SUNFISH LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING – APRIL 7, 2009
7:00 P.M. - ST. ANNE’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH
Attendants:
Mayor: Molly Park
Councilmembers: Cathy DeCourcy, Judy MacManus, Richard Williams and Roger Conant.
City Attorney: Tim Kuntz
City Planner: Laurie Smith
City Engineer: Tim Hanson
Building Official: Russ Wahl
City Forester: Jim Nayes
City Treasurer: Mike Blair
City Clerk: Cathy Iago
Police Chief Manila Shaver
and Members of the General Public.
1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Molly Park opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
2. APPROVE AGENDA: Mayor Park requested two items be placed on the agenda under Old/New Business; Report on Aerial Deer Count from Councilmember DeCourcy and Reconsideration of Video Taped Council Meetings per request of Councilmember Conant. She asked if there were any further additions or corrections to the agenda. Councilmember Conant requested discussion related to the Noxious Weed information provided by the City Attorney. The Mayor asked if there were any other items and there was no response
Councilmember DeCourcy moved approval of the Agenda as amended, seconded by Councilmember MacManus and carried. (5-0)
3. CONSENT AGENDA: The Mayor asked if there were any questions or comments relating to any items on the Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Conant asked if the $3,700 for engineering expenses noted on the Treasurer’s report are directly related to the Salem Church Road Improvement and where they are reflected in the List of Bills. Treasurer Blair explained those costs are a separate line item under WSB; he also noted that there is a separate line item for Attorney’s fees related to the project.
Councilmember DeCourcy requested a change to page 3 of the Study Council meeting minutes of March 3, 2009; she noted that she stated “ash runoff” not “flying debris” is harmful if a fire-pit is located too close to a lake.
Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments and there was no response.
Councilmember Williams moved approval of the Consent Agenda with the amendment to the minutes, seconded by Councilmember Conant and carried. (5-0)
a. Special Council Meeting Minutes of March 3, 2009.
b. Regular Council Meeting Minutes of March 3, 2009.
c. List of Bills
d. Monthly Financial Statements
4. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: None.
5. INSPECTOR’S REPORTS:
a. Building Inspector: Inspector Wahl stated that he conducted one (1) inspection and issued one (1)
permit in March.
Council thanked the Inspector for his report.
- City pLANNER: Planner Smith advised that there was no Commission meeting in March due to the lack of a quorum. She stated the Planning Commission will meet in April to consider an application for a detached garage; the application would be heard by Council at their May meeting.
Mayor Park asked if a site visit would be conducted on the property prior to the meeting and the Planner responded yes.
Council thanked the Planner for her report - City Engineer: Salem Church Road Reconstruction: The Engineer advised he would review information on the improvement under New Business later on the agenda.
Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP): Engineer Hanson explained that due to staff scheduling the public hearing for the SWMP has been moved to the May 5, 2009 Council meeting. He noted that after conducting the public hearing and with Council approval the plan would then be adopted.
NPDES Annual Public Hearing: The Engineer stated that the annual public hearing for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) would also be held at the May 5, 2009 regular Council meeting as the hearing for the Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan; he noted the two items are interrelated in several ways.
Charlton Road Feasibility Update: Engineer Hanson explained that he continues to work on the Charlton Road feasibility update.
Dakota County Capital Improvement Plan (CIP): The approved Dakota County CIP for 2009-2013 has been placed on the County’s website for review. He advised that there are no projects immediately adjacent to the Sunfish Lake. He explained that Dakota County has requested cities review the 2010-2014 CIP and send any comments relating to the plan.
Councilmember Conant asked if there was any reason to review the plan since there are no projects that immediately impacting the City. Engineer Hanson commented that if Council has interest in what is happening in the County they have the option to review the plan; he indicated that the proposed I-494/Delaware Avenue interchange might be an item of interest, however; there are no projects identified at this time that impact the City.
Aggregate Mining within Dakota County: The City of Sunfish Lake received the 2009 aggregate mining payment in the amount of $345.40.
Councilmember Conant asked what aggregate mining involves and why the City receives the payment.
Engineer Hanson explained that the payment is from a tax collected for sand and gravel mining in the County; the County developed a formula based on population for distribution of the payment to cities.
