HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-01-29 HPC Packet
MAPLEWOOD HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY HALL
January 29, 2009 -7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes
a. November 20, 2008
5. Chair Opening Statements/Presentations
6. City Attorney Discussion - Open Meeting Law
7. Old Business
a. Comprehensive Plan Review
8. New Business
a. 2009 Goal Setting
9. Visitor Presentations
10. Commission Presentations
11. Staff Presentations
a. Historical Preservation Commission Staff Liaison
b. Community Development and Park Department Reorganization
Update
c. Historical Preservation Commission Term Limit Clarification
e. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair
12. Adjournment
Agenda Item 4.a.
MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY HALL
NOVEMBER 20, 2008
A. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Ron Cockriel called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.
B. ATTENDANCE
Present: Chair Ron Cockriel, Vice Chair Richard CUr'f"ie, Lu Aurelius,
Liaison Lois Behm, Staff Representative ShannF'Tnwall
Absent: Commissioners Caleb Anderson, Pete;fjpulay, Bob Creager, AIGEllbraith
Ron noted a quorum did not exist; therefore no offiCicll business could be conducted.
However, there could be open discussion of some items to prepare for the next
meeting with full Commission attendal"l(';@, He suggestedtabling Approval of the
Agenda and Minutes, then move on thrQogrrtbe items thatdbinot require a decision:
,.... ..........,.
F2 - regarding previous discussions aboUthavi9g~~9mOJjssioner join the Ramsey
County Historical Socie.t?';,~~~oted in the Ejj?t6ric PresEtrvation Commission ordinance,
Ron said he had obt~il"ledtfreErl}rmbership~pplicationinformation. He commented on
the cost ($40/year)al1(J somedfthe benefits<fQr membership, and asked if anyone
would be interested. Et.l...who ~<'lS the only person indicating interest at the previous
meeting, said she still would liketqbeJhe member and Ron passed the paperwork on
to her for submission.
.,;:::;'.::::;...... ....::..::.::,
...... ...,:.......:.......:...::.;>. ............;;..:;
..,..... ......;..:;;:.....:.::....", ..,........'...M.
....:.... ":-::',':::;'cc.:"--<: ---',.,.",.':.:"
Caleb Anderson arrived at 7:10,treatinq a quorum, so business could continue as
usual. .
C. APPROVALOF I AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA
Lois requestedcjddition ofG4: December Meeting
Ron requested additiQnQfG5: Richie Place
Lu moved to appro\/eithe additions to the Aqenda, Richard seconded, Ayes - all.
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. MINUTES OF AUGUST 21, 2008
Lu moved approval of the minutes of Auqust 21, 2008, Caleb seconded, ayes - all.
1
2. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2008
Lu moved approval of the minutes of September 18, 2008; Richard seconded, ayes-all
3. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 16, 2008
Lu moved approval of the minutes of October 16, 2008, Richard seconded, ayes - all.
E. CHAIR OPENING STATEMENTS I VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Ron commented on the November 4th passage of the LegaGYAmendment, which
included a provision for funds for historic preservation, arl(J c()I.lTcLpotentially be a
source of help in the Commission's and City's preserJIatiqn efforts,
No Visitor Presentation for this meeting.
F. OLD BUSINESS
1. CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT STATUS
Ron reported that Shann Finwall has~.gn~ some researchf~garding achieving Certified
Local Government Status and asked h~r:t8if~port on her findings.
Shann said she talked with Michael Koop, who spoke at the Commission meeting in
February, and asked abgutthr next stepsr~quired for CLG status.
First, the current ordig?ncell'{l:)lcJld have to b~amendedto ensure that the Commission
has oversight auth9rjt~t and thi:"jf<ordinance w9~ld have to be approved by the City
Council. Next, theC0D'lI'IlisSiO?g~ould have tocgme up with a system for surveying and
inventorying historic pr()p.~r;tieB'i@gt@l?,~ity. CYfrently there is a list the Commission
made up ofhi~tgfi~'l"1ouse's~~~t tfierersg~gQ['rently no official survey of what the City
considefsto be hist8Ej~proper;tir?' A system would have to be created for surveying
thoseq.gd the way weqi<:ilt woulg@?ye to be approved by the State Historical Society.
Third, ifV\iQuld be necess~r::y to eri$gre adequate public process for any historical
projects. ThElt is, if thereWfJs a plan to place historical signage throughout a
neighborhoCld'vve would h~~e to ensure that the public was notified and given an
opportunity to]Qinjn on th;;!t'process.
Then, once all thCl~i?Jhil"lgs are met, we would go to the City Council for approval of an
amendment to the~[grl1cjnce and a resolution of support to apply for Certified Local
Government status.. 'Once that was approved we would bring it to the State Historical
Society and they would have 90 days to review our request and then notify us either
that we are approved for this status or denied. Once we are certified, the City would
have to submit an annual report stating we are following through on all the goals and
objectives of the status doing various programs, etc. Any time the State Historical
Society decides we are not fulfilling the goals and objectives of the status they can
decertify us.
2
The Certified Local Government status makes the City eligible for Federal and State
grants for historical purposes, but these grants are nearly always 50% matching grants,
meaning that if you receive a grant for $20,000 to do historical markers in a
neighborhood, the City of Maplewood or some other body such as the Historical
Society, would have to come up with 50% of that, i.e., $1 O,OOO,.atld only 20% of that, or
$2,000, could be used for in-kind work such as staff time administering the program. So
that is something to consider before applying for funds, thattf-[lilre always has to be
financial backing from the City or some other body.
,............ ........."
,........ ............
She then read the purpose of the program from th@itprQ2~dures m~tlual:
"The Certified Local Government program seeks to encourage and expand local
involvement in preservation issues through ap<:ll1nership between the Certified Local
Government and the State Historical Preser\/atio@);Qffice to strengthen existing local
preservation programs and promote the developm~r1~>8friewones. Certified Local
Governments are eligible to apply annually for grantsagrninistered through the State
Historical Preservation Office from a~g~i~nated federalt8~.[tified Local Government
pass-through allocation. A Certified Lq~cjlc~8yernment woql2Slgsume a leadership role
by identifying, evaluating and protectinghist6(i~[~gources witbin their community,
receiving technical and advisory services,:from tl3e~t<'Jt@Hist6rical Preservation Office
and having a formal rolejl"l.~l;le National R~gi?tElr proce.$$."
........'..T............. ............". h
......c:.':;':::...."'.,"....": '::,'-:::-' i:::"
.........,. ......,.....--....,. ',.
Shann added that 2yriQg theCiI~~ussion with'flAr. Koop about Maplewood's
opportunities to becort1~~. CertIfied Local Gov~roment he indicated that to begin, what
this Commission needstQ.qo i?QomlillJP with.some goals and objectives before just
jumping int9tb~>~P8IicationRGQcElss'lfam(j?rt1aRing all these modifications to the
ordinan9E?andsofol"tl;l..The<?I~Mneeds t6know what the Commission's goals and
objecti~@s are, what th~ir:pl<:lns'a[@SlsJar as the preservation of particular sites, which
is whysbrtalked with RqQE3arlier~t:!6t.lt a possible goal setting meeting that would be
an importantJirst step to d~terminewhether it makes sense to apply for the
certification..
Ron said he belieV.~~It i~s~r good opportunity. It will give us some direction and allow us
as a Commission,a~'StVeli as the City, to do a little bit of soul searching about what our
role is or should be .as an advisory to the Council. Shann previously went through the 8
or 9 steps that would be involved to complete this process and, looking at them, they all
seem achievable. As to the 50-50 match, we would be looking at different resources if
we get our goals together and if, when the Council reviews them they agree those
goals go along with what the City is doing, maybe they can kind of budget them in,
setting aside some dollars each year as we go through development and
3
redevelopment. The City Council and Staff could provide a budget; we can go to the
Preservation Office and maybe they can provide the other 50%, then maybe we can get
our signage up; get our inventories in place; or we can identify significant sites and
structures. As mentioned in the opening statements regarding funds which may be
available because of the Legacy Amendment, he feels that if the Minnesota Historical
Society recognizes Maplewood as a Certified Local Government it might give us an
edge when applying for funds from those sources. With som@goaLsetting and finding
out what we as a Commission see as important, the fact thgt'O'lany of us also work with
the Maplewood Area Historical Society which also has pre;servi:jtion goals, and there
are probably some projects we could do jointly, with shaRed costs.
^" ... .......,
Regarding goal setting, December is a busy montRfor most of us, sb.after we have
taken care of our personal resolutions we can.g@'t together somewhat ihfbrmally in
January, sitting around a table and focusing<CJl1<!:jgElJs. Wf:jGould think throUgh the
process and the types of goals we would like to ha~E:l' ..
Commissioners who are also Historil;;~l~ociety membeF~(.;puld talk to that group and
find out what types of projects they feellJVg~19 be beneficialiClpdget some input and
support from them. All Commissioners.r:;oulctp~rl1aps comeJ.lpwith goals which may
be their pet projects that may be within the parameter~ of our mission.
Ron asked if the Commissioners think setting the Jahuary meeting as a goal-setting
meeting and to reVieV\I.pastcic;tiyities to crea~e a year-end report for the Council, as
re~uired. by our Or?I~~nce. ,^,e8~puld possibl~go back 18 months to incorporate the
50t Anniversary wor~~g?, at tb~jend of the repprt, attach the goals for 2009. The
Council would then kno\^.lwhatwehave doneCll"'ld what our goals are and what we hope
to do in the futHrrLcmd wouli:Jillave'flleqpHprrtbnity to either accept it as is, question
and/or cqrnml~ntonit,tl1en p0~~iply incorporate it into their process and hopefully there
will be~few dollars tt:i@y:<?an sefg~idefor those goals.
Lu asked.when in Janl.i~f~the mei:1ting would be as she is going to be out of town until
around Jc:llJl:jary 23rd wour~.:bate tortliss the meeting as she is very interested in setting
the goals,. ..........
