SUNFISH LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING – SEPTEMBER 7, 2010

SUNFISH LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING – SEPTEMBER 7, 2010

7:00 P.M. - ST. ANNE’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH

 

Attendants:

 

      Mayor:  Molly Park

      Councilmembers: Judy MacManus, Cathy DeCourcy and Richard Williams.

      City Attorney:  Tim Kuntz

City Building Official: Russ Wahl
City Forester: Jim Nayes
City Planner:  Carie Fuhrman and Laurie Smith

      City Engineer:  Tim Hanson

      City Treasurer:  Mike Blair

City Clerk:  Cathy Iago

Police Chief: Manila Shaver
Officer Matt Muellner
     and Members of the General Public.
Councilmember Conant was absent.
     

1.   CALL TO ORDER:  Mayor Molly Park opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.

2.   APPROVE AGENDA:       Mayor Park asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Agenda. Attorney Kuntz explained that he wished to discuss an upcoming item under new business, however; no formal action from Council is necessary.

The Mayor asked if there were any further additions or corrections to the agenda and there was no response.                     

Councilmember DeCourcy moved approval of the Agenda, seconded by Councilmember MacManus and carried.  (4-0)

  

3.   CONSENT AGENDA:       Mayor Park asked if there were any other questions or comments relating to any items on the Consent Agenda. 

Councilmember MacManus stated she had questions relating to the list of bills. She commented that she appreciates receiving copies of the bills via email for review. She questioned the proposed payment of $59,000 for the Acorn Drive improvement.

Treasurer Blair explained that the original amount owed was $160,000 and that the City had made a payment in March of approximately $55,000. He stated that the bonds were with Mainstreet Bank, which closed, and the bond issue was taken over by Central Bank; he explained that the bonds now belong to the FDIC and that he has had difficulty contacting the FDIC regarding the payment. He noted that the City has sufficient cash reserves to pay off the bonds and that the only remaining bond issue would be for Salem Church Road. He also advised that the in future the City will not be able to levy on the Acorn bond issue and the early payment of Acorn Drive will save  interest. He recommended Council authorize the final payment for Acorn Drive.

Mayor Park noted that originally the bond issue for Acorn Drive would run for ten years.

Councilmember MacManus agreed that it would be great to be able to payoff the bond issue early to save interest.

Councilmember MacManus questioned the amount of $32,000 listed in the Preliminary Budget for Charlton Road.

Treasurer Blair explained that the matter would be discussed later on the agenda with the proposed budget item.

Councilmember MacManus noted the charge under the Northwest Associated Consultants billing statement for a phone call at $141.00; she asked if this happens often without Council authorizing the monetary amount.
Planner Smith explained that it probably it was not just one phone call and that other items relating to the matter have been included with the amount. She explained that the call was most likely based on a complaint from a resident and staff may have had to research the code, which would account for the higher cost.

Councilmember Williams questioned if phone conversations with residents are in conjunction with a planning application would they be shown as a “pass through” item in the bills.

Treasurer Blair agreed that there would be two separate invoices if the conversation relates to an application and that the escrow funds would be charged.

Attorney Kuntz pointed out that the billings are a judgmental issue for staff; he noted that most phone calls relating to City business are handled by the consultants since there is no city hall in Sunfish Lake. He explained that staff would normally proceed to answer questions on minor issues. He advised that if it is apparent an issue needs more attention, staff would normally request direction from Council.

Councilmember MacManus pointed out the cost listed under the Legal billings for the study on rubbish haulers; she questioned if Council should have proceeded with the study at cost of $1,200 since it appears that the item would not be resolved.

Mayor Park asked the City Attorney if he wished to comment on this matter.

Attorney Kuntz explained that the issue of limiting garbage collection was discussed on a couple of different occasions by Council; he stated that in his judgment the research was warranted after the item arose a third time in order to provide sufficient information for Council to make an informed decision on the matter. He pointed out that the cost for the study is included as part of the annual contact with the Attorney’s office and most likely would not exceed the budget set for 2010.

Councilmember MacManus questioned the charges for DUI under legal billings.

Attorney Kuntz explained that his office also provides prosecution for arrests and that the legal bills for arrests are divided into four (4) categories; DUI, Assault, General, and Traffic.

