Loading...
062209 CC Reg Min5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7®00 P.M. 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Acting Mayor Turgeon called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Acting Mayor Turgeon; Councilmembers Bailey, Woodruff and Zerby; Attorney Tietjen; City Administrator Heck; Finance Director Burton; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: Mayor Liz& B. Review Agenda Acting Mayor Turgeon requested Item 9.A, Country Road 19 Project Closeout, be added to the agenda. This was added to the work session agenda immediately preceding this meeting but there was no time to discuss it. Acting Mayor Turgeon then requested Item 10.B.1, Final Approval of Southshore Center Lease Agreement, be added to the agenda. She explained that during its June 6, 2009, regular meeting Council directed Staff to make a few modifications to the lease agreement. Administrator Heck clarified that the lease agreement was approved during the June 6"' meeting subject to the changes recommended by Council. Council has been provided with a copy of the updated copy. Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the agenda amended. Motion passed 4/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, June 8, 2009 Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of June 8, 2009, as amended in Item 2, Page 3, Paragraph 3, replace "Councilmember Woodruff stated 20% of the 2008 budget for permit revenue was achieved in the first quarter of 2008 and 35% in the second quarter. He questioned what the 2009 year-end result would be if one assumes the same percent numbers are applicable to 2009." with "Councilmember Woodruff stated if, for example, 20% of the 2008 budget for permit revenue was achieved in the first quarter of 2008 and 35% in the second quarter, he wondered what the 2009 year-end result would be if one assumes the same percent numbers are applicable to 2009.". Motion passed 4/0. B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, June 8 2009 Bailey moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of June 2009, as presented. Motion passed 4/0. AR COUN , ?S a Page 2 of 3. CONSENT AGENDA Acting Mayor Turgeon reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Recycling Services Request for Proposal (This was moved to Item IO.G under General/New Business.) C. Accept Proposal for Professional Services for Bridge Inspection D. Motion Establishing May 22, 2010, as Spring Cleanup Day E. Investment Committee Report 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. Harding Avenue and Harding Lane Road Reconstruction Acting Mayor Turgeon opened the Public Hearing at 7:13 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. Engineer Landini explained because special assessments for watermain improvements are being considered as part of the Harding Avenue and Harding Lane road reconstruction project State Statutes require the City must hold a public hearing before the City Council may act on a resolution to order the project. The installation of City water, which is the assessable portion of the project, has been initiated by the City; therefore, at least four-fifths of the Council must vote to approve the ordering of the project. Should Council decide there will not be special assessments, the project can be ordered with a simple majority vote of the Council. This public hearing was advertised in the Sun Sailor on June 4, 2009, and June 11, 2009. Two notices were mailed to the residents that would be impacted by the project, and a notice was also hand delivered to them. The City conducted another survey of residents on Survey Monkey. As of today seven property owners had responded; five indicated they were not interested in extending City water and two indicated they were. Landini went on to explain the feasibility report for the project indicates the assessment amount for affected properties would be $8,035.71. The meeting packet contains two resolutions for Council's consideration; one resolution authorizes watermain extension and one does not. Director Brown clarified U Ju Page J of the resolutions approve the ordering of final plans, specifications and estimates for the project, approval of either resolution would move the process forward. Acting Mayor Turgeon opened the Public Testimony Portion of the Public Hearing at 7:17 P.M. Dale Sonnichsen, 5695 Hardin Lane, stated he attended the May 26, 2009, City Council meeting during which Council approved the feasibility report for project. During that meeting he informed Council that he was not interested in the watermain extension. He appreciated the communication from Staff about the project including the surveys it conducted. He explained on June 20t" his neighborhood had a neighborhood gathering during which he had the opportunity to talk to most of the residents along Harding Avenue and Harding Lane about this project. He stated based on the number of residents that responded to the latest survey, he concluded that the residents did not understand the survey was time sensitive. Because of the lack of response to the survey, he explained he circulated a petition about watermain assessments. Of the fourteen property owners that would be assessed for watermain extension ten indicated they are not in favor of the assessment, two were either in favor of it or neutral to it, and contact was not made with the remaining two. He stated he thought one of the two property owners he was not able to contact would also not be in favor of the assessment. He submitted a copy of the petition for public record. Roland Peterson, 5630 Hardin Lane, stated he concurred with Mr. Sonnichsen's comments. Watermain assessment was the largest topic of discussion at the June 20"' neighborhood family gathering. It was fairly unanimous that City water was not something the property owners wanted to have. He noted property owners were not pressured to sign the petition. He stated he did not complete the most recent survey because he did not understand it was time sensitive. If the survey was going to be one of the determining factors in making the decision about the watermain extension and assessment, he suggested the survey remain open for an additional week to allow residents the opportunity to respond to the survey. Acting Mayor Turgeon closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:20 P.M. Councilmember Zerby stated the petition is for or against the watermain assessment and not the extension of watermain. He asked if the residents would be in favor of extending watermain it they were not assessed for it, noting that is not the City's policy. Mr. Sonnichsen responded they would. Councilmember Bailey stated if watermain was not installed as part of this project it would likely never be installed. Councilmember Woodruff requested Staff explain the City's process for determining the installation of watermain based on things such as petition. Director Brown explained the City's Ordinance specifies that if the residents want to petition for City water, then 67 percent of the property owners of lots abutting the street must be in support of the resident-initiated petition for it to be successful. If Council thinks that extension of watermain is in the City's best interest, then Council can choose to extend watermain with a four-fifths supporting vote of the Councilmembers. He thought that is what occurred as part of the Wedgewood Drive, Manitou Lane and Teal Center project. He stated because Mayor Liz& was not present this evening all Councilmembers present would have to vote in favor of watermain installation this evening for it be considered as part of the final plans and specifications. Councilmember Woodruff stated the resolutions stated Harding Avenue and Harding Lane will be reconstructed, yet the opinion of cost in the feasibility report talks about pavement removal. He thought the resolution should be consistent with the wording in the opinion of cost, or at least talk about the estimated cost. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated Council discussed total reconstruction when it approved the y rv s:Ye4of20 feasibility report. Woodruff stated the resolution could be amended to reference the opinion of cost in the feasibility report. Director Brown stated Staff would make that change. Acting Mayor Turgeon asked if looping the existing watermain in the near vicinity of Harding Avenue and Harding Lane would benefit the City's water system. Director Brown explained looping a watermain provides redundancy in the system should the City experience things such as a watermain break; the loop would allow for back-feeding the area affected by the break. But more importantly, it improves water quality and flow characteristics. To extend watermain the City would have to utilize some of the existing easement areas and go in between homes or in backyards of one or two of the homes to make the connection. Any time the City installs any type of pipe it should do so with the understanding that it will have to access that pipe at sometime. That could be a charged issue with heightened concerns from residents. Easements are available at the other end of Wedgewood Drive to be able to facilitate the loop. Looping the watermain is a critical thing when there are a number of residents hooked up to City water. Engineer Landini explained the City has a large drainage and utility easement at the end of Harding Lane for the installation of watermain at a future point in time. He did not think it extended to Wedgewood Drive. The property on the corner of Wedgewood Drive was not evaluated because it is out of the scope of this project. Director Brown explained a large concern for this project for the easement at the end of the cul-de-sac Landini referred to is the stormwater facility. He would have concerns if the Council wanted to squeeze a watermain utility in an area where there is already a cramped stormwater pond. Other easements would have to be explored; without having the other plats in front of him he thought it could impact up to four properties. That would have to be researched. Councilmember Woodruff asked if there are any new developments that were not included in the feasibility report prepared by WSB and Associates that Council should know about. Engineer Landini stated the report is still accurate for the project that was evaluated. Woodruff moved, Bailey seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 09-034, "A Resolution Ordering Finalization of Plans, Specifications and Estimate for the Harding Lane and Harding Avenue Reconstruction Project not to include Watermain Improvements" subject to the cost estimate in the feasibility report from WSB and Associates for an amount of $557,400." Motion passed 4/0. Acting Mayor Turgeon closed the Public Hearing at 7:31 P.M. 7. PARKS Chair Norman reported on matters considered and actions taken at the June 9, 2009, Park Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). He noted the Commission went on a tour of three City-owned parks prior to its meeting. Councilmember Zerby stated he recently turned on to Eureka Avenue from Highway 7 at the same time a number of ballgames were ending.. There was a great deal of traffic congestion at that time; the line of cars waiting to get on to Highway 7 was horrendous. Drivers were doing anything possible to avoid the area. He noted Eureka Road is a narrow road. He asked if it would be possible to stagger the end times of the ballgames played in City parks. Chair Norman stated Community Rec Resources attempts to schedule the games so there isn't a great deal of overlap. Traffic is an issue that has risen recently. Norman stated the Commission has asked Staff to consider there traffic control for tournaments. Acting Mayor Turgeon suggested tournament schedulers should hire someone (e.g., a South Lake Minnetonka Police Department Community Service Officer) to provide traffic control services at tournaments. Norman explained that it's crry ;J, I1 ES June 22, 2009 Page of 20 his intent to add language to the tournament agreement that the organizers will be required to provide CSO traffic control for tournaments of a certain size. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated she received a few comments from people watching a recent soccer tournament when it rained a great deal about the fields being damaged because the teams played on very wet fields. Chair Norman explained that the specific sports organizations are responsible for calling the games because of inclement weather. Director Brown stated Staff does monitor the weather on a daily basis. Staff did consider the weather for that weekend, and determined the amount of abuse the fields would take would not be significant enough to shut down the tournament. In response to a question from Acting Mayor Turgeon, Chair Norman stated the same company is being considered to build the signs for the City-owned parks and City Hall. In response to a question from Councilmember Zerby, Chair Norman stated the Park Commission toured Crescent Beach as part of its May park tour. Administrator Heck explained that the Park Commission will prioritize projects for consideration by Council for 2009 and 2010, and the projects should be "bricks and mortar" type projects. 8. PLANNING Planning Commissioner Arnst reported on matters considered and actions taken at the June 16, 2009, Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Regarding Parking Requirements Director Nielsen stated in 2008 the Planning Commission updated the City's commercial zoning districts; it paired down the number of commercial zoning districts the City had and expanded the number of uses allowed in the remaining districts. The need to identify the City's off-street parking requirements was a bi-product of those changes; there were a number of uses added to the commercial districts that did not have an associated parking requirement. The Commission considered the parking requirements for all districts, not just the commercial districts. The proposed ordinance text amendment before Council this evening updates the parking requirements for every allowable use. It also includes a new definition for shopping centers which is more specific than the older definition. The parking requirement for shopping centers was reduced from 5.5 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross leasable floor area to 5 spaces. A lot of the categories added fall under the use of retail / service commercial which has somewhat of a standard of 1 per 200 square feet of floor area. A number of resources were used as input to the revisions. Some of them were the Institute of Transportation Engineers manual, the American Planning Association's Planning Advisory Service report and many ordinances. Councilmember Woodruff asked if the changes would affect existing properties; will there be tighter restrictions on the different uses of properties. Director Nielsen stated he did not think that would happen. Nielsen noted the requirement for schools was updated, and he thought the Minnewashta School should be in conformance with the proposed new requirements. He explained the proposed changes have made both fitness centers and restaurants a separate category with their own requirements. There could possibly be a shortfall for those two uses. Existing businesses are "grandfathered" in. Zerby moved, Bailey seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 459, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1201 of the Shorewood City Code (Zoning) Regarding Off-Street Parking." Motion passed 4/0. Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Adopting SOLUTION NO. 09-035, "A Resolution Approving the Publication of Ordinance NO. 459 by Title and Summary." Motion passed 4/0. 