Andrew Gaspard
Name: Andrew Gaspard
Email: [email protected]
Campaign Phone: NA
Campaign Website: www.andrewfornorthoaks.com
Twitter Handle: NA
Facebook Page: facebook.com/AndrewForNorthOaks
Candidate Bio
My wife Nina and I moved to North Oaks in 2014 with our four children, drawn by a community where kids could grow up with access to nature and the freedom to enjoy it.
I hold a Master of Urban Planning and an MBA, and I have worked in city planning, commercial banking, business management, and real estate — including as an officer and board member of a private investment company managing commercial real estate and 10,000 acres of timberland.
I was elected to the North Oaks City Council in 2024 and have served a two-year term. In that time I voted against two tax increases, because I did not believe residents had been given an adequate accounting of what was driving them. I have pushed consistently for greater budget and fiscal transparency — plain-language reporting that lets residents see where their money goes without having to dig for it. And I have asked the City to seek multiple bids on significant projects, so we can demonstrate we are getting fair value rather than assume it.
I am running again because that work is not finished, and the decisions ahead on roads, utilities, and city services deserve disciplined evaluation.
What style of leadership would you bring to this position?
I ask questions before I vote, and I expect answers I can explain to a resident in plain language. My training is in urban planning and finance, so my instinct on any significant decision is to ask what the evidence actually shows, what the alternatives cost, and what we are committing the City to over ten and twenty years — not just this budget cycle.
I also believe disagreement should be substantive rather than personal. I have taken positions my colleagues did not share, and I have done so by making the argument on the merits and in public, where residents can weigh it themselves. That is the standard I hold myself to: be prepared, be specific, show your reasoning, and keep the working relationships intact so the Council can still function when the vote is over.
What are your top three priorities if elected, and how might they be affected by growing uncertainty around state and federal funding?
First, property tax accountability. I want recent increases audited and a plain-language explanation published showing where every dollar goes.
Second, transparency and resident voice — restoring a real process for residents to bring proposals to the Council, pushing major decisions into open session, and producing consistent, uniform reporting on city finances and services.
Third, disciplined stewardship of our natural resources and land use, working closely with VLAWMO and our Natural Resources Commission.
North Oaks receives very little direct state or federal aid, so the risk to us is indirect but real. We contract for fire and emergency service through the Lake Johanna Fire Department and for public safety through the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office, and both of those organizations are exposed to funding cuts. If their budgets tighten, the effect reaches us through service levels and contract costs. That means working closely with both organizations — and with the other cities that share these services — to be thoughtful about how we do more with less, rather than waiting to absorb the consequences. It also raises the value of competitive bidding and rigorous cost analysis: when revenue is less predictable, getting full value for each dollar matters more.
What is the biggest challenge facing North Oaks right now, and where do you see the greatest opportunity?
The biggest challenge is that North Oaks is approaching a series of consequential, expensive, long-horizon decisions — roads, utilities, buildings and facilities, city services, and development — at the same time residents are absorbing real increases in their tax bills.
The greatest opportunity is that we start from a position of genuine strength. North Oaks has a strong tax base, low debt levels, an investment-grade credit rating, and an engaged and sophisticated population.
The City and NOHOA — our resident-governed homeowners association — should work together and pool resources wherever it makes sense. That is the largest opportunity available to us. Redundancy between the two organizations remains a real problem — it is expensive, and it leaves residents genuinely confused about who is responsible for what. Evaluating major building and facility projects in a coordinated way, rather than separately, will produce better results and save money. The same logic applies to equipment, professional services, and administrative capacity. Every dollar spent twice for one community is a dollar wasted, and residents pay both bills.
If we do that analytical work carefully and show residents our reasoning, we can make these decisions once, make them well, and preserve what people moved here for. My planning and finance background is suited to exactly that work.
How would you characterize the business climate in North Oaks, and what role should city government play in partnering with the business community to attract jobs, develop the workforce, and address shared challenges?