Mayor Park pointed out that if an incident occurs within the City, the Attorney’s office must be involved.

Treasurer Blair noted that the City also receives a portion of the fines that are collected by Dakota County to offset some of the costs for prosecution.

Councilmember MacManus thanked staff for the explanations.

Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments or questions relating to the Consent Agenda.

Councilmember DeCourcy asked that the minutes be corrected on page 6 to reflect that Jim Gilbert does not work for the Dodge Nature Center; she indicated that she believes he is a commentator for WCCO television.

Mayor Park asked if there were any further items and there was no response.

Councilmember DeCourcy moved to approve the Consent Agenda with the correction to the August 3, 2010 minutes, seconded by Councilmember Williams and carried. (4-0)  

a.      Regular Council meeting minutes of August 3, 2010.

b.      List of Bills

c.       Monthly Financials

4.   COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC:   None.

5.   PUBLIC HEARING/PRESENTATION:     None.

6.   PLANNING COMMISSION/PLANNER’S REPORT:        Mayor Park advised that Planner Smith had submitted her resignation as the City’s Planning Consultant.

Planner Smith advised that she has accepted a new position that allows her to work regular hours and more at home in the evening with her son.  She introduced the new consultant from NAC, Carie Fuhrman, and explained Carie has been with the firm for four (4) years. She stated that she has briefed Carie on Sunfish Lake issues. She stated she loved working for the City of Sunfish Lake and thanked Council for their support during her employment.

Planner Fuhrman stated she is looking forward to working with Council and staff in Sunfish Lake. She explained that she also works with May Township and the City of Loredo and that she was previously employed by the City of Crosslake as the Assistant Planner.

Council and staff introduced themselves to the new planner and welcomed her to the City.

Mayor Park presented Planner Smith with a gift from Council and staff and congratulated her on her new position.

7.   INSPECTOR’S REPORTS: 

 

a.   Building Inspector:        Inspector Wahl stated he conducted two (2) inspections and issued two (2) building permits in August. He stated that the property at 1025 65th Street had been sold and the new owner is Tim Phillips.

Council thanked the Inspector for his report.

 

b.   City Engineer:   Salem Church Road Reconstruction:  Engineer Hanson stated he has reviewed the project final punch list and that the contractor is in the process of completing the work; he advised that he anticipates submitting a request for final payment at the October or November meeting.

Musser Park:    The Engineer explained that staff has not received a response from Minnesota Land Trust regarding the request to construct a parking lot in Musser Park.

Shoulder Repairs:  Engineer Hanson stated that he received quotes for the shoulder repairs on various City streets and that formal Council action would be requested later on the agenda.

Address along Salem Church Road:     Engineer Hanson stated he would be working with the new planning consultant to resolve this issue. He advised that staff has researched the history of the address and how they were assigned to the parcels and City records do not indicate any changes. He advised that Dakota County stated they had no involvement in addressing property nor are their records showing any parcel addresses being issued.

The Engineer explained that he is unsure how the matter will be resolved, but he will continue to work with staff and the residents to reach a solution.

Councilmember Williams asked if both lots are buildable parcels.

Engineer Hanson explained that both parcels contain homes and are located on a shared driveway.

Mayor Park explained the matter arose due to an issue with an ambulance call and difficulty finding the address.

Angell Road Speed Hump:  The Engineer stated that letters were sent to the property owners, a specification was developed and quotes were received for installing a speed hump (permanent or temporary) on Angell Road. He explained this matter would be discussed later on the agenda.


Public Works Activites Undertaken in the Month of July: 2011 Public Works and Engineering Budget:   The Engineer stated a budget was developed for 2011 based on historical costs, anticipated infrastructure needs, and required items. He stated he provided the materials to the City Treasurer for inclusion in the proposed budget and that the matter will be discussed later on the agenda.
 
Anticipated Engineer Activities for the Month of September: 

 -   Complete shoulder repairs and roadside swale re-grading on City Streets

       -   Grading Charlton Road
 -   Reviewing storm sewer outfall as required by the City’s SWPPP

Councilmember Williams asked if there are any storm sewers in the City and if culverts are included.