9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORDS A. County Road 19 Project Closeout Director Brown stated he had hoped to discuss this item during the work session preceding this meeting. The topic was not discussed due to lack of time. He prepared a draft memorandum on this topic that afternoon because Councilmember Woodruff wanted to discuss the topic this evening. Brown explained the City received the final items that were necessary to close out the County Road 19 and Smithtown Road Reconstruction Project from Hennepin County on May 5, 2009. The County had been in a long protracted discussion regarding final payment issues. It's not uncommon for the closeout of a project of this size to take a long time. Because Staff is the administrator of the project, Staff is responsible for closing out the records from the County, the Minnesota Department of Transportation - State Aid, the City of Tonka Bay, WSB and Associates, and Xcel Energy. There are more than 350 construction items that must be apportioned out to each agency and then submitted to the State Aid division to insure each item has been apportioned correctly and to insure each item is eligible for reimbursement from the Municipal State Aide (MSA) Program. Brown then explained he prepared three tables summarizing the financial aspects of the project. Table I summarizes the construction and construction engineering costs for the project. Table 2 summarizes accounts payables and receivables (i.e., the flow of funding between the agencies). Table 3 summarizes the MSA account. Brown highlighted the information in the three Tables. With regard to construction and construction engineering costs, Brown explained the total cost of the project was approximately $5.910 million. Shorewood's cost was approximately $1.656 million. Tonka Bay's cost was approximately $139,400 and Hennepin County's cost was approximately $4.114 million. The cost to underground utilities was $169,000 per the invoice generated by Xcel Energy. From a procedural perspective Shorewood's portion of that cost has to be listed as $84,500 even though that cost is being paid by the Shorewood rate payers. A Shorewood requested surcharge was put in place to pay for that and Xcel Energy is financing that. With regard to accounts receivables and payables, Brown explained he is in the process of categorizing the different payables to show what is/was payable to Shorewood by Hennepin County and Tonka Bay as well as what is payable to the County by both Shorewood and Tonka Bay. With regard to the MSA account, Brown explained Table 3 reflects some of the MSA transactions that have occurred to date. The County still owes Shorewood approximately $298,000 and Shorewood still owes the County approximately $357,000. Director Burton clarified Shorewood has received the funds from the County and is pending reimbursements from MSA. CITY O J k C,_ ;S June 22, 2009 Rage 7 of 20 Brown explained the MSA account has an unencumbered fund balance of $362,720.54. At the beginning of the year the City received notice that it would receive an annual allocation of approximately $184,400, noting that amount has been fairly consistent over the last three years. At the time the project was started the City asked for and received a five-year annual allocation advance (the maximum advance it could receive) in MSA funds from the State in order to do to this project. At that time Council understood that would not be enough to fund the entire project; the City would have to ask for another State Aid advance once the project was complete. That time has come. When this project was let the Councihnembers seated at that time knew this project would deplete the City's MSA account balance through 2012. MSA funds would begin to accumulate in the MSA account after 2012. The City hopes to recover approximately $665,600 from the MSA fund. Based on the City's current MSA account balance of $362,720.54, the City needs an additional three-year advance in State aid. Brown stated he hoped to have this project closed out by the next Council meeting which is scheduled for July 13, 2009. He also hoped to have a resolution prepared asking for a three-year advance from the State against the City's MSA account for Council to consider during that same meeting. He noted he would not be in attendance at that meeting. Brown then stated the concern is in trying to balance the City's financial liabilities against the project needs. The City's MSA account has always been considered when discussing the potential reconstruction of Vine Hill Road. Even if an advance in MSA funding was not requested, the City's MSA account balance would fund only a small portion of that project which could cost the City alone approximately $3 million. When the County Road 19 project was let, Staff and the seated Council understood funding mechanisms in addition to MSA funding had to be identified. Councilmember Woodruff thanked Director Brown for his efforts. He found the explanation from Brown very helpful, in particular with regard to MSA finding. Councilmember Woodruff asked if Staff expected the City would be able to collect the amount its due from Tonka Bay. Brown explained the City has invoiced Tonka Bay for approximately $129,000 a few weeks ago. He has been involved in discussions with the Tonka Bay City Administrator regarding how the amount was determined. The cooperative agreement for this project states the table in the agreement was an estimate and the final numbers will vary, and that by signing the agreement the City of Tonka Bay was willing to take on that burden. Woodruff then questioned if he correctly understood that the City was in the process of making its payment to Hennepin County. Brown explained once the reconciliation of the project financials is complete that will be considered. Councilmember Woodruff stated based on the City's annual financial report it appeared the City made an internal loan from the Sewer Fund to pay the contractors. Director Burton concurred. In response to another comment from Woodruff, Burton explained the City received the approximate payment of $298,000 from the County and the Finance Department is working with Director Brown to prepare the extensive paper work that is required to receive the MSA reimbursement. The City has received partial payment from Tonka Bay; there is an outstanding balance due of approximately $57,000 and Staff is currently in discussions with Tonka Bay about that. Woodruff asked if City should accommodate any risk for the County Road 19 project in the 2010 General Fund budget, to which Director Burton responded no. Director Brown stated when a project such as this is let the Department of State Aid allows the administering city for the project (in this case Shorewood) to ask for up to 70 percent of the project to be wired to the administering city's account to help finance the project. The City received an initial advance of more than $879,000. tJLAi3 CC J LT- ES Jul Page 8 of Director Brown noted that State Aid finds are allocated on a first-come first-served basis, noting the State said there are plenty of fiends available. Councilmember Bailey asked if the $665,600 the City hopes to recover from the MSA fund will pay off the City's internal loan, to which Director Brown stated it would. Director Brown clarified that the numbers included in his draft memorandum are subject to refinement. Councilmember Bailey asked if there was any reason to think Tonka Bay's outstanding balance payable to Shorewood of $57,000 will actually be determined to be less than that amount. Director Brown stated not from the City's perspective, noting there will likely be more discussion about the final cost. Director Burton commented that Tonka Bay received proceeds for the demolition of the Tonka Bay liquor store which had to be done in order to reconstruct the intersection. Director Brown explained the construction costs were very close to the original construction estimates. The right-of-way acquisition costs were originally estimated to be $250,000; that estimated amount was doubled for the project estimate. Shorewood's actual portion of the right-of-way costs were approximately $342,000. The Cities had no control of these costs as the County made the acquisitions. The demolition of the liquor store was a very contentious issue and cost more than estimated. Councilmember Zerby stated he has heard that the title of the old Country Road 19 triangle property, which is now the "gateway garden", has not been transferred to the City. Director Nielsen stated the property is in Tonka Bay and the municipal boundary has not been changed. The topic of detachment and annexation was discussed about two years ago, but was put on hold until the project was closed out. Both Cities were agreeable to that back then. Nielsen noted it is not a requirement of the project. 