> here, >> council member Stron >> here, >> Mayor Row >> here. Uh, and with us at the day by way of introduction, we have our city attorney Rachel Tierney who's on my right at the far end. Our city manager, Pat Trojan, who's on my left at the other end of the day. uh and we will perhaps have other uh staff uh participating in the meeting, we'll make introductions uh as those uh folks may be involved. I do want to remind folks if you do have a cell phone to silence it or otherwise assure that it doesn't disrupt our meeting this evening. Um also for members of the public who are here and want to follow along with the agenda, there are extra copies of the agenda on the back table under the big clock by the door. Uh there are also or is one complete set of all the meeting materials uh located in a large binder there which are uh which is available for members of the public to share uh and reference uh over the course of the meeting. Um that has all the materials that the council has before it to consider uh this evening. Uh do want to also note that uh folks are here for public comment. We'll have an opportunity to uh explain sort of the rules of the road for that at that time. But otherwise, uh, we'll ask folks if you're able to stand for the pledge of allegiance. [snorts] >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [snorts] >> Right. Next on our agenda this evening is to approve tonight's agenda. And as always, we'll check with uh staff to see if there are any changes that need to be made to the agenda this evening. >> Mr. Mayor, we have no changes by staff. >> All right. Uh any changes uh requested by council members this evening to the agenda or [clears throat] items to remove from the consent agenda for separate consideration? All right. Uh and we do also want to check with the audience if anyone is here for an item in section 10 of tonight's agenda. Uh that's at the end of the agenda. Uh section 10 is known as the uh consent agenda. These items are normally taken up as a single motion uh and they are as I said towards the end of the meeting and if anybody was here to either speak to or ask a question about one of the items in section 10 uh it would be good to let us know at this time and we can move that item forward in the meeting. Is there anyone here to speak to or ask a question about an item in section 10 of tonight's agenda otherwise known as the consent agenda? It does not appear to be the case. Uh, in that case, I think we can proceed with the agenda as presented. Is there a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. It's been moved by Council Member Gra, seconded by Council Member Strong to approve tonight's agenda as presented. Uh, any discussion on that motion? Hearing [clears throat] none, all those in favor signify by saying I. Opposed? That passes unanimously. >> Uh, and then before we proceed with the rest of the agenda this evening, uh, the council, uh, uh, has a council and the city have a statement, uh, that I will read. uh and make that part of the uh the meeting proceedings this evening. Uh the statement reads as follows. Uh the recent actions of the Department of Homeland Security, immigration enforcement agents in our community stand in direct opposition to the city of Roseville's core values of accountability, community, equity, safety, and integrity. uh as that that are rooted in the engagement with our community. Our community is exhausted by the fear and disruption uh associated with the operation metro surge and are heartbroken by the loss of life of Renee Good and Alex Prey. Families hesitate to leave their homes for school or work or to run basic errands. Trust in public institutions has been shaken at its foundation. Our community cannot thrive when people are afraid. Public safety cannot exist without trust and trust cannot exist where intimidation and fear are used as the governing tool. The actions of DHS and the support those actions receive from elected and appointed uh federal government officials undermine at best and violate at worst the rights and values guaranteed in our constitution. We stand with our residents, our faith leaders, our educators, our businesses, and the countless community members who are acting every day to respond to these federal actions with courage and compassion. This community belongs to everyone who calls it home. As a local government, we commit to using every lawful tool and influence within our authority to support and protect our community. We will continue to center safety, dignity, and belonging in our actions in accordance with our core values. We commit to reducing harm, sharing accurate information, and standing alongside all those who are impacted. We cannot decide federal policy, but we can choose how we respond. We choose to respond with care, resolve, and an unwavering commitment to those who live and work in Roseville and visit Roseville. We are unequivocally, we unequivocally condemn the dangerous, divisive, and deadly actions of DHS and demand that these actions stop not just in Roseville and in Minnesota, but across the nation. And that is signed by all of the council members. [applause] With that, then we will move to our first opportunity for public comment this evening. Uh this is our general public comment which would be an opportunity for members of the public to speak on items that either may be related to city business or of interest to people in the community uh but are not on tonight's agenda. Uh we will have opportunities for public comment on agenda items or the agenda item essentially as it comes up. Uh but uh we do once again always provide this opportunity at the start of each meeting for general public comment. Uh once again not related to agenda items this evening. And we've got our first commenters here. I just do want to say for members of the public who may be uh coming up next to comment, once again, we do have the three-minute time limit, we do ask that you state your name and either your street or address to identify yourself if you're comfortable with that uh and address comments or questions to the council. Uh under the general public comment, there may be questions raised that we're not able to answer uh at this time and we'll certainly work to make sure and get those answers to the public uh if those questions are raised. And with that, we'll recognize our first uh public comment this evening. >> Hi, my name is Kathy Armont. I live at 1161 Lori Road West. >> Monty Johnson, 1033 [snorts] Brooks Avenue West. >> We also got >> I'm Bill Farmer from 640 Hel Drive. >> Mike Gregory, 1945 Sharale Avenue. >> Um, and we're we're here tonight to talk about a project that we have which is called Roseville Cares. Um, and so in talking in spades with everything that's happening in our community here, I'm just going to read what I have. Um, Roseville area is a community where caring actions happen all year long. Whether it's helping a neighbor shovel their walk, volunteering to help a child read, hosting a food drive, Roseville Cares is a community initiative that spotlights caring auctions in our community and inspires others to carry it forward. It began in 2025 with Do Good Roseville and the Roseville Area Optimus Club um character development initiative um promoting volunteer opportunities in the community. With 2026, we've expanded our planning committee to include other area service organizations and businesses. We know that people tr and we know that people truly want to do good, but finding time and knowing where to start can be challenging. Roseville Cares Weeks makes it easy by offering simple, meaningful ways to get involved. It's a community effort designed to remove barriers and help everyone make a have a positive impact. Life gets busy and it's easy to say we'll volunteer someday, next week, next month, when things finally slow down. Roseville Cares Week is a chance to hit pause on pro procrastination and join neighbors in doing something kind this week. Even a small act can make a big difference. Um say with all of that said, knowing everything that's going on in our community and how much people are doing and um for the for their for their neighbors, um we know that that that information is happening. We also know that people want have more energy around wanting to do things than than we can almost absorb in that in that effort um safely. And so we also know that other organizations still need help like the city's business goes on other organizations business still needs to go on. And I'd like to um point that make people understand that. Um so um once you're ready once you're ready to jump in the big question becomes what should I do? And don't worry I'm do good rose. I've got plenty of ideas. Um, you can choose from easy at home projects, group activities, or opportunities with local organizations that are always happening to welcome new volunteers. It's a great place to get inspired and find something that feels just right. This year, we're also making a space for those who just do not have time to spare. You can do good by donating to our Roseville Roseville Cares community scholarship. No amount is too small, but it's when we pull small amounts that big things happen. So we have if you refer to um if you go to the do good rose um do grow website we've got a list of things there opportunities there we have a list of organizations that have volunteer octu volunteer opportunities uh we have over 111 organizations that have been part of our volunteer fairs in the past so there is something truly you can find an organization that meets your makes your passion we've also um underscored a number of organizations where you can make meals get together a group of people make a meal to serve for someone we've got projects you name it, we got a project. You want to make whimsical wigs, you want to you want to write cards, there's a whole list of projects out there. And also what DGood Rosa does often is host a collection. You know, we're doing a food collection right now, but there's other types of needs within the community. Um, so I just want to encourage everyone that if people do come up with a project or something they want to do that that's really knowing everything else that's going on in the community, knowing that they do that, if they let us know or send us pictures, um, we want to know about that and share that information to show everything that's going on, but but at the same time, we've got other stuff going on and Monti is going to talk about that. >> Um, this year we're excited to add to our Roseville Cares Week appreciation event for first responders. Uh, they are at the forefront. Uh the other thing that we've uh in talking to the chiefs we understand that they are the people who see those most in need, people that uh are unseen sometimes. And so we are as part of that we are uh gathering significant amount of gift cards. We've raised some decent money to be able to do that so that these uh folks can then uh help out those people most in need that we might not otherwise see or know about. Uh there's also every meal uh project for that first Friday in with the uh uh optimist club and with the uh KMAN is also helping out. Um the Rotary is also helping out. So we have a number of community groups, businesses, Blaze, others coming together to make just so everybody knows that Roseville really does care and we really see that these kind of t-shirts are going to be the singular most popular [laughter] uh apparel item in Roseville over the next 10 years. So, um, we're really excited about just the momentum. Uh, partnering with Dog Good Roseville has been fantastic because they represent the kind of character that our character development initiative is all about and what you spoke to, uh, Dan as part of that proclamation that ties into right what what we're we're trying to do. And again, I just have to end by saying we know we're not going to know everything that's happening in our community right now with everyone that is putting really literally putting their lives on their line to protect their neighbors. And I looking forward to the day when we can dem we can talk about what's happened in our community when we get through this horrific um situation. But um so there's going to be a lot of unsung heroes right now and I just want to really respect everyone in our community that's doing that. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And again, that's uh next week, January 31st through February 8th, uh action Roseville cares action week in Roseville. Uh and once again, more information is available at the Do Good Roseville website. So, appreciate you being here this evening and letting folks know about that and um hopefully uh everybody that has the opportunity will take advantage of that and and contribute in some way. Right. Is there anyone else for general public comment this evening? Hello and welcome. >> Good evening. My name is Angela Burn, uh 15-year Roseville resident. I have a few points I wanted to share tonight. Um the first is that I am hearing from my network that Roseville police are being spotted talking to ICE officers. I sure hope they are doing the right thing, encouraging them from moving away from spaces like elementary school parking lots, businesses, and other places where they should not be gathering. Um, however, that sentiment of trust is not what I am hearing from my network. Uh, they do not know what is happening. So, they are scared. I am here to let you know that you better get real clear on police involvement because we will not have any trust to build on after this. Um, it is not an assumption that our police are here to protect everyone for every every one of your constituents. That is not a given. >> [snorts] >> Uh second, I want to speak directly to council member Strahan's behavior last Thursday night. Um you do not get to raise a fist and call at the call for ICE to leave our city and then have the audacity to loudly lecture your constituents from the day about the tone of our anger. You eagerly leapt into this race for council in 2020. And if you're confident in your work in this and your engagement in this community, you all wouldn't be defensive and you specifically would not have yelled at us on Thursday night. Learn how to hold our anger. Learn how to hold the discomfort because I would gladly trade it and you should gladly trade it for the safety of our community. This work is literally life or death for all of the rest of us on the other side of this day. To all of you, I will give you this reminder again. If this work does not cost you anything, if this work does not cost you people in your networks that criticize you, if this does not cost you comfort in your family spaces, in your friend spaces, in your places of worship spaces, if this work does not cost you opportunities, and if you are not getting hit by the same stones that are hitting the people that you represent, then you are not in fact doing the work that is being called on in this moment. We all need to be standing arm in- arm taking these stones for our neighbors. And lastly, I will not yield any of my time tonight. I have about 45 seconds left and I'm going to hold this space for our neighbors and our constituents who are still trapped in their homes. Thank you very much. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Uh is there anyone else from the public who wishes to speak under general comment this evening? >> Hello and welcome. >> Hello. Um hi Carrie Glly. Um I live in Roseville 36 years um near Dale Street and Highway 36. Um, and I I think I have more questions. Uh, so first of all, thank you for the statement you read earlier, Mayor Row, um, and denouncing the illegal activities of immigration agents in our city. So, thank you for that. Um, but I do have a couple questions and if they're answered at any point in this meeting, that's awesome. Or if you answer them on email or however you can answer them. And I I suspect that other folks have similar questions. So, um, my first question, um, I'll try to stay in my time. Um, looking at the agenda, and I might be missing this, but, um, I looked at the agenda a day or two ago, and I thought I saw that there was um, a resolution about um, the evict asking the governor for the eviction moratorum. And I'm not seeing that on here. So, am I missing it right now? >> It's still part of our Okay, perfect. Great. Um, then I guess this is a comment. Um, and I'll wait till the this comes up, but agenda item number 10 F, um, I have a concern about approving that, um, based on, uh, evidence that I've been receiving in community about, um, who might be actually renting that location, at least in the short term. Um, that that's a safety risk for our community. Uh, then, uh, last question, I guess. Um, so agenda item number 11 B talks about the future agenda. Um, I'm not super wellversed in how city council meetings work, but so I guess my question is, is that when you'll kind of let us know what will be on the next agendas? And based on Thursday, the 22nd meeting, um what I'm expecting is that um some of the followup from that meeting might be whatever progress between council and staff is made um up to that point would be shared with us, like whatever different city departments have as suggestions to support community. Um and then um and maybe that follow-up discussion of reworking the um police procedure in relation to immigration enforcement would be on that agenda. Um and then what's helpful for me um as as just the way I learn and how I take in information is if you're presenting us something new, tell us it's new and it didn't exist before. um if it is an update or a change, if you could show us on screen and tell us this is what we had before, this is what we are going to do now. Um just making it as clear as possible um to community so we understand. Um and like Angela, I'll use the 12 seconds left to hold space for community. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Are there other uh comments this evening under general public comment? >> Hello and welcome. >> Hi, good evening. My name is May. I live on uh at 1901 Ryan Avenue in Roseville. Um I've been here for a while. love our city very much. Um, as you can see, I am not I I don't look like the rest of you. [laughter] I am a first generation Mong immigrant, and we've been here for a long time. And the recent ICE activities have profoundly impacted us and a lot of people of color. And I do, as much as I appreciate your statement against ICE in the at the beginning, I am wondering, would the city of Roseville take it a step further? Would you be able to or would you be willing to, I should say, mandate that ICE actually are not covering their face and that they are identifiable? because it is absolutely terrifying for anyone to be grabbed by mass people. I can't imagine what that would feel like to have your windows broken and to have your doors broken and have mass people grab you and you would have no idea who these perpetrators are. You have no idea who these people are. Is it really a federal government person or is it someone else? Would Roseville be willing to make any mandate or demand that the federal government identify themsel, show their faces so that the people know who is in front of them, who is taking them. >> Thank you for your comments. And I'm asking will will you consider that? >> Uh actually on our meeting of uh the 21st we did have uh some discussion about that and um there are limited abilities for cities to tell federal agencies what they can do in that regard. I believe as we noted there was some litigation out in California about >> correct California is looking into that. >> Right. So we're >> will you pioneer that? Would you be willing >> to put your constituents ahead of this tyranny? >> Well, like I said, we had that conversation on the 21st and I think we're still looking at what's going on with that matter. So, uh, we don't have any further information at this time for you. >> I feel like >> I have to say this isn't a conversation at this point. This is public comment and so we appreciate your input and your comments >> but we do have to proceed with our agenda as well. >> I'll give you that's three minutes. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Is there anyone else uh who wishes to speak under general public comment at this time? >> I'll jump in. [snorts] >> Should I sign in or is it just your name? Uh I'm Andy uh over on County Road Sea and Rice by like Acorn Park. It's a great spot. Um I don't know, just a couple notes. I didn't really plan anything. Like can you guys blink twice if you're held here against your will, right? Like the the Roseville City Council is like like you guys could resign or whatever if you want at any point in time, right? Like there's no no one's forcing you to be here, right? So I just like kind of coming off of the last one, same sort of camp. like you guys are up on the deis, right? You guys are the representatives of the city. I don't know any of you individually. I don't particularly hold any malice towards you individually, but as the representatives of the city, the buck stops somewhere. And I it's like right here. And I just just making sure that like you guys don't have to be here. You could leave. Uh and then just kind of in agreement on not renewing the short-term rental. That seems awesome, right? Like that's something you guys could do right now. very compelling evidence that they're unsavory characters staying there. Why let them? That's great. Make it make it so it's harder to do. Uh, another one that's been sort of on my radar is these flock cameras. We had some emails back and forth. I read the policy. Um, the federal government is like putting lists together of citizens that they think are disruptive, right? Like, and they're partnering with Palunteer. I mean, it's far-fetched to me to imagine that the federal government cannot use the flock cameras legally, illegally, with your knowledge, without your knowledge in any capacity. And I think the really only the answer is to just not make the data, right? Like making that data, having that data exist leaves it open to be abused by people and we just shouldn't have it. So, I would make a pitch for getting rid of those. Uh, and then I guess just another pitch while the iron is hot and we're hearing about the police partnering with federal agents in some capacity. I see all these videos. I do not see any police I'm super happy about. Uh, and as I understand it, they all stand behind the same thin blue line. I I think it's a great time to think about freezing funding to police, decreasing funding to police, taking resources from that organization and putting it anywhere else in a way to help people in particular while we're in crisis. Uh and uh that's all I got. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you for your comments. Uh is there anyone else who wishes to uh comment during general public comment this evening? >> All right. Seeing no one then uh we will proceed with the rest of our meeting. Um and thank you again to folks who uh participated this evening in the final public comment. Uh next on our agenda, we have recognitions and donations. We have two proclamations and then also accepting some donations for uh the parks and recreation department or to the parks and recreation department. Uh so the first proclamation is in regard to uh black history month in Roseville. Uh I will read the proclamation and then a motion from the council to approve would be in order. The proclamation reads as follows. Whereas the city of Roseville is committed to recognizing and honoring the contributions of all members of our community. And whereas Negro History Week was established in 1926 by Dr. Cart Carter Godwin Woodson as a way to neutralize the deliberate distortion of black history. And whereas this movement grew over the years to Black History Month to give an objective and scholarly balance in American world and world history. And whereas the month of February was selected as Black History Month because it marks the birth of Frederick Douglas, Web Dubo, Langston Hughes, and Abraham Lincoln, who are all leaders whose actions greatly impacted the lives of black Americans. And whereas the contributions African-Americans made and continue to make in building our nation's infrastructure and economic strength as well as our history, music, arts, national defense from the Revolutionary War to present day, uh written words and discoveries and inventions are often overlooked. And whereas on January 1, 1863, the Emancipation Proclamation set the United States on a path of ending slavery. And on August 28th, 1963, hundreds of thousands of Americans of all backgrounds joined uh the March on Washington, which was led by Martin Luther King Jr., the Southern Southern Christian Leadership Conference, James Framer, Congress of Racial Equality, John Lewis, Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, A Phip Randolph, Brotherhood of Sleeping Carporters, Roy Wilkins, uh National Association for the Advancement of Color People, uh and Whitney Young Jr., uh of the Urban League in pursuit of jobs, justice and freedom uh to the memorial of Abraham Lincoln at in Washington DC. And whereas despite all the progress, the legacy of slavery and segregation still persists in our nation in the forms of mass incarceration, the schoolto prison pipeline, racial profiling, educational inequalities, housing and employment discrimination, racism, and bias. And whereas in 2026, Black History Month honors the theme, a century of black history commemorations that focuses on the various and profound ways that work and working of all kinds, free and unfree, skilled and unskilled, vocational and voluntary, have shaped our country. And whereas the city invites all members of the community to renew their commitment to inclusion, racial equality, justice, creating a community where all belong, and to participate in the activities designed to advance the cause of freedom and equality for all. Now, therefore, be it resolved, the city of Roseville declares February 2026 to be Black History Month in the city. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Moved by council member Grath, seconded by Council Member Straw. Uh discussion on that motion. I think it's really a good reminder with some of the things that are happening nationally that this this is still an issue and becoming more of an issue every day with some of the mu museums being having problems on a national level. >> Yeah. Actually, information being removed, historical information being removed from museums. >> So, I think this is maybe something we need to really pay attention to and add a little bit to uh if if things continue. So, that's why I'm making the motion. >> Great. Thank you. Other discussion on the motion? Council members, >> I would just like to add to that um the uh contributions of um African-Americans to our medical research um isn't highlighted here, but is especially important as we think of Henry Alax Tuskegee um and the unfortunate and u unwelcome contributions they made to our overall safety um can't be ignored. I know that we have celebrated Junth as an organization and as a as a city for the last few years and I I know we try really hard to make sure if we have a statement that it it is reflected in an action and I feel that's each year it's gotten a little bit larger and reflects um a commitment to making sure that this is more than words. So I hope we continue to make that partnership >> and thank you. Is there other discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor of the proclamation signify by saying I. >> I opposed. That passes unanimously. Uh the second proclamation is in respect to uh Optimus Day in Roseville. We just heard from a few of the uh representatives of Optimus in regard to action week in Roseville next week. The proclamation reads, uh, whereas volunteers working with young people who are our joy of today and our hope of tomorrow are exuberant representatives of the potential to be reached and the dreams to come true. They are all unbounded in their enthusiasm to use their own talent, skills, and hard work to make a difference in others lives. And whereas members of Optimist International will celebrate Optimist Day throughout the world, the first t Thursday of every February to promote their efforts in helping and recognizing the young people that make a difference in their communities and who encourage greater exchange of ideas between young people and adults. And whereas there are over 2400 optimist clubs with more than 70,000 members among optim optimist international and optimist members throughout the world that carry out more than 6,500 service projects that serve 6 million young people each year. Now therefore be resolved that the city of Roseville recognizes Thursday, February 5th, 2026 to be optimist day in the city. May this day instill pride in our city's optimists for all of their accomplishments and for the impact they have they have to truly make a difference in others lives. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. It's been moved by council member Sharter, seconded by council member Grath to approve that proclamation. Uh discussion on the motion. >> You know they um the Optimus Club and has done such really good work. I've had uh fortunate to see what the Roseville branch does and so I'm glad to be able to support this. >> All right, other discussion on the motion. >> They've done a lot of work with Ukraine and uh youth in Ukraine and bringing students over here to experience some things and I think it's been really an important work that I've seen them do. It's hard to >> hard to have an option today but but um >> I think the their name of their uh group is intentional. >> Yes, I know. Yeah, I agree. I mean, for all times, >> times when it's easy to be optimistic and times when it's less easy, >> probably more important today than ever. >> Certainly. Uh, is there any other discussion on the motion? Hearing none, all those in favor of that proclamation signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes unanimously. >> Uh, and then thirdly, we have the opportunity to [snorts] accept some general donations to the parks and recreation uh department. Um, and I'm not sure who is uh bringing that forward for our consideration this evening. Looks like our parks and recck director, Matt Johnson. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. >> Thank you, mayor and councel. Uh, this is a a rather formal business item, but uh one that um certainly warrants some some highlight. Um I'm here tonight to officially accept donations in the amount of $29,081 that were donated to the parks and recreation department over the past year. Um, these donations were received as a combination of cash and inind contributions and it is required by state law that these be officially accepted by the city council. And therefore, a resolution exists in your packet to uh officially accept these donations. These donations range from in dollar amount from $20 all the way up to just over $14,000 and are an example of the wide ranging commitment that this community has to its parks and recreation services. These funds are utilized for both specific projects and general uses and used both to reduce uh impact on the city levy as well as augment exceptional projects. Some examples of projects that these funds went to were uh updating the Roseville Ice Arena sound system, replacement of split rail fencing at the Muriel Seline Arboritum, the uh Central Park flowers are all fully donated, um as well as even our updated Roseville puppet wagon. Um, I also do want to note that a s significant number of these donations were made in memoriam of advocates of our parks and recreation system who passed away over the past year. And again, we just want to take a moment and actually note that um in addition to the donations that are in the packet and this resolution, another $115,000 were donated for specific projects that were accepted earlier in the year, making the total amount donated uh over the past year to our parks and recreation system just shy of $145,000. I highlight that not to in any way say that we do some fantastic job of soliciting funds, but instead to highlight the outstanding commitment that our community has to the parks and recreation system. And before turning it back over to you, Mr. Mayor, on behalf of the staff, um I do want to explicitly thank those that contributed to our parks and recreation system in any dollar amount, but in addition to financially through advocacy and volunteerism over the past year. With that, I'll turn it back to you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, uh, Mr. Johnson. Very well said. Uh, and those thanks, uh, and that those things that we're thanking people for are very well appreciated by the community. Uh, we do have the, uh, resolution, uh, accepting those donations. Uh, that's attachment uh, one to this item. Are there any questions? First of all, for staff, >> council member Schroer, >> not a not a question, but I I am just I am just so amazed that the volunteer that we h volunteerism we have in Roseville and and I think you mentioned it. It's not just a dollar amount, but the amount of time people are willing to um commit to keeping this community going. And then these different organizations too that are willing to augment and make things even better in our community. I just want to say thank you, thank you, thank you for everyone who helps. And your name might not be on this list, but you know, for all the help you've done as well. >> All right. Do we have a motion on the resolution? >> So moved. >> Second. It's been moved by council member Schroeder. I think uh council member Stron uh got the second on that discussion on the motion. Anything else to add? Council member Schroer. Council member Strong. >> I'd just like to especially shout out the uh Blooming Boulevard um in addition to the the volunteers as uh Council Member Schroeder mentioned, you can get a tiny tiny little plot if you volunteer. There are so many people who want to volunteer to plant flowers and to really um augment the city in that way that you get a tiny little section and a few little flowers because there's so many people who want to contribute and it's such a beautiful contribution throughout the year. It really just continues um and people comment on it regularly. What a lovely addition is as you kind of come down Lexington and see those lovely flowers. So, um we are thankful for all of the um donations for sure, but um that one is one that is particularly notable just because it's something we see every day. So, thank you to all though. >> Wanted to check with Mr. Johnson. Is there any problem naming the folks that the memorial uh donations are given in the name of? >> Uh there is not. No. >> Okay. Then I would want to note that uh there was a a couple of donations uh totaling approximatelyund excuse me $250 uh as a memorial to Marilyn Maguire. Uh there was a memorial of about $150 to uh Paul W. Warner. Uh and then a number of donations that uh add up to several hundred uh in the memorial to uh Donald Glendy. Uh I believe also uh the Verning family uh also made a contribution as well. V I R N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N I N G N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N I Vernick. Uh thank you uh once again to everybody who's donated and we especially appreciate those memorials uh and the honor uh to those individuals uh for their interest and love of our parks. With that, we have the the resolution um before us as a motion. Uh any further discussion on the motion hearing? [clears throat] None. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes unanimously and those donations are accepted. Thank you again, Mr. Johnson and to all the donation all the donors. >> Uh that brings us to our one business item we have this evening which is uh to discuss Roseville's uh 2026 legislative priorities. Of course the legislative session uh at the state level is uh beginning on February 17th and so uh this is timely to get this uh together uh in time for the communication of our priorities to the representatives uh at the legislature uh prior to that. And I'll turn over to Mr. Trean to bring this item for the council's uh consideration after our initial discussion earlier. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. Uh as noted in the RCA, we did uh have a first look at these priorities at the January 5th meeting. We reviewed the 2025 uh priorities. Um decided that most of them were still relevant, but wanted to bring back uh several for conversation. And we do have the addition uh since it went to print um uh the packet went to print about the eviction moratorum and I'll get into that here in a second. So um we had divided our priorities up between high and other priorities. The distinction there being if it's a high priority that is something that we actively advocate for at the legislature uh either through um uh testimony at public hearings, involvement of staff and city council uh to advocate for that directly. So we have four uh currently that um actually were priorities last year as well. One is to seek financial support for the capital improvements at the Oval. That's something we've had in our list for quite a long time. We have received funding in the past, but we have one last batch of funding that we need to have uh to complete the work that's needed there. We also uh had a priority about allowing local units of government to designate the licensed ambulance servers. area right now is governed by state law and cities don't really have any input and there's no accountability uh by the providers as well. So we like to have some more ability to control that so we can have uh quality service and good response times for our residents. We also have prioritized enacting statewide licensing of massage therapists. This has been an ongoing conversation. Currently uh each city licensed massage therapists as we know um there are um situations uh at some massage therapy establishments where there's human trafficking going on and we try to do our best to stay on top of it but uh as it's licensed on an individual level at the state uh I'm sorry at the local level it's really hard to know um what the standing is oftentimes and we think the best course of action is to have statewide licensing system that can track better um violations and or uh bad actors in the massage therapy business. So, we would like to see that uh change. And then finally, we had uh a law about modifying state law regarding park dedication. Currently, uh it is based on a land subdivision. Uh we have many uh parcels of land where um it's already somewhat developed as a redevelopment. For instance, maybe putting up 200 uh apartment units. Uh we are not able to collect park dedication fees because it's not technically a land subdivision. So, we want to have that ability. There's many other cities uh in the metro that are also advocating for the same thing. So, it's kind of a coalition approach on that. I would note that uh none of those um four items really had any traction this uh last first year of the session. So, we're in the second year of the session. So, we would hopefully see some action. Moving on to the >> actually just if you could note, did some of them have legislation introduced? However, >> yeah, the uh statewide licensing of massage therapists did have um uh legislation There's nothing about the uh uh uh ambulance service provider or the park dedication. Okay. Uh the the the oval funding I guess was applied for and was floating around but not included in the final uh bonding bill at the end of uh the day but we did testify on that. >> I believe there was some legislation that was done and not directly related to this ambulance service. However, there was some changes in law for rural uh ambulance >> for rural. Yes. So there was some movement um not fully but >> right I think some funding came along with that to to help them out >> and there is I believe a working group associated with that as well >> and our and our chief is involved in that. So >> okay >> can I say something about the massage therapist licensing? I think one of the problems we've had in the city when it's locally quite often they'll get shut down but then they just move to another municipality or and it's hard to track that when it's all local instead of being a statewide. So, I just wanted to be sure the listeners understand that part of it. >> Yep. Thank you for that clarification. >> Yeah, we actually, as I I like to point out, uh we have statewide licensing and and regulation of uh cosmetologists in the state, right? >> But we don't have it for massage therapy and you know, I just it doesn't make sense with all the issues with trafficking and and all that. >> All right. Okay. Uh so, moving on to other priorities. I see that first bullet point actually should have been removed that we're going to have further discussion on that. So that wasn't necessarily um um kind of a task to remain. The other ones we do um uh look to maintain here is allow for the use of city websites and other technology based methods for official notices. Uh we're interested in seeing police officer arbitration reform to give uh uh cities better power to have discipline in place. We do support efforts uh uh for the department of labor for advanced energy standards as part of the state building code to require that and other things that other uh regulations and incentives for green construction. We also uh would like to see continued funding for local government to local governments for emerald emerald ashbor. There has been funding in the past. It kind of goes up and down. We have been real successful in leveraging state funds to um deliver our emerald ashbor program and we' like to see that funding continued. And then we'd also like to see continued funding for mental health services and resources for public safety. As you know, we've really leaned into that with our training of our officers for many years and embedding social workers. We want to continue to see that support um for that. We did talk about adding a couple uh other um items. Uh the first bullet point is something that actually we've kind of had as part of our legislative priority for the last couple years, but not so in so much words. We This is about the middle uh missing middle housing and the local preeemption. Uh we've had sent letters in the past as bills have been considered. So I think the idea was to have a direct priority listed in here and and my guess that would be probably located in high priority and that would read support the continuation of local decision-making authority over zoning, land use, and affordable housing issues and oppose one-sizefitsall zoning, land use, and affordable housing frameworks imposed on cities through legislation. Uh the other uh two that we have added is the reestablishment of the local cannabis aid account to provide ongoing funding to cities to assist with costs related to local implementation of legal adult use cannabis. When uh the cannabis law was passed originally, there was some dollars coming to uh local cities that had dispensaries for enforcement that was removed uh last year. And so I think the idea is that we should uh receive some state funding to help uh with our any enforcement efforts that we do. I would note that is a priority I think for both metro cities and uh League of Minnesota cities. So I've placed that in the other priorities for now that meaning that others will carry that weight but we will certainly support that. And then also um we uh wanted to add some language about uh having state funding to help state and local law enforcement agencies prevent and respond to street racing and carjackings. This is consistent with a lot of our focus over the years about uh autotheft and um the carburetor uh law as well. So uh this is continued funding for that. Um and I know that's a priority for sure for Metro Cities. I think it was for the league as well. And so uh to acknowledge that we want to put it in our priority something but it would be an other priority. Then we [clears throat] identified discuss uh the following items uh that were in the 2025 priorities whether that not they should be in there or rewarded or thought of differently. One is the creation of sustainable alternative funding sources for cable commissions uh i.e. broadband franchise fees. There has been some movement apparently the first broadband franchise uh I think in the country uh certainly in the state uh was done in Woodbury for broadband. Um so I have included some information in the packet about that. Uh Michael Bradley who's the uh communications attorney um um uh for many agencies in the state of Minnesota but also 9 north which is our local cable commission uh has been at the forefront of that and he provided some information. He unfortunately couldn't be here tonight but gave some background and from the way I understand it there was just a recent court case that uh at least in in in in his analysis uh has um broadband providers uh treated differently and then a telecommunications agency which is regulated differently. So uh there are some opportunities uh there um and whether or not that is a legislative priority uh we get the law change or it's just something that we focus on. I do know in talking to other managers and administrators, many cities are having this teed up for a conversation and everybody's trying to figure out kind