02-24-11 Multi City Mtg MinCITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2011
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6:30 P.M.
Shorewood Mayor Lizee called the Shorewood Work Session to order at 6:34 P.M
A. Roll Call
Present. Shorewood Mayor Christine Lizee; Councilmembers Laura Hotvet, Debbie Siakel,
Richard Woodruff, and Scott 'Lerby; Administrator Brian Heck; Finance Director Bruce
DeJong; Planning Director Brad Nielsen; Director of Public Works Larry Brown; and
Building Inspector Joe Pazandak
Also Present: Excelsior Councilmember Greg Miller; City Manager Kristi Luger; Finance Director
Joan Carlson; and Public Works Superintendent Dave W isdorf
Tonka Bay City Administrator Joe Kohlmann
Fritz Partners Rebecca Heiderpriem
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Shorewood Mayor Lizee noted Excelsior Mayor Nick Ruehl is not able to be here this evening because
of medical reasons. She also noted that Tonka Bay Mayor Bill LaBelle was not able to be in attendance
because of family medical reasons.
Shorewood Mayor Lizee stated this is the second visioning meeting for the Cities of Excelsior,
Shorewood and Tonka Bay (the Cities).
Shorewood Mayor Lizee turned control of the work session over to Ms. Heiderpriem.
Ms. Heiderpriem encouraged the participants to have open and honest dialogue this evening. She then
reviewed the agenda for the evening.
2. ESTABLISH EXPECTATIONS
Ms. Heiderpriem asked the attendees to identify what they expect to accomplish during this session. The
expectations were as follows.
➢ For the participants to feel safe and excited about sharing ideas relative to the big
picture.
➢ To explore what is feasible.
➢ To identify and get buy in on specific projects the three Cities can move forward with.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 24, 2011
Page 2 of 7
➢ To identify one area to work on collaboratively as a South Lake community.
➢ To ensure an investment in each other and keep the conversations going when things
become more difficult in the conversation.
➢ To build on the great things the three Cities have already done together.
➢ To gain an understanding of the different perspectives from the three Cities.
➢ To establish common ground to build off of.
➢ To gain an understanding of what occurred during the January 31, 2011, meeting.
➢ To establish stepping stones for the leadership group.
➢ To make progress during this session for furthering the visioning mission.
➢ To gain an understanding of what future collaborative projects are out there.
➢ To have a cohesive, collaborative, communicative and conjunctional group; a key to this
effort.
3. REVIEW OF JANUARY 31, 2011, VISIONING MEETING
Ms. Heiderpriem reviewed the ideas identified during the visioning session held on January 31, 2011 (the
details of which can be found in the minutes for that meeting). The ideas which had been grouped into
categories were displayed around the room. The categories are: more efficient processes; combined
services; fewer staff; improved attitudes; financial implications; new branding; and, the lake.
4. CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT
Ms. Heiderpriem asked the group to identify the great things the three Cities are already doing
collaboratively. The following things were identified.
➢ They are members of joint powers organizations for public safety services; one joint
organization has four member cities and the other five.
➢ They share equipment.
➢ They share in the ownership of the Southshore Community Center along with two other
cities.
➢ They bid out seal coating together.
➢ They do beach maintenance together.
➢ They share public works staff sometimes.
➢ They safety train their public works staffs together.
➢ They train election judges together.
➢ They are members of a fourteen - member -city joint powers organization that provides
public access television services.
➢ They share some utilities.
➢ They share retail and sports complexes.
➢ They work on community events together (e.g., the Fourth of July Celebration, Art on
the Lake, Apple Day, Arctic Fever, etc.).
Ms. Heiderpriem asked the participants how the above collaboration efforts came about. The responses
included through great leadership and great staff, and some was out of the necessity to provide services
in a cost effective manor (e.g., police and fire safety services). Ms. Heiderpriem commented those three
elements continue to be present today. She stated the Cities have already done a lot of good work; they
just need to continue to keep building on those past efforts. She congratulated the Cities for the good
work they have already done.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 24, 2011
Page 3 of 7
Ms. Heiderpriem commented that when she served as Cabinet Secretary for Information Technology for
the State of Wisconsin she was charged with the goal of getting departments within state government to
collaborate and share information technology resources.
Ms. Heiderpriem stated during the last visioning meeting the resource of Lake Minnetonka (the Lake)
was mentioned but not discussed. She asked the participants if there are ways to share services for
preserving and protecting the Lake. She then asked Shorewood Councilmember Siakel to respond to her
question. Siakel responded the Lake is the one big thing that binds the cities surrounding the Lake
together. Siakel stated the recent discussions about the Lake have centered on protecting it going forward
and creating a common community view of what that means.