Ron will checK\.&i.th Staff tQ$ee if we could meet the last week of January which would
be the 29th .(. .j
Shann said she wdol8cneck on it and e-mail everyone.
2. RAMSEY COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY See Chair comments between B & C
4
3. TIME CAPSULE
Ron reported that a City resident stopped by his house last week and dropped off some
photographs, letters and other things, so it is trickling in but he would like to get it done
before our 70th Anniversary, so that is one of his goals. He would like to get a copy of
the Comprehensive plan in there; the Historical Society is planpFngto put some things
in also.
Richard said Chuck Turning is working on a disc of the eotll"e$oth Anniversary activities
and expects to have it done soon. ...... . ..........
Lu inquired about the video that was prepared for thE!40j9\Annive~~l3ry, which contains
a lot of historical information.
Richard reported that has been copied to a DVDand can go in.
Ron wondered if a DVD player should be incltiCled - discussion indicated there should
still be one around in 50 years. The Commissiohis~till hoping for and accepting items
to be placed in the time capsule.
4. CITY MAPS - HISTORIC SITES tf\,11~~~ERSHHH
Ron suggested tabling this item until J'i'i6EIC!~;At that timeeverybne should have more
ideas and several sites, with informatiorfitoaCl~btqtl'1@ mastet\map.
~,"..." ...............
5. MAPLEWOOD MOMENTS ..' .
Ron: What historic nt:lti6nal sporting team event took place in Maplewood in 1995?
Answer: The first Women's Hockey Tournament was held at Aldrich Arena. Not sure
which teams, but it was the firstever women's'hockey tournament - not Ringette, but
actually with a puck. ..... ...
G. NEW BUSINESS ..
'.:. _..'::.::_:_:_:..:'>"_ ....,..;c::._:.:,.,::::.;"
. ',-:".:;",',' ',.,',..,'''','",,',., ^,'.
-'''' '-":":-.,",":':;".'"'--. .".,.,'.-."....... ..,.,
p,',' 'oM'_",.,.,.
1. EXpiRATION OF COMMISSIOiSlER TERMS
Shann repo[tl'ld two 3-yeatt~rms are expiring, Lu and Bob, and the procedure is to
reapply if inte~~l:ited, along.yvith any other applicants for appointment, and be
interviewed byff1~c;ounGil;0There was discussion about the status of terms, as they
are supposed to beii$tSl.ggered to assure continuity of experience. but at this point 2
terms are expiring irii~ob8 and the other 5 terms are shown to expire in 2010. There
was also discussion'about the discrepancy between the Ordinance, which states the
Commission is to interview the applicants and make a recommendation to the Council,
while the Council Procedures, which were amended in 2004, state the Council will
interview the applicants with questions submitted by the Commission.
Shann will look research the questions and report back.
City residents who are interested in applying for appointment to the Commission can
5
find an application form on the City website, or obtain one from the City Manager's
office.
2. YEAR END REPORT - 2008 ACTIVITIES & 2009 GOALS
Completed in F-1
3. UPDATE ON SOCIETY ACTIVITY
Open Houses - December 6 and 7, 1 :00 to 4:00
Members Potluck December 10,6:00 - Everyone brings food.
Nominating Committee is preparing for January offi9r.[.eIEl.Gtions3g"XElar terms
January Holiday Tea is January 10, with seating <;ltcn~38 a.m. and 2:3~p.m.
Reservations can be made through Charlotte VYasiluk orcontact any member for her
telephone number.
4. DECEMBER MEETING .................
Based on discussions in F-1, Ron m~.~~d to cancel tI1~.J:>:cember meetinq and
move the January meetinq to Janu~~~.~. Lu seconded; aves - all.
,.................. ..
.,."-.,.,..,.,..-.-......-,.,,.
,.,.._. ""',m',,,.,,,,
,'".,.,-- ',_",',"'"'..,',',',',",',.,-,,,.
q",' .,-,-'..,..".,,-','.,',._,
5. RICHIE PLACE ...............c..>.>.
Ron reported there is a proposed new deVelopmetitohtheborder of Maplewood and
Little Canada, between2J"lElt~.(e preserves'iResidentsof both cities have contacted
Ron because they b~IJeve the~~ea was onc~.inhabited by Indians because they have
found what they belie'\l~to be Iq~ian tools andpt~er artifacts, as well as a raised area
they feel could be an "'i'I]jJgn b~Ri~I.9.(ound. Ron has worked with Dr. Callahan of the U
of M and bas~~..8n knowle~q~ne>nasqai~~~i'fie aqreed to walk the property with one
of the re~idents;IT"~r.(~Side'l'I~8id no18rinqany of the items believed to be artifacts, so
other than a red qr13niterock sawnothinq to convince him, but referred the qentlemen
to Dr. Gallahan.
-:-,"_"',," -"'-:-:-":.',-:',"',. _..:;;',;
,,- .'::'_. -:::>:::-::: ',-
'..', .....:,...::,.. .,',-
,,'- --.......,..... ,"
,........... ',',.,.---..,',
H. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Ron thanked:fh@.technical~iaff for including the Historic Preservation Commission on
the meeting re..orQadcast.sthedule. It is appreciated
,..',',',','/--.. ,',,',-,
,.,,_.,......,... "'0"""-
..,...,..........',.,._.',.__'..u
Shann said now that the Commission has a staff liaison it will be necessary to have a
"Staff Presentations"items on the Agenda - location is not important.
She also announced that a great group of U of M Environmental Policy Undergraduate
Program students working on their capstone project chose Maplewood to work on their
project. Their project is titled Sustainable Maplewood and they are presenting their
final report on Tuesday, December 11 from 6:30 - 8:30 at the Community Center.
6
Some of the problems they worked on were:
Altering impervious surfaces for storm water mitigation
Public area vegetation management
Managing sustainable parks
Green workplace models
Planning connectivity and capacity building - South leg
Supporting a learning community
Ron said that Lion's Park has a steel "snail" thati?iri/perfectly ition and
wondered whether that could be saved by placing it somewhere else.
followed relative to the vandalism of sculpturesir"1~egacypark, and a suggestion was
made that perhaps the "snail" could be placed the:r'~9s E1s:6l..llpture.
I. ADJOURNMENT - 8:20
7
Agenda Item 6
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Historical Preservation Commission
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
Open Meeting Law Discussion
January 23, 2009 for the January 29 HPC Meeting
The Minnesota Open Meeting Law (Minnesota Statutes, section 13D) requires
that meetings of governmental bodies generally be open to the public. The
Minnesota Supreme Court has articulated three purposes of the law:
1. Prohibit actions being taken at a secret meeting where it is impossible
for the interested public to become fully informed about a public
board's decision or to detect improper influences.
2. To assure the public's right to be informed.
3. To afford the public an opportunity to present its views to the public
body.
Alan Kantrud, city attorney, will be present at the January 28 Park Commission
meeting to summarize the Minnesota Open Meeting Law and how it impacts the
Park Commission.
Attachments:
1, Minnesota House of Representatives Open Meeting Law Information Brief
2, Minnesota Open Meeting Law
A-H-QGh me(}+- 1
'l'l"I'~",~(['~JIJ'.Il'iM'~
Research Department
600 State Office Building
St. Paul, MN 55155
i!!l~t~
Deborah A. Dyson, Legislative Analyst
651-296-8291
Revised~l;
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
~~lequires that meetings of governmental
bodies generally be open to the public. The Minnesota Supreme Court has
articulated three purposes ofthe law:
. To prohibit actions being taken at a secret meeting where it is impossible
for the interested public to become fully informed about a public board's
decisions or to detect improper influences
. To assure the public's right to be informed
. To afford the public an opportunity to present its views to the public body'
This information brief discusses the groups and types of meetings covered by the
open meeting law, and then reviews the requirements of and exceptions to the law
and the penalties for its violation.
Contents
Groups and Meetings Governed by the Open Meeting Law ...................................2
Requirements of the Open Meeting Law .................................................................5
Exceptions to the Open Meeting Law......................................................................7
Penalties ............... .~'... ........................................ .................... ............................. ....11
Advice ....................................................................................................................12
1 Minn. Stat. ch. 13D (recoded from Minn. Stat. ~ 471.705 in 2000). The Minnesota Open Meeting Law was
originally enacted in Laws 1957, chapter 773, section 1.
2 Prior Lake American v, Mader, 642 N.W.2d 729, 735 (Minn. 2002) (citing St, Cloud Newspapers, Inc, v,
District 742 Community Schools, 332 N.W.2d 1, 4 (Minn. 1983)). While the courts consistently say that the open
meeting law is to afford the public an opportunity to present its views to the public body, there is no general right for
members of the public to speak at a meeting. Some statutes, and perhaps some home rule charters, specifY that a
hearing on a particular matter must be held at which anyone who wishes to address the public body may do so. See,
e,g., Minn. Stat. ~ 117.0412, subd. 2,
Copies of this publication may be obtained by calling 651-296-6753, This document can be made available in
alternative formats for people with disabilities by calling 651-296-6753 or the Minnesota State Relay Service at
711 or 1-800-627-3529 (TTY). Many House Research Department publications are also available on the
Internet at: www.house.mn/hrd/hrd.htm.
v
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 2
Groups and Meetings Governed by the Open Meeting Law
The law applies to all levels of state and local government.
The open meeting law applies to:
. a state agency, board, commission, or department when it is required or permitted by law
to transact public business in a meeting;
. the governing body of any school district, unorganized territory, county, city, town, or
other public body;
. a committee, subcommittee, board, department, or commission of a public body subject
to the law; and
. the governing body or a committee of a statewide or local public pension plan.'
"Public body" is not defined but the Minnesota Supreme Court has stated that "[i]n common
understanding, 'public body' is possibly the broadest expression for the category of
governmental entities that perform functions for the public benefit.'"