of what to do. So whether or not we include on the priorities, I think it's something that we'll have to have continued discussion on and continue to partner with N North as well that and then also uh wanted to talk about amending the state building code that uh would allow municipalities to require sprinkler systems in what are known as R2 or multifamily occupancy groups. This is something that we've had uh on our priority list since 2018 or so, 2019. Um up to about 2000 uh any apartment buildings or multif family buildings did not require to have sprinklers. Since that time, uh they have been required. So knowing our age of our housing stock, we have uh many multif family buildings that are unsprinkled and uh the fire department uh is a strong advocate for sprinkling. It does save lives and and property damage. Uh this is something that uh obviously raises cost for uh new construction or uh I'm sorry for retrofit um because new construction is required to do that. Uh they feel it's very important to keep that on but I think we wanted to bring that back for discussion. Unfortunately, Chief Rosanne can't be here tonight so we did provide a memo and so we can certainly have a conversation about that. Last uh but not least wanted to talk about um u having a priority around uh urging the governor to have an executive order uh to impose a temporary eviction moratorum uh to protect the residents and businesses harmed by the federal government's immigration enforcement agencies. So uh that is a priority. You can see the wording is there. We've also drafted a letter uh to be sent to the governor and a resolution uh that asks for that to happen. Those are in your packet um uh for your consideration. Uh I would suggest if that's something we want to do, we would uh look to pass a resolution and direct staff to send that letter to the governor. I would note there's one small change to the letter uh that council member Schroeder uh asked for and that is highlighted in yellow regard regarding providing resources to uh whether it's the landlords or housing providers and homeowners um some some re financial resources uh dealing with that effect of that moratorum if uh they're not collecting rent or able to pay their mortgage. So uh that is something we can certainly add to the priority and if we do I would say that would be high priority. That would be something we directly advocate for and I think our immediate action we can take uh today uh would be to uh approve that resolution and authorize that letter to be sent down to the governor. And with that I will pause and see if there's any questions. My intention is to to hear the feedback tonight and then bring back the final list at the February 9th meeting for official adoption and that'll be in time for the legislative session. >> Great. Thank you, Mr. Trojan. And I did want to note two things on those uh items for discussion. One is that it does appear from the information from uh attorney Bradley that that the uh the environment for that particular type of franchising seems to from that court case be such that pursuing a legislative solution allowing for the franchising [clears throat] a given that it hasn't been successful in recent attempts and B given this new landscape perhaps is unnecessary. I think it does make sense. So, it may not need to be a legislative priority, but I think as a city, we may want to make sure that we're having those conversations with our cable commission and fellow cities, the nine the eight other cities to see if that's a a pursuit that we can undertake to get that uh that franchising capability underway. uh so that as as there are broadband uh rollouts in Roseville um we may be behind a couple of instances already but uh certainly if there are new seems to be something that a number of companies are getting into that we have that potentially in place. Uh the other one on the fire code since I had brought that uh up the main thing was is just it had been on our priorities list for a number of years and didn't seem to be getting any traction. uh if the fire department is still advocating for it and if it remains a uh an other priority, I don't know that I would take it off the list on the basis of that, but I would be open to other council members thoughts on that. Uh council member Sher. >> Yeah. Um I just wanted to add one one more you were talking about the um eviction moratorum. I just wanted to um explain why I added that line in here um adding the financial resources because if um we the way this was written it was mainly for renters and I think Roseville has really promoted firsttime home ownership in the and worked really hard with Habitat for Humanity and other programs to get people own their houses and and so I would want to make sure that if if this um this operation um ice stuff is affecting uh renters. It's probably affecting homeowners too and I want to make sure we don't exclude them. But then also um there's some very um small um landlords too, the mom pops ones that I know during the co um um um crisis that some of them had some big issues, you know, as well. But um the main thing I said about the resources is because we get the state has a sales tax for housing that um they're collecting and I would think that they could use some of that to help fund these programs because it is about housing. So that's why I said about the resources that I think um we don't necessarily have to um spell it out, but that's where my thoughts were. One, they have the sales tax at the state level they could use to help out. And two, I just wanted to make sure we did not exclude um particularly um homeowners um especially first-time homeowners that they might have issues as well. >> Just on that note, it may make sense to talk not just in terms of eviction moratorium but perhaps a foreclosure moratorium or something like that. >> Yeah. And I wasn't sure >> just related once again to the mortgage holders. Y um I did want to check the state sales tax related to housing. Is that entirely distributed to communities for expenditure or is there a portion of it that's maintained at the state or do we know for sure? >> I don't think we know for sure. We certainly get a local appropriation of that. Um so we're we're going to be talking about how we should distribute that. Uh I do not know if the state retains any of that. Uh so that's a really good question. I think regardless of the answer to that, I think we have at least had some preliminary discussions or I have with our community development folks about and we've got a SK a planned discussion about more broadly our housing funding and our use of our local sales or our our local share of the of the state housing sales tax uh about providing some of that assistance. I would be comfortable still noting in our in our request to the governor, you know, that assistance be provided. I wouldn't necessarily specify where it's coming from or what the source is, but just because of the fact that >> just doing the moratorum on the evictions takes care of the people that are that are, you know, facing that. But it I think we do want to try to keep our housing system as financially whole as we can uh through the process because the last thing we want to do is as you were noting with mom and pop type um you know property owners and small multif family that those folks uh are providing uh most of the time what's known as naturally occurring affordable housing to people. uh and if they're not able to continue in that business uh and provide that housing, that doesn't help the the housing uh system or the housing um um situation in our community. So, I would I would be supportive of that sort of language. Uh Council Bower. And then um I guess following up with uh that some of the problems with those local um that sales tax housing sales tax I believe I miss a law it's mostly directed towards what we can you know we're very limited on what we can do with those funds most directly you know there's assistance we'll talk about this as you mentioned during the EDA >> that uh it's really for rent assistance and it would be nice I mean I don't know if we want to include something here but allow more ability for um also ownership assistance as Well, >> nice adding flexibility sales tax, right? Because right now, if that was there and changed, that would allow us to then help both uh renters and homeowners. Uh right now, we can only help with via the EDA and those funds with renters. So, it'd be nice to add just some wording into this to I mean, kind of note that flexibility. I feel like that's a much easier step to um a more near-term solution that might be more quick and accessible. the funds are already there. It [clears throat] just changes what restrictions we have with them. There might be a little bit flexibility with that because um if you go through those restrictions, there is a thing at the very end that says or other programs approved. So, we may as a city of Roseville and talk about this during the EDA when that comes up, but we should definitely seek um besides maybe doing this, send a letter and try to work with um Minnesota Housing Authority, I believe it is. >> Housing Minnesota, >> housing Minnesota um to see if we can't get that approved at least for our municipality because that's something we could do without the governor. That's just them as an administration or administrative body approving that. >> Sure. And so, there's a couple of different things going on here. >> Sorry. >> Yeah. And and I will say also that I had reached out to our uh staff about the possibility of using >> the LAAHA funds or the local um uh housing sales tax for uh mortgage assistance as well. And so that's already something that they were going to be doing some research into. Um but I I understand that there may be some restrictions there or that we have you have to get the special permission for those those special cases. So it sounds like the ask is that we want to provide for the um the moratorium on evictions and potentially related to foreclosures as well and provide the financial assistance to help with the uh the the renters, homeowners, etc. Um and then also that flexibility for cities to use the LAA funds. >> I'm I'm comfortable with this document as is with the note of directing staff maybe in this paragraph where it begins. >> Well, we won't direct staff in our letter to the governor. I mean, sorry to make the change, but something where the local governments have limited authority to maybe write something in there to provide >> add add more authority for >> add more authority to allow >> flexibility certainly >> because I think local governments are really looking for ways to spend that money because it's >> that is the problem. >> It can't be used on existing programs >> and that's a situation we have in areas that are built up that don't have necessarily as large apartment stock in such as Roseville. >> All right. >> So, I'd be supportive of that. >> Are you making notes, Mr. Tre? All right. Um and then I can yield to something else, but then I want to come back to the um cable commission. >> Okay. Council member Strong. >> Um as the newly minted uh ambassador to the 9 north, I just wanted to make sure that people understand the value of this uh resource to them. It is our public access um which had previously been funded by cable commission. Um and it is amazing to me how many people still