112408 CC Reg Min
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SOUTHSHORE CENTER
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2008 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:06 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Bailey, Turgeon, Wellens and Woodruff, Attorney
Keane; City Administrator Heck; Finance Director Burton; Planning Director Nielsen;
and Director of Public Works Brown
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, approving the agenda presented. Motion passed 510.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Work Session Minutes, November 10, 2008
Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of
November 10, 2008, as amended in Item 2, Page 1, Paragraph 3, Sentence 8 change "study with 5 -
10 projections" to "study with 5-10 year projections"; in Item 2, Page 2, Paragraph 7, Sentence 1,
change "Administrator Hack" to "Administrator Heck"; in Item 1, Page 4, Paragraph 9, Sentence
2 change "Sanitary Sewer Fund reserves would go done" to "Sanitary Sewer Fund reserves would
go down"; and in Item 1, Page 5, Paragraph 8, Sentence 2 change "The 2008 planned capital outlay
of $100,000 was cancelled in order to increase fund balance for 2009 projects." to "It was decided
it was not necessary to spend the 2008 planned capital outlay of $100,000. The result being an
increase of the fund balance for 2009 projects." Motion passed 510.
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, November 10, 2008
Turgeon moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of
November 10, 2008, as amended in Item 9.G, Page 9, Paragraph 2, Sentence 1 change
"Councilmember Woodruff stated during his tenure on the Council the Friends have struggled
financial, and he did not know to what degree because he has not reviewed any financial
statements of the Friends." to "Councilmember Woodruff stated during his tenure on the Council
the Friends have struggled financially, and he did not know to what degree because he has not
received any financial statements from the Friends." Motion passed 5/0.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Lizee reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 2 of 19
Turgeon moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and
Adopting the resolutions therein.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
B. Property and Liability Insurance Renewal
C. Awarding the 2008 Sanitary Sewer Jet Vacuum Cleaning (This item was moved to
Item 10.13 under Engineering/Public Works.)
D. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 08-0829 "A Resolution Accepting Quote and
Awarding Contract for 2009 Storm Pipe Replacement Project."
E. Certificate of Achievement Award
Motion passed 5/0.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation by Chief Judge James T. Swenson
Mayor Lizee introduced Chief Judge James T. Swenson, the Chief Judge of the State of Minnesota
Fourth Judicial District Court, which serves Hennepin County.
Judge Swenson stated he was appointed to Chief Judge on July 1, 2008, and serves on numerous
committees within Hennepin County. He wanted to introduce himself, tell about the District Court, as
well as answer any questions. He distributed a pamphlet titled "What You Should Know About
Minnesota's Courts" and statistical 2007 criminal data for the City.
Judge Swenson explained in July 2008 he researched how the Court compares to five other large district
courts around the Country. In those five courts, approximately 5,000 cases are processed per year per
judge. The Hennepin County Court processes over 8,000 cases per year per judge. He noted the United
States Chamber of Commerce always ranks the Court in the top 2 - 3 for places that are most fair for
businesses. He stated the Court is one of two star large urban courts in America. Many people come to
Hennepin County to be trained on large urban environment issues.
Judge Swenson explained the Court has taken two budget cuts, reducing the number of employees. A
hiring freeze was put in place in the fall of 2008; the Court is operating at a 5 percent vacancy factor, and
there are 28 unfilled positions. He noted if the Court does not get 5 percent new money just for personnel
costs, it will have to cut an additional 41 positions over the next two years.
Judge Swenson cited one example of the impact of staff reductions: cuts in the Domestic Abuse Service
Center resulted in people not being served and having to return to their abusive environment.
He explained the Court developed Self-Help Centers (SHC) to guide self-represented people in the Court
process. The Court had to cut interpreter positions from the SHC. If the Court has to make more of these
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 3 of 19
types of budget cuts, it is likely the Domestic Abuse Service Center, the SHC, and possibly some of the
suburban courts would close. He noted this is not desirable.
Judge Swenson stated the Court's three suburban courts handle approximately 140,000 appearances per
year, compared to other courts throughout the State that handle less than 5,000 appearances per year. He
explained how closing courts is detrimental to the public safety services and budgets.
Judge Swenson discussed a number of other valuable programs which are in jeopardy, such as the
Driving Under the Influence (DUI) Court program.
Judge Swenson stated if Councilmembers or residents believe in providing quality court services and/or
if they want the Court's three Suburban Courts to remain open, he encouraged them to contact their State
Legislators and ask them to fund the Fourth Judicial District Court. He offered to entertain any questions
Council may have.
In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Judge Swenson explained the 2007 Criminal
Data information he provided was data for the City of Shorewood only. Woodruff requested information
for all four communities served by the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department. Judge Swenson stated
he will research if he can get that information.
Councilmember Woodruff stated in a previous Council work session, Council reduced the City's 2009
budgeted revenues from fines and forfeitures by $15,000 based on the 2008 actual through October. He
asked Judge Swenson if he knew why the revenues are going down. Judge Swenson stated in 2007 the
Court collected $55 million in fines, and its 2008 budget is $43 million; the revenues from those fines go
to the Justice Partners general fund. A lot of traffic violations that used to be handled through the court
system are now being placed on the State's Payable List. Violators can pay the specific State-wide rate
for each particular violation. That rate is not determined by a municipality; it's determined by the
Judicial Council. It's possible that the uniform rates could have been less than what was previously
charged. He will check into why the revenues declined. He noted the Crime Data indicates the Court
collected basically all of the fines imposed.
Councilmember Bailey asked Judge Swenson what his position is on Administrative Code Enforcement.
Judge Swenson stated the District Courts don't have a particular position. The State Attorney General
had some concerns about administrative type courts. When the decision was made to have the State fund
the Judicial Branch (the Court used to be funded by Hennepin County) it was to try to insure justice was
the same in all counties. Bailey stated the reason for Administrative Code Enforcement is to allow a
municipality to solve minor violations in a quicker and more efficient manner.
Judge Swenson stated the Court is reviewing all the services it provides to determine which ones will
have to be cut if there are further budget cuts.
B. Presentation by Dick Osgood, Lake Minnetonka Association (LMA) Representative
Mayor Lizee introduced Dick Osgood, with the Lake Minnetonka Association (LMA).