In determining whether the open meeting law applies to a particular entity, one should look at all
of the entity's characteristics. For example, in a 1998 case, the Minnesota Supreme Court held
that because the statute authorizing creation of a municipal power agency authorized an agency
to conduct its affairs as a private corporation, it could hold closed meetings.' The court held so
notwithstanding the statute that provides for municipal power agencies to be political
subdivisions ofthe state"
The open meeting law and the Government Data Practices Act apply to the University of
Minnesota Board of Regents, and the application of these laws to the university does not violate
the university's constitutional autonomy.'
J Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.Ol, subd. 1.
, Star Tribune Co. v, University of MInnesota Board of Regents, 683 N.W .2d 274, 280 (Minn. 2004).
'Southern Minn. Mun. Power Agency v, Boyne, 578 N.W.2d 362, 364 (Minn. 1998) (citing Minn, Stat. ~
453.54, subd. 21, and discussing the factors that distinguish a public corporation from a private corporation).
6 Minn. Stat. ~ 453.53, subd. 1, ~ (1) (The agency agreement shall state: "(1) That the municipal power agency
is created and incorporated. .. as a municipal corporation and a political subdivision of the state, to exercise
thereunder a part of the sovereign powers of the state;"). .-
, Star Tribune Co" 683 N.W.2d 274. In 2002, Mark Yudofresigued from the presidency of the University of
Minnesota. When [malists for the position had been selected but not announced, the Board of Regents closed a
meeting to interview them, ensuring their privacy. The university asserted that its constitutional autonomy meant it
was not subject to these laws. A number of newspapers sued, claiming that the university is subject to the open
meeting law and data practices act, and that it violated both laws. The district court and court of appeals agreed with
the newspapers, and the state supreme court affirmed those decisions.
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 3
The law generally applies to nonprofit corporations created by governmental entities.
The list of groups covered by the open meeting law does not refer to nonprofit corporations
created by a governmental entity. However, the law creating a specific public nonprofit
corporation may specify that it is subject to the open meeting law.' In addition, corporations
created by political subdivisions are clearly subject to the open meeting law.'
Gatherings of less than a quorum of a public body are not subject to the law; a "meeting"
is held when the group is capable of exercising decision-making powers.
The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that the open meeting law applies only to a quorum or
more of members ofthe governing body or a committee, subcommittee, board, department, or
commission of the governing body.1O Serial meetings in groups ofless than a quorum held in
order to avoid open meeting law requirements may also be found to be a violation, depending on
the facts ofthe case.lI
A public body subject to the law should be cautious about using e-mail to communicate with -
other members ofthe body. Although the statute does not specifically address the use of e-mail,
it is likely that the court would analyze use of e-mail in the same way as it has telephone
conversations and letters." That is, communication about official business through telephone
conversations or letters by a quorum of a public body subject to the law would violate the law.
Serial communication through telephone conversations or letters by less than a quorum with the
intent to avoid a public hearing or to come to an agreement on an issue relating to official
business could also violate the law.
In a 1993 case, the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the open meeting law was not violated
when two of five city council members attended private mediation sessions related to city
8 E.g., Minn. Stat. ss 62Q.03, subd. 6 (Minnesota Risk Adjustment Association); 1l60.03, subd. 5 (Minnesota
Technology, Inc.); 116V.OI, subd. 10 (Agricultural Utilization Research Institute); 116S.02, subds. 6 and 7
(Minnesota Business Finance, Inc.); 124D.385, subd. 4 (Minnesota Commission on National and Community
Service may create a nonprofit bllt it is subject to the open meeting law); 128C.22 (State High School League); and
Laws 1990, ch. 535, S 2, subd. 6 (Lake Superior Center Authority),
'Minn. Stat. S 465.719, subd. 9 (enacted by Laws 2000, ch. 455, art. I, S 2, subd. 9). A 1986 attorney general
opinion stated that the open meeting law did not apply to nonprofit corporations created by political subdivisions.
Op. Att'y Gen. 92a-30, Jan. 29, 1986. The 1999 Legislature established a task force to recommend legislation in
2000, governing corporations created by political subdivisions. Laws 1999, ch. 186. Among other things, the 2000
legislation addressed the issue of application of the open meeting law, stating that the law applied and a corporation
created by a political subdivision cannot be exempted from it.
10 Moberg v, Independent School Dist. No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510 (Minn. 1983).
11 1d. at 518; see also Mankato Free Press Co, v, City of North Mankato, 563 N.W.2d 291,295 (Minn. App.
1997). On remand to the district court for a factual finding on whether the city used serial interviews to avoid the
open meeting law, the trial court found, and the court of appeals affirmed, that the serial meetings were not held to
avoid the law. Mankato Free Press Co. v. City of North Mankato, 1998 WL 865714 (Minn. App. 1998)
(unpublished opinion).
" Moberg, 336 N.W.2d at 518. The Commissioner of Administration stated in a July 9, 2008, opinion that an
e-mail sent to all members of a city council was effectively "printed material" that should be available to members
of the public and also suggested that the legislature revise the statute to recognize the use of electronic and other
types of communications. Minn. Dept. of Admin. Advisory Op. 08-15.
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 4
business. The court determined that the two council members did not constitute a committee or
subcommittee of the council because the group was not capable of exercising decision-making
powers.13
The law applies to informational meetings.
The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that the open meeting law applies to all gatherings of
members of a governing body, regardless of whether or not action is taken or contemplated.
Thus, a gathering of members of a public body for an informational seminar on matters currently
facing the body or that might come before the body must be conducted openly.14 However, a
1975 attorney general opinion stated that city council attendance at a League of Minnesota Cities
training program for city officials did not violate the open meeting law ifthe members did not
discuss specific municipal business. 15 Under a 2007 law, it appears that informational meetings
ofthe Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources may be closed.16
The law does not cover chance or social gatherings.
The open meeting law does not apply to chance or social gatherings of members of a public
body.17 However, a quorum ofa public body may not, as a group, discuss or receive information
on official business in any setting under the guise of a private social gathering.18
The law does not apply to certain types of advisory groups.
The Minnesota Court of Appeals has held that the open meeting law does not apply to certain
types of advisory groupS.19 In that case, a presidential search advisory committee to the
University of Minnesota Board of Regents was held not to be a committee ofthe governing body
for purposes of the open meeting law. In reaching its holding, the court pointed out that no
regents were on the search committee and that the committee had no power to set policy or make
a final decision. It is not clear if a court would reach the same result if members of the
governing body were also on the advisory committee. Depending on the number of members of
the governing body involved and on the form ofthe delegation of authority from the governing
13 Sovereign v, Dunn, 498 N.W.2d 62 (Minn. App. 1993).
14 St, Cloud Newspapers, Inc, v, District 742 Cmty, Schools, 332 N.W.2d I (Minn. 1983).
IS Op, Att'y Gen. 63a-5, Feb. 5, 1975.
16 Minn. Stat. ~ 116P.08, subd. 5 ("(a) Meetings of the commission, committees or subcommittees ofthe
commission, technical advisory committees, and peer review panels must be open to the public. The commission
shall attempt to meet throughout various regions of the state during each biennium. For purposes of this subdivision,
a meeting occurs when a quorum is present and action is taken regarding a matter within the jurisdiction ofthe
commission, a committee or subcommittee of the commission, a technical advisory committee, or a peer review
paneL (b) For legislative members of the commission, enforcement of this subdivision is governed by section 3.055,
subdivision 2. For nonlegislative members of the commission, enforcement of this subdivision is governed by
section 13D.06, subdivisions I and 2," (emphasis added)).
17 St, Cloud Newspapers. Inc., 332 N,W,2d at 7.
18 Moberg, 336 N.W.2d at 518,
19 The Minnesota Daily v, University of Minnesota, 432 N,W.2d 189 (Minn, App. 1988).
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 5
body to the members, a court might consider the advisory committee to be a committee of the
governing body.
A separate law applies to the legislature.
In 1990, the legislature passed a law separate from the open meeting law that requires all
legislative meetings be open to the public." The law applies to House and Senate floor sessions
and to meetings of committees, subcommittees, conference committees, and legislative
commissions. For purposes of this law, a meeting occurs when a quorum is present and action is
taken regarding a matter within the jurisdiction of the group. Each house of the legislature must
adopt rules to implement these requirements. Remedies provided under these rules are the
exclusive means of enforcing this law.
Requirements of the Open Meeting Law
The primary requirement of the open meeting law is that meetings be open to the public.
The law also requires that votes in open meetings be recorded in a joumal and that the journal be
open to the public. The vote of each member must be recorded on appropriations of money,
except for payments of judgments and claims and amounts fixed by statute.'1 A straw ballot to
narrow the list of candidates for city administrator and not made public was held to be a secret
vote in violation ofthe open meeting law.22
Open meetings must be held in a public place within the borders ofthe public body."
Meetings may be held by interactive television if specified conditions are met to ensure openness
and accessibility for those who wish to attend." .
Specific agencies have broader authority to hold meetings by telephone conference call or other
electronic means as long as,specified conditions are met to ensure openness and accessibility for
those who wish to attend. In addition, a meeting of any public body may be conducted by
telephone or other electronic means if a health pandemic or other emergency makes meeting in
person impractical or imprudent and all of the same conditions as for other meetings held by
telephone conference call or other electronic means are met, unless unfeasible due to the
pandemic or emergency. In general, those conditions include the following:
20 Minn. Stat. ~ 3.055 (added by Laws 1990, ch, 608, art. 6, ~ I).
21 Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.OI, subds. 4 and 5.
22 Mankato Free Press Co" 563 N.W.2d at 295-96.
" Quast v, KYlutson, 150 N.W.2d 199, 200 (Minn. 1967) (school board meeting held 20 miles outside the
jurisdiction of the school board at a private office did not comply with open meeting law; consolidation proceedings
were fatany defective because the resolution by which the proceedings were initiated was not adopted at a public
meeting as required by law).
"Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.02. See also Minn. Stat. ~ 471.59, subd. 2 Goint powers board for educational purposes).
