Loading...
02-24-14 CC Reg Mtg Minutes CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2014 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 7:03 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, Sundberg, and Woodruff; Attorney Keane; City Clerk Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and, City Engineer Hornby Absent: None. B. Review Agenda Mayor Zerby noted staff had asked that Item 3.C be removed from the agenda. He asked that Item 10.E Representative Appointment on the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board be added to the agenda. Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the agenda as amended. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Special Meeting Minutes, February 3, 2014 Hotvet moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the City Council Special Meeting Minutes of February 3, 2014, as presented. Councilmember Siakel noted that Council had a special meeting on February 3, 2014, because its January 27 meeting was cancelled due to inclement weather. She was not able to attend the special meeting because she was out of town. She stated that when she read the minutes for that meeting she was concerned about some of the comments that were made about the approval of the increase to the stormwater rate. There were comments made about raiding the Stormwater Management Fund, about the increase in the rate being a backdoor way of taxing the residents, and about Council needing to act as grownups. She explained the City hired Ehlers to do a rate study for the stormwater rate and the sanitary sewer rate. Increasing the stormwater rate is not a backdoor tax or way to pay for trails. The Stormwater Management Fund was projected to have insufficient funds to meet the City’s stormwater management needs. She noted she found the comments to be condescending and unfair. She stated there is no intention to raid or backdoor anything. Council is being fiscally responsible. She commented that Council talked about trails during its February 8, 2014, Council and staff retreat and there was discussion about possibly bonding for the construction of trails. She noted that she wanted to go on record that small rate increases have been well thought out. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 2 of 14 Mayor Zerby stated she was missed at the February 3 meeting and that he appreciated hearing her comments this evening. Motion passed 5/0. B. City Council Executive Session Minutes, February 10, 2014 Hotvet moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the City Council Executive Session Minutes of February 10, 2014, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. A. City Council Work Session Minutes, February 10, 2014 Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of February 10, 2014, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, February 10, 2014 Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of February 10, 2014, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Zerby reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Shorewood Yacht Club Multiple Dock Facility License C. Approval of Cooperative Agreement for Signal System County Road 19 and Trunk Highway (This was removed from the agenda at staff’s request.) Motion passed 5/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. PUBLIC HEARING None. 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS None. 7. PARKS A. Report on the February 11, 2014, Park Commission Meeting CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 3 of 14 Director Nielsen reported on matters considered and actions taken at the February 11, 2014, Park Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Councilmember Woodruff stated that during its February 3, 2014, special meeting Council authorized the transfer of the proceeds from the sale of the residential property located at 5795 Country Club Road from the General Fund to the Park Capital Improvements Fund. Director Nielsen noted the Park Commission was pleased to hear that. Woodruff stated doing that provides the funding necessary for park improvement projects through 2015. 8. PLANNING A. Setback Variance/Variance to Construction Standards Applicant: Dan and Trina Volbrecht Location: 5770 Smithtown Circle Director Nielsen explained Trina and Dan Volbrecht own the property located at 5770 Smithtown Circle. They were cited in October 2013 for a zoning violation. They constructed a vinyl storage structure in their rear yard without a permit and in violation of Shorewood zoning regulations. The structure does not comply with the rear yard setback and side yard setback abutting the street requirements for the R-1C, Single-Family Residential zoning district the property is located in. And, it does not meet the construction requirements for an accessory structure in a residential district. Rather than remove the structure the Volbrechts chose to apply for variances. The City suspended any enforcement efforts until that variance requests had been resolved. He displayed a copy of a survey showing the location of the vinyl structure and a picture of that structure that was taken in October. Staff identified three alternative locations for an accessory structure the size