Public Works Activates Undertaken in the Month of March:
Street Clearing Activities: The Engineer stated the streets were plowed and sanded/salted on February 26 and sanded on March 11, 2009.
Spring Load Limit Postings: Engineer Hanson advised that the spring load limits were posted on March 9; the load limits are 5-tons per axle for all city streets, with the exception of Charlton Road which is 4-ton per axle limit. He noted these limits will stay in effect until late April or early may, depending on weather conditions.
Street Sweeping: The Engineer explained that spring street sweeping is usually completed during the month of April. He advised that he solicited quotes from five firms and four quotes were received. The Engineer recommends award of the street sweeping bid to Reliakor Services, as the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $850.00. He stated that the sweeping will be done with a pickup broom in order to physically remove the material from the street as opposed to sweeping it into the ditches. He advised that because the quote was so much lower than the other bidders, he contacted the company to insure that they were aware of the requirements in the bid specifications and they agreed that they would meet the requirements. He further noted that the spring sweeping is part of the water quality management procedures per the City’s NPDES permit (SWPPP).
Councilmember Williams asked if they are aware of the fact that the materials must be taken off-site. Mr. Hanson responded that the company normally does work for builders, not cities, but that they did agree to the requirements in the bid specifications. He noted that they are not a “start-up” company, although he is unsure how long they have been in business.
Mayor Park asked if they have done work for other cities in Dakota County. The Engineer responded that he believes the company has done work in Dakota County, but not for cities.
Councilmember Conant moved to award the street sweeping bid to Reliakor Services, as the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $850.00, seconded by Councilmember Williams and carried. (5-0)
Anticipated Engineer/Public Works Activities for the Month of April:
* Complete Feasibility Study for Charlton Road
* Preparation of contract documents for the Salem Church Road Reconstruction Project
* Preparation for the Public Hearing on the Comprehensive Strom Water Management Plan
* Preparation for the Public Hearing for the NPDES Annual Report
* Street Sweeping in mid-April
Council thanked the Engineer for his report. - CITY FORESTER: Forester Nayes explained that Mark Johnson was out of the country and that he had issued one (1) burning permit in March. He stated that Mark indicated he plans to be back in town for the Arbor Day celebration.
Mayor Park asked when Arbor Day is scheduled; Mr. Nayes responded the first Saturday in May.
Councilmember Conant asked what activities are planned for Arbor Day. Mayor Park explained that activities include recycling of materials and tree planting.
Councilmember DeCourcy asked if there would be any tall trees available. Mr. Nayes responded yes and explained the three species include Oak, White Birch, and River Birch that are approximately 1-1-1/2” in diameter, as well as the usual smaller trees.
Council thanked the Forester for his report. - PUBLIC SAFETY: Mayor Park distributed the Public Safety monthly report for January, 2009. Chief Shaver was present and stated there was nothing noteworthy to report except the fact that there were no false alarms this month.
Councilmember DeCourcy asked for an explanation of “harassing communications” and the reason for “extra patrols. The Chief explained that harassing communications would involve telephone calls or letters that exacerbate to the point where the police are called. He further stated that the extra patrols were for two residences; both residents requested the extra patrols since they are out-of-town frequently.
Council thanked Chief Shaver for his report.
6. OTHER/NEW BUSINESS:
a. Consider Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding Contract for City Project 2008-02, Salem Church Road Reconstruction: The Engineer explained that seven (7) bids were received and opened on April 3, 2009 and that the bidding results were competitive. He advised that ASTECH Company from St. Cloud, Minnesota was the lowest responsible bidder. He stated that in checking references for the company he did not receive a high quality report, but found that those contacted advised the company has done adequate work on much larger projects.
The Engineer recommended awarding the bid to Asphalt Surface Technologies Corporation (ASTECH) in the amount of $228,995.51, based on references and the low bid amount received.
Mayor Park asked if there were any questions or comments.