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 6
. All members ofthe body can hear one another and can hear all discussion and testimony
. Members of the public at the regular meeting location can hear all discussion, testimony,
and votes
. At least one member of the body, chief legal counsel, or chief administrative officer is
present at the regular meeting location
. All votes are conducted by roll call
. The public body must allow a person to monitor the meeting electronically from another
location. The body may require the person to pay for any documented additional costs
the body incurs as a result of the additional connection
. The public body must give notice of the regular meeting location, ofthe fact that some
members may participate by telephone or other electronic means, and ofthe right ofthe
public to monitor the meeting from another location"
The law requires public bodies to give notice oftheir meetings.
In 1974, the Minnesota Supreme Court held that failure to give notice of a meeting is a violation
of the open meeting law.26 The court has also held that it is a violation of the open meeting law
to conduct business before the time publicly announced for a meeting.27
In 1987, the legislature spelled out the notice requirements in statute for regular, special,
emergency, and closed meetings. _~~li!li'irBfu'l!l1t!St!fd"(}';l!I[~'lfu1!f€iwm"!r.
,T>"O'""~"'''-'''>''''''''S''''-''''''''')l''''''"'''''''~tl_ . n' '~'l.""^~.t-,.""",,,,,,,,,~}
.Neep~s~uou.u-fe" ',-IiJFi''P(tS';''.: ~~r;{J;J:~~~:",~'&~,C\~:uti~:_,.8'1g~2..'U!P.#~Lli"I.'floGt;i);'i"
· Wl_~S!~~~lIi81l~q:_~~~m.!),,\li~~\l'~~~a~.~fl
"Minn. Stat. ~~ 13D.021 (health pandemic, other emergency); 35,0661 (Board of Animal Health during
restricted travel for animal health reasons); 41A.0235 (Minnesota Agricultural and Economic Development Board);
41B.026 (Rural Finance Agency); 116J.68, subd. 5 (Small Business Development Center Advisory Board); 116L.03,
subd. 8 (Minnesota Jobs Skills Partnership Board); 116L.665, subd. 2a (Governor's Workforce Development
Council); 116M,15, subd. 5 (Urban Initiative Board); 116U,25 (Explore Minnesota Tourism Council); 129C.105
(perpich Center for Arts Education); 248.10 (Rehabilitation Council for the Blind); 256.482, subd. 5b (Minnesota
State Council on Disability); 256.975, subd. 2a. (Minnesota Board on Aging); 256C.28, subd. 7 (Commission of
Deaf, Deaf.Blind, and Hard of Hearing Minnesotans); 268A.02, subd, 3 (State Rehabilitation Council and
Statewide Independent Living Council); 326B.32, subd. 7 (Board of Electricity); 326B.435, subd. 7 (Board of
Plumbing); 341.26 (Combative Sports Commission); 462A.041 (Minnesota Housing Finance Agency),
26 Sullivan v, Credit River Township, 217N,W.2d 502 (1974).
27 Merzv. Leitch, 342 N.W.2d 141, 145 (Minn. 1984).
28 Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.04, subd. I (~ 13D.04, previously ~ 471.705, subd. Ic, was added by Laws 1987, ch. 313,
~ I),
29 Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.04, subd. 2; Rupp v, Mayasich, 533 N.W.2d 893 (Minn. App. 1995) (bulletin board must
be reasonably accessible to the public), A February 3, 2004, advisory opinion by the Commissioner of
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 7
· Make good faith efforts to notifY news media that have filed written requests (with
telephone numbers) for notice of emergency meetings (special meetings called because of
circumstances that require immediate consideration)"
The same notice requirements apply to closed meetings.'!
For state agencies, absent any other specific law governing notice, publication requirements can
be satisfied by pilblishing notice in the State Register."
The law requires relevant materials to be publicly available.
The open meeting law requires that for open meetings, at least one copy of any printed material
prepared by the public body and distributed or available to all members of the public body also
be available in the meeting room for inspection by the public. This requirement does not apply
to materials that are classified as other than public under the Government Data Practices Act."
Exceptions to the Open Meeting Law
A closed meeting, except one closed under the attorney-client privilege, must be electronically
recorded at the expense ofthe public body. Unless otherwise provided by law, the recordings
must be preserved for at least three years after the date of the meeting."
The law does not apply to state agency disciplinary hearings.
The open meeting law does not apply to any state agency, board, or commission when exercising
quasi-judicial functions involving disciplinary hearings."
Certain meetings involving employee evaluation or discipline must be closed.
A public body must close meetings for preliminary consideration of allegations or charges
against an individual subject to its authority." If the members ofthe public body conclude that
discipline may be warranted as a result ofthose charges, further meetings or hearings relating to
Administration stated that a public body's actions at a special meeting are limited to those topics included in the
notice of special meeting. Minnesota Department of Administration Advisory Opinion 04-004.
"Minn. Stat. ~ I3D.04, subd. 3.
,! Minn. Stat. ~ I3D.04, subd. 5.
" Minn. Stat. ~ I3D.04, subd. 6.
" Minn. Stat. ~ I3D.Ol, subd. 6.
"Minn. Stat. ~ I3D.05, subd. I, c1. (d).
" Minn. Stat. ~ I3D.OI, subd. 2 (2); see also Zahavy v. University of Minnesota, 544 N.W.2d 32, 41-42 (Minn.
App. 1996).
"Minn. Stat. ~ I3D.05, subd. 2 (b).
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 8
the charges must be open.
subject of the meeting.
Meetings must also be open at the request of the individual who is the
Statutes other than the open meeting law may permit or require closed meetings for certain local
governmental bodies to conduct specific kinds of disciplinary hearings. For example, school
board hearings held to discharge or demote a teacher are private unless the affected teacher
wants a public hearing.37
A public body may close a meeting to evaluate the performance of an individual who is subject
to its authority." Before closing a meeting, the public body must identify the individual to be
evaluated. The public body must summarize the conclusions ofthe evaluation at its next open
meeting. An evaluation meeting must be open at the request of the subject of the meeting.
A meeting must be closed if an individual's medical records governed by Minnesota Statutes,
section 144.291 to 144.298, are discussed."
A meeting may be closed to discuss labor negotiatious.
The open meeting law permits a public body to hold a closed meeting to discuss strategy and
proposals for labor negotiations conducted under the Public Employment Labor Relations Act."
The statute specifies procedures for tape-recording of these meetings, and for the recordings to
become public when negotiations are completed.'1 Another law permits the Commissioner ofthe
Bureau of Mediation Services to close negotiations and mediation sessions between public
employers and public employees. These negotiations are public meetings, unless the
commissioner closes them."
The law permits closed meetings based on a limited attorney-client privilege.
In 1976, the Minnesota Supreme Court held that there is a limited exception, based on the
attorney-client privilege, for meetings to discuss strategy for threatened or pending litigation."
In 1990, the legislature added the attorney-client exception to the open meeting law." Although
the statute is not limited, the court has since held that the scope of the exception remains limited
in relation to the open meeting law."
37 Minn. Stat. ~ 122A.41, subd. 9.
"Minn. Stat. ~ 130.05, subd. 3(a).
"Minn. Stat. ~ 130.05, subd. 2.
40 Minn, Stat. ~ 130,03, subd. 1.
41 Minn. Stat. ~ 130.03, subd. 2,
42 Minn. Stat. ~ 179A.14, subd. 3.
4' Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co, v, Housing & RedevelopmentAuth., 251 N.W.2d 620,626 (1976).
44 Minn, Stat. ~ 130.05, subd. 3(b) (added by Laws 1990, ch. 550 ~ 2).
" Star Tribune v. Board of Ed, Special School Dist, No, 1, 507 N.W.2d 869 (Minn. App. 1993) review denied
(Mllm. Dec. 22, 1993). The court of appeals did not accept the argument that the statutory exception encompassed
the full attorney-client privilege because that woutd result in the exception swallowing the rule in favor of open
meetings. In 2002, the Minnesota Supreme Court restated that the attorney-client privilege exception only applies
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 9
The attorney-client privilege exception does not apply to a mere request for general legal advice.
Nor does it apply when a governing body seeks to discuss with its attorney the strengths and
weaknesses of a proposed legislative enactment (like a city ordinance) that may lead to future
lawsuits because that can be viewed as general legal advice. Furthermore, discussion of
proposed legislation is just the sort of discussion that should be public."
In order to close a meeting under the attorney-client privilege exception, the governing body
must give a particularized statement describing the subject to be discussed. A general statement
that the meeting is being closed to discuss pending or threatened litigation is not sufficient."
A meeting may be closed to address certain security issues.
If disclosure of the information discussed would pose a danger to public safety or compromise
security procedures or responses, a meeting may be closed to:
. receive security briefings and reports,
. discuss issues related to security systems,
. discuss emergency response proce~ures, and
. discuss security deficiencies in or recommendations regarding public services,
infrastructure, and facilities.
Before closing a meeting, the public body must refer to the facilities, systems, procedures,
services, or infrastructures to be considered during the closed meeting. A closed meeting must
be tape-recorded at the expense of the governing body, and the recording must be preserved for
at least four years.
Financial issues related to security matters must be discussed and all related financial decisions
must be made at an open meeting."
when the purposes for the exception outweigh the purposes of the open meeting law. In that case, the city council
was threatened with a lawsuit if it did not grant a request. The court found that the threat of a lawsuit did not
warrant closing the meeting. Prior Lake American v, Mader, 642 N,W.2d 729 (Minn. 2002) (en bane). Cf Brainerd
Daily Dispatch v, Dehen, 693 N.W.2d 435 (Minn. App, 2005) (applying analysis of Star Tribune and Prior Lake
American, finding threats were sufficiently specific and imminent that confidential consultation with legal counsel
appointed by city's insurer to discuss defense strategy or reconciliation to address a tbreatenea lawsuit justified
closing the meeting),
" Northwest Publications, Inc. v, City ofSt, Paul, 435 N.W.2d 64, 68 (Minn. App. 1989); Star Tribune, 507
N.W.2d at 872.
"The Free Press v. County of Blue Earth, 677N.W.2d 471 (Minn. App. 2004).
"Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.05, subd. 3.
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 10
A meeting may be closed to discuss certain issues relating to government property sales or
purchases.
A public body may close a meeting to:
. determine the asking price for real or personal property to be sold by the government
entity;
. review confidential or nonpublic appraisal data; and
. develop or consider offers or counteroffers for the purchase or sale of real or personal
property.
Before holding a closed meeting, the public body must identify on the record the particular
property that is the subject of the closed meeting. The proceedings must be tape-recorded at the
expense ofthe public body. The recording must be preserved for eight years after the date of the
meeting and made available to the public after all property discussed at the meeting has been
purchased or sold or the governing body has abandoned the purchase or sale. The property that
is the subject of the closed meeting must be specifically identified on the tape. A list of members
and all other persons present at the closed meeting must be made available to the public after the
closed meeting. If an action is brought claiming that public business other than discussions
allowed under this exception was transacted at a closed meeting held during the time when the
tape is not available to the public, the court would review the recording of the meeting in camera
and either dismiss the action if the court finds no violation, or permit use of the recording at trial
(subject to protective orders) ifthe court finds there is a violation."
An agreement reached that is based on an offer considered at a closed meeting is contingent on
approval of the public body at an open meeting. The actual purchase or sale must be approved at
an open meeting after the notice period required by statute or the governing body's internal
procedures, and the purchase price or sale price is public data. 50
There is a narrow exception for certain meetings of public hospital boards.
Boards of public hospitals and certain health organizations may close meetings to discuss
competitive market activities and contracts.'!
On-site inspections by town board members are not subject to the law.
The law does not apply to a gathering oftown board members to perform on-site inspections, if
the town has no employees or other staff able to perform the inspections and the town board is
acting essentially in a staff capacity. The town board must make good faith efforts to provide
notice of the inspections to the media that have filed a written request, including a telephone
"Minn. Stat. ~ 13D,05, subd, 3, referring to ~ 13D.03, subd. 3.
50 Minn, Stat. ~ 13D.05, subd. 3. Property appraisal data covered by this law is described in Minnesota
Statutes, section 13.44, subdivision 3.
,! Minn. Stat. ~ 144.58t, subds. 4 and 5.
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 11
number, for notice. Notice must be by telephone or by any other method used to notifY the
members of the public body."
The law does not apply to meetings of the Commissioner of Corrections."
The law specifies how it relates to the Government Data Practices Act.
Except as specifically provided, public meetings may not be closed to discuss data that are not
public data under the Government Data Practices Act." Data that are not public may be
discussed at an open meeting without liability, if the matter discussed is within the public body's
authority and if it is reasonably necessary to conduct the business before the public body."
A portion of a meeting must be closed ifthe following data are discussed:
. Data that would identifY alleged victims or reporters of criminal sexual conduct, domestic
abuse, or maltreatment of minors or vulnerable adults"
. Active investigative data collected by a law enforcement agency, or internal affairs data
relating to alleged misconduct by law enforcement personnel"
. Certain types of educational, health, medical, welfare, or mental health data that are not
public data"
Penalties
The open meeting law provides a civil penalty of up to $300 for intentional violation." A person
who is found to have intentionally violated the law in three or more legal actions involving the
same governmental body forfeits the right to serve on that body for a time equal to the term the
person was serving. The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that this removal provision is
constitutional only if the conduct constitutes malfeasance or nonfeasance and provided that the
violations occurred after the person had a reasonable amount of time to learn the responsibilities
of office."
"Minn. Stat. ~ 366.01, subd. 11.
53 Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.Ol, subd. 2 (1). This exception does not make sense. Unti11982, the exception was for
meetings of the corrections board-a multimember body. A 1983 instruction directed the revisor of statutes to
change ,"corrections board" to "commissioner of corrections" throughout the statutes. Laws 1983, ch. 274, ~ 18.
" Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.05, subd. 1.
"Minn. Stat. ~~ 13.03, subd. 11, 13.05, subd. 4, ~ (e), and 13D.05, subd, 1.
"Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.05, subd. 2 (a)(I).
"Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.05, subd. 2 (a)(2).
"Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.05, subd. 2 (a)(3).
"Minn. Stat. ~ 13D.06.
" Claude v, Collins, 518 N.W.2d 836, 843 (Minn. 1994) (discussing the constitutionality of provision relating
to removal from office); see also Brown v. Cannon Falls Township, 723 N.W.2d 31, 41.44 (Minn. App. 2006)
(discussing the statutory history and that since 1994 the statute has required three or more legal actions),
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 12
A public body may not pay a civil penalty on behalf of a person who violated the law. However,
a public body may pay any costs, disbursements, or attorney fees incurred by or awarded against
a member of the body in an action under the open meeting law if the member was found not
guilty of a violation.6!
A court may award reasonable costs, disbursements, and reasonable attorney fees of up to
$13,000 to any party in an action under the open meeting law. However, the following
conditions apply:
. A court may award costs and attorney fees to a defendant only if it [mds that the action
was frivolous and without merit
. A court may award monetary penalties or attorney fees against a member of a public
body only if the court finds there was an intent to violate the open meeting law
The court must award reasonable attorney fees to a prevailing plaintiff if the public body was
also the subject of a prior written opinion issued by the Commissioner of Administration, and the
court finds that the opinion is directly related to the cause of action being litigated and that the
public body did not follow the opinion."
The appropriate mechanism to enforce the open meeting law is to bring an action in district court
seeking injunctive relief or damages. The statute does not provide for a declaratory judgment
action."
The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that actions taken at a meeting held in violation ofthe
open meeting law are not invalid or rescindable."
Advice
Public bodies subject to the open meeting law may seek advice on the application of the law and
how to comply with it from'three sources:
. The governmental entity's attorney
. The attorney general"
. The Commissioner of Administration66
6! Op, Att'y Gen. 471-a, Dec. 31, 1992; Minn. Stat. S 13D.06, subd. 4 (c).
" Minn, Stat. S 13D,06, subd. 4.
63 Rupp v, Mayasich, 561 N.W,2d 555 (Minn. App. 1997).
64 Sullivan v, Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176-177, 217N.W.2d 502, 507 (Minn. 1974).
" Under Minnesota Statutes, section 8.06, the attorney general is the attorney for all state officers and boards
or commissions created by law. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 8.07, the attorney general, on request from an
attorney for a county, city, town, public pension fund, school board, or unorganized area, gives written opinions on
matters of public importance.
House Research Department
Minnesota Open Meeting Law
Revised: November 2008
Page 13
An individual may seek advice from two sources:
. The individual's attorney
. The Commissioner of Administration"
Since 2003, an individual who disagrees with the manner in which members of a governing body
perform their duties under the open meeting law may request the Commissioner of
Administration to give a written opinion on the governing body's compliance with the law.
A governing body or person requesting an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration must
pay a $200 fee ifthe commissioner issues an opinion.
The commissioner may decide not to issue an opinion. If the commissioner decides not to issue
an opinion, the commissioner must notify the requester within five days of receipt of the request.
If the commissioner decides to issue an opinion, it must be done within 20 days of the request
(with a 30-day extension possible for good cause and notice to the requester). The governing
body must be allowed to explain how it performs its duties under the law.
Opinions of the Commissioner of Administration are not binding, but a court must give the
opinions deference. However, a governing body that follows an opinion is not liable for fines,
attorney's fees or any other penalty, or forfeiture of office.
For more information about open meetings and other issues related to the government, visit the
government operations area of our web site, www.house.mnlhrdlissinfo/gv_state.htm.
66 Minn, Stat. ~ 13.072, subds. 1 and 2.
67 Id.; see www.ipad.state.rnn.us/opinionsJindex.html for access to prior opinions of the Commissioner of
Administration or to fInd out how to request an opinion.
A 1MCnft\e/\T 2
I
MINNESOTA STATUTES 2008
13D.Ol MEETINGS MUST BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC; EXCEPTIONS.
Subdivision I. In executive branch, local government. All meetings, including executive
sessions, must be open to the public
(a) of a state
(1) agency,
(2) board,
(3) commission, or
(4) department,
when required or permitted by law to transact public business in a meeting;
(b) of the governing body of a
(1) school district however organized,
(2) unorganized territory,
(3) county,
(4) statutory or home rule charter city,
(5) town, or
(6) other public body;
(c) of any
(1) committee,
(2) subcommittee,
(3) board,
(4) department, or
(5) commission,
of a public body; and
(d) ofthe governing body or a committee of:
(1) a statewide public pension plan defined in section 356A.Ol, subdivision 24; or
(2) a local public pension plan governed by section 69.77, sections 69.771 to 69.775,
or chapter 354A, 422A, or 423B.
Subd. 2. Exceptions. This chapter does not apply
Copyright (Q 2008 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
2
MINNESOTA STATUTES 2008
13D.OI
(1) to meetings of the commissioner of corrections;
(2) to a state agency, board, or commission when it is exercising quasi-judicial functions
involving disciplinary proceedings; or
(3) as otherwise expressly provided by statute.
Subd. 3. Subject of and grounds for closed meetiug. Before closing a meeting, a public
body shall state on the record the specific grounds permitting the meeting to be closed and
describe the subject to be discussed.
Subd. 4. Votes to be kept in journal. (a) The votes ofthe members of the state agency,
board, commission, or department; or of the governing body, committee, subcommittee, board,
department, or commission on an action taken in a meeting required by this section to be open to
the public must be recorded in a journal kept for that purpose.
(b) The vote of each member must be recorded on each appropriation of money, except for
payments of judgments, claims, and amounts fixed by statute.
Subd. 5. Public access to journal. The journal must be open to the public during all normal
business hours where records of the public body are kept.
Subd. 6. Public copy of members' materials. (a) In any meeting which under subdivisions
1, 2, 4, and 5, and section 13D.02 mnst be open to the public, at least one copy of any printed
materials relating to the agenda items of the meeting prepared or distributed by or at the direction
of the governing body or its employees and:
(1) distributed at the meeting to all members of the governing body;
(2) distributed before the meeting to all members; or
(3) available in the meeting room to all members;
shall be available in the meeting room for inspection by the public while the governing body
considers their subject matter.