Mr. Osgood stated earlier this year representatives of the LMA and some of the City's residents who
have property on Phelps Bay came before Council to request funding for the three-bay Eurasian
watermilfoil control project for Carman Bay, Grays Bay and Phelps on Lake Minnetonka (the Lake). The
Cities of Minnetrista, Mound and Shorewood were all approached for funding. Shorewood contributed
$6,000 toward the treatment of Phelps Bay. A few months ago he provided Council with an update on
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 4 of 19
this project. This evening he will highlight the 2008 treatment results and the plans for the 2009
treatment effort, as well as make a request for funding. He noted some of the residents on Phelps Bay
were present this evening in support of the funding request.
Mr. Osgood indicated the first treatment on Phelps Bay (the Bay) occurred on May 14th and it consisted
of using two chemical products. One product was to control milfoil and the other to preemptively keep
curlyleaf pondweed from becoming a problem. The Technical Committee now knows there were some
issues with the dilution of the chemical, and the control was not as effective as was anticipated.
Mr. Osgood explained the plan for 2009 is to modify the treatments, noting that final decisions can not
been made until specific proposals are received for potential applicators. The 2009 treatments would
likely occur later in the season when milfoil is more prone to treatment with the chemical products. The
chemical used will likely be a granular formulation versus a liquid formulation; the granular chemical
will stay at the root system longer. The Technical Committee will seek proposals from applicators with
some guarantees and assurances. The Committee and the people funding the treatments (the lakeshore
owners, the three cities, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, and the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources) are firm on this. The 2009 anticipated results are expected to be much better.
Mr. Osgood stated the lakeshore owners on the three bays have started raising funds for the 2009
treatment efforts. The LMA is collecting donations from lakeshore owners. He noted a decision has not
been made regarding who will administer the project in 2009 - the LMA, the LMCD or a cooperative
arrangement between the two.
Mr. Osgood requested the City contribute $6,000 to help fund the 2009 treatment of Phelps Bay, noting
that amount is the same as what was requested in 2008. He stated similar requests will be made of
Minnetrista and Mound, and he will attend the Mound Council meeting on November 25th.
Mayor Lizee stated Shorewood and Minnetrista each contributed $6,000 to the treatment project in 2008
and Mound contributed $12,000.
Mr. Osgood stated the amounts requested of the three cities in 2009 is the same as that requested in 2008.
It's also anticipated that the LMCD, through its Save-the-Lake Fund, and the DNR will make
contributions similar to the ones they made in 2008.
Mayor Lizde asked if any of the residents present this evening wanted to address this topic.
Jack Kimball, 4445 Enchanted Cove, stated the 2008 treatment project did not live up to the residents
expectations. The City's residents who live on Enchanted Island and have lakeshore property on Phelps
Bay have 27 percent of the properties on Phelps Bay. These residents contributed 65 percent of the
private funding. Although the residents are not pleased with the 2008 results, they are in support of the
project moving forward because they know mitigating milfoil works. The residents want the City to
contribute funding for the 2009 treatment efforts. If the City does not, each of the City's residents with
lakeshore on Phelps Bay will have to contribute an additional $100. He noted increases in his and his
neighbor's 2009 taxes and stated they are paying a lot of taxes, and there aren't any City parks on
Enchanted Island, noting that Lake Minnetonka is in some ways their park. The residents are appreciative
of the contribution the City made in 2008, and they request the City make a similar contribution in 2009.
Councilmember Turgeon questioned when the Technical Committee anticipated receiving proposals from
applicators. She stated she had attended the LMCD 2009 budget discussion meeting, and she did not
think the LMCD budgeted for any treatments. She commented that at that time the LMCD Save-the-Lake
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 5 of 19
Fund did not have a lot of money. She thought there were a lot of unanswered questions relating to
treatment specifics, applicators and funding sources. She stated the Army Corps of Engineers' report
does not match up to what she just got. She then stated there is no long-term plan.
Mr. Osgood explained the DNR grant cycle application process does not begin until January 2009;
therefore, funds cannot be secured at this time. The LMCD prefers to help fund this effort using funds
from its Save-the-Lake Fund; the deadline for submitting an application to the LMCD is a few weeks out.
He stated when the 2008 request was made Council suggested that any funding request for 2009 be made
prior to the 2009 General Fund Budget being adopted. Although he can't give assurances that the LMCD
and the DNR will make contributions similar to the ones they made in 2008, funding discussions have
taken place with representatives of those organizations. He stated Council could choose to allocate funds
contingent upon receiving funds from the DNR and the LMCD. He noted his assessment of the 2008
treatment results is consistent with the Army Corps of Engineers' treatment report which was included in
the meeting packet.
Councilmember Bailey stated he wanted DNR and LMCD representatives to appear before Council and
say they agreed with the report and that they are willing to help fund the 2009 treatment efforts. He did
not want the City to commit to a funding contribution before those two organizations commit to doing so.
Mayor Lizee stated the three-bay Eurasian watermilfoil treatment project has been talked about being a
five-year plan with 2008 being the first year of the Plan. She asked the Councilmembers if they would be
comfortable making a $6,000 commitment, contingent upon the DNR and the LMCD making donations
in 2009 similar to the ones they made in 2008. She thought the Council needed to allocate funds in the
City's 2009 General Fund Budget. She suggested the City's LMCD representative appear before Council
at its December 8, 2008, meeting, to give an update on the project. She stated it was important to allocate
funds in the 2009 budget for this effort.
Councilmember Bailey stated the City has the opportunity to fund a donation out of its General Fund
Reserves in January or February of 2009 if Council so chooses. He again stated he would be more
comfortable if the regional authorities spoke to Council first and then Council could make its decision.
Councilmember Wellens stated he appreciates the honest report on the 2008 treatment results, and the
report on the plans for modifying the treatment efforts in 2009. He also appreciates the fact the residents
are willing to contribute to funding the treatment efforts. He explained with any new request for money
the decision is usually delayed until at least the next Council meeting. He stated he had no problem with
the request, but formal action should be considered at the December 8`" Council meeting.
In response to a question from Mr. Kimball, Mayor Lizee explained the Council was not ready to make a
commitment for a $6,000 donation to the 2009 three-bay milfoil treatment project this evening.