Councilmember Conant commented that this is a $300,000 project and one of the larger projects the City will undertake; he also noted that the proposed assessment per affected property would be approximate $2,800. He pointed out that when reviewing the road it was rated at 5, which does not reflect that a road reconstruction is necessary. He stated that the WSB firm has handled the process from its beginning to end and controls the information and that Council is not qualified to make judgments based on informational materials received. He explained that he was previously involved in a situation where a decision was made based on theory and control of information and he does not wish to be placed in that type of situation again. He explained he discussed this matter with a couple of civil engineers and they advised that due to public interest in the project it would be appropriate to hire another engineering firm prior to conduct a peer review prior to Council action..
Councilmember Conant stated he strongly believes that a peer review of the project is necessary in this instance and that the cost would be under $6,000. He suggested Council defer acting on the bids and retain another firm to conduct the peer review to insure the City is proceeding in the most cost effective manner prior to placing a financial burden on the homeowners.
Mayor Park explained that after she was contacted by Councilmember Conant to discuss this proposal, she contacted the League of Minnesota Cities, their attorney and the City Attorney. She stated that both attorneys advised that the City Engineer has followed all normal and legal processes related to an improvement project and that there would be no legal reason to pursue the peer review. The Mayor thanked Councilmember Conant for his insights relating to this matter.
Councilmember Conant commented that he was advised by the civil engineers that it is common practice to conduct peer reviews; he indicated it would not make a difference if the project were somewhat delayed.
Councilmember DeCourcy pointed out it would be a $6,000 difference in the project cost and she would not support the review.
Engineer Hanson pointed out that since Councilmember Conant was not a part of the earlier discussions relating to the project it would be appropriate to summarize the process. He stated that the project was initiated based on the CIP rating of the street which is conducted by engineers who review the road surface and attach a ranking to the street condition. He advised that the project was originally recommended as a mill and overlay project, which is somewhat less costly, however; he suggested that Braun Intertec be retained to conduct soil borings on the road due to its condition and age. He noted that Braun Intertec recommended that the project be upgraded to pavement reclamation, which is one step higher than a mill and overlay; he explained that the pavement is removed and ground in place to be returned to the surface of the road. He pointed out that this process adds a stronger base to the road versus the mill and overlay. He further explained that he based his recommendation for the project on the information received from Braun Intertec. He stated that he also had a staff member at WSB review the road since this person had previously worked for MN/DOT in the capacity of rating roads and that he agreed the mill and overlay would not work in this instance and recommended the upgrade to the pavement reclamation project.
Mayor Park requested that Council follow parliamentary procedures and address questions for staff to her.
Councilmember Conant pointed out that the review may cost less than $6,000 and in the total context of the project expenditures it would be a trivial amount to spend; he commented that Council should think of it as an inspection of the process thus far.
Councilmember DeCourcy commented that she was uncomfortable with the discussion when it questions the capabilities of staff; she stated that in her opinion the City has never had a better engineer than Mr. Hanson and that he has provided sufficient data and recommended hiring Braun Intertec to provide a second opinion on the project.
Councilmember Williams stated he understands that peer review may be necessary in some instances, however; in his opinion this project does not require a review. He agreed that Councilmember Conant may have questions regarding this project since he was not part of the Council during the initial discussions. He asked the City Engineer if the staff person from MN/DOT reviewed the road after the recommendation from Braun Intertec or prior to their soil borings. Engineer Hanson responded that the staff person’s review was after Braun’s recommendation.
Councilmember Williams commented that a peer review may be necessary if no checks were in place, but in his opinion there is no need in this particular case. He further stated that in his opinion if the City does less than recommended it may not last as long. He also noted that if the project is delayed it may alter the bid since he is unsure the length of time the bid is valid. He supported the improvement as recommended based on the good bid and two professional opinions that this is the way to proceed.
Councilmember MacManus pointed out that she understands the comments from Councilmember Conant since this is a major financial undertaking for the City and since the residents are expected to pay assessments; however, in her opinion the City has done its due diligence on the project.
Councilmember Conant commented that Treasurer Blair does an excellent job; however, the City conducts an audit on his work. Treasurer Blair responded that due to the size of the City the State does not require an audit.
Councilmember Conant questioned if all engineering expenses are included in the bid. Councilmember Williams stated the expenses are covered in the project costs.
Clerk Iago momentarily left the room and Mayor Park suggested that discussion be reviewed for her benefit.