Excelsior Councilmember Miller explained that the fourteen Lake area communities are members of an
organization called the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD). He noted the branding aspect of
the Lake is extremely important for the City of Excelsior. He stated the Cities of Excelsior and Tonka
Bay lease dock slips to their residents. He commented that the Commons in Excelsior is in effect a
regional park. Excelsior City Manager Luger noted the Commons would not be anywhere near as
successful if it weren't abutting the Lake.
Shorewood Mayor Liz& stated the Lake is a highly recognized and regarded amenity that the five South
Lake cities share and want to protect, noting it does have financial implications to all properties located
within the five cities independent of whether or not the properties front the Lake. She then stated all five
South Lake cities are concerned about the health and sustainability of the Lake and how the Lake is
managed. The health and sustainability of the Lake depends on healthy partnerships between the Lake
cities, the LMCD, the Minnehaha Watershed District (MCWD), the Lake Minnetonka Association and
the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR).
Ms. Heiderpriem asked who governs the Lake and is primarily responsible for it. Excelsior
Councilmember Miller responded at the state level it's the MnDNR. Then there are the MCWD, the
LMCD, Hennepin County and the individual cities. Shorewood Mayor Lizcre stated the various agencies
have different responsibilities and they often overlap. Ms. Heiderpriem then asked if the Cities are
leading the changes with regard to the Lake or if they are at the table with the agencies. Shorewood
Councilmember Siakel stated the Cities are already at the table with the agencies. Siakel explained that
with regard to aquatic invasive species (AIS) there are more efforts expended to monitor boats that leave
the Lake than there are on those that enter the Lake. Siakel stated she thought attitudes on how those
things should be managed differ. Miller stated he thought the Cities have common goals. Miller then
stated the Lake cities have less influence with the MnDNR than it does with the LMCD.
5. DISCUSS FUTURE IDEAS
Ms. Heiderpriem stated during the last visioning session the participants were asked to finish the
statement "We will know we have reached the desired end state of collaborating as three cities when ... ".
The ideas identified were classified into seven categories. She asked the participants to identify which of
the ideas are controllable and which were uncontrollable. She explained controllable ideas are things the
participants and others in the three Cities can do something about. Uncontrollable ideas should be
communicated to the appropriate individuals but the cities won't spend time on them. She then asked the
participants to identify the ideas as short-term or long -term goals. There was group consensus to consider
a project that takes 0 — 18 months or less as short-term. Work on longer term projects could begin in the
next 0 — 18 months but won't be completed within 18 months She also asked the participants to
determine priorities within categories by weighted voting with each participant having two votes in each
category.
CITY OF SIIOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 24, 2011
Page 4 of 7
The results of these exercises and associated discussion are as follows.
More Efficient Processes
Idea
Controllable/
Short -Term/
Uncontrollable
Long-Term
1. share salt storage
C
ST
1. hold quarterly structured meetings of city
C
ST
administrators, city managers, public works
C
ST
personnel and planning personnel
C
ST
2. coordinated capital improvement programs /
C
ST
deve activities
C
LT
3. have unified zoning & city planning outside the
C
LT
box of city borders
i C
LT
4. h ave co mmon utility reading/billing s stems
C
LT
5. establish great partnerships with state agencies
C
LT
(e.g.; the Minnesota Department of Natural
C
LT
Resources)
C
LT
• combine election functions
U
• one comprehensive plan for all
U
Combined Services
Idea
Controllable/
Uncontrollable
1 Short -Term/
Long -Term
I
1. share salt storage
C
ST
2. Ash Borer tree investigation
C
ST
3. share software and information technology
services (tied with 4)
C
ST
4. combine refuse and recycling services
C
ST
5. County Road 19, a corridor for all
C
LT
6. improve the parks and recreation band shell
C
LT
7. ensure consistency with rental housing ordinances
(tied with 8)
1 C
LT
8. safe walking/biking access to all city parks and
connections between cities
i C
LT
➢ converge to one building
C
LT
➢ unified water system - already have unified sewer
1 C
LT
➢ larger police department
C
LT
➢ create proper road crossings through the three
cities for the Three Rivers Park trail
C
LT
• five South Lake cities working together, not just
three
U
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 24, 2011
Page 5 of 7
Financial Implications and Pewer Staff (these were combined for voted weighting)
Idea
Controllable/
Uncontrollable
Short -Term/
Lona -Term
j Uncontrollable
Long-Term
1. review opportunities for seasonal people /
equipment — formulate rotating crews
C
ST
2. succession planning
C
ST
3. cities have increased service deliverables at
reduced cost
C
ST
➢ outsourcing
C
ST
➢ shared city management (part time managers /
administrators / planners)
C
LT
➢ consolidate city staff (eliminate specialties,
contract out, on call, etc)
C
LT
➢ an e to funding formulas - who pays how much
C
LT
• tax base is level between all three cities
U
• everything is exactly the same as it is now, but
costs less
U
• a way to tax visitors who use our cities e.g., a local
sales tax
U
Branding
Idea
Controllable/
Short -Term/
j Uncontrollable
Long-Term
1. make the services we provide the best we can
provide; top quality services, not more services
C
ST
• when residents say they live in the South Lake area
U
ST
rather than being from a particular city - broader
C
ST
community identity
C
LT
• one larger city title with municipalities or
i U
burroughs
Improved Attitudes
Idea
Controllable/
Uncontrollable
Short -Term/
Long-Term
1. make the services we provide the best we can
provide; top quality services, not more services
C
ST
2. end to the "mine /your" attitude
C
ST
j 3. formally recognize Excelsior as the downtown of
the South Lake area
C
ST
4. when you notice no difference in community
infrastructure and services between the cities
C
LT
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 24, 2011
Page 6 of 7
• change values, change expectations
U
• eliminate parochialism
U
• residents recognize and support value of city
U
services
• resident perception of local government is very
U
positive — taxpayers have complete confidence that
the city is being run as effectively and efficiently
as possible
• when residents believe that the services they
U
receive are well worth their tax dollars and that
they are getting a good value
Ms. Heiderpriem reviewed the list of priority projects in the order of number of votes received.