In response to a comment from Mr. Osgood, Councilmember Bailey stated prior to Council making a
decision he wanted to hear evaluation reports from DNR and LMCD representatives and he wanted
assurances they would help fund the 2009 treatment efforts. Councilmember Turgeon stated she agreed
with Bailey's preference. She stated there was money in a contingency fund and felt the decision did not
have to be made at the December 8t'' meeting. She wants to review a long-range plan, and would like to
know what the other agencies were committed to doing. She was not in support of the Lake Minnetonka
lakeshore owners or the 14 cities footing the bill for milfoil treatment of the Lake forever; noting the.
watershed districts and other agencies need to get involved.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 6 of 19
Mr. Osgood stated he would not have a formal funding commitment from the DNR and the LMCD by the
December 8a' because of those agencies funding cycles. The agencies will have to speak for themselves as
to whether they will make a long-rage commitment; they typically fund on a year-by-year basis as does
the City. He noted the five-year LVMP does recognize the various funding cycles.
Mayor Lizee recommended Council strongly consider funding this effort in 2009. There are contingency
funds available to do so.
6. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
7. PARKS
A. Report on the November 18, 2008 Park Commission Meeting
Chair Norman reported on matters considered and actions taken at the November 18, 2008, Park
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting).
B. RFP for Consulting Park Planning Services
Director Brown stated the Park Commission is looking for a consultant who can provide insight into and
analysis of the City's parks. The consultant would review the master plan for the City's parks and the
survey results, provide ideas and trends, meet with the Park Commission and assist in utilizing the budget
for future planning, and review the current park infrastructure on a park-by-park basis. The Commission
wants the consultant to provide ideas for bringing continuity to the Park System. The Commission would
then take the information provided to them and prioritize the options and equipment purchases for the
next 20 years.
Brown then stated the Park Commission recommended approval of the Request for Proposals (RFP) for
Consulting Park Planning Services, a copy of which was included in the meeting packet. Brown reviewed
the deadlines set for RFP submittals noting the deadlines are based on Council approving moving
forward with the process this evening.
Councilmember Bailey expressed concern about the Park Commission's recommendation to hire a
consultant without having first identified a clear set of objectives for the consultant to achieve. The
existing master plan for the Park System is the result of a lot of labor on the part of the Park Commission,
Staff and prior consultants. He wants the Park Commission to provide a compelling case for what value
will be realized from hiring another consultant.
Director Brown stated the master plan was not a bad product, but Staff perceives the plan doesn't
adequately help with the development of a work program for the park system. He thought the Park
Commission wants to refine the plan; a consultant would provide a broader view of what other cities'
were experiencing and doing.
Councilmember Turgeon stated it was her recollection that when a consultant was hired to help with the
master plan, the consultant considered what the parks offered and what could be added to the parks to
handle the City's demographics. The plan is only eight years old. She commented the City hasn't grown
in the last eight years. She stated there are other means for researching what the trends are for city park
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 7 of 19
systems and for gathering information. Director Brown clarified the consultant facilitated a couple of
Park Commission and Staff discussions; the consultant did not do the analysis.
Park Commission Chair Norman stated the master plan provides a good base. The Commission is not an
expert on new park trends, opportunities, amenities, types of structures, etc. For example, some of the
parks lack activities for seniors. He commented renovations to the facility at Manor Park are being
considered. The Commission wants to identify other amenities to increase the utilization of all Parks, and
would like the input of a consultant with expertise in the park field.
Mayor Lizee stated she viewed hiring a consultant as an investment. The master plan is eight years old
and it should be updated. She commented the Park Commission was comprised of a great group of
volunteers. She noted the City does not have a specific employee dedicated to working with the City's
parks. In the past Director Brown and now Engineer Landini perform parks related activities. She stated
the City has invested in hiring Community Rec Resources to perform scheduling functions for the park
fields, noting the City previously had scheduling issues. She recommended the plan be updated to
address facilities and use, and since the City does not have a full-time employee to address park needs, it
would be appropriate to send out an RFP for park design services to help the Park Commission prepare a
long-term project plan which the Council has been asking for.
Councilmember Wellens stated Council is not authorizing the expenditure of funds at this time; it is only
considering issuing an RFP for park design services. After receiving RFPs from consultants Council can
evaluate whether or not there would be value in hiring a consultant.
Councilmember Bailey stated if the RFP were to ask for advice on something specific such as what to do
to improve the building in Manor Park and if Council thought Staff was not able to do that assessment, he
could support hiring a consultant to help with that effort. He would be willing to issue the RFP, as
written, with the understanding that the purpose is to gather information. He wanted to hear
Administrator Heck's perspective on the current utilization of employee resources, and maybe Council
should considering using funds to increase staff time for park related work rather than for a consultant.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he found it difficult to identify what the consultant was expected to
deliver, and he stated he could not determine when the consultant's services would no longer be needed.
He stated the RFP was only asking responders to provide a bid, but he questioned how bids could be
provided to do general work. He was in support of having some planning activities occur with regard to
the park system and if that meant addressing specific deficiencies in the master plan then those specific
things should be identified in the RFP.
Wellens moved, Bailey seconded, recommending approval of the Request for Proposals for
Consulting Park Planning Services.
Councilmember Bailey questioned how the scope of the RFP could be narrowed down. Chair Norman
stated the Park Commission intentionally left the scope broad in an attempt to identify new ideas for how
to get the highest and best use of the City's parks. The Commission thought it could provide more
direction to the responders when it met with them.
Councilmember Turgeon stated Community Rec Resources can provide information about the highest
use of the parks because it schedules the use of the park fields.
Director Brown stated the RFP came about during Park Commission discussions about wanting to
establish a consistent identity and a sustainable design for the City's parks. It wanted to have common
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 8 of 19
signage and consistent design of the parks' shelters, where possible. He cited the re-branding of the
Hennepin County Park System to the Three Rivers Park District. The Commission wanted to allow the
consultant to present new ideas during the interview process, and it expected to define the deliverables
during the interview process.
Councilmember Bailey stated a general vision for the park system and modifications for the master plan
should be part of the deliverable. He indicated he would probably vote in favor of issuing the RFP
because he wanted to see some park project started in 2009, and if the consultant could help make that
happen then he was willing to consider hiring one. Council could then decide if it wanted to spend the
funds. He would not support an open-ended contract for broadly defined design services.
Mayor Lizde stated the RFP requested information such as fee schedule, timeline for completion,
deliverable format, etc. She thought it would be a good investment to help refine the master plan and
develop a vision for the park system.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he wanted the RFP to be more specific regarding what the deliverables
are. If it is to update the master plan, then it should identify what sections should be updated. If there are
specific design projects for things such as signage and shelters they should be identified.