Councilmember DeCourcy stated she favors awarding the bid and that the project proceeds as recommended.
Councilmember Williams summarized by stating he is not opposed to peer review, but he believes that it has already been accomplished by hiring a soils engineering firm to review the proposed improvement. He stated he is comfortable with that the project as designed is the correct way to proceed and that the bids are good. He noted that indirect costs are always estimated figures and vary higher or lower depending on several factors. He questioned if the cost for the Braun Intertec review were included in the project.
Engineer Hanson responded yes and noted those costs are listed under Item 4 in the estimated costs.
Councilmember Conant commented that although he believes he failed to convince Council of the necessity for the review, he would make a motion recommending it be done.
Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments and there was no response.
Councilmember Conant moved to authorize the expenditure not to exceed $6,000 to retain an engineering firm for peer review of the Salem Church Road Improvement project documentation and recommendation.
Motion failed for lack of second.
Councilmember Williams moved to adopt Resolution No. 09-07 titled, Resolution ACCEPTING Bid AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR CITY Project No. 2008-02, Salem Church Road Reconstruction to ASTECH as the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $228,995.51, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy.
In discussion, Councilmember Williams asked if the estimated costs were compiled after the bids were received. Attorney Kuntz explained that the information was distributed for the January, 2009 meeting and the only change to the estimated costs based on the bids would be under Item 1; the amount would be reduced from $263,610 to approximately $252,000. He explained that he and the Treasurer would make a recommendation to reduce the amount of the bond based on the bids.
Mayor Park called for a vote on the motion.
Motion carried. (Ayes: 4, Williams, DeCourcy, MacManus, Park) (Nayes: 1 Conant)
b. Consider Resolution Memorializing the Policy and Planning Reasons for Installation of Traffic
Calming Devices Along Salem Church Road in connection with City Project No. 2008-02, Salem Church
Road Reconstruction:
Attorney Kuntz explained that the feasibility report for the Salem Church Road project included the installation of traffic calming devices and if the Council wishes to proceed with the installation of the speed tables, he would recommend that a resolution be adopted that memorializes the policy and planning reasons for installing the traffic devices. He stated that adopting such a resolution would be similar to the policy adopted when Acorn Drive was constructed below City standards as a rural road and helps to protect the City from future liability. He advised that the resolution would list the reasons why the City considering this particular device and the court would view such action as a policy decision; according to the League of Minnesota Cities there are several cities that have implemented traffic claming policies and such a policy can support a defense of statutory immunity. He stated that he requested the City Engineer’s input regarding the rationale for use of the traffic calming device in conjunction with the improvement project for inclusion in the resolution; he reviewed the reasons as listed in the proposed resolution. He also referred Council to his report dated April 2, 2009 that contains the findings of a research report on traffic devices which was requested by Council at their January 6, 2009 meeting. a
Councilmember Williams commented that in reading the Attorney’s report it appears that it would support not installing speed humps.
Councilmember Conant stated it that in his opinion the research indicates that the traffic devices would best be restricted to local streets. Councilmember Williams noted that it appears as if many of the cities limit the use of the devices only to local streets and not collector streets.
Mayor Park asked for the engineer’s definition of Salem Church Road and Engineer Hanson stated that in the Comprehensive Plan it is defined as a collector street.
Councilmember Conant asked if the residents support the installation of the traffic devices.
Councilmembers DeCourcy and Williams both agreed that residents strongly supported the installation in two locations along the street.
Councilmember Williams recalled that Council had also discussed the proposed location of the devices as requested by certain residents and had to place them in slightly different places from the preferred locations the residents supported due to installation regulations.
Attorney Kuntz pointed out that the devices were better positioned to maintain immunity; he noted that this is not the first time the City has encountered discussion of installing the devices along the road and there appears to be strong support from the residents due to the nature of the road and its classification. He also noted that residents expressed concern for pedestrian safety and raised the issue of sight distance problems along the roadway. He stated that if Council is of the opinion the traffic devices will create a safer road then they should adopt the resolution memorializing the policy and reasons for their installation.