(b) This subdivision does not apply to materials classified by law as other than public as
defined in chapter 13, or to materials relating to the agenda items of a closed meeting held in
accordance with the procedures in section 13D.03 or other law permitting the closing of meetings .
History: 1957 c 773 s 1; 1967 c 462 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 654 s 15; 1973 c 680 s
1,3; 1975 c 271 s 6; 1981 c 174 s 1; 1983 c 137 s 1; 1983 c 274 s 18; 1984 c 462 s 27; 1987 c
313 s 1; 1990 c 550 s 2,3; 1991 c 292 art 8 s 12; 1991 c 319 s 22; 1994 c 618 art 1 s 39; 1997
c 154 s 2; ISp2001 c 10 art 4 s 1
Copyright C 2008 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
1
MINNESOTA STATUTES 2008
13D.02
13D.02 MEETINGS CONDUCTED BY INTERACTIVE TV; CONDITIONS.
Subdivision 1. Conditions. A meeting governed by section 13D.Ol, subdivisions 1,2,4, and
5, and this section may be conducted by interactive television so long as:
(1) all members of the body participating in the meeting, wherever their physical location,
can hear and see one another and can hear and see all discussion and testimony presented at any
location at which at least one member is present;
(2) members ofthe public present at the regular meeting location ofthe body can hear and
see all discussion and testimony and all votes of members ofthe body;
(3) at least one member ofthe body is physically present at the regular meeting location; and
(4) each location at which a member ofthe body is present is open and accessible to the
public.
Subd. 2. Members are present for quorum, participation. Each member of a body
participating in a meeting by electronic means is considered present at the meeting for purposes
of determining a quorum and participating in all proceedings.
Subd. 3. Monitoring from remote site; costs. Ifinteractive television is used to conduct
a meeting, to the extent practical, a public body shall allow a person to monitor the meeting
electronically from a remote location. The body may require the person making such a connection
to pay for documented marginal costs that the public body incurs as a result of the additional
connection.
Subd. 4. Notice of regular and all member sites. If interactive television is used to conduct
a regular, special, or emergency meeting, the public body shall provide notice of the regular
meeting location and notice of any site where a member of the public body will be participating
in the meeting by interactive television. The timing and method of providing notice must be as
described in section 13D.04.
History: 1957 c 773 s 1; 1967 c 462 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 654 s 15; 1973 c 680 s
1,3; 1975 c 271 s 6; 1981 c 174 s 1; 1983 c 137 s 1; 1983 c 274 s 18; 1984 c 462 s 27; 1987 c 313
s 1; 1990c550s2,3; 1991 c292art8s12; 1991 c319s22; 1994c618art 1 s39; 1997c 154s2
Copyright <C 2008 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
1
MrNNESOTA STATUTES 2008
13D.021
13D.021 MEETINGS BY TELEPHONE OR OTHER ELECTRONIC MEANS;
CONDITIONS.
Subdivision 1. Conditions. A meeting governed by this section and section 13D.Ol,
subdivisions 1,2, 4, and 5, may be conducted by telephone or other electronic means so long as
the following conditions are met:
(1) the presiding officer, chieflegal counsel, or chief administrative officer for the affected
governing body determines that an in-person meeting or a meeting conducted under section
13D.02 is not practical or prudent because of a health pandemic or an emergency declared under
chapter 12;
(2) all members of the body participating in the meeting, wherever their physical location,
can hear one another and can hear all discussion and testimony;
(3) members of the public present at the regular meeting location of the body can hear all
discussion and testimony and all votes of the members of the body, unless attendance at the
regular meeting location is not feasible due to the health pandemic or emergency declaration;
(4) at least one member of the body, chief legal counsel, or chief administrative officer is
physically present at the regular meeting location, unless unfeasible due to the health pandemic or
emergency declaration; and
(5) all votes are conducted by roll call, so each member's vote on each issue can be identified
and recorded.
Subd. 2. Members are present for quorum, participation. Each member ofthe body
participating in a meeting by telephone or other electronic means is considered present at the
meeting for purposes of determining a quorum and participating in.all proceedings.
Subd. 3. Monitoring from remote site; costs. Iftelephone or another electronic means is
used to conduct a meeting, to the extent practical, the body shall allow a person to monitor
the meeting electronically from a remote location. The body may require the person making a
connection to pay for the documented additional cost that the body incurs as a result ofthe
additional connection.
Subd. 4. Notice of regular and all member sites. Iftelephone or another electronic means is
used to conduct a regular, special, or emergency meeting, the public body shall provide notice of
the regular meeting location, of the fact that some members may participate by telephone or other
electronic means, and of the provisions of subdivision 3. The timing and method of providing
notice is governed by section 13D.04 ofthe Open Meeting Law.
Copyright @2008 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
1
MINNESOTA STATUTES 2008
13D.03
13D.03 CLOSED MEETINGS FOR LABOR NEGOTIATIONS STRATEGY.
Subdivision 1. Procedure, (a) Section 13D.Ol, subdivisions 1,2,4,5, and section 13D.02 do
not apply to a meeting held pursuant to the procedure in this section.
(b) The governing body ofa public employer may by a majority vote in a public meeting
decide to hold a closed meeting to consider strategy for labor negotiations, including negotiation
strategies or developments or discussion and review of labor negotiation proposals, conducted
pursuant to sections l79A.Ol to l79A.25.
( c) The time of commencement and place of the closed meeting shall be announced at
the public meeting.
(d) A written roll of members and all other persons present at the closed meeting shall be
made available to the public after the closed meeting.
Subd. 2. Meeting must be recorded. (a) The proceedings of a closed meeting to discuss
negotiation strategies shall be tape-recorded at the expense ofthe governing body.
(b) The recording shall be preserved for two years after the contract is signed and shall be
made available to the public after all labor contracts are signed by the governing body for the
current budget period.
Subd. 3. Ifviolatiou claimed. ,(a) If an action is brought claiming that public business
other than discussions of labor negotiation strategies or developments or discussion and review
of labor negotiation proposals was transacted at a closed meeting held pursuant to this section
during the time when the tape is not available to the public, the court shall review the recording
of the meeting in camera.
(b) If the court finds that this section was not violated, the action shall be dismissed and the
recording shall be sealed and preserved in the records ofthe court until otherwise made available
to the public pursuant to this section.
(c) If the court finds that this section was violated, the recording may be introduced at
trial in its entirety subject to any protective orders as requested by either party and deemed
appropriate by the court.
History: 1957 c 773 s 1; 1967 c 462 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 654 s 15; 1973 c 680 s
1,3; 1975 c 271 s 6; 1981 c 174 s 1; 1983 c 137 s 1; 1983 c 274 s 18; 1984 c 4,62 s 27; 1987 c313
sl; 1990c550s2,3; 1991 c 292 art8s 12; 1991 c319 s 22; 1994c618art 1 s39; 1997c 154s2
Copyright If;:) 2008 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
MINNESOTA STATUTES 2008
13D.04
13D.04 NOTICE OF MEETINGS.
Subdivision 1. Regular meetings. A schedule of the regular meetings of a public body shall
be kept on file at its primary offices. If a public body decides to hold a regular meeting at a time or
place different from the time or place stated in its schedule of regular meetings, it shall give the
same notice of the meeting that is provided in this section for a special meeting.
Subd. 2. Special meetings. (a) For a special meeting, except an emergency meeting or a
special meeting for which a notice requirement is otherwise expressly established by statute, the
public body shall post written notice of the date, time, place, and purpose of the meeting on the
principal bulletin board of the public body, or if the public body has no principal bulletin board,
on the door of its usual meeting room.
(b) The notice shall also be mailed or otherwise delivered to each person who has filed a
written request for notice of special meetings with the public body. This notice shall be posted and
mailed or delivered at least three days before the date ofthe meeting.
( c) As an alternative to mailing or otherwise delivering notice to persons who have filed a
written request for notice of special meetings, the public body may publish the notice once, at
least three days before the meeting, in the official newspaper of the public body or, ifthere is
none, in a qualified newspaper of general circulation within the area of the public body's authority.
(d) A person filing a request for notice of special meetings may limit the request to
notification of meetings concerning particular subjects, in which case the public body is required
to send notice to that person only concerning special meetings involving those subjects.
(e) A public body may establish an expiration date for requests for notices of special
meetings pursuant to this subdivision and require refiling of the request once each year.
(f) Not more than 60 days before the expiration date of a request for notice, the public body
shall send notice of the refiling requirement to each person who filed during the preceding year.
Subd. 3. Emergency meetings. (a) For an emergency meeting, the public body shall make
good faith efforts to provide notice ofthe meeting to each news medium that has filed a written
request for notice if the request includes the news medium's telephone number.
(b) Notice ofthe emergency meeting shall be given by telephone or by any other method
used to notify the members of the public body.
(c) Notice shall be provided to each news medium which has filed a written request for notice
as soon as reasonably practicable after notice has been given to the members.
Copyright iO 2008 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
2
MINNESOTA STATUTES 2008
13D.04
(d) Notice shall include the subject of the meeting. Posted or published notice of an
emergency meeting is not required.
(e) An "emergency" meeting is a special meeting called because of circumstances that, in the
judgment of the public body, require immediate consideration by the public body.
(f) If matters not directly related to the emergency are discussed or acted upon at an
emergency meeting, the minutes of the meeting shall include a specific description ofthe matters.
(g) The notice requirement of this subdivision supersedes any other statutory notice
requirement for a special meeting that is an emergency meeting.
Subd. 4. Recessed or continued meetings. (a) If a meeting is a recessed or continued
session of a previous meeting, and the time and place of the meeting was established during
the previous meeting and recorded in the minutes of that meeting, then no further published or
mailed notice is necessary.
