031306 CC Reg Min
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2006
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Mayor Love called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M.
A.
Roll Call
Present.
Mayor Love; CounciImembers Callies (arrived at 7: 1 0 P.M.), Lizee, Turgeon, and
Wellens; Administrator Dawson; Finance Director Burton; Attorney Keane; Director of
Public Works Brown
Absent:
None
B.
Review Agenda
Lizee moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the Agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Special Meeting Minutes, February 27, 2006
Wellens moved, Lizee seconded, Approving the City Council Special Meeting Minutes of February
27,2006, as presented. Motion passed 4/0.
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, February 27, 2006
Turgeon moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of
February 27, 2006, as Amended, on Page 9, Item 8.C, Paragraph 7, Sentence 1, change
"Councilmember Callies moved to direct" to "Councilmember Turgeon moved to direct". Motion
passed 4/0.
C. City Council Work Session Minutes, February 27, 2006
Turgeon moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Meeting Minutes of
February 27, 2006, as Amended, on Page 1, Item 2, Paragraph 2, Sentence 2, change "for
determining which roads would be replaned" to "for determining which roads would be
reclaimed" and on Page 2, Item 2, Paragraph 5, Sentence 1, change "shingles on the Southshore
Center" to " shingles on the Eddy Station". Motion passed 4/0.
3. CONSENT AGENDA - Motion to approve items on Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions
Therein:
Mayor Love reviewed the Items on the Consent Agenda.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING
March 13, 2006
Page 2 of7
Lizee moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and
Adopting the Resolutions Therein:
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
B. Staffing - No action required
C. Animal Impound Services Agreement
Motion passed 4/0.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
None.
6. PUBLIC HEARING
A. 7:00 p.m. - Public Information Meeting regarding Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Program
Mayor Love opened the Public Hearing at 7:08 P.M.
Administrator Dawson explained as part of the Federal Clean Water Act, the City of Shorewood was
required to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The two main
requirements of this permit were the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program
(SWPPP) and subsequent annual reports. He then explained in preparation for the annual report, a public
meeting must be held to discuss the City's SWPPP. He noted this was the second year Shorewood was
preparing the annual report.
Dawson stated Steve Gurney, the Interim City Engineer, would gIve the presentation outlining the
SWPPP and items included in the annual report.
Engineer Gurney explained he would provide a brief history of the SWPPP, discuss the NPDES permit
requirements, identify future actions the City may want to take, and then open the hearing up to questions
and comments.
Engineer Gurney explained the NPDES is required by the Federal Clean Water Act. He stated the
NPDES targets construction sites, industrial discharges, and urban storm water discharges. He noted
urban storm water discharges would be the focus of discussion at the public hearing. The NPDES
Program went into effect for Minneapolis and St. Paul in 2000. Construction sites five or more acres in
size were then required to get a NPDES permit. In 2003 Phase II requirements were implemented. Phase
II required cities with a population of 10,000 or greater or urbanized cities to get a NPDES permit. The
systems for those cities were called Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). Another Phase II
requirement was for Construction Sites one or more acres in size to get a NPDES permit.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING
March 13, 2006
Page 3 of7
Gurney went on to explain there were six Minimum Control Measures (MCMs). Each of the six MCMs
had one or two Best Management Practices (BMP) associated with it. He then provided a description of
each MCM, listed the requirements, and identified future action items.
1. MCM 1 - Public Education and Outreach: the City had brochures sent out to residents.
The 2004 City ShoReport newsletters contained 11 articles related to environmental
issues such as wetlands, water runoff, recycling, etc. The SWPPP was available at City
Hall, and the City's website provided information about the SWPPP.
2. MCM 2 - Public Participation and Involvement: This requires an annual public meeting
and filing an annual report. The Public Hearing is a requirement for the 2004 permit.
There will be a record of decision made and the public comments would be incorporated
into future versions of the SWPPP.
3. MCM 3 - Illicit Discharge and Detection Elimination: The City has developed a storm
sewer base map, although the verification phase needed to be completed. An Illicit
Discharge Ordinance will be adopted at a later date as it was required by the NPDES.