Councilmember Wellens stated the Park Commission was interested in the tax-forfeited parcel of land
that the City has an opportunity to acquire even though there is no parking near by. He questioned if the
consultant could address how that property could be utilized.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he would prefer to delay approving the RFP until it is modified to
identify more specific deliverables.
Mayor Lizde stated if Council delays action on this item the RFP process could not be approved until its
Council's first meeting in 2009.
Wellens amended his motion to include subject to the RFP being modified to identify specific
deliverables.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he assumed the Park Commission and Council wants to determine who
is qualified to do the work and how much will they charge. If that is the case, he could support moving
forward with the RFP process if the RFP is modified slightly to request the consultant identify what
needs to be done to the parks to meet today's needs and future needs, and to identify a schedule of
events. After it's determined which consultant is most qualified and provides the services for a
reasonable hourly rate, then the scope of the project can be determined; the Park Commission can
develop a task list for Council to review.
Councilmember Turgeon stated she did not understand why designing improvements to Cathcart Park
would be a priority when it is not located within the City. She stated she was not convinced the RFP
process would accomplish what's desired.
Wellens withdrew his amendment.
Motion passed 5/0.
Councilmember Bailey suggested a joint Council and Park Commission meeting be scheduled with the
consultant in attendance to discuss specific tasks and deliverables.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 9 of 19
Chair Norman stated he would bring the request for specific deliverables to the Park Commission at its
December 91h meeting.
C. Approve Changes to the Park Priority Policy
Director Brown stated per Council's direction the Park Commission revised the City's Park Priority
Policy to incorporate the use of reserving City-owned tennis courts for for-profit businesses. He noted a
copy of the revised Policy was included in the meeting packet.
Brown reviewed the changes to the Policy. Under Item 2, Categorization of Facilities, tennis courts have
been deleted from Category 1 Facilities/Athletic Facilities and inserted into the Category 2 Facilities/Non
Athletic Facilities. Under Item 4, Prioritization of Facility Use Requests: Prioritization for Category 2
and 3 Facilities, Priority 2, the following was added: Tennis Court use for for profit groups may reserve
the tennis courts Monday-Friday from 9:00 am. to 3: 00 p. m. no more than 3 hours a day and not exceed
15 hours a week. The reason for this change is that Prioritization for Category 2 still gives the resident
first priority.
Brown stated the Park Commission recommends the City Council approve the changes to the Park
Priority Policy relating to the use of the tennis courts.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he wanted to approve the changes, but he can't determine how it's
going to work. He explained under Prioritization for Category 2 and 3 Facilities, Priority 1 is resident
request on a first come first served basis. For-profit businesses need to have a predictable schedule. He
stated the rules for use by for-profit businesses must state City residents must be allowed to participate in
a business' program offering if they desire.
Park Chair Norman stated the City and Carlson Tennis would enter into an arrangement similar to the
one entered into with P Lair for skatepark programs. The arrangement will specify that Shorewood
residents must be able to participate in the program. Carlson Tennis will provide some lessons which are
open to the public at no cost, and the residents can pay a fee to participate in private lessons. He
explained the tennis lesson programs offered by Carlson Tennis will be promoted in the Shore Report,
and the community will be notified the Badger Park tennis courts will be unavailable for use during those
lessons. Community Rec Resources will be responsible for reserving the courts for for-profit business
tennis activities.
Administrator Heck stated this was an opportunity for the City to enter into an arrangement with Carlson
Tennis to provide a recreation program sponsored by the City. In effect, the City would contract with
Carlson Tennis to provide tennis lessons. The residents would sign up with the City to get lessons for
some to-be-determined park-and-recreation fee. Carlson Tennis will get a portion of the fee for providing
the lessons and the City will get a small portion for administrative efforts. Community Rec Resources
could be responsible for scheduling the use of the courts. This situation will be of benefit to the City, the
residents and Carlson Tennis.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested the priorities for Category 2 and 3 Facilities be changed to Priority
1 - Tennis Court use for for-profit groups may reserve the tennis courts Monday-Friday from 9:00 a.m. to
3:00 p.m. no more than 3 hours a day and not exceed 15 hours a week; Priority 2 - Resident request on
first come first serve basis; Priority 3 - Organized activity previously registered with the City of
Shorewood Park Coordinator; and, Priority 4 - Non-resident request on a first come first serve basis.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 10 of 19
There was ensuing discussion about what the priorities were in the revised Policy for tennis court use by
for-profit businesses.
Councilmember Bailey stated although there is some inconsistency in the revised Policy, he suggested
the Policy be approved.
Bailey moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the changes to the Park Priority Policy relating to
the use of the tennis courts. Motion passed 5/0.
8. PLANNING - Report by Representative
Commissioner Gniffke reported on matters considered and actions taken at the November 18, 2008,
Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting).
A. C.U.P. For Telecom Facilities
Applicant: Telecom Transport Management, Inc.
Location: SE Area Water Tower - 5500 Old Market Road
Director Nielsen stated Telecom Transport Management, Inc. (TTM) has applied for a conditional use
permit (C.U.P.) to locate telecommunications facilities at 5500 Old Market Road. The property is the site
of the City's SE Area Water Tower. TTM's original proposal was to erect three telecommunications
dish-style antennas into the rail system at the top of the Tower. The Planning Commission held a public
hearing for that request during its October 7, 2008, meeting.
Nielsen then stated the request had been placed on Council's agenda for its October 27, 2008, meeting
for consideration. The topic was continued to this meeting because TTM wanted to modify its request.
Between the October 7 h meeting and the October 27`h meeting TTM changed the number of antennas it
proposed erecting to one from three.
Nielsen explained TTM has since requested the City reduce its rent rate for this request to $3,000 from
$18,000, noting the $18,000 rate is for up to six antennas on a tower. Staff researched what a number of other
cities do (several of which TTM has dealt with), finding there was no consistency in rental rates. It appears that
some cities have agreed to lower their rate or negotiate their rates. Staff does not recommend this.
Nielsen stated the meeting packet contained a draft resolution approving the C.U.P. for TTM. He noted a
minor change will be made to the resolution. In conclusion #2 Equipment to be Placed Within the
Enclosure" will be changed to Equipment to be Placed as Directed by the Director of Public Works".
Nielsen stated the Planning Commission did recommend approval of TTM's original request. He also
noted that Debra Weiss, representing TTM, was present this evening to explain the reason TTM
requested the rent rate be lowered.