North Oaks is, by design, a primarily residential community — our founding covenant intentionally limits commercial development, and that is central to what residents value here. So the question for a city like ours is not how to attract large-scale commercial growth; it is whether we are a competent, predictable partner to the business community in the ways that actually matter.
That means efficient and consistent permitting, clear timelines, and decisions that do not change depending on who is asking. It means sound fiscal management that keeps the tax and fee environment stable and forecastable. And it means engaging seriously at the regional level, because the challenges that affect East Metro employers — workforce, housing supply, transportation infrastructure, water resources — do not stop at our borders and cannot be solved by any one city.
I would welcome closer engagement between North Oaks and the regional business community. Cities our size often disengage from that conversation, and I think that is a mistake: the decisions made in Ramsey County and at the Met Council affect our residents whether or not we are at the table.
What do you view as the most pressing public safety challenges in your community, and how would you address them?
Public safety in North Oaks centers on traffic and road safety, water and ice safety on our lakes, domestic incidents, and property crime and scam activity. We also have an older population than many communities our size, and that should be reflected in how we design and evaluate services — from medical response times and fire district capacity to the scams that disproportionately target older residents.
We contract for both police and fire service — with the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office and the Lake Johanna Fire District — and those contracts represent a substantial share of the city budget. My approach is to hold them to the same standard as any other significant expenditure: are they performing well, are response times what we expect, and are we getting appropriate value? That review should be routine and public, not something that happens only when there is a problem.
On traffic in particular, I would use actual data — traffic patterns, incident history, call volumes — to prioritize signage, striping, and intersection improvements, rather than responding to whichever concern was raised most recently.
What ideas do you have to address housing shortages and affordability, and how do you view the role of rent control policies in that process?
North Oaks is a low-density, covenant-governed community with very little multifamily or rental housing, so citywide rent control is not an applicable tool here and I would not support it for this community. My broader concern with rent control, from a planning perspective, is that it addresses price without addressing supply, and the East Metro's affordability problem is fundamentally a supply problem.
Where affordability genuinely bites in North Oaks is cumulative cost of ownership — taxes, fees, and utility rates. For longtime residents and those on fixed incomes, a decade of compounding local increases is what prices people out of a home they already own. Holding the line on the levy is an affordability policy for this community.
Regionally, I think cities should be honest that housing supply requires actually permitting housing, and that the East Metro will not solve workforce shortages while housing costs push workers further from where the jobs are.
How would you improve transportation infrastructure and safety for drivers, transit riders, cyclists, and pedestrians in your community?
North Oaks has an unusual structure: NOHOA maintains our roads, trails, and plowing, while the City is responsible for road safety elements such as signage and striping. Getting good outcomes therefore depends heavily on coordination, and one of my priorities is working constructively with NOHOA so that City and Association efforts complement each other — no duplication, and no gaps where each assumes the other is responsible.
Within the City's authority, I would prioritize based on evidence: incident history and traffic patterns should determine where we invest in signage, striping, sightlines, and crossing improvements. Our trail system is heavily used by residents walking, biking, and skiing, and safe road crossings are the highest-value safety investment we can make.
Regionally, transportation infrastructure decisions are made largely at the county and Met Council level, and North Oaks should participate in those conversations rather than react to their outcomes.
Residential property owners across the region are feeling significant strain from rising property tax bills. How would you approach balancing fiscal responsibility with the demand for services when setting the city levy?
Residents are feeling real strain, and the City needs to take ownership of the portion of that burden it actually controls. I have voted against two tax increases during my term because the justification presented did not meet the standard I think residents are owed.
My approach is line-by-line scrutiny. Every significant year-over-year change should come with a clear, plain-language explanation before the vote, not after. Discretionary studies, consultant contracts, reserve transfers, and administrative growth should each have to justify themselves on their own terms. And high-expense projects should go out for multiple bids as a matter of routine — competitive bidding is the single most reliable discipline available to a small city, and it costs nothing to require it.