➢ share salt storage (ST)
➢ Ash Borer tree investigation (ST)
➢ share software and information technology services (ST)
➢ combine refuse and recycling services (ST)
➢ review opportunities for seasonal people /equipment; formulate rotating crews (ST)
➢ succession planning (ST)
➢ cities have increased service deliverables at reduced cost (ST)
➢ hold quarterly structured meetings of city administrators, city managers, public works
personnel and planning personnel (ST)
➢ coordinated capital improvement programs / development activities (ST)
➢ have unified zoning and city planning outside the box of city borders (LT)
➢ have common utility reading /billing systems (LT)
In response to a question from Ms. Heiderpriem, Shorewood Mayor Lizde stated she thought the projects
on the list were doable.
Shorewood Couneilmember Siakel expressed some concern on how the above list of combined priorities
was developed. She explained she would have voted for more than two projects in one category and only
one or none in other categories. She stated she did not think the list was totally indicative of what she
thought were the most important priorities.
Ms. Heiderpriem asked if there were any suggestions about how the group wanted to deal with the Lake
category.
Shorewood Administrator Heck stated from his vantage point most of the things the Cities' residents are
concerned about with regard to the Lake the Cities have minimal control over. The Cities' Councils can
allocate funds to organizations to deal with issues such as aquatic invasive species. He commented there
are a number of agencies that have responsibility for various matters related to the Lake and some of their
efforts overlap.
Shorewood Mayor Lizee stated the Lake is important to all residents, either directly or indirectly, in the
Lake area community. It's imperative for the Cities' Councils and staffs to stay abreast of the issues and
adequately communicate to their residents what the issues are and what steps should be taken to address
the issues.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 24, 2011
Page 7 of 7
Shorewood Councilmember Hotvet stated as a non- lakeshore property owner she thinks public access to
the Lake is extremely important. This includes the Commons and the public beaches around the Lake.
Communications about those amenities are important as well. She suggested a Lake group be formed to
stay abreast of Lake issues, to make sure they are communicated to the residents and to work with the
various agencies.
6. MEETING WRAP -UP
Ms. Heiderpriem reviewed the expectations for the session the group identified early on in the meeting.
Per group feedback all but one expectation was satisfied. The group thought the expectation "To gain an
understanding of the different perspectives from the three Cities." will not be satisfied until work on
projects begins to happen.
Ms. Heiderpriem asked the group to provide feedback about this session. The feedback was as follows.
Positive things mentioned about the session
• the session was worth peoples time
• new ideas were presented
• some issues were defined better
• some possible action plans were defined
• identified specific things which could benefit the Cities' residents
➢ Opportunities
All the Cities were not fully represented. Therefore, there is concern that the
Cities' councils may not fully support the list of priorities identified this evening.
ADJOURN
Shorewood Mayor Liz6e adjourned the Shorewood City Council Work Session of February 24,
2011, at 8:25 P.M. for all but Excelsior City Manager Luger and Shorewood and Tonka Bay City
Administrators Heck and Kohlmann and the Recorder.
Excelsior City Manager Luger and Shorewood and Tonka Bay City Administrators Heck and Kohlmann
stayed on to begin discussing how they would like to move forward with some of the opportunities
identified during the first visioning meeting and prioritized during this meeting. The three have agreed to
meet on March 4, 2011, to continue that discussion.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
Christine Freeman, Recorder
Christine Liz6e, Mayor