Debra Weiss, representing TTM, Inc., stated TTM has no issue with the language in the City's Water
Tower Space Lease Agreement with one exception. TTM is requesting the City reduce its base rent
amount for up to six antennas to $3,000 from $18,000. She noted TTM originally proposed erecting three
antennas on the SE Area Water Tower.
Ms. Weiss stated TTM applied for and received a Utility Niche Permit from the Public Utilities
Commission. TTM technology transmits data for telecommunications carriers. The technology is similar
to a T-1 line but it communicates wirelessly using line of sight for transmission.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 11 of 19
Ms. Weiss explained at the SE Area Water Tower location TTM is now proposing to erect one dish
antenna that is two feet in diameter. She routed a picture showing the outside compound of where
equipment will be located and a picture of a site in Mendota Heights where TTM installed equipment.
TTM proposes using a 16-square-foot area of ground space outside of the enclosed area. Other carriers
use an area approximately 15 feet by 20 feet in size for their shelters for up to six panel antennas. The
additional weight placed on the Tower for six panel antennas and the 300 square-feet ground space is
approximately one ton. TTM is proposing the 16-square-foot ground equipment be placed along side of
the fence compound; it will not utilize any valuable ground space for future carriers. The location of the
antenna on the handrail will not restrict new carriers from being able to locate their equipment on the
Tower. TTM Technology will add approximately 64 pounds of weight for the antenna and cables on the
Tower.
Ms. Weiss then explained TTM does not charge a fluctuating fee based consumption like wireless
carriers do; it has a set fee. TTM moves more data faster than a traditional land line carrier can move.
The City's base rate for up to six antennas amounts to a cost of $250 per antenna. She noted traditional
carriers also place much more weight on a tower and use much more ground space. She commented
AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile all have equipment on this Tower. She explained if TTM were to pay a
monthly base rate of $300, then over the life of the contract the City could earn approximately $107,000
more in revenue (including an annual 4 percent annual increase) from TTM rental. She stated if TTM
cannot have its monthly base rate for one antenna reduced to $300 it cannot afford to supply service for
its AT&T customer contract at the SE Area Water Tower location.
Councilmember Bailey asked Ms. Weiss if this was a take-it or leave-it proposition.
Ms. Weiss explained TTM is locked into its rate.
Councilmember Turgeon expressed concern that if the City lowered its base rate for TTM other wireless
carriers would request a rate reduction. Councilmember Woodruff shared her concern.
Ms. Weiss noted that TTM is the only company in the market that provides the type of service it
provides. TTM has contracts with AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon. Ms. Weiss stated TTM wants to
lease space for just one antenna and the reduced base rate it is requesting in for one two-foot-in-diameter
antenna only. Council could add language to the lease agreement to specify if someone wanted to put
additional TTM antennas on the tower the rate would increase. It has done similar things with other
cities, and their rates range from $200 - $300 per month per antenna depending on whether a one-foot or
two-foot in diameter antenna is used.
Councilmember Wellens stated he understood the problem to be one of an inflexible pricing structure, to
which Ms. Weiss responded that is correct.
Councilmember Woodruff expressed disappointment that the rate-reduction request was not discussed at
the October 27, 2008, Council meeting. He explained TTM originally proposed erecting three antennas
and based on its requested $300 monthly base rate its monthly rates for three antennas would have been
$900 per month; the City's standard monthly base rate for up to six antennas is $1,500. He stated he did
not want Council deciding if the rental rate for erecting antennas should vary based on shape and size. In
this situation TTM came to the City with a financial proposition that does not meet the City's leasing
requirements.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 12 of 19
Administrator Heck stated the City's base rate for erecting up to six antennas on a water tower was
discussed at the October 27"' meeting. Ms. Weiss apparently perceived the rate as a per antenna cost,
which it is not. The City's rate is $18,000 for up to six antennas and then it is increased for additional
antennas. He stated no one can say the space on the handrail on the Tower will never be desired because
of changing technology. He then stated the City's past position has been the base rate for locating
equipment on the City's water towers is $18,000 for I - 6 antennas independent of size and weight.
Woodruff moved, Bailey seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 08-0839 "A Resolution Granting
a Conditional User Permit to Telecom Transport Management, Inc. to Locate Telecommunications
Facilities at 5500 Old Market Road on the Southeast Area Water Tower" subject to Staff
recommendations. Motion passed 5/0.
B. C.U.P. For Telecom Facilities
Applicant: Telecom Transport Management, Inc.
Location: Minnewashta Water Tower - 26352 Smithtown Road
Director Nielsen explained this request is very similar to the request just considered for Telecom
Transport Management, Inc. In this request TTM has applied for a conditional use permit to locate
telecommunications facilities at 26352 Smithtown Road. This property is zoned R-lA, Single-family
Residential and is part of the Minnewashta Elementary School property. It is also the site of the City's
Minnewashta Water Tower. TTM proposes to erect dish-style antennas around the tower pedestal at a
height of 110 feet. It also proposes to install four antennas; two of them are two-foot in diameter and the
other two are three-foot in diameter. TTM proposes to locate ground equipment inside the Tower. Staff
has advised them that no equipment will be placed inside the Tower. There are two buildings on the site
and one of them was oversized to accommodate future equipment. TTM's equipment can be housed in
the oversized building.
Nielsen noted that at its October 27, 2008, meeting Council requested Staff research charging for the use
of ground space for telecommunications equipment. He stated Staff found out that a few cities charge a
minimal amount for the use of ground space. He understood Council's concern to be one of lack of
control over the amount of ground space used. He explained the City has control over the site because of
its ownership of the site and its control over what it allows to happen on the site. He stated the value in
the rental operation to telecommunications companies is the vertical real estate (i.e.; the space on the
tower). He explained the telecommunications ground-space equipment has gotten much smaller over the
years. He stated Staff does not recommend charging for ground space.
Nielsen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the C.U.P. He noted a copy of a
resolution approving the C.U.P. and a copy of the City's Water Tower Space Lease Agreement were
included in the meeting packet.
Director Nielsen stated Debra Weiss, representing Telecom Transport Management, Inc., is in
attendance.
Woodruff moved, Bailey seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 08-084, "A Resolution Granting
a Conditional User Permit to Telecom Transport Management, Inc. to Locate Telecommunications
Facilities at 26352 Smithtown Road on the Minnewashta Water Tower" subject to Staff
recommendations. Motion passed 510.
Mayor Lizee recessed the meeting for a short break at 9:06 P.M.