Essential services — police and fire contracts, road safety, basic administration — must be funded responsibly, and I have never argued otherwise. The question is not whether to spend, but whether each dollar was tested against alternatives before it went out the door. I would rather ask hard questions before spending than explain surprises afterward.
What are the two or three issues where you believe city government is best positioned to lead — and why the city rather than the state or county?
Land use and conservation. Protecting open space, wetlands, lakes, and the character established by our founding covenant is inherently local. The state and county have neither the specific knowledge nor the mandate to make those judgments for us, and the consequences of getting them wrong are permanent. This is work the City must do in genuine partnership with NOHOA and residents.
Budget transparency and levy discipline. The City sets its own levy and controls how it explains that levy to residents. That accountability cannot be delegated upward, and it should not be treated as though it could. When residents ask why their taxes rose, the answer has to come from us.
I would add a third: coordination between the City and NOHOA. We are the only party positioned to ensure that residents' dues and taxes together produce full value rather than overlapping or leaving gaps. No higher level of government understands or can manage that relationship.
What does real taxpayer transparency look like to you, and what specific steps would you take to achieve it — both in terms of financial reporting and public engagement?
Real transparency means a resident who is not an accountant can understand where the money went and why, without filing a request or attending a meeting to find out.
Concretely, I would push for four things. First, plain-language budget summaries — including an explanation of every significant year-over-year change — published before votes are taken, not after. Second, an audit of recent property tax increases with the results made public in accessible form. Third, consistent, uniform reporting on city finances and services, so residents can compare year to year rather than re-learning a new format each cycle. Fourth, regular public accounting of city contracts and vendor performance, including how each vendor was selected and whether the work was competitively bid.
On engagement, I want to restore a genuine process for residents to bring proposals to the Council and receive a real response, and to push major decisions into open session wherever the law permits. Residents should be able to observe how a decision was reached, not simply be told what was decided.
Email: [email protected]
Campaign Phone: NA
Campaign Website: www.andrewfornorthoaks.com
Twitter Handle: NA
Facebook Page: facebook.com/AndrewForNorthOaks
Candidate Bio
My wife Nina and I moved to North Oaks in 2014 with our four children, drawn by a community where kids could grow up with access to nature and the freedom to enjoy it.
I hold a Master of Urban Planning and an MBA, and I have worked in city planning, commercial banking, business management, and real estate — including as an officer and board member of a private investment company managing commercial real estate and 10,000 acres of timberland.
I was elected to the North Oaks City Council in 2024 and have served a two-year term. In that time I voted against two tax increases, because I did not believe residents had been given an adequate accounting of what was driving them. I have pushed consistently for greater budget and fiscal transparency — plain-language reporting that lets residents see where their money goes without having to dig for it. And I have asked the City to seek multiple bids on significant projects, so we can demonstrate we are getting fair value rather than assume it.
I am running again because that work is not finished, and the decisions ahead on roads, utilities, and city services deserve disciplined evaluation.
What style of leadership would you bring to this position?
I ask questions before I vote, and I expect answers I can explain to a resident in plain language. My training is in urban planning and finance, so my instinct on any significant decision is to ask what the evidence actually shows, what the alternatives cost, and what we are committing the City to over ten and twenty years — not just this budget cycle.
I also believe disagreement should be substantive rather than personal. I have taken positions my colleagues did not share, and I have done so by making the argument on the merits and in public, where residents can weigh it themselves. That is the standard I hold myself to: be prepared, be specific, show your reasoning, and keep the working relationships intact so the Council can still function when the vote is over.
What are your top three priorities if elected, and how might they be affected by growing uncertainty around state and federal funding?
First, property tax accountability. I want recent increases audited and a plain-language explanation published showing where every dollar goes.