(b) For purposes ofthis subdivision, the term "meeting" includes a public hearing conducted
pursuant to chapter 429 or any other law or charter provision requiring a public hearing by
a public body.
Subd. 5. Closed meetings. The notice requirements of this section apply to closed meetings.
Subd. 6. State agencies. For a meeting of an agency, board, commission, or department of
the state:
(I) the notice requirements of this section apply only if a statute governing meetings of the
agency, board, or commission does not contain specific reference to the method of providing
notice; and
(2) all provisions ofthjs section relating to publication are satisfied by publication in the
State Register.
Subd. 7. Actual notice. If a person receives actual notice of a meeting of a public body at
least 24 hours before the meeting, all notice requirements of this section are satisfied with respect
to that person, regardless of the method of receipt of notice.
History: 1957 c 773 s 1; 1967 c 462 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 654 s 15; 1973 c 680 s
1,3; 1975 c 271 s 6; 1981 c 174 s 1; 1983 c 137 s 1; 1983 c 274 s 18; 1984 c 462 s 27; 1987 c 313
s 1; 1990 c 550 s 2,3; 1991 c 292 art 8 s 12; 1991 d19 s 22; 1994 c 618 art 1 839; 1997 cl54 s 2
Copyright@ 2008 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.
Agenda Item 7.a.
MEMO
TO:
DuWayne Konewko, Community and Park Director
Historical Preservation Commission
FROM:
Jennifer Haskamp, Pulse Land Group
DATE:
RE:
January 20, 2008
Comprehensive Plan Update
INTRODUCTION
On December 8, 2008 the City Council recommended the Draft Comprehensive Plan Update, This action was the first step in
moving the document forward to ultimate adoption and therefore the policy direction of the City over the next ten years.
Although the Draft was adopted, there remains time in which the Council and other Commissions can review the document to
ensure that the information in the document accurately reflects the goals and objectives of the community moving forward. As
a courtesy, and in light of the timeline, the Council has directed Staff to bring the draft document to each commission to solicit
any feedback on the document in its entirety.
BACKGROUND AND TIMELlNE
The Comprehensive Plan is a large document that includes eleven chapters each addressing a different issue related to land
use, development, infrastructure or the environment. The Comprehensive Plan Update process was structured to allow each
commission to comment and develop the chapter that most directly related to the responsibilities of that commission. The
Historical Preservation Commission drafted, reviewed and commented on the Historical Resources Chapter (Chapter 9) in the
fall of 2008. Since the Historical Preservation Commission reviewed the chapter, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing to review the entire Comprehensive Plan Update draft and recommended the document to the City Council. The
document has been publicly reviewed at numerous meetings, and there were not any significant comments or changes made
to the Historical Resources chapter.
CHAPTER HIGHLIGHTS
The Historical Resources chapter focuses on the need to create a good system to inventory, understand and protect the
historical resources in the City, The chapter expresses the importance of having a clear set of goals and objectives supported
by an action plan to ensure that the historical resources of Maplewood are protected. Although the planning efforts and
objectives for historical preservation are in Chapter 9, the idea of historical significance and preservation is interwoven
throughout the entire Comprehensive Plan. Moving forward, the city recognizes that the historical context and resources in
the city help to define the character of the community and therefore has reaching power across most planning efforts.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending that the Historic Preservation Commission review Chapter 9 once again to ensure that the chapter
addresses the issues, concerns, or goals for the next planning period. Staff has also provided you with a copy of the
Comprehensive Plan Update in its entirety if you are interested in seeing how Chapter 9 fits into the larger document. Please
come to the meeting prepared to discuss the Historical Resources Chapter and bring any other comments you might have
about the document. It is our intent to pass along all comments/concerns to the City Council for their consideration and
potential action,
Attachments:
Hard Copy of the Historical Resources Chapter of the Draft 2008 Comprehensive Plan
Disk Containing all Eleven Chapters of the Draft 2008 Comprehensive Plan
Chapter 9: Historical Resources
Introduction
Maplewood was incorporated in 1957. Before that, it was the Township of New Canada, which was founded 99
years earlier in 1858 when the Minnesota Territory became a state, Historical Resources are defined as properties
and structures of historical significance and Importance as well as archeological sites and elements of cultural and
traditional importance. These resources contribute to the City by providing information about Its past. They provide
evidence of the way Maplewood was settled and people's contributions made to our society. They also provide
insight into the values that formed Maplewood.
Preserving historic sites and resources benefits the City, both economically and socially, Historic preservation goes
beyond the primary concern of understanding the significance of historic and cultural resources, It also focuses on
integrating historic preservation into the broader planning and decision-making arena, so it can be relevant to social
and economic concerns,
The Maplewood Comprehensive Plan will, among other things:
. Guide future growth and development in an orderly manner.
. Define the proper functional relationships between different types of land uses.
. Help to coordinate public and private sector decisions.
. Establish a framework to guide and involve citizen participation in City government.
. Provide for a sense of community and neighborhood identity.
These goals can be supported by an effective Historical Resources Plan. The plan can also be supported by citizens
and decision-makers who use the guidance of this chapter to preserve historic, cultural, and archeological resources
in Maplewood.
Purpose
This Historical Resources Plan supports and interrelates with all elements, goals, and objectives of the
comprehensive plan. The purpose of the Historical Resources Plan is to:
. Guide the City in a comprehensive program of historic preservation and historic resource management.
. Describe the existing historic resources and historic preservation activities in Maplewood.
. Evaluate the historic preservation and historic resources needs of Maplewood's residents, as may be
determined by the Historical Preservation Commission, and to set standards for measuring the meeting
of those needs.
. Promote the use and conservation of historic properties In Maplewood for the education, inspiration,
pleasure, and enrichment of area citizens.
. Plan for adequate support and understanding of the historic resources in Maplewood.
. Designate the goals, objectives and actions that Maplewood will use to help preserve the historic
resources in the city.
Historical Resources
9-1
Discussion, Challenges and Issues
Maplewood began to be settled by European descents more than 100 years ago. The City is interested in identifying
its historic resources, The Historic Preservation Commission will be challenged in this task because of:
. The aging of our citizens who have knowledge of historic places.
. The limits in public funding to support historic preservation programs.
. The development or redevelopment of sites that might have historic resources,
. The current lack of a program which encourages historical interest and private owner acceptance of
properties that have historic resources.
There are opportunities available, however. Maplewood could build on these opportunities to develop a program to
help preserve the City's heritage. These opportunities include:
. Completing an inventory of historic resources in Maplewood and setting priorities of importance.
. Working with knowledgeable preservation-oriented organizations. Working with county, state, and
federal agencies that have knowledge of historic resources and programs.
The Metropolitan Council's "Local Planning Handbook" has several suggested guidelines for an historic preservation
plan. These include standards for establishing a Heritage Preservation Commission and practices to follow. The
Handbook also recommends following the Secretary of Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and
Historic Preservation which include standards for preservation planning and guidelines and activities for a
preservation-planning program.
Standards for Preservation PlanninCl
o Historic Contexts
1. Decisions about historic properties are most reliably made when the relationship of
individual properties to other similar properties is understood, Information about historic
properties which represent aspects of history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and
culture must be collected and organized to define these relationships. This organizational
framework is called a "historic context." The historic context organizes information
based on a cultural theme and its geographical and chronological limits. Contexts
describe the significant broad patterns of development in an area that may be represented
by historic properties. The development of historic contexts is the foundation for decisions
about identification, evaluation, registration, and treatment of historic properties,
2, Develop goals, objectives, and priorities for the identification, registration, and treatment
of historic properties. This task should be pursued by the City, the Historical Preservation
Commission, and the Maplewood Area Historical Society after the City Council adopts this
plan.
Historical Resources
9-2
Guidelines and Activities for a Preservation Plannina Proaram
o These guidelines are to include a development of Historic Contexts. A comprehensive summary of
Maplewood's history can be created by developing a set of historic contexts that will include all
significant historic and cultural properties and sites in the City. Maplewood should coordinate any
efforts with the State Historic Preservation Office since it generally has the most complete
information and is usually in the best position to advise and assist the City in matters of historical
importance.
o Once the City and the Historical Preservation Commission or the Maplewood Area Historical
Society has finished the inventory of Heritage Resources, they should be organized into historic
contexts. This organization should be based on a cultural theme, geography and chronology.
o The designation of Maplewood Heritage Landmarks should be given to those historically or
culturally significant objects, structure, buildings, sites and districts in the City. To be designated a
heritage landmark; a property must meet specific criteria for determining historical significance.
Besides local registration, certain properties may qualify for nomination to the National Register of
Historic Places. Properties on the Nationai Register are recognized for their historical significance,
The creation of a register for significant historical properties is a critical step in planning historic
preservation. Conflicts between Maplewood's requirements and standards for historic preservation
and those of the state or federal government shall be decided by the City Council.
o Maplewood is eligible to apply to the State Historical Preservation Office to be a Certified Local
Government (CLG). After joining, Maplewood would be able to participate in the CLG preservation
partnership that the National Historic Preservation Act established. Federal funding is available
through a grants-in-aid-program to finance activities such as the local inventory of historic
resources, historic preservation planning and education.
Historical Resources
9-3
Historic Preservation Goals
1. Support the protection of the City's heritage by preserving, protecting, conserving, and wisely using the
significant historical, cultural, architectural, or archeological objects, structures, buildings, sites,
resources and districts in the City.
2. Encourage community identity and civic pride by preserving and protecting historic properties,
structures, sites and resources in Maplewood.
3. Develop a historic preservation program and integrate the program with other planning programs In the
City.
4. Establish a comprehensive framework for all decisions and actions related to historic preservation.
5. Encourage broad citizen participation in historic preservation, in order to obtain the knowledge, insights,
and support of City residents.
6. Write a historic resources management plan.
Historic Preservation Objectives
1. The Historical Preservation Commission will advise, assist and make recommendations to the City Council,
about historic preservation and resource matters,
2. Maplewood will implement the historic preservation goals and objectives by linking and integrating with other
City programs and activities, This includes, but is not limited to, planning, zoning, code enforcement,
housing, economic development and pubiic works as appropriate.