I
~I
i
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 13 of 19
Mayor Lizee reconvened the meeting at 9:12 P.M.
C. Preliminary Plat - Brockwood
Applicant: Synergy Land Co. (Brent Hislop)
Location: Approximately 6 acres between Strawberry Lane and
Cathcart Drive
Director Nielsen stated Brent Hislop, Synergy Land Company, LLC, has arranged to purchase
approximately 5.3 acres of land located between Cathcart Drive and Strawberry Lane, just north of the
Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA) right-of-way. Mr. Hislop proposes to subdivide the
property into two parcels. The parcel fronting on Cathcart Drive will be approximately one acre in size,
and the parcel fronting on Strawberry Lane will be over four acres in size. Mr. Hislop's plan is to sell the
parcel fronting on Cathcart Drive and to build his own house on the larger parcel, which could be
resubdivided at a later date.
Nielsen explained the property is zoned R-IA, Single-Family Residential, which requires lots to be at
least 40,000 square feet in area. The proposed lots range in size from 40,638 square feet in area to 60,475
square feet in area. The land is relatively flat and substantially wooded. According to the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District, there are no wetlands on the subject property.
With regard to the analysis of the case, Nielsen stated the proposed division is somewhat similar to the
Petron Rearrangement approved earlier this year, except in this case a new building site is being created
as a result of the division.
Nielsen explained the City's Zoning Code requires when properties capable of additional development
are subdivided, the applicant must provide a resubdivision sketch, or "ghost plat" demonstrating how the
remainder of the property can be developed in the future, in accordance with Subdivision and Zoning
Codes. It is not necessary to develop the property as illustrated in the sketch; this sketch will be
incorporated into a development agreement as a guide for when the property ultimately develops. The
applicant has submitted a plan that will accommodate the future development of the site. The two initial
lots and the proposed future lots all meet or exceed R-IA zoning requirements. One item that should be
corrected is the lot line between future lots 3 and 4; straightening this line will not adversely affect Lot 4.
All proposed lots have ample buildable area. This was illustrated on applicant's preliminary utility plan
and preliminary grading plan, which show proposed utilities and grading, respectively, as well as
building setbacks.
Nielsen stated most of the issues associated with this plat had to do with engineering. The City Engineer
has addressed these under separate cover in a report dated November 13, 2008. Nielsen thought most, if
not all, issues had been addressed. He stated some of the issues had to do with drainage. The Engineer
was concerned that what little flow of drainage there is across the property might be interrupted by the
proposed street alignment or driveway alignment. Even though the cul-de-sac street will not be
constructed until the larger property is subdivided, there will be a driveway put in for this subdivision. A
series of culverts will be installed to insure water can move freely as it does today.
Nielsen noted the developer had originally considered extending City water to the site, but the cost of
doing so became prohibitive. He explained the City's development regulations require that a
development capable of three or more lots must install City water if the cost does not exceed $10,000 per
lot. In this case, the estimates prepared by the applicant's engineer suggest nearly twice that amount.
Therefore, the two proposed lots will be served by private wells. This may change in the future since
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 14 of 19
there is land south of the HCRRA LRT Trail capable of development. This would extend the water main
closer to the subject property, increasing the feasibility of extension later on.
Nielsen explained the applicant proposes connecting the two proposed lots to sanitary sewer. He
explained the City's sanitary sewer main does not come all the way to the proposed property fronting on
Cathcart drive. Therefore, the main will have to be extended from its nearest location to the property. The
sewer line for the property fronting Strawberry Lane will come in on the proposed road alignment which
will also be the future driveway alignment.
Nielsen stated the applicant shows drainage and utility easements for all lots, including the ones that will
be required as part of this proposal.
Nielsen explained if the larger lot were to be subdivided and further developed, the applicant's
subdivision sketch illustrates an option for installing a pond on the north side of the property. He noted
that would require cooperation of the property owner to the north. He commented the property owner to
the north wants to make sure there is enough water to keep that pond filed. He stated the sketch also
illustrates a second option for a pond that would be located entirely on the applicant's property. He
explained if any draintile is disrupted during construction or development it would have to be
maintained.
Nielsen noted the two-lot plat will require payment of park dedication fees ($5000 per lot) and local
sanitary sewer extension charges ($1200 per lot). The development of the future lots will be subject to
the charges in effect at the time they are platted. The applicant has to submit a final plat within six
months of receiving approval from Council to divide the lot.
Nielsen then explained the resubdivision sketch shows the future lots being accessed by a cul-de-sac
street extending westward from Strawberry Lane. The proposed location of the street is based upon soil
tests of the property, which indicate deeper levels of organic soil on the northerly portion of the site.
Placing the street on the southerly portion of the site, results in considerably less site alteration (grading
and tree removal) than a northerly alignment. He noted the development agreement will discuss tree
preservation, and a tree preservation plan will have to be submitted as part of the building permit process.
Nielsen stated Staff recommends the preliminary plat be approved. This approval is contingent upon the
applicant entering into a development agreement as part of the final plat process, stipulating that any
future development of the property will include the installation of all site improvements, including street,
utilities and storm water drainage facilities.
Mr. Hislop was present to answer any questions. He stated Director Nielsen did a very thorough job of
explaining the proposal. He commented he worked closely with Nielsen and Engineer Landini. He noted
that the two-lot subdivision and the potential four-lot subdivision would meet City Code requirements.
He clarified the existing parcel of land is approximately 6.5 acres in size. Approximately one-tenth of an
acre will granted to both Cathcart Drive and Strawberry Lane. The smaller parcel of land will be
approximately one acre in size and the larger parcel will be approximately 5.3 acres in size.
Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, approving the preliminary plat for a two-lot subdivision for
Brent Hislop for the property located between Cathcart Drive and Strawberry Lane just north of
the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority right-of-way subject to Staffs conditions. Motion
passed 5/0.
9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 15 of 19
A. Hennepin County Levy Discussion
Administrator Heck stated Councilmember Woodruff has been in contact with Hennepin County
Commissioner Koblick's staff regarding Hennepin County's proposed tax levy for 2009. He then stated
he had forwarded the Councilmembers via email information Woodruff had put together. He went on to
state Woodruff has drafted a letter presenting Council's position on the levy that he wanted to discuss
with Council.
Councilmember Woodruff explained Commissioner Koblick contacted Council several months ago
regarding the Hennepin County Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HCHRA) new separate property
tax levy being proposed for 2009. It is his understanding that in the past the County has not had the
authority from the State to do a tax levy for the HRA except for four cities located within the County.