4. MCM 4 - Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control: This has been in place for a
number of years. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) has a very
aggressive storm water erosion control plan, and plans to conduct reviews and
inspections of all basins. The MCWD is the regulatory commission for the City for
erosion control, storm water runoff, and plan reviews.
5. MCM 5 - Post Construction Storm Water Management: Although this is a new SWPPP
requirement, this is being done by the MCWD. The best way to satisfy this requirement
is through the use of functional treatment ponds, infiltration basins, and regional
treatment ponds (where possible).
6. MCM 6 - Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping: This requires inspection of
each outflow at each of the ponds to ensure the ponds are working properly. Twenty
percent of the ponds must be inspected each year. All the structural BMPs in place must
also be inspected. Ongoing Staff training with regard to street sweeping, road salt
applications, and hazardous material storage must occur.
Engineer Gurney discussed the ramifications of a lawsuit between the Minnesota Polution Control
Agency (MCPA) and the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA). The MCPA was then
required to notice and review the permit for all MS4 SWPPPs. At the MCPA Board Meeting in
December 2005 the new permit was approved.
Engineer Gurney then reviewed the rule changes for 2006. Each MS4 was required to apply for a new
permit by June 1, 2006. The MCPA would then issue notice of the permit application and review the
application. If approved the MCP A would issue the new NPDES permit to the MS4s. He noted the permit
language had been modified to change "minimize pollutants" to "reduce pollutants".
Gurney then explained a non-degradation analysis requirement was being implemented. Currently 30
cities, which were selected by size or growth potential, had to conduct an analysis showing pollutant
loadings for total suspended solids and phosphorous and runoff volumes for 1988, 2000, and 2020. If
there had been an increase in the loadings the city would have to prepare a corrective action plan for
CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING
March 13, 2006
Page 4 of7
reducing the loadings. He stated only the 30 Cities identified were required to do a non-degradation plan,
but it was highly probable that would eventually be a requirement for all cities when it was time to apply
for a new NPDES permit (which would be 2011 for Shorewood).
Engineer Gurney reviewed the City's next steps. The City must revise and re-submit its SWPPP to the
MPCA for review and public notice by June 1, 2006. The existing permit requires the City to prepare a
new annual report and submit it by June 30, 2006. He noted the City would either be covered by the
existing permit or the new permit; it would not be without a permit. He stated the City should begin to
consider what it would take to conduct a non-degradation analysis should that requirement be imposed on
the City.
Mayor Loved asked if there were any members of the public wishing to comment. There were none.
Mayor Love asked Director Brown if the City had a complete inventory of all of the sedimentation ponds
and were the ponds checked to determine how much sedimentation there was in the basins. Brown
responded a sedimentation pond inventory had been done as part of the mapping exercise just being
completed, which included the entire storm water system. With regard to a ditch inventory, Brown stated
that still needed to be done as did a pond inventory. He stated the MCWD encouraged cities to conduct a
pond inventory and to identify how much silt each pond had. He then stated pond restoration (e.g.
removing silt) was quite expensive and the City should plan for those types of projects.
Mayor Love asked Director Brown if the MCWD had agreed to help fund pond cleanup if the City would
create a pond inventory as encouraged by the MCWD. Brown was not aware of such a commitment on
behalf of the MCWD. Love stated he would like the opportunity to discuss this request for pond cleanup
funding with the MCWD on behalf of Shorewood and other cities. He then stated he believed the
MCWD should assume some responsibility for pond cleanup because they had not implemented strict
agreements for maintaining the ponds until the late 1980's.
Councilmember Lizee asked if the City had the 1988 loading data should a non-degradation analysis be
required. Engineer Gurney stated the data would probably be an estimate. He explained there was
topographic map information from 1966 and 1999. There was aerial photography available from a
number of sources that would show land use in 1988 and impervious surfaces, and that information could
be used to estimate runoff estimates. He then stated the 2000 data was basically the current data and
2020 data would be based on the Comprehensive Plan.
Councilmember Turgeon asked Director Brown if he had enough information to estimate budget
requirements with the degree of uncertainty there was. Director Brown stated pond inventory and cleanup
activities would take a number of years and he didn't think projecting the costs by July 2006 for the 2007
budget would be terribly difficult.