Mayor Park asked if the resolution memorializes the rationale for installation of the speed table versus a speed hump or bump. Attorney Kuntz responded that Finding No. 5 in the resolution outlines the reasons for the speed table versus the speed hump or bump. He also advised that the resolution only applies to Salem Church Road.
Mayor Park asked if the installation of the speed tables would require the removal of trees on both sides of the road and if the trees are located in the right-of-way. Engineer Hanson explained that trees would have to be removed since the installation of the speed table requires a “clear” zone for traffic; he noted that three (3) trees that are located within the City right-of-way would have to be removed.
Councilmember DeCourcy asked if the trees had already been removed and the engineer responded that he was not aware of any tree removal at this time.
Mayor Park asked if the City would have to educate residents on the use of the speed tables. Engineer Hanson explained that the speed table is somewhat wider and longer in length than a speed hump or bump so that traffic can traverse the table comfortably at 25 mph. He noted that signage must be installed at each location.
Councilmember Williams asked if trees would still have to be removed if speed humps were installed and the engineer responded yes.
Councilmember DeCourcy asked if the signs would read “Speed Table”. Engineer Hanson stated the signs would state “Speed Hump”.
Councilmember MacManus asked if the City would be protected from all liability by adopting the resolution. Attorney Kuntz responded that the City would be better positioned if future liability occurs; he noted that the City is deviating from the standard policy and therefore it would be beneficial to adopt the resolution that memorializes the rationale for doing so.
Councilmember Williams asked if signing and striping the devices are requirements. Engineer Hanson responded yes and noted that the City must also maintain the striping and signage as part of the requirements.
Mayor Park asked if there were any further questions and there was no response.
Councilmember DeCourcy moved to adopt Resolution No. 09-08 titled, Resolution MEMORIALIZING THE POLICY AND PLANNING REASONS FOR INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC CLAMING DEVICES ALONG SALEM CHURCH ROAD IN CONNECT WITH THE Salem Church Road Reconstruction PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 2008-02, seconded by Councilmember Williams and carried. (5-0)
c. Consider Resolution Providing for Sale of $360,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2009A, in
connection with City Project No. 208-02, Salem Church Road Reconstruction:
Attorney Kuntz explained that Council adopted as resolution at their December 2, 2008 to appoint Steve Apfelbacher of Ehlers & Associates as bond counsel for the Salem Church Road Improvement Project. He explained that the initial request was for $360,000 to be financed, however; based on the low bid received in the amount of $229,000 and adding a 10 percent contingency, the total project costs would be approximately $11,000 less than the original estimated cost of $263,000. He stated that he conferred with the City Treasurer and they agreed to recommend reducing the bond amount to be financed by $10,000 to $350,000.
The Attorney noted that the question usually arises as to whether or not the City should take monies from the reserve funds to cover the project cost as opposed to borrowing for the bond issue. He pointed out that generally around June of each year the City reserves are at their lowest point since there is a delay in receiving the tax refund from the County. He stated the Treasurer projects an amount of $200,000 in the City reserves which equals approximately six months of operating expenses for the City and the League of Minnesota cities recommend that cities retain at least a reserve to cover a six month period. He advised that both he and Treasurer Blair recommend financing the project with a bond issue in order to retain the reserve funds.
Mr. Kuntz introduced Steve Alfelbach of Ehlers & Associates to review the bond issue.
Councilmember Conant asked if the City has the ability to develop a line of credit with a bank. Treasurer Blair responded that he is unsure if that option is available.
Attorney Kuntz explained there are strict regulations regarding borrowing capabilities for cities and that a line of credit would not be an option.
Mr. Alfelbacher explained that there would be a change in the dollar amount in the proposed resolution authorizing the sale of the bonds reducing that amount to $350,000. He noted that he is hired to determine the type of security issue and how to structure the sale. He advised that he would recommended the sale of general obligation bonds and that Council determined a repayment term of 10-years, with 40 percent of the costs covered by special assessments to the benefited property owners. He distributed a list of banks in the area that would be solicited for bids; he noted that he received the names of banks in the area and contact persons from some Councilmembers.
Mayor Park asked if any banks listed are part of the cease and desist order and if that would have any bearing on their participation. Mr. Blair responded that Mainstreet Bank in involved in the order.