Earlier in 2008 the State Legislature was asked to give the County authority to actually levy a property
tax on all cities within the County for the purpose of funding the HRA; the Legislature granted that
request. The County is proposing to impose that levy in 2009 in the amount of $1.3 million. That amount
is the same as the amount of funding the HRA received in 2008; therefore, the levy in itself is not
increasing property taxes. He stated that after having discussions with Commissioner Koblick and some
of her staff, it is his understanding that this separate levy authority could reach up to $23 million in
addition to Hennepin County's general fund levy.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he drafted a letter to the Hennepin County Commissioners about this separate
property tax levy. He stated the timing of sending the letter is important because the Hennepin County
Commission will finalize its budget in the next two weeks. Woodruff read his draft letter to the Council.
Woodruff moved, Bailey seconded, approving the issuance of Woodruff 's draft letter to the
Hennepin County Commissioners regarding the Hennepin County Housing & Redevelopment
Authority (HCHRA) new separate property tax levy being proposed for 2009.
Councilmember Bailey stated creating a separate tax structure makes it difficult for taxpayers to
understand the total tax levy by a jurisdiction.
Councilmember Wellens expressed concern about Council getting outside of its duties by expressing
commentaries on other agencies. Taking this action could open the door to Council commenting on
things such as abortion, gun control, and so forth.
Mayor Lizee stated she did not think it was appropriate to speak for all of the City's residents without
there being a presentation on the topic. She noted Councilmember Woodruff had done research on the
topic. She stated it was not something Council needed to support by resolution.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he could appreciate some Councilmembers' reluctance to issuing the
letter, but Commissioner Koblick did ask the City to comment on the proposed tax levy.
Motion passed 4/1 with Liz6e dissenting.
B. Authorize Sale of Tax-Forfeited Land to Adjoining Landowners
Administrator Heck stated at its November 10, 2008, meeting Council discussed how to dispose of a tax
forfeited parcel of land located on the west side of Howard's Point Road, between the lots located at
5440 and 5460 Howard's Point Road. At that meeting Council directed Staff to explore options for
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 16 of 19
establishing a price for the tax forfeited parcel; researching what the delinquent taxes, assessments and
fees are; and whether or not the City would be responsible to pay those items if it acquired the property.
Heck reviewed the information he received from Hennepin County Tax Services, as provided in his staff
memorandum. He also noted for the period 1996-2008, there is approximately $8,000 due for delinquent
taxes, fees and penalties; and if the City were to acquire the land and designate the land for public use
there would be no cost to the City.
Heck stated Staff continues to recommend the parcel be approved for auction to abutting land owners.
Staff does not think there is a public purpose for this parcel; the parcel is unbuildable and the parcel
would benefit either adjacent property owner as both of those properties are non-conforming. He noted a
resolution to this affect was included in the meeting packet for Council's consideration.
Director Nielsen stated the Park Commission expressed interest in having the City acquire the land. The
Commission thought it could be used for things such as placing a canoe rack on it or a fishing dock on
the lakeshore. He explained with 50-foot setbacks from the lakeshore and the street and with side
setbacks that almost touch, there is no buildable area on the lot for either structures or parking. He noted
that in the past the City did assist the previous property owner in blocking access to the property because
snowmobilers and ice fisherpersons were using the property to access Lake Minnetonka from Howard's
Point Road. The City also posted the Road no parking based on resident complaints.
Mayor Lizee stated she remembered having discussions about this property when she was on the
Planning Commission. The property does have lakeshore which makes it valuable, but she questioned if
it would be wise to take it off the City's tax rolls. The lot is not buildable, there is no parking and lake
access is deemed dangerous in the winter.
Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 08-0859 "A Resolution
Concerning a Certain Tax-Forfeited Parcel Lying Within the City and Approving it for Sale to an
Abutting Owner." Motion passed 510.
10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
A. Illicit Discharge Ordinance Discussion 2nd Draft
Director Brown stated the meeting packet contained a copy of the second draft of the City's Illicit
Discharge Ordinance. This draft ordinance is based off a model ordinance and modified by
Councilmember Wellens and Staff. Staff added concrete washout to the list of pollutants and the appeal
timeframe was reduced to ten days to be consistent with Zoning Violation Appeals.
Brown explained that as part of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the City the
Illicit Discharge Ordinance was listed for adoption by December 31, 2008. Council first reviewed the
model ordinance on October 13, 2008. He stated some examples of illicit discharges are dumping oil or
paint in a catch basin, having a septic field drain to a roadside ditch, etc. He then stated it was his
understanding Engineer Landini had reviewed the second draft of the Ordinance with the City Attorney
and the Attorney's comments have been incorporated.
Brown stated Engineer Landini recommends Council discuss this draft of the Ordinance. Staff will revise
the Ordinance to include Council's comments and present the final ordinance to Council at its December
8t' meeting for adoption.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 17 of 19
Administrator Heck clarified the second draft of the Ordinance has not been reviewed by the City
Attorney. Any Council comments will be incorporated into the Ordinance before it is given to the City
Attorney for review and comment.
Councilmember Wellens stated he removed approximate two-thirds of what was contained in the first
draft of the Ordinance. The second draft is his attempt at drafting an ordinance; therefore, he is sure the
second draft will need quite a bit of review.
Councilmember Woodruff explained he will withhold comment until the City Attorney's revisions have
been incorporated into the next draft of the Ordinance. Some of the language modifications he would
recommend may be identified by the City Attorney. Councilmember Turgeon stated she would delay her
comments until after the Ordinance has been reviewed and revised by the City Attorney.
Councilmember Bailey questioned if the wording of some of the provisions in the Ordinance will be
refined. Administrator Heck stated they would be modified.
Councilmember Bailey questioned if the draft Ordinance will help the City implement and enforce a
program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges into the City's storm sewer system. Director Brown
stated it will be one more tool to help with that, noting that illicit discharges are a large problem. Bailey
questioned if Councilmember Wellens removed anything from the draft ordinance that would be
necessary to include in order to enforce the intent of the Ordinance. Brown stated he did not think so.
Wellens moved, Woodruff seconded, directing Staff to have the City Attorney review and comment
on the draft of the City's Illicit Discharge Ordinance, and to present the final Ordinance to Council
at its December 8, 2008, meeting. Motion passed 5/0.