of what they want that would comply with City Code. There are other locations that would work as well. Nielsen noted the Planning Commission held a public hearing on their requests during its February 5, 2014, meeting and unanimously voted to deny the variances. It took into consideration that if something can be done without a variance it is difficult to satisfy the practical difficulty criterion for granting a variance. He explained staff had recommended that the violation be corrected within 15 days of the Council meeting. The Commission recommended they be given until May 15 to remove the structure. In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Director Nielsen explained the tall posts that are part of the fence will as part of this have to be shortened so they comply with the Zoning Code. They are included in the zoning violation notice. Councilmember Sundberg noted she was the Council liaison at the Planning Commission meeting when this was discussed. She stated she understood the Volbrechts had thought they had come up with a good solution. Unfortunately, they did not know the requirements of the City Code. The Planning Commission did not think it was practical to ask them to remove the structure during the winter. Sundberg moved, Woodruff seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14-008. “A Resolution Denying Setback and Building Construction Material Variances to Dan and Trina Volbrecht, 5570 Smithtown Circle, and Requiring the Structure in Question be Removed No later than May 15, 2014.” Motion passed 5/0. 9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 4 of 14 A. Amendment to Chapter 610 of the Shorewood City Code Pertaining to Seasonal Weight Restrictions Director Brown explained that the Seasonal Weight Restrictions (SWR) identified in the City Code extend from March 1 to May 1. That does not give any consideration to the actual frost conditions in the ground. Before the internet age those restrictions used to be quite common. Cities were able to reduce the number of phone calls that came in asking if the weight restrictions were still in effect. Most metropolitan communities have gone to having their seasonal weight restrictions coincide with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) restrictions. That is what Council is being asked to consider for the City this evening. The City has about 103 SWR signs. With this process when MnDOT implements weight restrictions Public Works personnel will have to put up the new signs. It would take three people about one full day to do that. And, when MnDOT removes the restrictions the signs would have to be taken down. Although it is labor intensive, cities understand that putting restrictions in place protects their high-value investments. MnDOT has ways to accurately check the frost conditions and therefore its restrictions are appropriately matched to its findings. The Seasonal Weight Restriction Ordinance has to be changed in two places to implement the change to the MnDOT program. One place is for four-ton roadways and the other is for six-ton roadways. Siakel moved, Hotvet seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 508 “An Ordinance Amending Chapter 610 of the Shorewood City Code as it Pertains to Seasonal Weight Restrictions.” Mayor Zerby noted he had spoken about this with a developer. He stated this change will be good for both the City and contractors. Councilmember Woodruff stated the City won’t have new weight limit signs by March 1. He asked what will be done this spring. Director Brown explained staff has talked about removing the current March 1 – Mary 1 SWR signs or bagging them because frost is not going to leave the ground any time soon. The City won’t enforce its Ordinance. Woodruff suggested leaving the signs up now and then take them down when MnDOT thinks it is safe or when the new signs are available. Brown explained if the current signs are left up the roadways are restricted from heavier loads and a contractor may be allowed to transport his heavy load on other roadways but when the contractor reaches the City’s border they won’t be able to deliver their load. Woodruff stated if the signs are taken down now there would be no way for people to know if there is or is not a weight restriction. Brown noted that MnDOT’s restrictions are currently off and they will go on when the conditions are soft. Woodruff expressed concern about not having any signs up. Brown explained if Council approves this change to the Ordinance then next year in the spring the signs would not be up until MnDOT enacted weight restrictions. Woodruff stated his concern is about wanting to have weight restrictions in the City but there would be no signs up. Brown noted the City should be able to get the new MnDOT generic weight limit signs quickly and that custom signs take a minimum of six to eight weeks to get. Motion passed 5/0. B. Authorization for Expenditure of Funds for Seasonal Load Restriction Signs Director Brown stated staff is asking Council to authorize the purchase of 120 weight limit signs. The number includes a few spares. The State Contract pricing for the signs is $23.85 each or a total of $2,862. He noted that the 2014 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) has allocated $6,300 to replace a subset of CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 5 of 14 signs in order to bring them into compliance with the Federal Highway Administration retroreflectivity standards. The weight limit signs were the next signs to be replaced. Sundberg moved, Woodruff seconded, authorizing the expenditure of funds out of the Capital Improvement Program for the purchase of new weight restriction signs for an amount not to exceed $2,862. Motion passed 5/0. 