Councilmember Conant indicated that it should not be an issue since the cease and desist order relates to mortgage loans and Steve Apfelbacher agreed that it would not fit into that category.
Mr. Apfelbacher explained that the bond sale is scheduled for May 5, 2009 and after receiving and tabulating the bids, he would present a report and resolution for Council consideration at their regular meeting that day. He stated that if approved by Council he will work with staff on the closing and assist the Treasurer with investments.
Mayor Park thanked Mr. Apfelacher for his report and asked if there were any further questions; there was no response.
Councilmember DeCourcy moved to adopt Resolution No. 09-09 titled, Resolution providing fr the sale of $350,000 general obligation imrpovement bonds, series 2009a,
seconded by CouncilmemberWilliams.
In discussion, Councilmember Conant asked if an attorney would review the offering documents. Mr. Kuntz responded that the City also took action in December, 2008 to retain Attorney Steve Bubel of Kennedy & Graven to review the documents.
Motion carried. (5-0)
d. Schedule Public Hearing at the Regular Council Meeting on May 5, 2009 to Review the City Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Program Plan (SWPPP) and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) :
Engineer Hanson explained that the City is required to conduct an annual public hearing to receive comments regarding the SWPPP Program and to maintain its NPDES permit. He noted that the public hearing would also include review and comments relating to the Storm Water Management Plan.
Councilmember Conant asked for an explanation on the NPDES permit. Mr. Hanson explained that the permit is required under the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) rules relating to the Clean Water Act. He advised that he would prepare and publish notices for the two public hearings.
Councilmember Conant asked what comments are normally received. Mayor Park commented that there are normally no comments or participants that attend the meetings, however; the process is regulated by the MPCA. Mr. Hanson agreed that noted that an annual report must be filed by the City before the end of June.
Councilmember Conant asked how often the SWPPP is updated and noted it was last done in 2006. Mr. Hanson stated it does not have to be renewed again until 2010.
Councilmember Conant commented that it appears the City is conducting meetings and residents are unaware of the documents or the programs, therefore they do not attend.
Councilmember Williams agreed that there is little participation; however, all cities are required to conduct the public hearings whether or not there is attendance. He noted that occasionally a resident may have a specific concern regarding water quality and attend the meeting.
Mayor Park suggested that Councilmember Conant may wish to encourage his neighbors to attend.
Councilmember Conant responded that he does not believe anyone is aware of the documents and therefore would not have anything to discuss.
Councilmember Williams suggested that the documents be placed on the website.
Councilmember Conant stated he wished to have it noted that he has trouble with the concept of conducting public meetings when the information has not been made available and therefore residents do not attend.
Councilmember Williams pointed out that some residents may attend to comment on the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program, however; he is unsure if they are unaware of its importance. He asked if the SWPPP document is currently on the City website and if not, he asked that it be placed on the website prior to the meeting.
Councilmember Conant commented that the SWPPP document appears to be the least accessible and confusing.
Engineer Hanson pointed out that the document format is rigidly structured according to regulations set forth by the MPCA.
Mayor Park called for a motion on this matter.
Councilmember Williams moved to schedule a Public Hearing to Review the City Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program Plan and the Storm Water Management Plan on May 5, 2009 at 7:00 p.m., seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (5-0)
e. Schedule Joint Meeting with Mendota Heights City Council at Mendota Heights City Hall, 1101 Victoria
Curve, on May 19, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. to Hear Dakota County Presentation:
Mayor Park explained that Brian Johnson of Dakota County would be present at the joint meeting to discuss the Inver Grove Heights Northwest Expansion Area issues with the surrounding communities; information would include the status of the traffic studies and the possible interchange at I-494 and Delaware Avenue. She asked that a quorum be present at the meeting to hear the information.
Councilmember Williams moved to schedule a Joint Meeting with the Mendota Heights City Council on May 19, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. at the Mendota Heights City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (5-0)
f. Consider Appointment of City Representative to the Minneapolis/St. Paul (MSP) Airport Noise Oversight
Committee (NOC) At-Large Community Group:
Mayor Park recommended the appointment of Gretchen Kennan, resident on Windy Hills Drive, to serve as the City representative to the Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport Noise Oversight Committee (NOC).