3, Maplewood will work with county, state and federal agencies and other organizations, including the State
Historic Preservation Office of the Minnesota Historical Society.
4. Maplewood will work with the Historicai Preservation Commission to identity, document, and evaluate the
historical significance of objects, structures, buildings, sites and resources.
5. Mapiewood will protect, preserve, and enhance significant heritage resources in the City by designating
them as Maplewood Heritage Landmarks. The City will also nominate appropriate sites to the National
Register of Historic Places.
6, Maplewood will have the Historicai Preservation Commission, with assistance from City Staff, prepare and
maintain the Maplewood Heritage Resources Inventory.
7. In cooperation with City Staff and the Maplewood Planning Commission, the Historical Preservation
Commission may comment on all development proposals that would affect properties on the historic
properties list.
8. Maplewood may issue permits or approve development plans that include conditions for historic
preservation, based upon the recommendations of the Historical Preservation Commission,
9. Maplewood supports research, community awareness and public education on the value and importance of
preservation, protection, and the use of heritage resources in the City.
10. Maplewood encourages the establishment of an accessible location where historic documents and artifacts
can be stored and protected.
Historical Resources
9-4
11. Maplewood supports the use of all financial sources and opportunities to support further historic
preservation efforts.
12, Maplewood supports the incorporation of local history Into present development by using historic names for
streets, parks and geographical features.
Historic Preservation Action Plan
The following is a list of activities that the City should follow in the coming years to carry out the goals and objectives
of the Historic Resources Plan, The City will periodically review and update this list
1. Adopt and implement a historic resources management plan, (To be done by the City.)
2. Advise, assist, and make recommendations about historic preservation and resources issues. (To be done
by the Historical Preservation Commission)
3. Identify, document, evaluate and maintain an inventory of historically significant objects, structures,
buildings, sites, resources and districts in Maplewood. (To be done by the Historical Preservation
Commission.)
4. Complete a preservation planning report before the City Council designates a property as a Maplewood
Heritage Landmark. (To be done by the Historical Preservation Commission.)
5. Issue a finding of significance for individual objects, structures, buildings, sites, resources and districts to
determine whether they are eligible for designation as Maplewood Heritage Landmarks, (To be done by the
Historical Preservation Commission.)
6, Designate significant historic or cultural properties or resources as Maplewood Heritage Landmarks and
nominate appropriate properties or resources for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, (To be
done by the City and the Historical Preservation Commission,)
7. Place properties designated as Maplewood Heritage Landmarks on the official Maplewood Zoning Map, or
on another map specifically created for this purpose. (To be done by City Staff.)
8, Use and follow the Secretary of Interior's standards and guidelines:
a. When advising the owners of historic properties about maintenance and restoration work. (To be
done by the City and the Historical Preservation Commission,)
b, For design review decisions about Heritage Landmarks and Historically Significant Structures and
for archeology and historic preservation. (To be done by the City.)
9, Review City ordinances and amend them as needed to reflect the goals and objectives for historic
preservation. (To be done by the Historical Preservation Commission,)
10. Establish a program for the placement of local historical markers and plaques that identifies and informs the
public about historic sites. (To be done by the City and the Historical Preservation Commission,)
11. Provide information and education about historic preservation and properties, sites or resources that are
historically or culturally significant to property owners and the general public, (To be done by the City and
the Historical Preservation Commission.)
Historical Resources
9-5
12. Participate in education and communication programs to increase the visibility and understanding of the
City's historic resources. (To be done by the Historical Preservation Commission.)
13, Advise schools and teachers in the development of curricula and teaching aids about history and historic
preservation in Maplewood. (To be done by the Historical Preservation Commission,)
14. Incorporate local history into present development by using historic names for streets, parks and
geographical features. (To be done by the City.)
15. Comment on all development proposals that would affect properties on the historic properties list (To be
done by the Historical Preservation Commission, in cooperation with City Staff and the Maplewood Planning
Commission,)
16. Review all applications or permits for the demolition, moving, or remodeling of Heritage Landmarks or
Historically Significant Structures in Maplewood to determine the possible impacts on significant heritage
resources. (To be done by the Historical Preservation Commission.)
17, Work with and encourage property owners to help preserve the heritage resource value and historical
integrity of significant historical or cultural resources, (To be done by the City and the Historical Preservation
Commission,)
18. Encourage property owners to meet historic preservation standards and guidelines when working on historic
properties. (To be done by the City.)
19, Work with the Historical Preservation Commission to appiy to the State Historicai Preservation Office for
certification as a Certified Local Government (CLG). (To be done by the City,)
20. Seek outside funding sources and participate where feasible on historic preservation projects, (To be done
by the City and the Historical Preservation Commission.)
21. Work with County, the State Historic Preservation Office of the Minnesota Historical Society and Federal
agencies when implementing this plan. (To be done by the City.)
".
Historical Resources
9-6
Agenda Item 8,a,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Historical Preservation Commission
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
HPC 2009 Goal Setting
January 23, 2009 for the January 29 HPC Meeting
INTRODUCTION
During the November 2008 Historical Preservation Commission (HPC) meeting, the
commission discussed the Certified Local Government program, This program seeks to
encourage and expand local involvement in preservation issues through a partnership
between the city and the State Historical Preservation Office. The purpose is to
strengthen existing local preservation programs and promote the development of new
programs, Certified Local Governments are eligible to apply annually for grants
administered through the State Historical Preservation Office from a designated federal
pass-through allocation,
Prior to applying for Certified Local Government status, the city must survey and
inventory historic properties and amend the historical commission ordinance to ensure
that the commission has oversight authority for these properties and that there is a
public process in place for historical projects,
DISCUSSION
Prior to applying for Certified Local Government status and completing the requirements
of a survey and code amendments, the commission determined they should discuss
goals and objectives for projects and preservation of sites, The city's historical
resources chapter of the draft 2008 comprehensive plan, which the commission will be
reviewing prior to this item, includes long-term historical preservation goals the city
hopes to achieve over a 10 to 20 year period. The purpose of yearly goal setting is to
review those long-term goals and determine which goals can be accomplish over the
year.
In addition to reviewing the historical resources chapter of the comprehensive plan, the
HPC should also review the historical commission ordinance publiC policy prior to
adopting goals for 2009, The public policy states:
It is the public policy of the city to engage in a comprehensive program of historic
preservation and to promote the use and conservation of historic properties for
the education, inspiration, pleasure and enrichment of the citizens of this Area,
The purpose of this division creating the commission is to secure for all citizens
of Maplewood the opportunity to preserve and promote its historic resources
through the dissemination of knowledge about area's history,
All actions of the commission shall be in the nature of recommendations to the
city council, and said commission shall have no final authority with reference to
any matters, except as the council may lawfully delegate authority to it.
RECOMMENDATION
Review the long-term goals proposed in the historical resources chapter of the draft
2008 comprehensive plan and the above-mentioned historical commission ordinance
powers and responsibilities and compile a list of goals which the Historical Preservation
Commission would like to achieve in 2009,
P:\Com-Dev\HPC\Goal Setting Memo
2
Agenda Item 11.c.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Historical Preservation Commission
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
Historical Preservation Commission Terms
January 22, 2009 for the January 29 HPC Meeting
BACKGROUND
The city council adopted the Historical Preservation Commission (HPC) ordinance in 2001. The
ordinance states that commissioners will be appointed to three-year terms, If a commissioner is
appointed mid-year, the remainder of the year will be considered the first year of the term, City
council appointment policy requires that commissioners whose appointments end must re-apply
and re-interview for the position, along with any outside applicants interested in serving on the
commission.
The city's list of commissioners and their term end dates currently specifies that Robert Creager
and Lucille Aurelius have terms expiring December 31,2008, However, after researching the city
council minutes there appears to be some discrepancies in the actual terms versus the city's list
of term end dates as follows:
Commissioner
Appointment Actual Term City's List of
Date End Date Term End Dates
Original Commission (2/3 Year Terms)
Robert Creager (2-Year Term)
Richard Currie (3-Year Term)
Lucille Aurelius (3-Year Term)
Ron Cockriel (3-YearTerm)
AI Galbraith (3-Year Term)
Peter Boulay (3-Year Term)
Caleb Anderson (3-Year Term)
5-29-01
7-26-04
7-26-04
7-26-04
8-28-06
8-28-06
1 0-9-06
2-25-08
12-31-06
12-31-07
12-31-07
12-31-08
12-31-08
12-31-08
12-31-10
12-31-08
12-31-09
12-31-08
12-31-10
12-31-10
12-31-10
12-31-10
DISCUSSION
Based on this research and the ordinance requirement that appointments made mid-year count
toward the first year, it appears that six members have terms which have ended including Robert
Creager (12-31-06), Richard Currie (12-31-07), Lucille Aurelius (12-31-07), Ron Cockriel (12-31-
08), AI Galbraith (12-31-08), and Peter Boulay (12-31-08), Research into this discrepancy does
not reveal why the appointments were missed, except to say that the HPC has not had a formal
city employee staff liaison until now. City council appointment policy would require all six
commissioners to submit an application and interview before the city council. There are currently
no new applicants for the HPC,
RECOMMENDATION
Review the background information and be prepared to discuss the terms during the meeting,
Agenda Item 11.e
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Historical Preservation Commission
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
Election of Chair and Vice-Chair
January 23, 2009 for the January 29 HPC Meeting
The historical commission ordinance states that the chairperson and vice-
chairperson shall be elected by the commission at the first meeting in January of
each year from among the members of the commission. The chairperson shall
be responsible for calling and presiding over all meetings and shall be entitled to
an equal vote with other members of the commission, If the chairperson is
unable to attend a meeting, the vice-chairperson shall conduct the meeting.
The current chairperson is Ron Cockriel and the current vice-chairperson is
Richard Currie. The commission should nominate and vote on a 2009
chairperson and vice-chairperson.