10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Amending Chapter 201 Planning Commission of the Shorewood City Code Director Nielsen explained that during the February 8, 2014, Council and staff retreat there was a suggestion made to reduce the number of number of people on the Planning and Park Commissions to five from seven. The amendments to the City Ordinance Chapter 201 included in the meeting packet for this agenda item and the following agenda item would do that. He noted they do not address the attendance issue. He stated staff recommends that issue be referred back to the respective Commissions with the understanding that the current attendance requirements are quite liberal. Mayor Zerby noted that he supports making the change. The City struggles to find suitable applicants to serve on these two Commissions as well as other commissions and boards. He thought the change would make the Commissions more effective and efficient. Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 509 “An Ordinance Amending Chapter 201 of the Shorewood City Code as it Pertains to the Planning Commission.” Motion passed 5/0. B. Amending Chapter 202 Park Commission of the Shorewood City Code Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 510 “An Ordinance Amending Chapter 201 of the Shorewood City Code as it Pertains to the Park Commission.” Motion passed 5/0. C. Badger Park Solar Energy Proposal Director Nielsen explained he and Mayor Zerby have met with representatives from JJR Power LLC who were making a proposal to the City to install a solar array that would provide some portion of the electric power consumed by the Southshore Community Center (SSCC), the Badger well building, Badger Field and Shorewood City Hall. It would sell power to the City for less than or equal to what Xcel Energy charges. The rate would be guaranteed for a number of years. He noted John Jaffray with JJR Power is present this evening to explain how things would work. He stated Councilmember Woodruff had submitted a list of questions to staff that he wanted answered and Mr. Jaffray had provided answers to them earlier in the day. He explained that in order to possibly qualify for funding for the program this year a letter of intent needs to be submitted and the application filed in a lottery by February 28. Mr. Jaffray thanked Council for the opportunity to be here. He explained a program was adopted in the State of Minnesota in June 2013 with Xcel Energy (Xcel) and other investment utilities where they have allocated a portion of SIT funds from conservation improvement allocations. Xcel will allocate $15 million a year for small projects for residential, government, nonprofit and commercial whereby those who install systems of a maximum size of 40 kilowatt (KW) per installation can receive a ten-year CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 6 of 14 production payment from Xcel. In the case of Shorewood it would be 20 cent per kilowatt hour (KWh) produced. He explained JJR is not making a hard, binding proposal at this time because there is not adequate information to do that. They are not sure what size the array should be. The plan would be to submit a 20 KW capacity array proposal on behalf of the City to a lottery the State Department of Commerce runs. That capacity array would provide 27,000 KWh a year. It is approximated the energy consumption in the Badger Park property to be 10-times that amount. Residential use is about 1,000 KWs per month. That window of opportunity closes on February 28. If the City were to win it would receive roughly a 20 KW allocation pot of money. That is 20 KW times the number of KWh used per year for 10 years. That would allow a system to be installed and paid for by JJR or its investors. The City would buy energy at a reduced cost over 10 years. He stated JJR is a Minnesota company that has been doing stuff in Minnesota since 2006. He has been involved with energy in the State since 1995 and commodities and finance since 1981. JJR would use panels made in Minnesota by tenKsolar. The project would cost $80,000 – $90,000 and that would be paid by JJR and its investors. The City would not have any out-of-pocket cost. A contract and lease-right agreement would have to be approved by Council if the City received an award. The project would receive a 30 percent investment tax credit and accelerated appreciation. The panels have a 20 – 25 year useful life. He noted if the City gets an award it is not obligated to proceed and it can refuse any of the contract terms. He stated the objective is to have a win/win situation. He commented that he is a resident of the City of Deephaven. He stated it would be a relatively small