10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. City Hall Landscaping Director Nielsen stated during its May 26, 2009, meeting Council discussed three quotes for landscaping the City Hall property. Council continued this item to a fixture meeting because the quote from Markel] Laberee Design Group for design services was a verbal quote only. A written quote has since been received. The other two quotes were from TKDA and All Seasons Landscape and Design. Staff continues to recommend using the services of Markell Laberee Design Group to prepare the landscaping plan for a cost of $2,400. The amount includes $400 for preparing concept sketches for the monument sign proposed for the City Hall property. He explained Markel] Laberee Design Group is a division of Lan-De- Con, and if Lan-De-Con is selected to install the landscaping the City will not have to pay for the design work. Staff strongly suggests going with a design/build firm which Staff's recommendation is, as is one of the other firms. Nielsen then stated he has been working with Kristi Anderson, the park coordinator, who has been working with a sign company called Arrow designs on designs for new signs for the City's parks. The sketches for the park signs are very similar to what Staff was envisioning for the monument sign for City Hall. Staff suggests the signs incorporate the same stone that is used on the front of City Hall. Nielsen went on to state Staff recommends Council accept the quote from Markell Laberee Design Group to prepare the design and detailed plans for landscaping the City Hall property subject to eliminating the $400 cost to prepare concept sketches for the monument sign. Staff would pursue the sign design work through Arrow designs. The Park Commission is apparently pleased with the concept sketches it has OLIN G MINUTES ,Ju ' Page of 2u looked at from Arrow designs. He noted that representatives of Markell Laberee Design Group and Lan- De-Con indicated the City's $40,000 - $50,000 range for the entire landscape project is reasonable, and it may be sufficient to purchase the monument sign for the City Hall property. The firms are willing to work with the City's volunteer gardeners. He stated Mark Laberee indicated the design work could be completed prior to the July 13`x' City Council meeting. Nielsen explained Metro Blooms had done a demonstration project in Freemen Park and is looking for other demonstration projects to do. The City is required to install a rain garden as part of the City Hall renovation project; it made that commitment to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The garden was originally proposed for the west end of the City Hall structure, but is now planned for installation on the City-owned property located 5795 Country Chub Road. Metro Blooms will provide the design and labor for installing the rain garden, and the worst case cost to the City would be for plants and materials. Staff would like the City to be ready for Metro Blooms to start this project when it's ready to do its next demonstration project. Acting Mayor Turgeon requested the renters of City-owned house be made aware of what is going to occur. Director Nielsen stated lie and Kristi Anderson did go and look at a recent sign Arrow deSigns did and were pleased with what they saw. The stone on that sign was similar to what is on City Hall. The prices for the monument signs are reasonable. Councilmember Zerby expressed concern about approving a landscaping project that could cost $40,000 - $50,000 when the City is looking at a 2010 general fined budget gap of $137,000. The grass on the City Hall property is growing aggressively and the City has a public Works staff that does maintenance and landscaping in the City's parks. He asked if this could be delayed, and maybe black dirt and seed could be put down by City staff. He expressed discomfort with spending $50,000 on landscaping and a monument sign in this economic climate. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated she did not disagree with Zerby's comments, noting that it was best not to plant during the heat of the summer. Zerby noted that the sign for the public safety facility in the City was purchased after the facility was built. In response to a question from Councilmember Bailey, Director Nielsen explained the Council is only being asked to consider approving the design and planning portion of the landscaping project. Nielsen stated the bonding for the City Hall renovation included funds for the landscaping; the funding would not be coming out of the General Fund budget. Councilmember Zerby stated the City still has to pay that money back over time. Bailey said the City will need to have a landscaping plan at some time. Zerby stated he would rather spend the $2,000 that it would cost to have a plan prepared on black dirt and grass seed. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated even if City staff were to do the landscaping there still needs to be a plan. The plan could be pleased in over a few years. Councilmember Bailey suggested Council approve the funding for the landscape plan. He thought it was prudent to have a plan. Councilmember Zerby stated Council needs to decide what size landscape project it wanted a plan prepared for. Is it $50,000 or $5,000? He is not in support of having a plan prepared for a $50,000 project. Woodruff moved, Bailey seconded, authorizing the City to enter into an agreement with Markell Laberee Design Group for services to prepare the landscape plan for City Hall without the sign concept sketches for an amount of $2,000. C1 /OOD RED Pa €af Councilmember Zerby stated he thought it prudent to decide on the scope of the landscape project prior to having a plan prepared. In response to a comment from Acting Mayor Turgeon, Director Nielsen explained the cost to do the design work is independent of the scope of the landscape project. Nielsen then explained the plan could be phased in over two to three years. Motion passed 311 with Zerby dissenting. Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, directing Staff to have Metro Blooms install a rain garden that will be installed on the City-owned property located at 5795 Country Club Road for a cost not to exceed $1,500 for plants and materials. Motion passed 4/0. B. Southshore Center - Community Recreation Resources Agreement Administrator Heck stated that Councilmembers Woodruff and Zerby, Kristi Anderson with Community Recreation Resources (CRR) and he met on June 16`x' to discuss Southshore Center (the Center) operational issues as well as the draft management agreement between the City and CRR. The agreement included in the meeting packet includes input from Woodruff, Zerby, Attorney Tietjen, and Ms. Anderson as well as himself. After the meeting packet was prepared lie received some comments from Ms. Anderson regarding the scope of services. This group had discussed whether or not the Center should be staffed between the hours of 9:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. Monday through Friday (normal hours) or should it only be open when there is an event planned. Councilmember Woodruff thought the agreement should specify that someone be on-site during normal hours. That is what the agreement reflects in Item 1.A (regarding providing staffing at the Center). The previous draft of the agreement indicated that Ms. Anderson would devote a approximately 17 hours per week over three days per week to be at the Center, and CRR would have additional people at the Center for an additional 10 hours per week. She will also work with volunteers to provide volunteer host services for an additional 20 hours per week. Ms. Anderson has requested the 17 hours per week over three days be put back in the agreement. The volunteer hours (Item l.B) and the payment for the additional CRR hours (Item 5.ii) are specified in the agreement. Councilmember Woodruff stated he did not have a problem including the 17-hour language for Ms. Anderson; his intent was to ensure that CRR has someone at the Center during normal hours. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated including the language was more limiting to Ms. Anderson personally. If it was not included it would allow anyone representing CRR to be on-site during normal hours. Councilmember Woodruff stated he surmised that Ms. Anderson's concern was the City would expect her to be on site more than 17 hours per week. Administrator Heck agreed that was Ms. Anderson's concern. There was consensus to change the payment schedule in the agreement to be on a calendar quarter basis. Administrator Heck stated the term of agreement specifies the agreement will commence on July 4, 2009, and end on July 1, 2012, per Ms. Anderson's request. He explained that the short-term operating agreement expires on June 30, 2009. Councilmember Woodruff was confused as to why Ms. Anderson would want to start the contract on a Saturday, and the start date of July 4r" is inconsistent with the base fee payment for services beginning July 1 sr Page 1 0', Administrator Heck stated he would inform Ms. Anderson that the agreement would be effective starting July I" in order to keep the agreement consistent. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated if there is no one scheduled to use the Center the first few days of July there is no need to have anyone on site those few days. Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, approving the independent contractor agreement for the operation, management and programming of the Southshore Community Center between the City of Shorewood and Community Recreation Resources subject to adding a stipulation that Kristi Anderson will be at the Center for seventeen hours each week over a three day period, changing the term of agreement to commence on July 1, 2009, changing the word January in Item 4 to quarter 4 and specifying the quarter is a calendar quarter. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated that Item 7.C under Responsibilities of the City states the City shall "Provide Southshore Center membership to the Chamber of Commerce and a keyless entrance access system, as at City Hall." She interprets that to mean the City is giving the Chamber a membership to the Southshore Center and a keyless entry system. With regard to the keyless entry system, Administrator Heck stated there is currently a lock-box for a key to the Center and he thought the access code to the lock box was well known. Councilmembers Woodruff and Zerby thought it would be prudent to install a card access system similar to the one installed at City Hall that would allow access cards to be deactivated after they were no longer used. Councihnember Woodruff clarified that the Southshore Center will become a member of the Chamber of Commerce. Without objection seconder, the maker of the motion amended the motion to include Item 7.C will be changed to say "Provide Southshore Center membership in the Chamber of Commerce." and add another item under Item 7 to say the City will "Install a keyless entry system to the Center similar to the one at City Hall." In response to a question from Councilmember Bailey, it was clarified that the agreement does not specify that CRR is not expected to reach a certain threshold for rental and programming revenues/income. Councilmember Zerby stated during agreement discussions the City's representatives took the business plan at face value. Bailey expressed concern that CRR may not aggressively market the use of the Center. Councilmember Woodruff stated the four participants in the discussion stated the agreement is a good enough for the first six months and it can be amended as things unfold. Councilmember Zerby stated CRR will report back to Council on Center operations on a regular basis. Councilmember Bailey stated that based on the actual revenues and expenses reported for the interim operation of the Center from February through June it appears the other member cities would not owe the City anything for those operations. The revenues and expenses should break even. Administrator Heck stated that is correct. Bailey asked if that includes all payables. Heck stated there is an incorrect rider on the insurance policy for the facility and that has to be corrected on the insurance premium. Heck explained the City has absorbed soft costs for things such as his time and Attorney Tietjen's time. That is not included in the receivables and payables. From the time Shorewood assumed responsibilities for the interim operation of the Center to June 30`x' there should not be a deficit based on current information. The income for the Center has been sufficient to cover the operating costs. C - -J _'S 2 P2 12 of 20 Acting Mayor Turgeon requested Staff prepare a recap of the operating revenues and expenses for the interim operation of the Center. She asked Staff to ensure any payables incurred during the interim time period be paid out of income earned during that same time period; she did not want rental income earned for rentals that will occur after June 30`x' to be used to pay previous expenses. Councilmember Woodruff suggested this be prepared for the July 27`x' Council meeting so the interim operations can be closed out. Councilmember Bailey asked if Councilmembers Woodruff and Zerby intended on serving on an oversight committee for the Center operations. Zerby stated he would be happy to do that. Motion passed 4/0. Councilmember Woodruff suggested Council review and approve the initial 6-month plan for Center operations during its next meeting. He also suggested that two Councilmembers, one Staff member and Ms. Anderson meet weekly for the first few weeks and then adjust the schedule to meet less frequently. Councilmember Bailey suggested a standing committee be established. Woodruff moved, Bailey seconded, establishing a Center Oversight Committee consisting of the City Administrator, Kristi Anderson from Community Recreation Resources and two Councilmembers to meet weekly initially and then adjusting the meeting schedule to be less frequent. Motion passed 4/0. Bailey moved, Zerby seconded, nominating Councilmembers Woodruff and Zerby to serve on the Center Oversight Committee. Motion passed 4/0. Councilmember Woodruff stated he had asked Administrator Heck to get a quote for the cost to install a keyless entry system. Administrator Heck stated the cost to install the system at City Hall was $2,500. Director Brown stated that included the control box the system is plugged into, and he thought the City had the necessary computer. Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, authorizing the installation on a keyless entrance system on the Southshore Center and the re-keying of the existing locks for an amount not to exceed $3,500. Motion passed 4/0. 1. Final Approval of the Southshore Center Lease Acting Mayor Turgeon asked Attorney Tietjen if Council needed to again approve the lease agreement between the City of Shorewood and the member cities because the changes Council approved during it's June 8, 2009, meeting have been made to the document. Attorney Tietjen stated the Council did not have to re-approve the agreement it approved during the June 8"' meeting subject to the changes approved at that time. Turgeon stated it's her understanding that the Cities of Deephaven, Excelsior and Greenwood have also approved the agreement. Administrator Heck stated he had received an e-mail from Greenwood Mayor Kind stating the Greenwood Council did approve the agreement. Acting Mayor Turgeon recessed the meeting at 8:57 P.M. Acting Mayor Turgeon reconvened the meeting at 9:02 P.M. C. Council Procedures and Policies CI'. Y,AR CC J, 1 Jane " Z, Page 13 0 _ Administrator Heck stated the June 8, 2009, meeting packet contained a draft copy of a policies and procedures document regarding Council operations he had prepared. During the June 8"' meeting Council asked him to provide them with a copy of the City of Minnetonka's policies and procedures document. He has done that and lie has incorporated some of the components of Minnetonka's document into his draft document. The components added to his document are Item 5, Rules, Decorum and