Councilmember DeCourcy noted that Gretchen is not home during daytime hours. Mayor Park commented that she is unsure if that is important in relation to the appointment; she noted that Ms. Kennan is extremely competent and would serve the City well in this position.
Councilmember DeCourcy pointed out that if Ms. Kennan is not available during daytime hours she would not be able to monitor the noise. Mayor Park explained that the main issue at this time appears to be night flights and that she believes Gretchen would be a good representative for the City.
Councilmember Conant moved to ratify the appointment of Gretchen Keenan to serve as the City representative to the MSP Airport Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) at-large community group, seconded by Councilmember MacManus and carried. (5-0)
g. Report on Aerial Deer Count: Councilmember DeCourcy explained that 53 deer were spotted during the aerial count; she noted that 46 were located on the south side of the lake and 7 on the north side of the lake. She stated that she is adamantly opposed to bow hunting to cull the herd based on the fact that a deer has been spotted walking around the City with an arrow in its leg. She indicated that the majority of the deer appear to be in Musser Park and that she would recommend hiring a professional sharp shooter to cull the herd.
Mayor Park pointed out that the helicopter pilot explained that normally they do not see all the deer during the aerial count and that the amount of deer counted could possibly be doubled.
Councilmember Conant commented that he had read on the Wisconsin DNR website that 26 deer per square mile is the recommended limit and beyond number that causes damage to property.
Mayor Park thanked Councilmember DeCourcy for the report and explained that no action is necessary this evening. She noted that the City of Mendota Heights had hired professional bow hunters to cull the herd in their community and that she would discuss options with their Police Chief.
h. Reconsideration of Video Taped Meetings: Mayor Park explained that Councilmember Conant had again raised the issue of possibly video taping Council meetings. She noted that St. Anne’s Church does not have the equipment capabilities that other communities have in their city halls. She advised that Councilmember Conant had discussed the matter with Dennis Rafferty at NDC4 and he had offered to review the issue if the majority of Councilmembers supported televising the meetings.
Councilmember Conant pointed out that Dennis had stated it was conceivably possible, however, he does not wish to pursue the matter unless Council supports taping the meetings.
Councilmember DeCourcy stated she does not favor televising the meetings.
Councilmember MacManus stated she would support the taping.
Councilmember Williams indicated he has mixed feelings since some cities have had requests for the tapes from private residents to use in pursuing civil actions; he stated he prefers to have written minutes.
Mayor Park asked if a formal vote is necessary and Attorney Kuntz responded no. He suggested a directive to purse the matter would be sufficient.
Councilmembers Williams and MacManus indicated they wished to have the information and Councilmember DeCourcy did not support the request.
i. Discussion of Noxious Weed Information: Councilmember Conant stated he had reviewed the background information in the City Attorney’s report dated April 2, 2009 and noted that two prohibited weeds listed and Poison Ivy and Garlic Mustard and that he has seen both within the City. He pointed out that the information listed in the report states that a General Notice regarding noxious weeds must be published on or before June 15 each year and questioned if the City publishes the notice.
Planner Smith advised she believes the County Weed Inspector takes care of publishing the notice, unless a city has a provision in its code requiring them to do so.
Councilmember Conant also pointed out that the weed inspector shall serve notice to property owners if noxious weeds are identified on their property. Planner Smith stated that in the past the City has sent a letter to property owners to remove weeds.
After a brief discussion regarding responsibility for publishing the weed notice Mayor Park asked the Planner to research the matter and report back to Council. Planner Smith agreed.
The Mayor asked if there was any further business and there was no response.
9. ADJOURN: Councilmember DeCourcy moved for adjournment at 8:55 p.m., seconded by Councilmember MacManus and carried. (5-0)
______________________ ___________________________
Molly Park, Mayor Catherine Iago, City Clerk
We are a small community proud of our heritage and committed to the preservation of our pristine, rural character. We cherish our privacy, yet know we are part of a thriving Dakota County and the greater Twin Cities metropolitan area. With these partnerships in mind, we strive to preserve that unique spirit which is Sunfish Lake, Minnesota.