Engineer Hanson explained that the culverts are classified as storm sewers.

Council thanked the Engineer for his report.

  1. CITY FORESTER:  Forester Nayes reported he issued one (1) Burning Permit in August, collected four (4) Oak Wilt samples and notified four (4) residents regarding Purple Loose Strife on their property. The Forester stated he had done clearing work on Sunnyside Lane and Charlton Road and that he removed a tree that had fallen across the road on Charlton Road.

    Forester Nayes explained that the mowing in Musser Park was completed and advised it was done later than normal due to some mechanical problems with the mower. He stated he found a Marijuana plant in Musser Park and destroyed it.

    The Forester explained that no Emerald Ash Borer has been found in the City..
     
    Council thanked the Forester for his report.

  2. PUBLIC SAFETY:   Chief Shaver reviewed the report and noted that false alarms are down from the same time period last year. He reminded those present that when the fall time change occurs it is a good rule to change the batteries in residential smoke alarms. The Chief also requested that residents who leave town for the winter provide a contact name and telephone number to the police department, prior to leaving, so the department has their emergency contact information.

    The Chief advised that one of our patrol officers responded to a report of someone dumping trash in the City. The responding officer requested that the person pick up the yard refuse and remove it from the City to be disposed of properly.

    Chief Shaver stated that Officer Muellner was present to discuss the deer management plan item that is listed later on the agenda. Moreover, the Chief reminded residents that with the winter months approaching the issue of trespassing to ice fish will arise; he reminded residents to provide written permission slips which can be found on the City’s website, to persons they are granting permission to cross their property to gain access to a particular lake. He further noted that residents should call the 911 Dispatch Center’s non-emergency line at 651-322-2323 if they notice anyone suspicious fishing on a lake.

    Councilmember MacManus noted there was a “hit and run” accident listed on the report; she questioned if it was serious.  Chief Shaver reviewed information and noted the accident occurred on Highway 110 and that there were no injuries.

    Mayor Park stated she attended the West St. Paul “Night to Unite” and commended the Chief and his staff for an excellent job in providing information to residents on safety issues.
    Council thanked Chief Shaver for his report.             

8.   NEW/OTHER BUSINESS:             

a.                      Consider Ordinance Establishing the Salaries for Mayor, Council and Planning Commission Members:

      Mayor Park introduced the proposed ordinance establishing salaries for Council and the Planning Commission.

Councilmember Williams asked if a motion is needed for discussion and Attorney Kuntz indicated that would be appropriate.

Councilmember DeCourcy stated it is her opinion that serving the City as an elected official is a labor of love and she does not believe any compensation is necessary.

Councilmember Williams agreed. He pointed out that compensation would not begin before being re-elected to office.

Attorney Kuntz disagreed and explained that if the proposed ordinance is adopted, the compensation would begin in January, 2011. 

Councilmember Williams stated that there appears to be a strong consensus with residents in the City that elected officials should not get paid and commented that it may not be appropriate to take action that would reflect poorly on the current candidates for office.

Councilmember MacManus concurred with the comments and explained that she does not consider it inappropriate to establish a salary for elected officials. She pointed out that in her opinion it would provide a sense of importance to the position and acknowledge the job of the elected officials. She commented that she most likely would not collect the salary if it is approved and that she thought the salary would be $150 a year, not for each meeting.

Mayor Park referred to the information provided by Councilmember Conant relating to smaller cities and compensation for their elected officials; she noted that there are 58 cities with population under 1,000 and all pay some type of compensation. She noted that these are difficult times for everyone and indicated that the City may be facing some difficult financial decisions in the future as revenues are decreasing and operating costs are increasing.

The Mayor stated she preferred to appropriate available funds for elected officials to attend professional training seminars or conferences where they can interact with elected officials from other cities; she commented that in her opinion the educational components assist elected officials to better serve the community.

Councilmember Williams agreed that the educational opportunities are worthwhile and indicated that each councilmember could be given a stipend to attend such functions.