project for JJR. And, it would be good for the economics of the Shorewood. JJR has not vetted out fully where the structure would go. Councilmember Sundberg noted she is very interested in renewable energy for Shorewood. She stated she thought there is a lot of potential for the City. She commented she has many, many questions that would have to be answered. She expressed reluctance to going about this in this way. She thought there is a need for a planned approach. She stated there are many renewable energy players around; some are terrific and some are not. There are many technologies available. She commented that tenKsolar is a good company. She stated she is aware of many miserable flops and she does not want Shorewood to make that mistake. She suggested also looking into wind as a renewable energy while noting she is aware there are a lot of issues with that. She also suggested bringing in experts that can help Council and staff on financing, on technology, on appropriate location and so forth. She noted to move this forward quickly in order to meet the February 28 date is not compelling to her. Councilmember Hotvet noted a decision has not been made about what Badger Park improvements will be made. She then stated that if Council decided to pursue the award she asked if it could be used for a project in a different area or if the scope could be larger. Mr. Jaffray stated the configuration and sizing would be locked in with the Department of Commerce. But, the City would not have to go forward with the project. The Department of Commerce does not want to receive a lot of frivolous applications. Mr. Jaffray stated the program JJR is talking about is one program that the City can pursue pursuant to the law and there are two or three other options that the City could pursue with regard to renewable energy in terms of solar. They are a Community Solar Garden Program and a Value of Solar Tariff. Councilmember Siakel stated she supports the idea of renewable energy and the idea of taking a well thought out approach to assessing its appropriateness for the City. She asked if the City could apply for the award next year. Mr. Jaffray responded it could. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 7 of 14 Mayor Zerby stated he would like to apply for the award this year. That would not obligate the City to accept the award. He then stated things are moving forward with narrowing down options for Badger Park. He noted that he would be pleased if the solar array would be able to power the Badger Park lighting and irrigation system. He stated he does not think there would be any harm in applying for the award and then continuing to have additional dialogue about this. He then stated the possibly location for the array is good. Councilmember Woodruff thanked Mr. Jaffray and Mr. Woodley for answering the questions he submitted so quickly. He stated having to submit an application by February 28 when it is already February 24 does not sit well with him. He agreed the improvements to Badger Park have not been solidified. He questioned if the Public Works facility might be a better location for this. He stated he thought it prudent to entertain other players in this business as well if Council is serious about this. He noted he knows a fair amount about one of them and that company is a multi-billion dollar company. He stated he wants to pursue renewable energy but not the award. Mayor Zerby clarified that Council is being asked to support sending a letter of intent only. He noted he likes the fact that local investors would be investing in the residents. Councilmember Sundberg reiterated that she is interesting in looking into renewable energy for the City and that she wanted to bring experts in who can help Council and staff determine what makes the best sense. She commented that investors come and go; they are vapor. She stated the projects are generally well intentioned but they often vaporize because investors change their mind. She then stated the application would be made on the City’s behalf but it would done in cooperation with a company she doesn’t know about. She noted that she is strongly against moving forward with this initiative. She stated there are plenty of similar incentives available. She then stated there will be more legislation that gets passed this legislative session that will mandate more investment in renewable energy by utility companies. She commented that City will not lose anything by taking more time. Councilmember Woodruff concurred and stated the most monetary opportunity the City would lose would be about $19,900. He noted he is not worried about this opportunity passing Council by. Woodruff moved, Sundberg seconded, tabling this item and directing staff to investigate this further and bring back more information from a variety of sources. Mayor Zerby stated he appreciates Council’s desire to look into this further. He then stated he viewed this as an opportunity to do something at no cost to the City. He viewed it as win/win situation. He noted that there will be a cost to the City to hire consultants to help Council and staff work through options. Motion passed 4/1 with Zerby dissenting. Mayor Zerby thanked Mr. Jaffray and