Order; Item 6, Addressing the Council; and more information on Motions. He explained lie did not expect Council to adopt the policies and procedures this evening. It's for discussion purposes only. Councilmember Woodruff stated that prior to this meeting he did not understand that the document provided to Council was a revision of the document provided to Council for its June 8"' meeting. He marked up the Minnetonka document and was prepared to discuss it this evening. He is not prepared to discuss the document during this meeting. He suggested this item be continued to another meeting. Councilmember Zerby stated he had no problem continuing this to another meeting, noting Mayor Lizee was absent this evening. Councilmember Bailey stated he thought Administrator Heck had prepared a great document. The document provides Councilmembers with a much needed tool for participating in more structured meetings. He cautioned Council should only adopt the policies and procedures if it intends on following the policies and procedures. He stated he is prepared to provide his input this evening, but he has no issue continuing this item to another meeting. In response to a comment from Acting Mayor Turgeon, Administrator Heck explained the policies and procedures are very similar to Roberts Rules of Orders. It has rules that are more streamlined than Roberts Rules of Orders with regard to things such as addressing the presiding officer of the meeting and for motions. He explained the document states if there is some procedure that is not covered in the document Roberts Rules of Orders would be the fallback. Administrator Heck asked Council to keep a copy of the document for discussion during its July 13"' meeting. Councilmember Zerby thanked Administrator Heck for his efforts and stated he thought the document was great. D. Social Host Ordinance Administrator Heck stated South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) Chief Litsey had sent him a copy of a social host ordinance which was adopted by the City of Minnetonka, a copy of the ordinance was include in the meeting packet for this evening. The SLMPD Coordinating Committee has discussed adopting such an ordinance, and it has requested the member cities' Councils consider adopting a common ordinance using Minnetonka's ordinance as a model. A social host ordinance makes it a misdemeanor for anyone to knowingly provide a venue for underage drinking. The Minnetonka School District supports the cities in the School District adopting such an ordinance. Minnetonka's ordinance was predicated on an ordinance adopted by the City of Chaska with some modifications. He suggested Council have a policy discussion about whether or not it wants to consider a social host ordinance and if so what format it should have. Councilmember Woodruff although he has heard about the concept of a social host ordinance, this is the first time he has read much detail about it. He stated he would like to get more information about such an CI J" AR COUNCIL ES June 1, : - Page 14 of 20 ordinance. He requested that he be provided with the ordinance Chaska adopted. Chief Litsey's memorandum indicates the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) had not yet drafted a model social host ordinance. It also indicates a copy of Minnetonka's adopted ordinance was forwarded to the LMC for review and comment, but as of Litsey's writing of his memo he had not received any comments from the LMC. He stated he would like to know what position the LMC is going to take regarding such an ordinance. Administrator Heck stated he does not know if the LMC has responded to Chief Litsey Councilmember Bailey stated he would like additional information. He questioned if any cities had considered such an ordinance but decided against it because of what a city believed were unintended consequences, and if so what were the possible unintended consequences. He wanted to discuss both the pros and cons of adopting such an ordinance. Councilmember Zerby stated the ownership issue came up when the University of Minnesota discussed the topic.. He also requested Council be provided with more information. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated she understood the Coordinating Committee received additional information. She then stated the City abuts the City of Deephaven and she thought the SLMPD would be doing more mutual aid activities with the Deephaven Police Department. She questioned what Deephaven's position is on such an ordinance. She stated Administrator Heck's memorandum asks if Council wants Staff to modify Minnetonka's ordinance to make it consistent with Shorewood's City Code, but she is not sure what the Code contains about this. Attorney Tietjen stated she had additional information that could be provided to Council. The social host ordinance was a topic of discussion at the recent legislative update with the Minnesota Association of City Attorneys. She also has information regarding the development of Minnetonka's ordinance with respect to the changes Minnetonka made to Chaska's ordinance and the reasons for the changes. She also has copies of ordinances adopted by other cities. She will provide Administrator Heck with the information. Administrator Heck stated this is not a time sensitive item. It was requested by the SLMPD and the Minnetonka School District. Council can schedule a policy discussion whenever it wants to. E. Excelsior Fire Department 2010 Budget Administrator Heck explained that the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) Board recommended adopting the proposed EFD 2010 - 2030 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and 2010 Operating Budget. The Board discussed the budget in detail. EFD Chief Gerber and the Board identified ways to find the projected $120,000 contribution to the Excelsior Firefighters Relief Association's (EFRA) frond for pensions while maintaining a zero percent overall budget increase over the 2009 adopted budget. The municipal contribution for 2010 will be the same as in 2009. For 2010 each member city's contribution will be based entirely on ad valorem and because of that the City's contribution for 2010 will be less than in 2009. Councilmember Bailey stated the State Auditor's office will not certify the amount of the required contribution until August 2009, but he believes the $120,000 estimate is fairly accurate. He explained that Chief Gerber worked closely with the Board to arrive at the budget. The budget includes the use of $40,000 in General Fund reserves and $40,000 in Fire Facilities Fund reserves. The remainder was offset through budget reductions. He thought the same approach could be used to help offset the 2011 required CITY O JLAR COU rt ES June ~2, Page 15 o 2_ contribution if necessary, noting it isn't desirable. The shortage of funding for the EFRA pension fund is a I0-year problem. An improvement in the financial market could reduce the size of the problem, but lie is not willing to count on that. The member cities will not be able to use reserves for 10 years in a row. In response to a question from Acting Mayor Turgeon, Councilmember Bailey explained firefighters are partially vested after 10 years. He also explained the per-year-of-service benefit is currently $6,250. In response to another question from Turgeon, Bailey explained there would not be any savings by postponing the replacement of the inspector vehicle/chief vehicle for one year. The previous EFD Board agreed to this replacement schedule: the Chief's vehicle will go to the Duty Officer, the Duty Officer's vehicle goes to the Fire Inspector, and the new vehicle will go to the Chief. Eight years after the purchase of a new Chief's vehicle that vehicle will be sold at auction. He related Chief Gerber has had conversations with a local fire department individual about its needs for a vehicle; the EFD could get more for the old vehicle by selling it to another department than it could by stripping it out and selling it at the auction. He noted Chief Gerber made many reductions in the operating budget but did not recommend delaying the replacement of the vehicle. Councilmember Bailey stated Chief Gerber has prepared a list of restoration priorities should the required contribution be less than the projected $120,000 amount. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated restoration of minimal wage increases would not be her first priority. Councilmember Zerby stated he attended the EFD meeting of the member cities' Councils. All of the questions were answered well. He thanked Councilmember Bailey for all of his efforts in guiding the development of the EFD budgets. Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the recommended Excelsior Fire District 2010 - 2030 Capital Improvement Program and the 2010 Operating Budget both dated May 18, 2009. Motion passed 4/0. F. South Lake Minnetonka Police Department 2009 Financial Status and 2010 Budget Overview Administrator Heck stated the meeting packet for this meeting contained a copy of the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) 2008 Audit Management Letter prepared by Stuwart Bonniwell, the certified public account for the SLMPD. It also contained a copy of the SLMPD verified claims for January - March 2009, and the first draft of the SLMPD 2010 Operating Budget. Heck explained he was not able to attend the June 3, 2009, SLMPD Coordinating Committee budget work session during which the Committee discussed the first draft of the budget. Therefore, he would not be able to provide any input about questions raised during the budget discussion or about the budget itself. Heck explained that Excelsior City Manager Luger, Tonka Bay City Administrator Loftus and he co- authored a memorandum to Chief Litsey outlining their observations and questions about the budget. Their memorandum was sent to Chief Litsey and the Coordinating Committee Members on June 19`x'. They suggested budget packets also include actual expenditures and revenues from previous years as well as current year-to-date actual information. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated she attended the Coordinating Committee work session. She did not think the Committee Members asked many questions. She highlighted some of the comments Chief Litsey made about the budget. Revenue from State Peace Officer Aid was reduced to $120,000 in 2010 from $137,000 in 2009; the $120,000 amount is probably optimistic. The line item Miscellaneous State Ct )UNCtL F ES Fa Reimbursement includes grant reimbursement for expenses incurred by participating in the Safe and Sober Program. Turgeon then stated it was her recollection that a couple of years ago the then Shorewood Council asked Chief Litsey to prepare budget in a format similar to the Excelsior Fire District's (EFD); that format contains past actual information, year-to-date current year information and the proposed next year budget. Litsey continues to produce 50-page, color-copy budget proposals that, from her vantage point, dazzles people with a bunch of words but has no meaning, and does not reflect the entire picture. It is her understanding that a couple of the member cities' administrators/manager had asked what was included in the line item supplies. The 2008 Audit Management Letter states supplies expenditures [fuel costs, ammunition, and general operating supplies] exceeded the budgeted estimate, and it occurs year after year. Turgeon suggested the message that should be delivered to Chief Litsey is the budget format needs to change. In her eight-year tenure on the Council the format has always been the same no matter what the Shorewood Councils have asked for. She stated she supports Administrator Heck's request for more detailed information. Administrator Heck stated he has spoken with Mayor Lizee about this on several occasions, and he raised the same issues with her that he has raised with the other member cities' administrators/manager and with Chief Litsey. He explained that is why he and the other cities' operating committee members wrote the memorandum to Litsey. He stated if he had not already sent the Councilmembers a copy of the letter he will do so. He hoped the Coordinating Committee would respond positively and insure more detailed information was provided. He noted the SLMPD is a joint powers organization; therefore, feedback should flow through Mayor Lizee, the City's representative on the Committee, to Litsey. He stated Mayor Lizee has indicated receptivity to some of the things discussed. Councilmember Zerby expressed concern that the draft budget reflects a pretty moderate 2.1 percent increase in expenses and a 6 percent decrease in revenue. He stated the budget reflects a moderate increase in wages yet the estimated revenues from Excelsior Park and Dock Patrol Services for 2010 are the same as the 2009 budgeted amount. He questioned why the cost for providing those services was not increased accordingly. He then stated he would also appreciate it if Chief Litsey would provide more detail so lie could analyze the budget more closely. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated SLMPD personnel received a 3 percent wage increase in 2009, yet another wage increase is budgeted for 2010. She explained the Coordinating Committee did not receive any comparative data about how SLMPD personnel are compensated compared to other police department personnel. She did not know what cost savings would be achieved after the realignment of some of the people and responsibilities; this will occur after Deputy Chief Nieling's retirement June 30`x'. She stated she was proud of the EFD for its due diligence, and she wanted to send the same message of a 2010 zero percent budget increase over 2009 to the SLMPD. In response to a comment from Councilmember Zerby, Acting Mayor Turgeon stated she did not believe all the expenses associated with the SLMPD participating in the Safe and Sober Program would be offset by the reimbursement from the Safe and Sober Grant Program. She wanted Chief Litsey to show in detail how the expenses will be offset by reimbursements. She also wants to know what the SLMPD's reserves are in the various funds. She did not find anything in Litsey's budget documents that indicate the SLMPD would use some of its reserves in 2010. She thought Litsey needed to be a little more creative. CITE' OF I ,A COUNCIT C MINUTES June 2, 2009 Page 1°7 € f20 Councilmember Bailey stated lie seconded Acting Mayor Turgeon's comments. He thought the EFD appropriately budgeted for zero percent wage increases, and that is an important goal for 2010 for the SLMPD. If the $120,000 required contribution to the EFRA fund for pensions was taken out of the 2010 EFD Operating Budget it would have decreased from the 2009 budget. He thought the EFD appropriately used reserves. He suggested Chief Litsey and the Coordinating Committee take a long hard look at using reserves during this time when the member cities are really stretched in terms of what they can afford. Councilmember Zerby stated Council had been provided with a 2009 year-to-date budget versus actual comparison through March 2009. It provided similar information to what Council has requested from the City's Finance Department. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated she wanted the SLMPD to provide detailed information similar to what the EFD provides. Councilmember Woodruff stated he is sensitive to the fact that the Coordinating Committee is responsible for doing the detail review of the SLMPD's draft budget. If he were a member of the Committee lie is not sure how he would be able to analyze the draft budget with the level of budget detail provided. He thought the EFD's format for providing draft budgets was a reasonable way to go about it. He then stated he wanted an explanation line item by line item and even sub-line item of why the budget estimate varied from the 2009 budget estimate. The SLMPD 2008 Audit Management Letter states that supplies expenditures exceeded the budget estimates for the past several years. The 2008 budget estimate for supplies was $66,000 and the actual was $79,000. For 2009 the budget is $69,900 and the budget estimate for 2010 is $66,500. He questioned why the budget estimate is going down while expenses are increasing; there is no explanation. Woodruff then stated the Shorewood Council had strongly suggested that the SLMPD prepare a budget with a zero percent increase over the 2009 budget. If the SLMPD had submitted a budget with a zero percent increase he would ask fewer questions about the budget. The first draft of the budget reflects a 3.1 percent increase; that increase uses up all of the increase the City can levy. The Audit Management Letter talks about the balances in various funds. He thought the SLMPD should do an analysis of those fund balances, and determine how any issues should be addressed. Woodruff noted he will have a very very difficult time approving a SLMPD 2010 Operating Budget that reflects any increase over the 2009 budget. Administrator Heck stated the year-to-date budget comparison data included in the budget packet was not part of the budget packet; it was included in the meeting packet for the June 3, 2009, Coordinating Committee regular meeting. He expressed that he hoped that at a minimum the Coordinating Committee would get the necessary level of budget detail in the same report as the proposed budget to make the analysis of draft budgets easier. Councilmember Zerby stated there should be historical budget data available that can be accessed. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated Chief Litsey's lack of response to the Shorewood Councils' requests for more detailed information is borderline insubordination. From her vantage point, it appears the attitude is if historical data is wanted there are ways people can get it. Litsey should accommodate the requests. Councilmember Zerby stated it's easy to ask for a zero percent budget increase over 2009. That makes him nervous when dealing with public safety. He wants to ensure the budget is scrutinized, but he does not want to pick an arbitrary percent increase. The SLMPD is losing funding from other government agencies and the differences must be made up at the local level. He thought it prudent to have long hard This was removed from the consent agenda at Councihmember Bailey's request Councilmember Bailey asked if the City was entering into the request for proposal (RFP) process having a position on dual versus single sort recycling. Administrator Heck stated he did not have a position and he did not think the Council has endorsed a position. Heck explained the RFP is predicated on an RFP jointly issued by several cities a few years ago. At that time the then Council wanted to remain with a dual-sort system. Councihmember Woodruff stated he was a Councilmember when this was discussed in 2007. Council considered a single-sort system because it thought it would be easier for residents, thereby possibly increasing participation. There were two reasons for not moving to a single-sort system. The first was the controversy there is in the industry about what portion of the recycled materials from a single-sort collection actually ends up being recycled. The other reason was cost differential. Councilmember Zerby stated lie has heard that a single-sort system of recycling is more expensive than a dual-sort system, but participation rates are higher. Councilmember Woodruff stated the cost differential won't be known until the responses corne back. Councilmember Bailey stated the RFP has references to revenue sharing. He asked if the City has participated in such a revenue sharing program, to which Administrator Heck stated the City's current contract does not include that. In response to anther question from Bailey, Heck stated the City has not collected on performance guarantees with the current vendor because the vendor has satisfied the performance requirements. The Councilmember Woodruff's comments about the RFP are summarized below ➢ Staff should verify that references to websites, organizations, plastic bottle compensation and so forth be researched to determine if they are still valid. ➢ Staff should verify the insurance coverage limits are still valid. Attorney Tietjen commented that insurance limits will increase effective July 1, 2009. ➢ There is a typographical mistake in the retention of records paragraph. ➢ The RFP should include a request for the cost for a bi-weekly pickup option for both the single-stream and dual-stream collection scenarios. ➢ In the contract selection process it should be clarified that Council will actually select the contractor. Bailey moved, Zerby seconded, approving the draft request for proposal for residential contract recycling services subject to making the changes suggested above and to making the references current. Motion passed 4/0. 11® STAFF AND COUNCIL RE- A, Administrator and Staff Director Nielsen stated the City has received feedback from the Metropolitan Council on the City's updated Comprehensive Plan. Staff will incorporate the changes into the Plan before Council considers it for adoption toward the end of the year. B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Bailey stated the ground cover around the base of the SE Area Water Tower looks disastrous. He suggested something be done about it, including killing everything and planting rye grass. The prairie grass appears to be doing better on Radisson Road. In response to a comment from Councilmember Bailey, Director Brown explained that the City of Minnetonka did a mill and overlay approximately 300 feet in length for potion of Vine Hill Road south of Townline Road. The current plan is for Minnetonka and Shorewood to do a mill and overlay of Vine Hill Road in 2010. Councilmember Bailey stated he does not like the process that is used when considering watermain installation as part of a roadway project. The City received a petition during the public hearing for the Harding Avenue and Harding Lane reconstruction project from the residents, and the vast majority of the petitioners apposed being assessed for the installation of water main. He was not sure what he would have done had a petition not been presented. Based on recent results, it's apparent that using survey monkey to conduct survey is not effective. He commented that maybe registered mail could be considered with specific instructions stating that lack on action on the part of property owners constitutes some type of default action. Director Brown explained Staff held two public information meetings, it mailed out three notices, it hand delivered another notice, and it conducted surveys on survey monkey. He stated Engineer Landini spent a significant amount of time trying to insure residents were informed. Councilmember Bailey stated he was glad the residents submitted the petition which indicated 71 % of the affected property owners had no interest in having watermain installed. Councilmember Zerby clarified the residents did not want to be assessed for having it installed. In response to a comment from Acting Mayor Turgeon, Director Brown stated early on in the project Staff explained that acquisition of easements for the roadway reconstruction would not be necessary. Staff has had spirited discussions with some property owners about potential easements for utilities. Councilmember Woodruff stated there was a question about who is responsible for repairing the lights on the buoys in Lake Minnetonka. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District has that responsibility. Hennepin County is responsible for the buoys themselves. He participated in a tour of Grays Bay and Phelps Bay to look at the results of the Eurasian Watermilfoil treatment of the Bays. The results are very positive; little milfoil remains. Curlyleaf pondweed was not treated in 2009; there is some growth of that. Carman Bay was not treated this year because the residents did not think it was worth contributing to the cost of the treatment. There are still watering restrictions with Lake Minnetonka water because there is a slight residual of the chemical in the lake. That should be lifted soon. ;IJLAI CC ~ ET N J, ES Ju " . , g Page 20 of 20 12. ADJOURN Zerby moved, Bailey seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of June 22, 2009, at 10012 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder ATTEST: Christine Lizee, Mayor Administrator/Clerk