retain cable. Um, I was going to say it's still funded by cable, but the dollars go down each year. >> Yes. But each year less and less people have cable u television and then there's less resources, but um it is an amazing resource where they're really at they are our local news um station. They are at our our um city events. They're at basketball games and hockey games and and they are kind of what we do to document our small town. Um and so I think it's really valuable. And so I think as mentioned, Woodbury and their consortium in the South Washington area were able to utilize um the broadband franchise. And so I would be supportive of retaining that on as a a um one of our other priorities at least joining um I think Mr. Bradley and N North are really leading the charge, but as part of N North, I think it's important that we keep our connection. So this is a legislative priority and we are asking the legislature to give us permission to do it. >> I thought it got moved to the >> right. So yeah, I mean I would say it it's no longer a legislative priority if we can do it anyway. I think the thing we want to focus on then is doing it. >> Yeah. >> And then I just had one comment about the letter u moratorum to um in the addition um I just little pause on provision of final financial resources to impacted landlords. Um, I I can see that being a small um landlord or um who is [clears throat] maybe having loss of funds, but I certainly wouldn't want to try to um make whole some private equity firm that is using the funds. So, I just want to make sure and I I know that it's really up to them how they decide, but I want to make sure that it doesn't somehow come off that we are saying every person who is losing funds is getting equal access to spending. I think as I was reading this, I was thinking instead of impacted landlords and homeowners that it would be impacted renters and homeowners, I would I would like to see the the aid go directly to the renters because they're the ones who are supposed to be able to pay their their rent to avoid eviction and that would make the most sense to me and then it goes ultimately to landlords, but at least the renters are a not getting evicted and a and b able to to maintain the good standing with their rent. >> Uh, council member Gro. Yeah, I would agree with that last comment. That makes sense. Um, cable commissions. Yeah, I think that's that's a good good resolution there. Uh, sprinkler systems. I have a little I'm a little uncertain about that because of the cost of retrofitting buildings. Of course, we want to save lives, but I think we need to look at when that would be done. I think it's kind of a complicated question. And I would leave it on here because there are details to be worked out, but I just want to express that now that that's not something easy to do to all these old buildings. >> Does it does make sense to add that we want some sort of financial framework to be put together to help that happen? >> Well, I would prefer that because, you know, when you start in it could cost more to put that in the building than the building's worth in some cases. So >> potentially. >> Um, just a question. And then I guess uh the only other thing would be is is this a leg this legislative one for federal? Would that be something we could do? >> Yeah. So, one of the things we've heard uh from residents uh in fact even just this evening um was the notion of perhaps adding a federal legislative priority uh that would ask our uh federal representatives to push for legislation to require federal uh enforcement officers to not be masked doing their normal business and to show ID and identify themselves uh as other agencies and other officers at other levels of government are required either by policy or law to do around the country. Um, obviously there can be exceptions for certain undercover operations just like we have in our own policy. Uh, but I think it might be something we want to urge our uh federal legislators to also pursue as legislation uh rather than being dependent on agencies to uh hopefully do the right thing in that regard. So that's a new addition uh open for council thoughts or discussion. >> Well, I think it's a good idea. I don't mean I know it's kind of a heavy lift. So, so what but I think putting it out there at least is a start and maybe others will follow us and with many voices maybe we could get some attention. I don't think we have trouble with our local u representatives on the national level here. But there are other others in the state that are national representatives that we need to pressure to do this kind of work so that we do have identifications [clears throat] >> because I understand totally what we heard tonight about being taken away by people with masks on is a very very threatening thing in my opinion. It's like being kidnapped. That's what I would see it as. So that's why I would support this. >> Other thoughts from council members council member power >> I would support this as well. So, I think there is probably some it's good time to do it as well. I think there's be receptive. I think there's a way for us, even though we're local and we're talking about federal, we can still probably work it up through the League of Minnesota Cities because there is a national uh league of cities as well. >> So, I think going through that route, they'll be able to aggregate and maybe bring in more cities and do that. So, I'm comfortable doing that. I think there is, you know, we can put some weight that I can take it back to the League of Minnesota cities uh as something and see how far we can get with that. I'm going to be on a call with Congresswoman McCollum tomorrow morning, so I'll make sure to bring it up there. >> Excellent. >> Unless you all say not to. >> That doesn't seem to be the case. All right, Council Member Sharter. >> Yeah, and I agree with Council Member Bower there because I think um bringing it up to the league because there's 800 cities in that organization and and and I think the higher levels we can bring it to, the the bigger the voice sounds more. So, so I do like that idea of of um him carrying the torch up up to the next level as well. >> Other thoughts from council members on that. >> Council Bower, you had yielded before. >> Yes. Regarding the franchise fees, I don't I would argue it's not settled. If you look at what happened in Woodbury, they worked with a willing um broadband provider in open access. they did not try to put say you know there's nothing that hasn't been tried hasn't been taken to court as far as like what they've done and produced. So I do think you're still going to need uh I still think it should be a legislative priority but I do think it hasn't been tested to say existing broadband providers to need a franchise fees like what it's by Minnesota law for utilities that we currently have you know power and gas. So if you if we want to do that also there's a if you look at Woodbury that's a new provider there's an agreement they have to bring in a buildout it's all brand new stuff over 5 years it's a unique situation that Woodbury found itself in that they were able to take advantage that I don't believe applies to our situation nor the situation in many metro cities especially in the inner inner ring. So, I'd be in favor of still keeping it a other priority because I do think you're going to need it because um I think if you were trying to do that with existing broad fires, it would be uh quickly litigated and I'm not so sure you would be able to stand on it. The court cases that they have allow them to do it in this particular case, but no one's actually testing that law per se. Certainly. And we uh just on on the cable franchising side of things, uh the example would be is that uh we had another uh cable provider come into the marketplace briefly. Uh in the mid I think it was the 2010 2015 time frame. Um it was the former US West whatever they were called at that particular time. Central Link. Yeah. Um anyway, they did agree to a franchise to provide cable services under the fact that we had a franchise requirement in place. So I think it's potentially possible that new providers even if somebody is sort of grandparented in, you know, can be impacted positively by the current scenario. But I don't disagree that we could keep this as something that we continue to ask for at the legislature. We have, despite having testified in favor of it a couple times over the last couple years, um we never had moved it up to a high priority. was always kind of another priority. So, it's probably where it goes. >> There are other situations that murky this merk this up because uh broadband if it is that definition, there's plenty of things that are in broadband but don't actually aren't consumer. They're business and where do [clears throat] we draw those lines? There's just a lot of things that are not settled. >> Fair enough. All right. Other thoughts from council? Oh, Mr. Trean. >> So, um took all those notes. So, reminder, I'll bring this all back here. So, I'll work on that federal uh priority and um about the R2 sprinkling about financial framework. We'll keep the uh franchise fees in there. Um just with the uh eviction moratorum since time is of the essence. I scratched really quick uh rough uh wording here and just want to run that by you just to see if that's okay. Um so that sentence read a temporary moratorium paired with clear state guidance and coordinated implementation and provision of financial resources including granting authority and flexibility to cities to utilize LAHA funding to assist impacted her renters and homeowners. >> Yes, that's good. >> I think that could work. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Did we need to add besides eviction uh the notion of foreclosure? I don't know. That wasn't part of I don't think what was done during CO if I remember right. >> No, I don't think so. Yeah, >> but anyway, >> I think we should have closure to that as well. It makes it very clear that we're talking both >> um renters and rent. >> Well, well, >> so that would that would add to wherever it's mentioning eviction moratorum. That would be eviction and forclosure. >> So, a temporary eviction and foreclosure moratorium would be the >> and it's and it is definitely targeted based on need as I seem to recall. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yep. Okay. >> All right. [cough] Anything else you need to clarify, Mr. Judge? >> Um, no, I don't think so. >> All right. >> Discussion. >> I do want to provide an opportunity also for members of the public now that we've had a bit of conversation about it. If there was somebody from the public who wish to comment on the proposed legislative priorities, this would be the opportunity at this time. >> I'd like to speak to the eviction moratorum. Is that still? >> Yes, it's part of our conversation right now. It's very relevant. >> Perfect. Well, I initially came to urge you to vote in favor of this resolution, but seeing as you guys are amanable to amendments, I'd like to offer some of my own. >> Would you be able to introduce yourself? >> Yes. Sorry. I'm just so excited. My name is Callie and I'm a resident of Roseville off of Loville Avenue. >> All right. And if you want after you're done, you can just sign your name on that that chart and then we'll have your spelling for the record. Awesome. Thank you. >> So, I was reading through the proposed resolution for Roseville and comparing that to the resolution that the Minneapolis City Council proposed and knowing the context that unfortunately Mayor Fry did not sign onto this um resolution that the council unanimously voted for. I think that context is important when we're discussing the language in the Roseville one being so soft compared to the Minneapolis one. And so I'd like to highlight some of the differences that I noticed. Um the language in the Minneapolis proposal includes escalating violence, threatening and violent attacks, threat of violent and abduction, um displacement and homelessness. And comparing that to some of the language in the Roseville one, it feels soft in so as it's uncertainty, fear, it's negatively affecting. And I would just urge you to remember the maybe seven plus hours of testimony that you've heard over the past two council meetings uh pertaining to multiple resolutions that you guys have addressed urging you to be more firm and resol resolute in the language that you're proposing and again given that the Minneapolis one didn't pass um and assuming that you guys will unanimously vote um to pass this given you have all signed off on the letter already. Um, you are not just representing Roseville at this point. You will perhaps be one of the leading cities preparing an eviction notice uh for Governor Walls. And so I'd urge you to think about uh the fact that you're representing Minneapolis to a degree because their mayor has failed them in, you know, not signing this resolution. And so the words that you guys choose are more important than ever. Um, Mayor Row, you just said something along the lines of, "Don't focus on doing, just do it if you have the power." And so on line 42, it says the city council seeks to act and uphold these values. Well, don't seek to act, just act. This is an act. And I'm not getting the sense of urgency that this moment is really needing. and especially the beautiful statement you guys just gave talking about condemning the division and the harm that's being produced. Where is that? Why is that not in here? Why is that not translating directly in this resolution and more aptly in the letter? So, I would urge you to consider um you know, addressing some more powerful language because everything in here is true. Um but everything the community is telling you is to be more direct and a little more assertive and forceful because what's happening is forceful against our communities. It's harmful. And I think you guys know that. And lastly, I'll end by saying my boyfriend wanted to note that there was a minor spelling error on the version that I have. >> I identify with your boyfriend. >> Okay. [laughter] >> So, again, thank you. I hope to see you all vote in favor of this resolution, but before um hopefully this doesn't get caught up in, you know, the procedural par paralysis. I do hope that you will consider some amendments. Um, and sorry, lastly, you're talking about standing alongside um the community members in your statement, and that language is not here, but I'd urge you to revisit the Minneapolis one. They do have a specific line where they say, "The council stands alongside our neighbors." And the only reason that I bring that up is because I don't see that listed anywhere besides in your letter saying that you stand ready to support the state and I urge you to stand with the people. Great. Thank you for your comments. I appreciate the the additions. I think uh probably part of what happened is that we had one written before the other and so we we can grab from one to augment the other now or the other way around. So, thank you for your uh feedback on that. >> Yes. Thank you. >> And we'll definitely check on that spelling error. >> Is there anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to uh proposed legislative priorities? Hello, mayor. Hi, um, council members. My name is Jesse Austin O'Neal and I live at 464 Glenwood Avenue in Roseville. Um, I'm here today to express support for the eviction moratorum, uh, resolution and letter before you today. Um, and specifically just wanted to note that the government or the governor's office has precedent for establishing a moratorum like this. We know six years ago that they put in place one um because of the crisis caused by the CO 19 pandemic. And while the COVID pandemic did cause enormous inequities in health, in economics, um the difference here is that this crisis is an intentional one caused and targeted at our most vulnerable community members, which makes something like this even more important. Um, I'm also heartened to hear that you're looking into distributing local resources for rental and mortgage assistance. Um, I look forward to hearing what comes of that and I appreciate the sentiments that my fellow neighbor shared, but um hope that I don't I'm not super familiar with all of the procedural stuff. I would um encourage you to take what you can now, but not um sacrifice expediency um to like nitpick the language. So, um, just I'll yield the rest of my time. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you for your comments. Is there anyone else from the public who wishes to speak to our legislative priorities? >> Hello. Again, Carrie Gelli, uh, Highway 36 and Dale Street. Um and you know if it is accurate and correct to say that the governor has um the authority to act quicker or sooner than waiting for the legislative session um I would encourage the council if and this might be reiterating what other folks have said if there's any way to act on this faster um because we're like 5 days away from rent being due. So, if we could potentially impact something for February 1st um rent due, I think that would be great. I would try to move that way if at all possible and if not, just do it as soon as possible. So, thank you. >> Right. Thank you. Appreciate those comments. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak? >> All right. Uh seeing no one, then we'll close the public comment on the legislative priorities. Um and uh perhaps what we can do depending on the council's uh feeling about it and perhaps also our legal council's feeling about it is that we can um authorize the letter and the resolution to be sent uh pending the final edits. Um and I you know I think the letter is easier to perhaps leave to final edits. Resolutions tend to be actions of the city council. Uh we could always follow up the letter with the resol with the final resolution if we need to take official action on it. Um, but I'll turn it over to council members and or staff or andor the attorney to feedback. Uh, council member B. >> Take a shot. I'm comfortable with the resolution as it is. Yes, we could add more language. I mean, the resolution is directed towards and the letter is directed towards the governor who can take action which I feel understands the situation and um, this is showing our support. I don't believe we have to as much convince him that these things are going on. So adding more language to it, I don't know, is going to change his mind from what he already has. I think he's very well aware of what's taking place. The language here, um, as some say, is you avoiding some of those things is a hope to probably grab more people, um, to be supportive of it and not push them off if it is a trying to throw a bigger tent, if you will. And so for that reason and also the expediency of just agreeing to it right now and moving it forward I think is sufficient. >> Other thoughts? Council member Scher. >> Yeah and I agree. I think um speed is more important than trying to to um change it. So we did make that one um change and I think it would be be it be I'd be supportive of just passing it with that one change and let's just get it out and get it out. You know, let's not spend more time. um word smorth smithing it I guess because I think the other piece is the governor this is the main thing is we want him to know we are supporting this and this is what we want and he's going to write it his way anyways but it just I think I want to get it out sooner than later >> thoughts from council members council member >> yeah I think that the time is of the essence here I I mean we can always improve on documents but really we need to get something out now and we we need to do it quickly. These documents are written [clears throat] in a certain way that might sound you know not as strong to you but they do have all the statements in place and I think we need to move forward forward with it tonight if if we can get that agreed to. >> Right. Is there a motion from the council? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. So the motion just to be clear, >> yes, >> is to is to adopt the resolution and approve the letter to the governor. Uh the resolution as presented in the letter with the changes. I don't know if we have to track the same changes in the resolution that we made to the letter. I can't I I apologize. I can't find my copy of the resolution in front of me and I >> it's up on the screen here. So we do say eviction moratorum. So I would just add and foreclosure moratorum and wherever if you give me the the ability wherever that needs to be added we'll add that to the final resolution before it's signed. >> Do you want us to sign this evening >> the letter? Yes. I hopefully have a copy ready uh at least the signature page but the resolution we can go into speak that based on your direction and I'm the one that signs that. So >> okay sign that tomorrow. >> Right. Uh we have the motion before us then to approve those items from council member Grath as the maker of the motion. Discussion on the motion. >> I think we've discussed enough things. >> Okay. Uh council member Strong as a secondary. All right. Other discussion. >> All right. Uh in the talk about expediency. Uh if there's no further discussion, all those in favor signif and then once again this is to adopt the resolution and approve sending the letter. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes unanimously. And I did just want to note for the public, thank you. Um [applause] the uh it does look like we are all signed off on the letter, but we don't have our signatures on the letter yet. It's it's a draft, but now once we sign it, it will be the official letter. It will happen. >> So, just to clarify that. Um then anything else on the legislative priorities? Uh it didn't sound like there was any objection to adding the federal priority. Um and that's a high priority. >> All right. And then we'll get going on that right away as well. won't hold off for the final document. Um, if there's nothing else, then Mr. Charge, I think you've got your guidance and we'll be bringing this back at a February February 9th meeting. >> February 9th. >> Okay. Y great. >> Thank you. >> Very good. Uh, that concludes our business items this evening. We have a couple of very important uh meeting minutes to re to review and approve as well as those consent items. Uh, first, the meeting minutes. We have the meeting minutes of our January 5th and January 12th council meetings. Um, we've had an opportunity to review those and provide feedback to staff and the final drafts with that feedback are before the council this evening. Are there any further changes or corrections that need to be made? Uh, or a motion to approve as presented. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Right. It's been moved by Council Member Bower, second by Council Gra to approve both minutes as presented. Is there any discussion on that motion? Right. Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I opposed. That passes unanimously. Those meeting minutes are approved. Uh that brings us to our consent agenda. None of the items were removed for separate consideration. Uh Mr. Treasure, would you give us a brief breakdown of the consent items as they are presented this evening? >> Yes. All right. [clears throat] Item 10 A approves payments in the amount of $2,218,38160. Item 10B approves a temporary liquor license to St. Rosal Lima Church and school for an event on March 21st and a temporary gambling permit for White Tails Unlimited for a raffle on March 21st at the Double Tree Hotel. Item 10 C approves the purchase of a new water fountain pump, 500 new recycling carts, and an expenditure uh for a subscription to storm water monitoring software. Agenda item 10D receives the grant report. To date, uh, the city has received $63,000 in grant funds. Agenda item 10E approves a short-term rental license for 329 South Aaso. Agenda item 10F approves the renewal of the short-term rental license for 770 HO. And, uh, agenda item 10G approves the renewal for the short-term rental license for 1901 Ryan Avenue. Item H approves the entering into an agreement with Kimley Horn to complete the environmental assessment worksheet in the amount of $19,000 for the for the Willow Willow Pond dredging project. I'm sorry, Willow Pond dredging project. Item 10 I approves a conditional use permit for motor vehicle repair at 2150 Hamlin Avenue. Item 10J approves agreements between the city and Metro Inet for financial personnel services and a lease for the Metro Inet data center. Item 10K approves the donation from the Midway Speed Skating Club for travel expenses for two park staff to travel to the 2026 Junior World Speed Skating Championships in Germany. The city of Roseville will host the 2028 Junior World Speed Skating Championships at the Oval. And this trip will be beneficial for staff uh to learn about the strategies and expectations of being a host site uh for an international competition as well as what the ice conditions uh and expectations would be for that event. There will be no city funds expended as part of this trip. And finally, item 10L approves entering into a professional services agreement with EKDA for the pathway feasibility study of the Aldine Street Rightway. And that is the consent agenda. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Tre. Is there a motion from the council on the consent items? >> Some moved. >> Second. >> It's been moved by council member Strong, second by council member Grath to approve the consent items as presented. Uh discussion, council member Strong. >> Yes, there's been some constrnation about 770 Hel Drive. I wanted to share some information. Um I had asked if there was possibility to conduct a rental log that um like a hotel registry that um could be utilized. Unfortunately um that um would be very limited on who could obtain that and for what purpose. Um I also reached out to ensure that there were no more than four unrelated adults in the home as indicated by our um ordinance and that was the case. Um we have also put into place the minimum stay of seven days um for you know to ensure that we were not having a constant cycle. We are told that the renters of concern are no longer in the home and other than this particular incident we have been told of no other uh violations or complaints related to this individual. Um, this person who owns the home has been very receptive to us and has been very willing to work with us to um to make sure that the neighbors and had to work with the neighborhood quite a lot to try to quell their fears as as their own as they also were someone who could potentially be in harm's way if they were renting to someone who was related to ICE. But again, we're told that that um any renders of concern have been vacated and our concern is telling someone who and who they can and cannot have occupy their space um is a challenge. So, I don't know. I I've had a lot of communication with uh attorney Tierney if she had anything to add on that. >> Yeah, >> I'm happy to answer any questions, but I don't have anything to add. Thank Well, as I understand it, there there are limitations as to how we can restrict um who can avail themselves of lodging at public establishments in the community. Maybe that's a question, a broad question about that. >> That is a broad question. Yes. >> Um what I will tell you is I don't know that I've ever seen a regulation like that and I'm not sure what a legal basis would be to impose one. >> Um certainly a research project at the at at the best case scenario. I would I would tend to just on the face of be a little concerned about constitutionality and protecting rights. But uh also it is good to know that that that rental has run its course and those individuals that were there are no longer there as part of that. Um the indication that the uh that the owner had was that the individuals were engineers who were uh working on a project in the area. Um, and that's, you know, there's no way necessarily to verify that, obviously, and puts puts our small, uh, residential homeowners in a very difficult position in terms of trying to police that. Um, and very fearful of losing their their ability to to use a national entity to to process their rentals and help with their financial needs. So, anyway, with that, we do have the motion before us. I don't believe there was anything else that I wanted to comment on. Was there anything else other council members wish to speak to? All right, we have the motion before us. All those in favor Oh, >> not on the consent agenda. We provided that opportunity earlier in the meeting. >> All right. Uh, with that, we've got the motion before us. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes unanimously. Those items are approved. That then brings us to the future agenda review. And just in response to a question that came up earlier in the meeting, um the future agenda review is our best estimate at this point of future uh agendas as they may come up and certainly the final agenda for any given meeting can can change up to the point when it's released to the public. Uh but that we try to make sure both for the benefit of the council uh as well as the benefit of the community that as best we can we provide a prediction as to when things will come forward. Um, and I think there are some things that uh we discussed at our last meeting, for instance, that may not be listed here yet because we're trying to slot them in based on what we know at the time and what else is on the agenda. So, with that preamble, I'll turn it over to Mr. Treasure to just briefly run through uh what we have for now on the uh future agendas. But I do note a new yes piece of documentation. >> Uh before I jump, I won't I won't read all this. Um, so, uh, in an effort to just to make sure there's better connections what the commission work is doing, uh, with the council and the public, we wanted to have a summary. I know most of you, uh, listen, watch, uh, read the minutes of the commission. So, you're quite familiar, but we wanted to have a summary each time. We would just include once a month in the packet kind of what they've been working on. So, get you a little bit more familiarity as well as the uh, rest of um, the public. So, this is two pages. This will be in our council packet moving forward. So, in regards to the future agenda, uh yes, Mr. Mayor, uh actually we this was printed before our meeting even happened on Thursday. This was out the door. So, um it is a fluid document for sure and it's something that uh we do update. We don't always include everything because we're still working through the details. >> However, our next meeting is February 9th. We have several things on there. Uh and probably the biggest discussion would be the the strategic plan. We do want to go [clears throat] over the objectives and going to have uh staff present that. So uh it's something that we want to present and share with you and get feedback on. Um so we do want to make sure we have appropriate time to do that. This is a really important document we've been working on for the last 18 months and we want to make sure we can integrate that into our budgeting cycle and things like that. The legislative priorities as well we'll bring back for approval. Uh also um want to bring back kind of a joint project between uh engineering and parks and recck about Pascal Street by Kaya Park about some traffic calming measures they've been uh taking. I don't know what all the findings are yet. I haven't seen them at least, but um they want to talk about that. We have the fireworks contract and the final payment for the uh pavement management plan. Reminder, on February 17th and perhaps the 19th, uh we have commission interviews for our vacancies. I was just asked when the deadline was. I don't know off the top of my head here, but it's coming up soon. So, if you have folks you want to reach out to to urge them, please have them contact >> probably that first week of Yeah, exactly February 6, next Friday. Okay. >> Yeah, because we usually need a about 10 days to put together the packets and everything. >> Uh on February uh 23rd, we have scheduled a couple things. One is uh the EA EDA meeting. This was something we originally scheduled for the 12th. Um so we've just moved that whole agenda to the 23rd and uh some of them are fairly routine uh items. Uh obviously the discussion uh relating to housing programs and ongoing EDA funding is a really big discussion. We have a lot of material in the packet and certainly it's a dynamic situation as far as you know uh dealing with the issues here um in front of us today. So, uh, we'll be prepared for that discussion. And at the regular council meeting, uh, uh, that night, we have a couple things. Um, but, um, you can see there about, uh, visit Roseville coming. Uh, there is the Minnesota State Patrol utility agreement. They have purchased a building behind Target and building their new headquarters there. And then, uh, looking to, um, accept a donation, a large donation, uh, for, um, at the Harriet Alexander Nature Center for a nature playground. So, we want to put out an RFP for somebody to help >> nature. Yeah, >> that's [laughter] a spelling, too. >> We didn't hear about that one. >> Nature play >> at he. >> Yeah. Um and so we want to issue an RFP for a designer on that. So, that's what we have uh coming up, >> right? And so, February 23rd EDA meeting uh for those listening to our discussion earlier about uh use of our funds for helping with housing assistance. That's that discussion, that last bullet on the on the 23rd. All right. Questions from the council or feedback on the future agendas? Any council member initiated items for future meetings uh or council reports or announcements? All right. Hearing none, the only other thing we have left on our agenda is adjournment. Is there a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> It's been moved by Council McGrath, seconded by Council Member Bower to adjurnn. Uh no discussion on a motion to adjurnn. All those in favor signify by saying I I opposed. That passes unanimously and we adjourned at 7:31 p.m. Thank you everyone.