Mayor Park asked if there was any further discussion and there was no response. The Mayor called for a motion
         
Councilmember DeCourcy moved to deny adoption of the proposed ordinance establishing salaries for Mayor, Council and Planning Commission, seconded by Councilmember Williams and carried. (4-0)

Mayor Park commended Councilmember Conant on the research he provided relating to this matter.

b.                      Consider Adoption of Proposed 2011 Budget and Tax Levy:   Mayor Park stated that the Treasurer and City Attorney would make a presentation on the preliminary budget item.

Attorney Kuntz explained that all cities must adopt and certify a proposed levy on or before September 15 each year. He advised that because the Sunfish Lake has a population over 500, the City must announce the meeting at which the budget and levy will be discussed and the public will be allowed to comment. He stated that the date and time of the meeting, which is held after November 24 at or later than 6:00 p.m., must be announced and noted in the minutes. The City must also notify the county auditor of the time and place of the meeting or meetings if necessary,   provide a phone number taxpayers may use to contact for more information, and a mailing address at which the City can receive comments. He explained that at or following the public comments at the scheduled meeting, the City may then adopt a budget and certify the final levy; the final levy must be certified on or before five working days after December 20, 2010.

The Attorney advised that the actions required this evening are as follows:

-   Set a “not to exceed” tax levy

      -   Set the regular meeting date of December 7, 2010 as the date at which public input will be taken
-   Set the regular meeting date of December 7, 2010 as the date at which the Council will adopt the final budget and
    set the tax levy

      -   Post the Notice of Meeting to Consider the 2011 Budget and Tax levy on the City website and at St. Anne’s
    Church prior to the December 7, 2010 meeting

Attorney Kuntz explained that the City is not required to publish a notice of the meeting and noted that in the past this meeting has been scheduled in conjunction with the regularly scheduled December 7, 2010 Council meeting.
 
Treasurer Blair referred to his report on the proposed 2011 operating budget, which includes an increase in levies of $25,800 over last year’s budget. He explained that the increase is due to the Salem Church Road levy and a proposed Charlton Road capital improvement.

The Treasurer recommended that the City pay off the remaining bonds for the Acorn Drive improvement, in the amount of $59,000, prior to this year-end so that the City will no longer levy for this item. He explained that in his opinion the City has sufficient cash reserves to pay off the bond debt and the City would have levied $8,300 in 2011 for the Acorn Drive bonds. He also noted that the first bond payment of $30,000 for the Salem Church Road improvement will be made in the 2011. 

Treasurer Blair referred to the attachments presented with his report and noted that the City Engineer had included a schedule detailing the various engineering expense categories. He pointed out that the 2011 proposed budget contains a capital item of $32,150 for Charlton Road Swale Improvements, which includes an easement purchase and construction costs. He stated the Engineer would be available for further explanation of this item.

The Treasurer advised that all other items in the operating budget are similar to last year and offered to discuss any of the items in detail.

Councilmember Williams asked if there were any additional taxing units constructed this year. Treasurer Blair stated there was one unit; he noted that the market value of properties in the City has decreased slightly, however, not as significantly as some other cities.

Mayor Park asked the Engineer to comment on the proposed Charlton Road Swale improvements.    

Engineer Hanson explained he included the proposed line item to cover the cost of potential drainage improvements along Charlton Road. He noted that the swales near the Dobranz and Slawik properties are filing up with sediments and that there are issues with the hill near the Crandall property. He commented that the most expensive improvements would be along the south side of the Chase property.

The Engineer advised that the amount proposed for capital improvements in 2011 is similar to the amount for the 2010 budget. He stated that Council would only be approving the amount, not any specific improvements at this time, however; in his opinion, the funds should be targeted for correcting the drainage problems on Charlton Road.

Councilmember MacManus questioned the $22,000 for improvement to the Dobranz property and asked if that included easement acquisition. Engineer Hanson explained the $22,000 is proposed for easement and easement acquisition costs, with an additional $10,000 for construction.

Councilmember MacManus commented that $32,000 won’t begin to cover all the corrections along the roadway.
Engineering Hanson agreed and pointed out that this is a starting point to begin correcting the drainage problems. He advised that he is not recommending a specific project at this time.
Mayor Park asked if the City has any other options for obtaining the necessary easements to correct the problems.

The Engineer explained that once the City identifies a project it may be possible to negotiate obtaining easements by other methods; he reiterated that the amount listed is merely establishing a number to begin correcting the problems.

Councilmember MacManus asked if the Engineer is suggesting that the Dobranz property be the first project if the budget is approved as presented.

Engineer Hanson responded yes and pointed out that it is his opinion the estimated cost for the improvements near the Dobranz property are similar to funds that were set aside in the 2010 budget for capital improvements. He noted that he would review possible improvements along the roadway prior to recommending a project; he pointed out that he may recommend a different project, but this would be a starting point. He explained that the City could build up the funds over a couple of years prior to beginning improvements along the road.      

Councilmember DeCourcy commented that in her opinion it may be time to pave Charlton Road from the Church to Highway 110; she noted that the Hovey’s have requested this area be paved for the past few years.

Councilmember Williams noted that this area of the road requires more maintenance and agreed that if it was blacktopped it would save some maintenance costs.

Mayor Park pointed out that improvement would be a separate item for discussion.

The Mayor thanked the Engineer and Treasurer for their presentations. She asked if Council had any further questions and there was no response.         

Councilmember Williams moved to adopt the Proposed 2011 Budget and Tax Levy and set the “not to exceed” tax levy amount at $390,800, and to memorialize by resolution that the City has determined that it will make the scheduled bond payment for the Acorn Drive Improvement out of existing cash reserves and that there is therefore no need to levy the scheduled levied amount of $8,300 in light of the Council deciding that the Acorn Drive Improvement Bond will be paid off in 2010 or 2011, seconded by Councilmember MacManus and carried. (4-0) 

Councilmember Williams moved to set the regular Council meeting date of December 7, 2010 as the date at which public input will be taken on this matter, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (4-0)

Councilmember Williams moved to set the date of December 7, 2010 as the date Council will discuss and adopt the final 2011 budget and set the tax levy, seconded by Councilmember MacManus and carried. (4-0)

Councilmember Williams moved to direct staff to post the Notice of Meeting to Consider the 2011 Budget and Tax Levy on the City website and at St. Anne’s Episcopal Church prior to the December 7, 2010 meeting, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (4-0)  

c.                      Consider Award of Contract for Road Shoulder Maintenance:  Engineer Hanson explained he had reviewed the areas of the City where road shoulder maintenance is required and obtained bids from three contractors for completing the work. He stated that the improvement would include adding aggregate and topsoil in these areas. He noted that a few of streets, such as Windy Hill Road, may also require blading. He indicated that along Salem Church Road and Salem Lane the improvements would include ditch cleaning and repair. He advised that not all the maintenance areas are shown on the maps he provided and that the repairs would occur all over town.

The Engineer stated that Pine Bend Paving was the lowest bid, in the amount of $7,488, and he recommended awarding the bid to Pine Bend Paving. He stated that this company has done several projects for the City and he has found they are a good contractor and that their work is thorough.

Councilmember DeCourcy moved to aware the contract for the 2010 Shoulder Repair Improvement Project on City streets to Pine Bend Paving in the amount of $7,488, seconded by Councilmember Williams.
In discussion, Mayor Park asked what corrections would be done on the east side of Salem Church Road. The Engineer explained that bituminous millings will be used for shoulder restoration, as outlined on page 2 of his report. He indicated that this is a problem area and may require installation of curb and storm sewer in the future.

The Mayor asked how long the proposed improvements will last in this area. The Engineer pointed out that a hard rain event may cause damage to the repairs, but that it appears the problems are getting better.

The Mayor asked if there were any further comments and there was no response; she called for a vote on the motion.

Motion carried. (4-0)

The Mayor thanked the Engineer for his report.

d.                      Discuss Request for Speed Hump Installation on Angell Road:  Engineer Hanson explained that per the request from Councilmember DeCourcy to install the temporary speed hump on Angell Road and subsequent discussion by Council, he sent a letter to residents along the roadway to receive their input. He noted that no responses were received from the property owners. He indicated that the letter stated the matter would be discussed by Council at this meeting and that there may be persons present regarding this item.

The Engineer stated he solicited quotes for the cost to install the temporary speed hump as well as the cost for installation of a permanent speed hump.  He commented that the quote received from Pine Bend Paving to install and remove the temporary speed hump appear to be high; he indicated that in his opinion there may be some damage to the temporary speed hump that is being stored by Pine Bend Paving.

Councilmember MacManus noted that the City owns the speed hump stored at Pine Bend Paving and that the costs for a new permanent speed hump are similar to the costs for installing the temporary one owned by the City.

The Engineer agreed that the City could have a new one installed for the same price as installing the temporary one.

Mayor Park clarified that the City would not be installing the temporary speed hump this fall and then removing it in a few months.

Engineer Hanson commented that it could be done whenever Council determines installation should occur.

Councilmember MacManus stated she would prefer to have the consensus of the residents that it is necessary prior to authorizing installation of either one.

Councilmember DeCourcy indicated that there is a blind corner along the road and that she believes she can gain the support of the residents for installation of the speed hump, however, she agreed that it is too late in the season to install it at this time.

Councilmember Williams pointed out that it may be more appropriate to address the traffic issue with vehicles speeding on the road.

Councilmember DeCourcy stated she has heard several good comments from residents regarding slower traffic along Salem Church Road after the installation of the speed tables. She questioned the difference in the costs for installation of the speed hump versus a speed table and also the high cost for installing the temporary speed hump.
The Engineer reviewed the cost difference for the speed table versus the hump. He indicated he has concerns relating to the cost for installation of the temporary speed hump regarding the storage and condition of the temporary hump being stored at Pine Bend Paving; he offered to look into the matter with the Pine Bend Paving.  
Councilmember Williams suggested monitoring traffic along the road to determine the most effective placement of the speed hump.

Engineer Hanson pointed out that there are limited areas for installation due to sight distances; he explained that traffic monitoring has not been done and it may not be a wise investment.
Councilmember Williams asked if the sight distances are required by statutes or by engineering standards. Engineer Hanson responded the distances are by engineering standards.

Councilmember MacManus noted that the temporary speed hump was used by another city and questioned if they should share some costs if repairs are necessary.

Engineer Hanson pointed out that if the temporary speed hump is damaged it would be difficult to prove when and where the damage occurred. He suggested he would contact Pine Bend Paving to determine the condition of the temporary speed hump.

No formal action was taken on this matter.               

      e.                      Discuss Deer Management Program and Contract with Metro Bow Hunters:   Councilmember Williams explained that he had contacted Officer Muellner to discuss the possibility of allowing residents to participate in the deer hunt with the Metro Bowhunters Association. He reported that Officer Muellner explained the Bowhunters Association is reluctant to assume the responsibility for non-members hunting. He suggested it may be possible to set-up a hunt at Musser Park for non-members as an alternative. He stated that several residents have expressed their willingness to provide the use of their land for hunting purposes. He commented that he does not have a clear plan of how to manage a residential hunt and what criteria should be established, since it is beyond his expertise.

Officer Muellner explained that it would be easier to allow the Metro Bowhunters Association to conduct a controlled hunt during the regular hunting season versus having to submit all the information to the DNR to obtain a special permit to conduct the hunt outside the regular season. In addition, it is uncertain if the DNR would grant another special permit. He pointed out that by using the Bowhunters Association members the City would not have to deal with disposal issues and would be assured that all the hunters are experienced.  He suggested that the City utilize the Bowhunters Association for this regular season and that Council consider the possibility of extending the parameters of the hunt to other properties with the permission of the landowners. He noted that by removing the restriction of hunting only in Musser Park, it would be possible to increase the number of deer removed during the hunt. He further pointed out that if Council wishes to allow hunting by residents, they should consider keeping the times and areas separate from those used by the Bowhunters Association.

Officer Muellner stated that the Metro Bowhunters Association had advised him they have attempted to conduct a hunt with non-members before, however, due to insurance issues it would not work. He advised the Council may determine the dates, times and when and where the controlled hunt would occur.

Councilmember Williams stated he was not opposed to granting permission to residents for hunting, however, he indicated his concern relates to how the City could determine if the hunters are experienced and qualified to hunt and how to determine the number of deer to be taken. 

Councilmember DeCourcy suggested that Council request a naturalist, such as Jim Gilbert, be requested to attend a meeting to discuss this issue. She commented that she is unsure the deer count taken was correct since deer are migratory and the migration usually occurs during winter months when the count was taken. She indicated she would prefer residents not be hunting on private land due to safety issues.

Councilmember MacManus agreed but noted that she read that the deer migration is never more than two miles. She agreed with Councilmember DeCourcy and stated she preferred not to allow citizens hunting on private property.

Councilmember Williams advised he is not concerned with hunting on private land if the City could insure that the residents are experienced and responsible hunters.

Mayor Park expressed concern relating to the geography of the hunting land and available parcels. She stated she prefers the idea of starting the hunt in Musser Park and possible expanding to other areas, but not all over the City.

Councilmember Williams explained that the code requires a contiguous 10-acre parcel for hunting.

Officer Muellner explained that Councilmember Conant discussed the possibility of hunting near Sunfish Lane and reported that most of the residents there were agreeable to hunting in that area. He noted that the Bowhunters would review any areas prior to conducting the hunt to ensure that the parcel meets certain safety standards.

Councilmember DeCourcy questioned how many deer were taken during the last hunt.

Officer Muellner explained that there were approximately 10 deer taken, including the does with fetuses. He stated that the aerial deer count from last year indicated there were about 50 deer living in Sunfish Lake, and the DNR proposes that for a City of this size the count should be approximately 10 deer.

Mayor Park explained that during her first year serving the City the Council allowed 10 to 15 deer to be taken; she noted that the Council also had the opportunity to determine how many male or female deer would be taken. She stated that the City Clerk issues permits to citizen for hunting purposes. She commented that Council would also have to consider the management of the permits if residents are allowed to hunt.

Councilmember DeCourcy reiterated that she preferred to have Jim Gilbert talk to Council to provide some ideas and options on how to manage the deer.

Councilmember Williams pointed out that because residents feed the deer the hunt is less successful. He stated that he is not a hunter, but in his opinion there is clearly a deer problem in the City. He noted that residents are complaining about the deer ruining their landscaping. He indicated that in his opinion there is a need to cull the herd to curb the problems related to citizen complaints and also for the sake of the deer.  He reiterated that his concern relates to ensuring that residents are responsible, qualified hunters rather than permitting residents to hunt. He explained that the time period for authorizing a hunt is tight. He suggested that if Council allows citizens to hunt it may be possible to refer citizens to the Bowhunters Association to determine if they are qualified.

Councilmember DeCourcy commented that if the City allows residents to hunt it would establish precedence and, in her opinion, it would open a “can of worms”.

Attorney Kuntz referred Council to the City Code and the regulations relating to hunting on private property. He noted that the regulations include a description of how the contiguous 10-acres of land is determined, the qualifications for hunters, and the issuance of permits by the City Clerk for hunting. He noted that last October the Council amended the ordinance to provide for the Metro Bowhunters to conduct the City sponsored hunt on City land; he further explained that this hunt was exempt from the code regulations and that Council created rules for the Bowhunters to conduct the hunt in Musser Park. 

The Attorney suggested that if Council wishes to authorize the Bowhunters to conduct a hunt at Musser Park during the regular season that the ordinance allows, the necessary modification could be accomplished. He pointed out that Council appears to be struggling with a decision as to who should hunt and where the hunt should be conducted. He noted that for the past few years the Council has not had to deal with this issue because they have set the number of deer to be taken during the regular season at zero.  He advised that the problem in the past was finding the resources and qualified hunters to conduct a hunt.  He recalled that resident Tim Stoddard had unsuccessfully attempted to find qualified hunters to cull the herd in previous years.  He stated that the Metro Bowhunters are qualified volunteers and Council had the authority to determine areas where they are allowed to hunt.

Attorney Kuntz suggested that the ordinance could be modified to allow a City Program for hunting whereby the City is the entity allowed to hunt on private land with permission from the property owner. He explained that the City would then contract with the Bowhunters to conduct a City sponsored hunting event on residential where permission has been granted.

Councilmember MacManus asked if they could hunt on all 10-acre parcels if the contiguous property owners grant permission. The Attorney responded yes.

Councilmember DeCourcy questioned why the City would expand the area when 10 deer were removed from Musser Park last year.
Councilmember MacManus commented that in her opinion 10 deer is not enough to relieve the problems.
        
Officer Muellner agreed and explained that expanding the area provides a better chance to remove the deer.

Councilmember Williams agreed with the Attorney’s suggestion to conduct a City sponsored event and have the City establish the program and contract with the Bowhunters. He commented that it would be unfair to exclude residents if they are qualified to hunt.

Councilmember MacManus agreed that the responsibility is then placed on the City to issue the permits.

Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments or questions.

Councilmember DeCourcy stated she wished to have Jim Gilbert appear before Council to discuss options and that she does not support opening the hunting to residents at this time. She explained her preference would be to contract with the Bowhunters to conduct a hunt in Musser Park and possibility along the highways, but not near residential properties.

Attorney Kuntz suggested Council pass a motion amending the City Code, Section 601.02, Subd. 3, with the following language:

 

Subd. 3  Discharge pursuant to City sponsored Deer Management Program on City Property or on Private Lands Where the City Has Been Authorized to Hunt.  Section 601.02 Subd. 1 shall not apply to any individual who discharges a firearm on City owned property pursuant to a City approved Deer Management Program or on any private land where the City has been authorized by the owner to hunt and conduct a City approved Deer Management Program when the individual is a participant in discharging the firearm pursuant to a the City approved Deer Management Program on that City property.  If the City approved Deer Management Program requires the approval or a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) then the authorized discharge must also comply with the conditions imposed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 


Councilmember Williams moved to adopt Ordinance No. 2010-02 titled, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 601.02, SUBD. 3, with the following language:

Subd. 3  Discharge pursuant to City sponsored Deer Management Program on City Property or on Private Lands Where the City Has Been Authorized to Hunt.  Section 601.02 Subd. 1 shall not apply to any individual who discharges a firearm on City owned property pursuant to a City approved Deer Management Program or on any private land where the City has been authorized by the owner to hunt and conduct a City approved Deer Management Program when the individual is a participant in discharging the firearm pursuant to a the City approved Deer Management Program on that City property.  If the City approved Deer Management Program requires the approval or a permit from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) then the authorized discharge must also comply with the conditions imposed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 

     

      Motion seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy.

In discussion, Attorney Kuntz read the proposed amendment for Council and suggested that other distinctions could be included for safety purposes. He noted that this allows the City to receive permission from property owners to conduct hunting on private property that meets the qualifications for a controlled hunting situation.

Councilmember MacManus questioned if it is easy for a private citizen to become a member of the Metro Bowhunters Assocation.  Officer Muellner responded yes and explained the person must pass a safety class and test, fill out an application, and pay a $15 membership fee. 

Councilmember Williams called the question.

Motion carried. (4-0)

Councilmember Williams moved to authorize the City to contract with the Metro Bowhunters Association to conduct a deer hunting event both on public and private property during the regular 2010 deer hunting season and to direct the City Attorney to negotiate and prepare a contact for Council review at the next regular meeting, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (4-0)

Councilmember Williams suggested that residents interested in hunting make application for membership with the Bowhunters Association.

Officer Muellner pointed out that members of the club must sign-up for this type of hunting event and are randomly selected to participate; he noted there is no assurance that a member will participate in each event.

Attorney Kuntz advised that Council should set the number of deer to be taken during this season.

Chief Shaver recommended 25 deer and noted that the City may establish the number of does or bucks to be taken.

In discussion Council concurred that the Bowhunters should attempt to take more female deer.
 
Councilmember Williams moved to set a limit of not to exceed 25 deer to be taken during the culling event conducted by the Metro Bow Hunters Association, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (4-0

     

      Mayor Park thanked Chief Shaver and Officer Muellner for their assistance.

Other/Miscellaneous:    Mayor Park asked if there was any further business.

Attorney Kuntz explained his office is working with staff to prepare an ordinance amendment relating to the new septic system regulations adopted by Dakota County and the MPCA; he stated the ordinance would be presented to Council at their regular meeting in October.

Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments and there was no response.

 

9.   ADJOURN:           Mayor Park called for adjournment at 8:55 p.m.    


______________________                                    ___________________________

Molly Park, Mayor                                                 Catherine Iago, City Clerk