Second, transparency and resident voice — restoring a real process for residents to bring proposals to the Council, pushing major decisions into open session, and producing consistent, uniform reporting on city finances and services.
Third, disciplined stewardship of our natural resources and land use, working closely with VLAWMO and our Natural Resources Commission.
North Oaks receives very little direct state or federal aid, so the risk to us is indirect but real. We contract for fire and emergency service through the Lake Johanna Fire Department and for public safety through the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office, and both of those organizations are exposed to funding cuts. If their budgets tighten, the effect reaches us through service levels and contract costs. That means working closely with both organizations — and with the other cities that share these services — to be thoughtful about how we do more with less, rather than waiting to absorb the consequences. It also raises the value of competitive bidding and rigorous cost analysis: when revenue is less predictable, getting full value for each dollar matters more.
What is the biggest challenge facing North Oaks right now, and where do you see the greatest opportunity?
The biggest challenge is that North Oaks is approaching a series of consequential, expensive, long-horizon decisions — roads, utilities, buildings and facilities, city services, and development — at the same time residents are absorbing real increases in their tax bills.
The greatest opportunity is that we start from a position of genuine strength. North Oaks has a strong tax base, low debt levels, an investment-grade credit rating, and an engaged and sophisticated population.
The City and NOHOA — our resident-governed homeowners association — should work together and pool resources wherever it makes sense. That is the largest opportunity available to us. Redundancy between the two organizations remains a real problem — it is expensive, and it leaves residents genuinely confused about who is responsible for what. Evaluating major building and facility projects in a coordinated way, rather than separately, will produce better results and save money. The same logic applies to equipment, professional services, and administrative capacity. Every dollar spent twice for one community is a dollar wasted, and residents pay both bills.
If we do that analytical work carefully and show residents our reasoning, we can make these decisions once, make them well, and preserve what people moved here for. My planning and finance background is suited to exactly that work.
How would you characterize the business climate in North Oaks, and what role should city government play in partnering with the business community to attract jobs, develop the workforce, and address shared challenges?
North Oaks is, by design, a primarily residential community — our founding covenant intentionally limits commercial development, and that is central to what residents value here. So the question for a city like ours is not how to attract large-scale commercial growth; it is whether we are a competent, predictable partner to the business community in the ways that actually matter.
That means efficient and consistent permitting, clear timelines, and decisions that do not change depending on who is asking. It means sound fiscal management that keeps the tax and fee environment stable and forecastable. And it means engaging seriously at the regional level, because the challenges that affect East Metro employers — workforce, housing supply, transportation infrastructure, water resources — do not stop at our borders and cannot be solved by any one city.
I would welcome closer engagement between North Oaks and the regional business community. Cities our size often disengage from that conversation, and I think that is a mistake: the decisions made in Ramsey County and at the Met Council affect our residents whether or not we are at the table.
What do you view as the most pressing public safety challenges in your community, and how would you address them?
Public safety in North Oaks centers on traffic and road safety, water and ice safety on our lakes, domestic incidents, and property crime and scam activity. We also have an older population than many communities our size, and that should be reflected in how we design and evaluate services — from medical response times and fire district capacity to the scams that disproportionately target older residents.
We contract for both police and fire service — with the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office and the Lake Johanna Fire District — and those contracts represent a substantial share of the city budget. My approach is to hold them to the same standard as any other significant expenditure: are they performing well, are response times what we expect, and are we getting appropriate value? That review should be routine and public, not something that happens only when there is a problem.
On traffic in particular, I would use actual data — traffic patterns, incident history, call volumes — to prioritize signage, striping, and intersection improvements, rather than responding to whichever concern was raised most recently.
What ideas do you have to address housing shortages and affordability, and how do you view the role of rent control policies in that process?
North Oaks is a low-density, covenant-governed community with very little multifamily or rental housing, so citywide rent control is not an applicable tool here and I would not support it for this community. My broader concern with rent control, from a planning perspective, is that it addresses price without addressing supply, and the East Metro's affordability problem is fundamentally a supply problem.