In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens regarding the source of educational materials,
Director Brown explained that Communications Technician Julie Moore gets the information from a
number of sources. He stated each city was to determine what its educational materials would be. He then
stated the SWPPP process had been in a state of evolution with the MPCA.
Mayor Love stated part of the problem with the Federal portion ofthe SWPPP was different geographical
areas have different storm water best management practices; for example, a snow climate which used
sand and chemicals on the roads would have different BMPs than a southern climate would have. He
added the effectiveness of the BMPs also needed to be assessed.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING
March 13, 2006
Page 5 of7
Councilmember Wellens commented it seemed unusual that the MPCA's number one issue was Public
Education and Outreach, yet each city was responsible for defining what it was going to communicate.
Mayor Love stated some public education programs had been uniformly adopted and accepted, and they
were quite successful. Examples he cited were motor oil and storm water stenciling.
Mayor Love closed the public hearing at 7:28 P.M.
Turgeon moved, Wellens seconded, to Direct Staff to Prepare a Record of Decision Regarding the
Storm Water Pollution Protection Prevention Program. Motion passed 5/0.
7. PARKS
Engineer Brown reported there had not been a meeting of the Park Commission since the most recent
Regular City Council Meeting, thus, there was nothing to report on at this time. The next meeting of the
Park Commission was scheduled for Wednesday, March 15, 2006, at City Hall at 7:00 P.M. Topics on
the Agenda included: music in the park, winter events, and goals and objectives.
8. PLANNING - Report by Representative
Commissioner Meyer noted there had not been a meeting of the Planning Commission since the most
recent Regular City Council meeting; thus, there was nothing to report on at this time.
9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. Goals and Priorities
With regard to the updated Goals and Priorities list for 2006/early 2007, Administrator Dawson
explained he would reorganize the prioritized items by category and redistribute to Council.
Lizee moved, Wellens seconded, approving the Goals and Priorities for 2006 and early 2007.
Motion passed 5/0.
10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
None.
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator & Staff
Administrator Dawson thanked Staff for arriving at 3 :30 A.M. to begin plowing roadways.
B. Mayor & City Council
Mayor Love stated the EFD Board had met on March 8, 2006, and was making good progress with the
selection process for the new fire chief. He stated the Selection Process Steering Committee (which
would conduct the first round of interviews and narrow the candidates down to 2 - 5 for additional
CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING
March 13, 2006
Page 6 of7
interviews) consisted of: two Boardmembers and an alternate; two Operating Committee members and an
alternate; two Firefighters and an alternate; and Interim Chief George.
Councilmember Wellens questioned the appropriateness of the Interim Chief being on the Steering
Committee if he was being considered a candidate. Mayor Love explained that Interim Chief George was
not interested in applying for the position.
Councilmember Turgeon stated she was pleased to know Interim Chief George was on the Steering
Committee because he had a great deal of knowledge and experience that would be useful to the process.
12. RECESS TO WORK SESSION
Mayor Love recessed the Regular City Council meeting to a City Council Work Session meeting at 7:35
P.M.
Mayor Love reconvened the Council meeting at 9: 15 P.M. It then recessed to an executive session.
13. RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION - SLMPD ARBITRATION STRATEGY
Mayor Love called the executive session to order at 9:27 P.M. All Councilmembers, the City Attorney
and Administrator Dawson were present.
With the City Council and Administrator, Attorney Keane discussed strategies related to the arbitration
on the allocation of operations costs for the member cities of the South Lake Minnetonka Police
Department.
The Executive Session was concluded at 9:50 P.M.
The City Council reconvened in regular session at 9:50 P.M. It then recessed to another executive
session.
14. RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION - CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S PERFORMANCE
REVIEW
Mayor Love called the executive session to order at 9:50 P.M. All Councilmembers and Administrator
Dawson were present.
Council and Administrator Dawson discussed the 2005 performance review of the City Administrator.
The Executive Session was concluded at 10:04 P.M.
The City Council reconvened in regular session at 10:04 P.M.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL MEETING
March 13, 2006
Page 7 of7
15. ADJOURN
Wellens moved, Lizee seconded, Adjourning the Regular City Council Meeting of March 13,2006,
at 10:05 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
Woody Love, Mayor
ATTEST: