060208 CC WS Min
CITY OF SHORE WOOD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
MONDAY, JUNE 2, 2008
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Acting Mayor Turgeon called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M.
A.
Roll Call
Present.
Acting Mayor Turgeon; Councilmembers Bailey, Wellens, and Woodruff; Acting
Administrator/Director of Public Works Brown; Finance Director Burton; Planning
Director Nielsen; and Engineer Landini
Absent:
Mayor Lizee
B.
Review Agenda
Acting Mayor Turgeon requested Item 4, Arsenic in Private Well Water, be discussed before Item 2 on
the agenda, and Item 2, City Administrator Performance Review Form, be discussed after Item 3 on the
agenda.
Bailey moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the Agenda as Amended. Motion passed 4/0.
2. CITY ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE REVIEW FORM
This item was discussed after Item 4 on the agenda.
Acting Administrator Brown stated per Council's direction Staff took existing points of review from the
City's administrator performance review form and inserted them into the City of Diamond Bar,
California, form.
Councilmember Bailey thanked Acting Administrator Brown for his efforts in merging the documents.
He cautioned Council not to make the form too lengthy. He recommended Council be parsimonious when
considering which items to keep in the form. He suggested each category contain 5 items, 10 at the most.
The items included in each category were there to provide Councilmembers with a way to be more
specific about their evaluations. He stated the Budget and Finance category included items that were the
Finance Director's responsibility; although the Administrator supervised that position those items should
be deleted from this form. He recommended a summary item be added to each category for an overall
ranking ofthe category.
After ensuing discussion, there following changes were agreed too.
~ Delete categories Law Enforcement and Additional Comments
~ Add a category called Intergovernmental Relations
~ The items will be changed to action statements
~ A overall rating item will be added for each category
~ Each item will be evaluated on a5-level rating
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
June 2, 2008
Page 2 of9
~ Relations with the City Council
Delete items A, C, 4,6, 7, 9, and 10
Add the word timely to item I
~ Planning
Delete items A, C, E, 3, 9, 10, 15, 16, and 18
Combine items I and 2
Delete "with the long range strategic planning process" from item 17
~ Organizational Skills
Delete items B, 3, 5, and 8
Merge item D with item 4
~ Budget and Finance
Delete items A, D, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9
Add administers to line I of item I
Add facilities to item 3
~ Community Relations
Delete items C, 2, 3,4,8,9, and 10
In item A change "City Administrator" to "City" and change "the Administrator'
to "staff'
Add accurate to item 6
Change item 7 to reflect something about an effective communications program
~ Personnel Relations
Delete items B, F, G, 3,4, and 5
~ Management Skills
Delete items D, F, H, 1,2, and 3
Change item A to "Does the City Administrator effectively handle conflict
resolution"
Move items A, B, C, E, G, and I to Leadership
Move items 4 and 5 to Intergovernmental Relations
Delete this category
~ Leadership
Delete items F, I, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 12
Move 2,3,4,5, and 6 to Intergovernmental Relations
Change item 8 to "The Administrator demonstrates imagination and initiative"
Acting Administrator Brown stated for the next discussion he will provide a copy of the original merged
form and an updated form reflecting the changes agreed to.
Discussion returned to Item 5 on the agenda.
3. FIBER OPTIC TO CITY HALL BUILDING
This was discussed after Item 4 on the agenda.
Councilmember Woodruff gave a brief presentation on fiber optics to the premise, as detailed in the copy
of the presentation on file. He discussed what fiber optics was, how it differed from other communication
infrastructures, and what the benefits were.
Councilmember Wellens questioned what Councilmember Woodruff was proposing.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the LMCC was chartered to deal with franchise for cable television.
From his vantage point the LMCC was not sure of what else it should do; the LMCC could expand its
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
June 2, 2008
Page 3 of9
mission. He then stated the next step would be for an expert on fiber optics to make a I - 1.5 hour
presentation to Council. He thought over a 15-year period, it would cost the average household about $60
per year to install the fiber optics infrastructure; those costs did not include access to content.
Councilmember Wellens stated although it was good technology, he would prefer to see a proposal from
the LMCC about what it wanted to do; such as to a business plan. He did not have to see another
presentation about the same thing. He stated the examples provided were mainly businesses, yet
Shorewood was primarily residential.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the LMCC was looking for member cities to champion a fiber optics
initiative. Some member cities have expressed they have no interest, and there were two other LMCC
representatives that expressed some interest. If the City wanted to be a champion, he could communicate
that to the LMCC. Woodruff stated he could work with the other two representatives to create greater
interest in fiber optics.
Councilmember Bailey stated he was skeptical about having public sponsorship for an initiative like this.
He stated fiber optics has been tried in other areas around the country and it had not been universally
successful. He questioned if the South Lake area was the best place to be a leader in this area as the area
was primarily residential. He would not create hurdles for a private venture, but he was reluctant to make
it a priority for the City to focus on.
Councilmember Wellens stated he did not want to create another business to compete with private
business. Councilmember Woodruff clarified that Mediacom was a content provider, and the fiber optics
discussion was about infrastructure.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he would research if there was other interest at the LMCC.
Discussion returned to Item 2 on the agenda.
4. ARSENIC IN PRIVATE WELL WATER
This item was discussed before Item 2 on the agenda.
Acting Administrator Brown stated Staff had received a number of pieces of correspondence regarding
arsenic in private well water. He explained Justin Blum and his wife, who are Shorewood residents,
requested this item be placed on the work session agenda for discussion. Mr. Blum had submitted
information about arsenic in water and the Blums had encouraged their neighbors to come to the
discussion.
Ms. Blum stated one year ago she noticed her feet were going numb. In March 2008 she was tested for
the possible presence of heavy metals. Her physician did not find any issue with heavy metals but the
level of arsenic in her body was very high; an arsenic level of 10 was acceptable and hers was a level of
147. After receiving her test results, they had their well water tested and they informed their neighbors of
their findings. After a number of treatments, her arsenic level dropped to 7. She stated she understood the
liability for well water was with the well owner. She explained she and her husband wanted the
neighborhood to become aware of the potential issue of arsenic in their private wells.
Mr. Blum stated he was a hydrogeologist and he works at the Minnesota Department of Health in the
area of drinking water. He explained some years ago when the Environmental Protection Agency (EP A)
was considering lowing the limits for arsenic in drinking water several studies were funded to research
this issue. One study, the Minnesota Arsenic Research (MAR) study, researched the level of arsenic in
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
June 2, 2008
Page 4 of 9
private wells located primarily in western Minnesota. Some of the arsenic levels in the western part of
the State were 150 ppb (parts per billion); the drinking water limit is 10 ppb.
Mr. Blum explained the arsenic comes from tight glacial clay left by the last glacial advance; in the City
there was a thickness of 100 200 feet of this clay above the first pervasive water-bearing sand layer.
There is also a strong downward hydraulic gradient; roughly one-half foot per foot of clay. Because the
City is between lakes there is very little hydraulic gradient (movement) between the lakes. For many of
the wells in the City, the well drillers drilled through the clay to the first sand and put a screen right
below the clay. On his property the screen was a 3-foot screen. Four property owners had their well water
tested recently for arsenic; one tested at a 10 ppb, one at 12 ppb, one at 14 ppb and the last at 28 ppb. He
commented the highest level of arsenic that has been found in Hennepin County is close to 60 ppb.
Mr. Blum then explained arsenic is most easily removed by re-oxidizing the water; this sorbs the arsenic
to iron particles that form in the water (i.e., rust). The water is then passed through an iron filter to
remove the iron and arsenic, and the filter is back-washed to the sanitary sewer for regeneration. He
commented iron in water is a good indication there may be a higher level of arsenic in the water.
Mr. Blum stated his intent was to make the Council aware of the situation and provide them with some
information on it. He stated there were parts of the City not served by City water; he encouraged the City
to send those people without access to City water a notice telling them they could be at risk for higher
levels of arsenic in their well water and recommend they test the water.
Acting Mayor Turgeon clarified this was not a public hearing; it was an information gathering session.
She requested the members of the audience wait until Council had discussion before they ask their
questions.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he had his well water tested recently for the presence of four metals; the
test results indicated the levels of metals in his water were well below the State limits. He paid $125 for
the test. He questioned if the City could direct people to firms that conduct such tests. Acting
Administrator Brown stated Mr. Blum's material contained information on how to find firms certified by
the State that do this type of testing. Brown stated for liability reasons the City cannot recommend any
specific agency; however, the public agencies the City'uses for different things are a matter of public
record and the City can provide that information. He noted the City contracts with the certified lab of
Twin Cities Water Clinic to conduct testing of City water. Mr. Blum stated he would be will to provide a
list of 5 - 6 certified labs in the State that do water testing. The prices for water testing ranged from $25 -
$70 per sample.
Acting Administrator Brown stated the City tests its wells annually, and the findings are published in a
variety of publications and it is available on the City's website.
Mr. Blum stated the State has a Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund; this could be a source of cheap
funding to help residents connect to City water who otherwise couldn't afford to do that. A community
has to apply for a loan from the Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund; and, the Fund was to deal with
contaminant issues (arsenic was a contaminant even though it may be natural). He explained he has
spoken with the supervisor for the Drinking Water Program at the Department of Health; the supervisor
authorized taking private well water samples in the City specifically to determine the size of the problem.
Depending on the size of the problem, the City could chose to apply for a loan from the Fund in February
2009 for improvements to the City's municipal water system. The interest rate ranged from 1.5% - 3%.
He also explained if someone could not afford to have their water tested people from the Public Water
Supply will conduct the test.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
June 2, 2008
Page 5 of 9
Acting Administrator Brown asked Mr. Blum to provide some insight into water treatment methods. Mr.
Blum stated it was not his area of expertise but he would share what he knew. He noted there were a
number of large firms in the area that offer such systems. The principle way to remove arsenic is to
oxidize it (similar to removing iron) which dissolves the arsenic; the challenge is to keep from
introducing bacteria during this process. Most processes use a strong chloride or potassium permanganate
to regenerate the media.
Acting Administrator Brown stated the technology to address arsenic is changing due to the heightened
awareness about arsenic. He cited the situation where Chanhassen had to rebuild some of its wells and
replace others in new locations to deal with its arsenic problem. He explained Staff is starting to receive
confirmed test results of elevated arsenic levels. He heard about a test result with a level of 75, but he has
not received the test results to confirm that.
Councilmember Woodruff questioned if there was a resource the City could direct residents after they
have had their well water tested and found high levels of arsenic and now want to find out what methods
there are to treat the problem (not including the names offirms).
Mr. Blum stated other states had more problems with the natural occurrence of arsenic than Minnesota
does. He explained Hennepin County's data on well records and well locations was lacking. He appealed
to the City to identify those properties which did not have the option to connect to City water; he also
appealed to the Council to designate where those wells are located. From what he can determine, there
are approximately 1,200 private wells in the City; and the City may know where about 200 of them are
located.
In response to a question from Councilmember Wellens, Mr. Blum stated if residents test their wells the
test results are not shared with the Department of Health unless the resident wants to share them. Wellens
suggested the City encourage the residents to share those results. Mr. Blum stated he would be willing to
work with the Staff to look at the distribution system and identify where the wells are likely located, and
then determine which wells would be a priority to look at. He commented some epidemiologists think the
limit of 10 ppb is too high and it should be 3 ppb.
Acting Administrator Brown stated Staff can educate the residents about arsenic in water, testing for
arsenic, and treating arsenic through the City newsletter and on the website. He commented some
residents were unwilling to share their water test results because it would become public record and that
could impact their property values. Councilmember Wellens stated maybe the residents could supply the
property street name only and not the property location. Mr. Blum stated the laws are changing; soon
there will be a requirement to test all new wells for arsenic and that will likely become a requirement for
existing wells. Ms. Blum stated she has heard that the sale of a house fell through at the end because of
the arsenic level in the water.
Director Burton stated the City, through its utility system, could identify those properties that have sewer
only and it could assume there are private wells on the property.
Mary Borgenson, 5485 Grant Lorenz Road, stated she had lived in the community for over 20 years. She
had attended numerous meetings regarding City water. She questioned if hooking up to City water would
solve the problem of high levels of arsenic. She also questioned if she would be obligated to hook up to
City water if she had the option even thought she may have chosen to install a water-treatment system at
great expense. She then questioned if City water would be a solution. She stated the Drinking Water
Revolving Loan Fund should be used to help residents solve the arsenic problem.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
June 2, 2008
Page 6 of9
Acting Administrator Brown stated arsenic was a natural contaminant, and there is a small amount in the
City water. The City's wells have a 5 ppb level or below of arsenic, and the City is bound to the State
drinking water standards. The City's wells draw from a different aquifer then the aquifer just below the
glacial clay, and most of the City's wells were 400 - 600 feet deep. He explained the City used to have a
City water expansion plan; the philosophy has changed to one of City water being driven by resident
request and financial viability.
A meeting attendee stated caution must be used when deciding to use different ppb limits for medical
complications. The complications vary by location and individual. He commented the 10 ppb level was
an arbitrary number.
Acting Administrator Brown stated three years ago the State considered dropping its arsenic limit to 5
ppb.
Acting Administrator Brown thanked Mr. Blum for sharing his information.
Discussion returned to Item 3 on the agenda.
5. WATER USE RESTRICTIONS
Engineer Landini explained the 2008 Goals and Priorities list contains an item to update the Water
Conservation ordinance; the intent was to attain better management of the drinking water resource and
assist with attaining a 10-year water use permit from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The
DNR would approve the plan as a permit based on ten-year water use if the City would make a stronger
commitment to water conservation; or, it would approve the plan as submitted based on 2012 water use
and the City would have to make annual amendments to the permit as needed. Staff preferred to pursue
the first of those two options to reduce and consolidate paper work.
Landini reviewed five options the City had to demonstrate stronger commitment to water conservation as
viewed by the DNR. In order of importance they are:
1. Implement a time-of-day watering restriction: no watering from 10:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M.;
2. Implement an odd/even watering restriction;
3. Audit large users and audit the system for loss;
4. Implement an increasing block water rate structure or add additional fees for high users;
and
5. Conduct a public information campaign including monthly billing of water utility.
Landini stated the DNR highly recommended the time-of-day restriction, although it would prefer it
would be from 10:00 A.M. 6:00 P.M. This restriction would be easiest for resident driven and
complaint restriction.
Acting Administrator Brown explained each year the City gets fined for greatly exceeding its allocation
for water consumption; the City has seven wells and the fine is approximately $4,000 - $6,000 per well.
The City is allowed to pump 60 million gallons for the Amesbury system. He had tried to convince the
DNR to allow the City to decrease the allocation for the Amesbury system and increase the allocation for
the Southeast Area system. The DNR is willing to allow a permit for the entire City, and the allocation
will be for City-wide use; but, the City needs to adopt a water conservation ordinance. He clarified
slightly less than half of the City was on the municipal water system. The intent was for this restriction to
apply to watering with City-water only. He noted the City had encouraged residents to keep their wells
for irrigations purposes when they converted to City water. He thought enforcement of the ordinance will
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
June 2, 2008
Page 7 of9
prove difficult. He commented Chanhassen shut down all watering during there watering restriction in
2007.
Councilmember Wellens questioned which plan Engineer Landini recommended to mInImIZe the
restrictions on the residents. Landini explained in the past the City had received complaints from
residents with private wells stating their wells ran dry because of residents' excessive use of City water
for watering. He recommended the City implement a time-of-day water restriction. Acting Administrator
Brown stated the City received 15 - 20 complaints per year.
Acting Administrator Brown explained other cities that have implemented a time-of-day watering
restriction have had their peaks in water demand level out. When lawn irrigations start the demand for
City water triples. He stated this irrigation watering restriction would be a benefit to the City.
Director Burton clarified the City has a tiered water rate system. Councilmember Wellens stated he
would prefer the City manage water consumption through rates. Burton stated there are residents where
money was not a detractor for consuming water. Acting Administrator Brown stated the DNR would not
look favorably on that approach.
Engineer Landini explained the odd/even option wouldn't work because it would force residents who
water every third day to water every other day and therefore consume more water.
Acting Administrator Brown stated the DNR was charged by the legislature with trying to implement
water conservation measures. This is one way to accomplish this. Councilmember Woodruff stated if
water conservation was the objective, then to achieve that with the time-of-day watering restriction it
should apply to well water users and municipal water system users. Brown stated the restricting well
water usage could result in a volatile reaction from the residents.
Engineer Landini stated Minnetonka imposes a watering restriction for public and well water usage.
Acting Administrator Brown stated residents had previously questioned why they should hook up to City
water when they had a private water source. He explained if the City agrees to a time-of-day watering
restriction, the DNR has agreed to the City's 10-year water consumption projection; there is a method to
try and increase the allocation should the City impose the restriction.
Councilmember Wellens stated he would like to know if the City was the last community to implement a
watering restriction, and if so it would be beneficial to communicate that to the residents.
Councilmember Bailey recommended the City avoid a confrontation with the DNR and implement the
time-of-day restriction. Hopefully, the increased City-wide water consumption allocation and the
restriction will result in the City not exceeding its water allocation.
Acting Administrator Brown predicted that some time in the next 10 15 years the DNR will take some
control over private wells.
6. OTHER
Acting Mayor Turgeon asked Acting Administrator Brown to provide an update on communications
regarding the ward system. Acting Administrator Brown stated he had distributed to Councilmembers via
email informtionthe City received from the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) regarding the system. It
was a very confusing issue because not many cities had sought legislation to go to a ward system, only to
want to reconsider the merits of the system. The State, the LMC, and Hennepin County were trying to
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
June 2, 2008
Page 8 of9
determine how to deal this type of situation. The email indicated the City was not pressured by time for
considering a change. Earlier in the day the City received information stating that a decision to change
had to be made and communicated by June 11 th because of the need to print ballot materials.
Councilmember Wellens stated a letter to the editor from Paula Callies stated the ward system was
established after years of study and multiple nights of public hearing; he questioned if that was true.
Acting Mayor Turgeon stated she knew nothing about a study. Director Nielsen stated there had been
years of conversation about the ward system dating back to 1997; there had not been a "formal" study.
Wellens stated he had some information he would distribute to Council on the ward system.
Acting Administrator Brown related that the City Attorney had spoken with the LMC; the LMC thought
if the City returned to an at-large system all seats should be on the ballot as the existing Councilmembers
were elected to a ward. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated the City did not do that when it went to the ward
system. Brown explained the ward system was implemented in a "tiered" manner.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the staggered terms have allowed the Council to retain some
institutional knowledge. He then stated he would have no problem being on the ballet this year, if he
chose to run. He was looking forward to hearing what the public had to say at the public hearing. He
stated he had heard from two residents, one in support of a change and one not.
Director Nielsen stated the City Attorney will prepare a memo on this item.
Councilmember Bailey stated he had received a call from a resident about the dead grass (the prairie
grass) near the water tower. Acting Administrator Brown stated signage will be placed in the area about
the prairie grass plantings.
Council member Woodruff requested the protective fencing be placed around the tree at Gideon Glen.
Acting Mayor Turgeon reviewed the calendar for interviewing City Administrator candidates and
reminded Council to get their comments on the interview questions to Sharon Klumpp by June 9th.
Councilmember Bailey stated he would not be able to attend the meet and greet session. Turgeon stated
there was a joint EFD member cities' councils budget work session scheduled for June II th at 6:00 P.M.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he would not be able to attend. Turgeon stated she went to a Lake
Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) budget meeting on May 29th and the basic message conveyed
by the cities in attendance was they would not support an 18.3% budget increase. There was suggestion
to remove the $30,000 budgeted for the milfoil herbicide treatment program and reduce the budget for
reserves. There was interest expressed in keeping the budget to a single digit, and Orono requested the
increase be kept to 4 percent (the request was made in writing as Orono was not represented at the
meeting). The LMCD conveyed it may be able to keep the increase to 5 percent. She noted Mr. Siakel,
the City's LMCD representative, was in attendance and he communicated the Council's were not in
support of the 18.3% increase. She commented Mr. Siakel was a strong advocate for funding the
herbicide treatment program.
Councilmember Wellens stated he would distribute a memo to Council regarding the May 28, 2008, EFD
Board meeting. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated she was not impressed with the budget.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
June 2, 2008
Page 9 of 9
7. ADJOURN
Wellens moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of June
2,2008, at 8:37 P.M. Motion passed 4/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST:
awrence A. Brown, cting City Administrator/Clerk