Where affordability genuinely bites in North Oaks is cumulative cost of ownership — taxes, fees, and utility rates. For longtime residents and those on fixed incomes, a decade of compounding local increases is what prices people out of a home they already own. Holding the line on the levy is an affordability policy for this community.
Regionally, I think cities should be honest that housing supply requires actually permitting housing, and that the East Metro will not solve workforce shortages while housing costs push workers further from where the jobs are.
How would you improve transportation infrastructure and safety for drivers, transit riders, cyclists, and pedestrians in your community?
North Oaks has an unusual structure: NOHOA maintains our roads, trails, and plowing, while the City is responsible for road safety elements such as signage and striping. Getting good outcomes therefore depends heavily on coordination, and one of my priorities is working constructively with NOHOA so that City and Association efforts complement each other — no duplication, and no gaps where each assumes the other is responsible.
Within the City's authority, I would prioritize based on evidence: incident history and traffic patterns should determine where we invest in signage, striping, sightlines, and crossing improvements. Our trail system is heavily used by residents walking, biking, and skiing, and safe road crossings are the highest-value safety investment we can make.
Regionally, transportation infrastructure decisions are made largely at the county and Met Council level, and North Oaks should participate in those conversations rather than react to their outcomes.
Residential property owners across the region are feeling significant strain from rising property tax bills. How would you approach balancing fiscal responsibility with the demand for services when setting the city levy?
Residents are feeling real strain, and the City needs to take ownership of the portion of that burden it actually controls. I have voted against two tax increases during my term because the justification presented did not meet the standard I think residents are owed.
My approach is line-by-line scrutiny. Every significant year-over-year change should come with a clear, plain-language explanation before the vote, not after. Discretionary studies, consultant contracts, reserve transfers, and administrative growth should each have to justify themselves on their own terms. And high-expense projects should go out for multiple bids as a matter of routine — competitive bidding is the single most reliable discipline available to a small city, and it costs nothing to require it.
Essential services — police and fire contracts, road safety, basic administration — must be funded responsibly, and I have never argued otherwise. The question is not whether to spend, but whether each dollar was tested against alternatives before it went out the door. I would rather ask hard questions before spending than explain surprises afterward.
What are the two or three issues where you believe city government is best positioned to lead — and why the city rather than the state or county?
Land use and conservation. Protecting open space, wetlands, lakes, and the character established by our founding covenant is inherently local. The state and county have neither the specific knowledge nor the mandate to make those judgments for us, and the consequences of getting them wrong are permanent. This is work the City must do in genuine partnership with NOHOA and residents.
Budget transparency and levy discipline. The City sets its own levy and controls how it explains that levy to residents. That accountability cannot be delegated upward, and it should not be treated as though it could. When residents ask why their taxes rose, the answer has to come from us.
I would add a third: coordination between the City and NOHOA. We are the only party positioned to ensure that residents' dues and taxes together produce full value rather than overlapping or leaving gaps. No higher level of government understands or can manage that relationship.
What does real taxpayer transparency look like to you, and what specific steps would you take to achieve it — both in terms of financial reporting and public engagement?
Real transparency means a resident who is not an accountant can understand where the money went and why, without filing a request or attending a meeting to find out.
Concretely, I would push for four things. First, plain-language budget summaries — including an explanation of every significant year-over-year change — published before votes are taken, not after. Second, an audit of recent property tax increases with the results made public in accessible form. Third, consistent, uniform reporting on city finances and services, so residents can compare year to year rather than re-learning a new format each cycle. Fourth, regular public accounting of city contracts and vendor performance, including how each vendor was selected and whether the work was competitively bid.
On engagement, I want to restore a genuine process for residents to bring proposals to the Council and receive a real response, and to push major decisions into open session wherever the law permits. Residents should be able to observe how a decision was reached, not simply be told what was decided.