B. Awarding the 2008 Sanitary Sewer Jet Vacuum Cleaning
This item was removed from the consent agenda at Councilmember Woodruff's request.
Councilmember Woodruff questioned if the Sanitary Sewer Jet Vacuum Cleaning, Main Line Televising,
Structure Inspection, Lateral Inspection and Internal Chemical Grouting Project will be done in 2008 as
stated in the memorandum from Staff or will it be done in 2009. Director Brown explained the planning
part of the project will start in 2008 and the majority of the project will be done in 2009.
Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 08-0819 "A Resolution
Accepting Quote and Awarding Contract for 2008 Sanitary Sewer Jet Vacuum Cleaning, Main
Line Televising, Structure Inspection, Lateral Inspection and Internal Chemical Grouting
Project." Motion passed 510.
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator & Staff
1. City Hall Construction Update
Administrator Heck provided an updated on the City Hall renovation. At the November 25, 2008, project
meeting there will be discussion about the HVAC system. Plastic is up on the interior walls; therefore the
area can be heated and block work can begin. The sidewalk and patch asphalt are done. The project cost
is still tracking on budget. The color for the decking material has been selected. The Architect has
recommended a change in the exterior paint color, but Heck did not have time to get color samples for
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 18 of 19
this evening's meeting. In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Director Brown stated
the siding will be painted on site there for delaying a decision on paint color will no impact the project
schedule.
2. Ron Johnson Easement Update
Administrator Heck stated he had been requested to provide an update on the situation regarding Ron
Johnson's claim that the City does not have an easement for drainage on his property. He stated he prepared a
summary memorandum dated November 24, 2008, for Council highlighting the history of the claim.
Specifically, the City does have and maintain an easement. This easement was ordered by the court in
1993 and it was perfected in 1994 on an order by Judge Allen Oleisky. The ongoing disagreement has
been the original court ordered stated the easement would be at the elevation of 914 feet and the area was
approximately 300 feet to the northeast of the southwest corner of the property line. When the City went
to have the have the easement perfected it was determined by Mr. Johnson that the 914-foot elevation
actually extended 1,350 feet to the northeast of the southwest corner of the property. Mr. Johnson filed a
motion for contempt against the City in 1995; he believed the City had not acquired the property to the
914-foot elevation. It was at this time the original land surveyor and another independent land surveyor
reviewed Mr. Johnson's survey and they stated the ground had been altered between June 21, 1993, and
the time the easement was perfected such that the 914-foot elevation was extended approximately 800
feet in a northeasterly direction across Mr. Johnson's property. The judge denied Mr. Johnson's motion
for contempt and stated the 914-foot elevation was located where it was determined to be in June 1993.
Administrator Heck stated that from his vantage point the issue of the easement is over.
Mayor Lizee asked Administrator Heck how much time he has spent on this issue in his short tenure with
the City. Heck stated he spent approximately two - three days reading materials; that time does not
include all of the back-and-forth emails with Mr. Johnson.
3. Water Tower Report
Director Brown stated the SE Area Water Tower renovation has been completed, and it is currently in a
"cure" state. Council expressed its pleasure with the look of the tower.
4. Comprehensive Plan Schedule
Director Nielsen stated the Planning Commission discussed revisions to the Transportation Chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan at its November 18, 2008, meeting. It was the last of the four Chapters the Commission
had to discuss, and it is essentially done with its draft. He stated the City was granted an extension from the
Metropolitan Council for submitting its updated plan; the new date for submission is no later than May 29,
2009. He explained the Commission's version of the Plan will be electronically distributed to the Council,
surrounding communities and affected agencies on November 28, 2008. The Commission's revisions will be
reviewed with Council during work sessions held in the next few months: Staff will review the comments it
receives from all parties to determine if any further revisions need to be made to the Plan. The updated Plan has
to be adopted by Council no later than its last meeting in May 2009.
Councilmember Bailey asked if Staff is planning to prepare a summary of the changes. Director Nielsen
explained in the draft Plan that Council receives the changes will be marked. Bailey requested a brief
summary of the changes be prepared by Staff.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
November 24, 2008
Page 19 of 19
B. Mayor & City Council
Councilmember Woodruff stated he viewed the recording of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
(LMCD) meeting one week ago at which there was a report on the three-bay Eurasian watermilfoil
treatment project. The report was similar as the report given earlier by Mr. Osgood. He noted there was
an Aquatic Invasive Species Committee within the LMCD, and there is a tentative meeting of that
Committee scheduled for 8:30 A.M. on December 5t1'; he plans on attending that meeting.
Councilmember Wellens stated lie attended an Excelsior Fire District Board Meeting on November 19,
2009. There was discussion about the current policy regarding the Excelsior Firefighters Relief
Association's authorization to ask for a benefit increase if the funding level of its Pension Fund reached
110 percent or more the previous year. The Operating Committee discussed modifying the policy to
require the funding level would have to be at a minimum of 110 percent for at least two, if not three,
consecutive years. He stated it was his recollection that the 2 - 3 year consecutive requirement would
also apply to a mandatory contribution. The Board will discuss about that idea.
Wellens then stated he assumed the reason the City's insurance costs were reduced is fewer accidents; he
congratulated Staff. He also congratulated Director Burton for again being awarded the Certificate of
Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2007.
Mayor Lizee stated she attended the Emergency Preparedness Seminar for residents hosted by the
Excelsior Fire Department, the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department and the South Tonka League
of Women Voters on November 15`11. She also attended a South Lake Minnetonka Police Department
Coordinating Committee meeting held on November 18, 2008. She noted it was the Committee's final
meeting in 2008. At the meeting it was discussed that at the SLMPD Operating Committee meeting the
Committee agreed that Administrator Heck would be an observer during union contract negotiations and
would participate in caucuses with Chief Litsey on the negotiations. The topic of a speed advisory trailer
was also discussed at Coordinating Committee meeting. The other SLMPD member cities discussed
wanting to share in the cost and use of the trailer. The SLMPD has been responsible for housing the City-
owned trailer, taking requests for using the trailer, scheduling the use of the trailer, transporting the
trailer to and from the setup location, and maintaining usage statistics; that trailer is no longer functional.
She noted there was an Executive Session held after the Coordinating Committee meeting to review
ChiefLitsey's performance evaluation with him.
12. ADJOURN
Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of November
24, 2008, at 9:58 P.M. Motion passed 510.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
Christine Lizee, Mayor