Mr. Woodley for coming. D. Boulder Cove Proposed Development – City of Chanhassen Director Nielsen explained in 2006 a developer proposed developing the property immediately south of the south end of Strawberry Lane. At that time twin homes and townhomes totaling 39 units were proposed. The development did not come to fruition. The City of Chanhassen has received a new development proposal for the Boulder Cove site. It would essentially be an extension of Strawberry Lane down to a cul-de-sac in the property serving 31 new lots and 2 existing properties. Shorewood staff has raised a number of issues that should be brought to the attention of Chanhassen. He clarified staff is not suggesting that the project be killed. He stated one of the issues raised is a land use issue. The proposal CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 8 of 14 refers to 31 single-family residences yet the developer refers to them as its “NextGen Series”. Some of the 31 units are designed as basically two family dwellings. He noted Council recently approved an ordinance to allow accessory apartments for extended family use. He explained the City has tight restrictions on them. For example, the apartments are for extended family members only and there is a size restriction on it. They cannot be rented out. Staff is not sure what, if any, restrictions Chanhassen has. He explained another issue raised is about the amount of additional traffic, both vehicle and pedestrian, that would result from development and the effect it would have on two somewhat substandard roads with nd regard to width (Strawberry Lane and West 62 Street). That issue was also raised in 2006. Staff has nd suggested Chanhassen indicate what its intent would be particularly for West 62 Street because traffic would probably primarily come and go that way to get to Highway 7. Strawberry Lane is a fairly narrow roadway and there is a lot of pedestrian traffic along there going to and from the school. Drainage was an issue in 2006. It appears for the recent application that the developer has spent a fair amount of time attempting to address the drainage issue. Based on what staff has looked at so far the developer will route the stormwater runoff out to the south. Nielsen stated staff suggests the issues and concerns they identified be incorporated into a letter to Chanhassen that Mayor Zerby would sign. The letter needs to be received by March 6; the end of the comment period. Councilmember Hotvet disclosed she lives along Strawberry Lane. She asked that the City strongly request that a traffic study be done (issue #6). She explained the traffic on that road is extremely heavy in the morning and afternoon with people driving or walking to and from the Minnewashta Elementary School. The trail also crosses in that area. She questioned how a proposed streetlight will work at the nd intersection of Strawberry Lane and West 62 Street (issue #11). Councilmember Woodruff also expressed concern about Strawberry Lane. He stated the development would be in the Minnetonka School District and he assumes the proposed houses would be attractive to families with children of or going to be of elementary age. That will generate a lot of additional pedestrian traffic as well. He then stated there is a development being proposed in Shorewood along Summit Avenue, a substandard street, which residents in Shorewood and Chanhassen have concerns about. He went on to state that the proposed development in Chanhassen will be in an already congested area. He noted that he supports including all of the 11 issues and concerns identified by staff in the letter. He commented that albeit infrequently when he tries to go east on Highway 7 after coming south on Church Road during the morning rush hour it takes a lot of time. He thought a stop light is needed at that intersection. Councilmember Sundberg stated the proposed Boulder Cove development in Chanhassen is far more serious than the proposed Summit Woods planned unit development (PUD) in Shorewood. The Boulder Cove development would include significantly more dwelling units. She noted she supports incorporating all 11 issues and concerns in the letter. Councilmember Siakel stated there is a big difference between a 4 unit development and a 31 unit development. She asked Director Nielsen what NextGen means. Nielsen explained from what he can tell it is the next generation model that the developer has come up with. The units would be divided with a main level and lower level each with a kitchen, separate access and separate living quarters. The two units could be locked off. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 9 of 14 Councilmember Hotvet asked that the issue of the trail crossing be added to the list of issues and concerns. Councilmember Woodruff stated the Boulder Cove Community narrative included in the meeting packet states “This revolutionary series is a multi-generational home plan designed specifically to accommodate two adult generations living under one roof with privacy and convenience.” Director Nielsen stated staff does not know how Chanhassen will regulate that. Councilmember Hotvet stated if a development is totally within Chanhassen she asked if it can build an exit/entrance on to Shorewood property. Director Nielsen explained this development would be using a public street and it has the right to do so. Based on past experience the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) will not allow the development to have an access to Highway 7 especially so close to Church Road. A number of years ago there were two corridor studies done and as a result of one Shorewood closed five direct accesses to Highway 7. Hotvet clarified she was talking about feeding onto Strawberry Lane. Nielsen stated for the proposed Summit Woods PUD the new residents will end up using Hummingbird Road at times and that roadway is located in Chanhassen. Staff’s issue is about if the roadways can support the development. He noted there is no way to route the traffic directly onto Church Road. He then noted that the excerpt from the February 27, 2006, City Council meeting minutes included in the meeting packet answers some of the questions being asked. Mayor Zerby stated the excerpt from the February 27 meeting indicates there were 14 people on record that spoke to the issue. Yet, there is no one present this evening to comment on this. He asked if this came up quickly or if more information was provided in advance in 2006. Director Nielsen stated the application was received by Chanhassen on February 14, 2014. He noted that Chanhassen will hold a public hearing on the development on March 18. nd Councilmember Woodruff asked if the 2006 proposal showed an entrance onto West 62 Street. Director Nielsen stated the road design is just about identical to the one in the 2006 proposal. nd Martin Heiland, 26510 West 62 Street stated his property is three driveways from the access to West ndnd 62 Street. He noted he spoke with the Chanhassen City Engineer last week. He stated West 62 Street is narrow and small and it is deteriorating. When four houses were built in a new development along nd Strawberry Lane the construction traffic really put a lot of wear and tear on West 62 Street. He can’t imagine what the construction traffic for 31 houses will do to the roadway. The City Engineer told him nd that Shorewood maintains West 62 Street. And, because the development only borders that roadway by nd a small amount the developer is not obligated to make upgrades to West 62 Street. He indicated he supports addressing the issues and concerns that have been raised. He noted that this evening he wanted to make his concerns known. He stated the Minnetonka School District is open enrollment and there are lots of parents who have to drive their children to school. The traffic is very busy between 7:00 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. on school days. He finds it scary to walk with his three young children to the bus stop at Church nd Road. It is a 100 foot walk on West 62 Street and sometimes 10 cars will drive by during the short walk. Councilmember Hotvet stated there is a driveway into the development off of Highway 7. She asked if that could be a separate access road. Director Nielsen stated he thought it was one or two driveways that serve the existing houses. He explained the plan staff has seen shows that those will be closed off and those two houses would access the new cul-de-sac. Hotvet clarified at the access off of Highway 7 she is talking about there are two pieces of wood across it. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 10 of 14 Director Nielsen explained the corridor studies for Highway 7 basically recommended the removal of direct access points onto Highway 7 for safety reasons. Based on experience if there is access off of Highway 7 onto an internal street he does not think MnDOT will allow that either. He stated he is not sure the neighborhood would want another thru street. There was a lot of controversy about that when Shorewood Oaks was built. Hotvet stated it would be interesting to know what MnDOT’s position is on that existing access. Nielsen stated a comment could be added regarding what is MnDOT’s position on access to Highway 7. nd Councilmember Woodruff asked if the Shorewood/Chanhassen boundary is the middle of West 62 Street. Director Brown responded it is. Woodruff then asked if Chanhassen is responsible for one half of the roadway. Brown responded yes. Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, directing staff to draft a letter to the City of Chanhassen incorporating the eleven issues and concerns identified by staff and authorizing the Mayor to sign it. Councilmember Sundberg clarified that Councilmember Hotvet asked that a concern about the trail crossing be added. Without objection from the maker or seconder, the motion was amended to include adding the concern about the trail crossing. Motion passed 5/0. E. Representative Appointment on the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board Mayor Zerby noted that at the dais this evening Council found a copy of a resolution making a representative appointment to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Board. The former representative Mark Sylvester has been unable to attend recent meetings. The City has advertised to fill that position. There has been one applicant and the Council will interview that person on March 10. In the meantime he thought it would be prudent to appoint an interim representative to attend the February 26 LMCD Board meeting. Staff member and Shorewood resident Julie Moore is willing to serve as the interim representative. If the applicant is well suited to that position Ms. Moore’s appointment will be rescinded during a future meeting. LMCD member cities cannot have an alternate representative. Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14-009, “A Resolution Appointing Julie Moore as the Interim Representative to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board.” Motion passed 5/0. 11. OLD BUSINESS 12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 1. Monthly Budget Report Mayor Zerby noted the meeting packet contains a copy of the December 2013 General Fund Monthly Budget Report. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 11 of 14 2. Reminder of Upcoming Work Session on March 10, 2014, to Review the Current Southshore Center Agreement and Discuss the Advisory Committee Proposal Mayor Zerby noted a Council work session is scheduled for March 10, 2014, to review the current Southshore Community Center (SSCC) agreement and to discuss the Southshore Center Advisory Committee’s (SCAC) proposal. He explained staff has met to discuss questions staff had about the business plan the Vantage Team prepared for the SSCC. Staff would like to discuss the questions it has with Council. Director DeJong noted that staff is meeting on February 25 to summarize the questions it has and it will email them to Administrator Joynes for his review. Mayor Zerby noted the SCAC has sunsetted. Its last meeting was about one week ago. During that meeting Greenwood Mayor Kind made a presentation; she expanded on the Vantage Team’s presentation. The SCAC thought Kind could make a presentation to the City Councils of the five cities that co-own the SSCC. She will make her presentation to the Shorewood City Council during its March 24 meeting. Other Engineer Hornby noted that the residents in the Sunnyvale Lane neighborhood have been invited to a neighborhood meeting on February 27 from 6:30 – 7:30 P.M. to talk about the improvement project. Director DeJong stated the preliminary year-end 2013 budget indicates that the year should end in a positive with the amount being about the same as the amount of the proceeds from the sale of the previously City-owned property located at 5795 Country Club Road. About $100,000 of General Fund reserves had been budgeted for use to balance the budget. That will not be needed for 2013. He noted the 2013 financial audit will happen during April. Staff is moving forward on the conversion to utility billing component of the new financial system. Representatives from Springbrook will be on site three days next week. Mayor Zerby stated hearing that the City came in under budget is good news. Director Nielsen stated that during Council’s next meeting he will present the results of the 2014 aerial deer survey done by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Hotvet stated that earlier in the day she and Mayor Zerby were among about 35 people who attended a meeting about a possible Lake Minnetonka Regional Scenic Byway initiative. She found the meeting to be very informative and beneficial. She noted things are in the exploratory phase. People are being educated and it is up to them to educate others about what that it would mean for the communities and the roadways. As things evolve the information will be brought back to the various city councils, agencies, businesses and so forth. Mayor Zerby noted he will attend a South Lake Minnetonka Police Department Coordinating Committee meeting on February 26 at 5:30 P.M. Councilmember Siakel stated that during Council’s February 10, 2014, meeting she gave a brief update about the January 22, 2014, Excelsior Fire District (EFD) Board meeting she attended. In hindsight she now believes that should have given a more thorough report. The comments made after her report CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 12 of 14 questioned if she had exceeded her authority during the Board meeting. She believes she acted within her scope of authority. She provided some background information and facts.  The five cities that are part of the EFD are serviced by a volunteer fire department.  There are currently approximately 44 volunteers. The member cities are fortunate to have people willing to volunteer.  The EFD has two fire stations – one along Smithtown Road in Shorewood and one in Deephaven.  The firefighters are paid an hourly call rate. The 2013 rate was $10.40.  If the EFD had to have a full-time department the member cities could possibly have to pay triple what the current cost is.  Firefighters have to meet a very rigorous training program, they are required to live in close proximity of one of the two stations, and they are on call.  Firefighters think their per-year-of-service (PYOS) pension benefit is an important part of the compensation they get. That benefit has been in place for a very long time.  An increase to the benefit has been a topic of discussion for quite some time.  EFD Board Chair Greg Miller from the City of Excelsior did a very good job of orchestrating the effort to define principles and policy guidelines for future benefit increases based on the Excelsior Firefighters Relief Association’s (EFRA’s) fund for pensions (Fund) coverage ratio, or Funding Coverage Percentage (FCP), thresholds and corresponding PYOS pension benefit percentage increases.  When she first updated Council on the EFD Board and EFRA Board discussions about a benefit increase in October 2013 what was being considered was a 4 percent ($250) benefit increase for 2014. An 8 percent ($500) increase was ultimately approved by the EFD Board during its January 22, 2014, meeting. She voted in favor of that. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) only allowed a $350 increase in 2014 so the other $150 will be carried over to 2015.  When the benefit increase was discussed by the two Boards during October a 4 percent increase was proposed for 2014 – 2017. At that time the following increase guidelines were proposed: If the coverage ratio was at least 110 percent and less than 115 percent the PYOS increase would be 2 percent; if the ratio was at least 115 percent and less than 120 percent the PYOS increase would be 3 percent; if the ratio was at least 120 percent and less than 125 percent the PYOS increase would be 4 percent; and, if the ratio was at least 125 percent the PYOS increase would be 5 percent. During its January 22, 2014, meeting the EFD Board approved higher coverage ratios in the resolution the EFD Board adopted establishing policy guidelines for PYOS pension benefit increases (112 percent – 2 percent, 117 percent – 3 percent, 124 percent – 4 percent, 132 percent – 5 percent). That is why a higher 2014 benefit increase was approved. The new guidelines will go into effect for 2015. There was a lot of negotiation that took place during that meeting  As a Council appointed liaison to the EFD Board she has the authority to negotiate and to make decisions in the best interest of Shorewood and its residents. That is what she did.  The volunteer firefighters become partially vested in their pension after 10 years of active service and they are fully vested after 20 years.  Any person who gives 20 years of their time and meets all of the demands of the Department certainly deserves the EFD Board to act in good faith. She believes the Board did that.  The EFD Board unanimously adopted the resolution establishing policy guidelines for pension increases. The majority adopted the resolution approving a guaranteed increase in the 2014 PYOS pension benefit. That was the right thing to do. The benefit was last increased in 2007.  The money in the EFRA’s Fund is the EFRA membership’s money. The vast majority of the money is from the Fund’s investments earnings. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 13 of 14  If there is a significant downturn in the market that creates a situation where the funding level in the Fund does not cover the entire pension liability the member cities through the EFD are required to make mandatory contributions to the Fund to help restore it to 100 percent funded. The 2008 market event created such a situation. In large part EFD General Fund reserves were used to make the contributions. There have been very few times when mandatory contributions have been required. Siakel explained that during its January 22, 2014, meeting the EFD Board again discussed the need to put aside contingency funds in the event of another significant downturn in the market. She noted it is not fair for the firefighters to be solely responsible for maintaining a high coverage ratio to protect against the need for mandatory contributions. The EFD Board agreed that a portion of the EFD 2013 Operating Budget surplus will be set aside for future mandatory contributions. Siakel stated there has been very thoughtful planning by the EFD Board and there has been a lot of back and forth amongst the EFD Boardmembers. She thought things are in the right place and that the Board did the right thing. She then stated that to suggest she exceeded her authority as the City’s representative on the EFD Board – she absolutely did not. She did what was in the best interest of Shorewood and its residents and a volunteer fire department that goes above and beyond every day. She went on to state that she will give a more thorough report on the EFD Board’s March 26 meeting and the discussion about setting aside funds in case there is another significant market downturn. Siakel clarified that the EFRA Board and membership does not need the EFD Board’s approval to increase the PYOS pension benefit. She stated she thought the outcome of the negotiations was a win/win. Councilmember Sundberg thanked Councilmember Siakel for being so diligent and stated she believes Siakel is doing an excellent job. She noted that she could not agree more with Siakel’s approach. Councilmember Hotvet thanked Councilmember Siakel for coming back and responding in an appropriate and respectful way and for presenting the facts. She expressed appreciation for what Siakel is doing as a member of the EFD Board. She stated she is confident that Siakel is doing the right thing on behalf of the residents. Safety comes first. She thanked Siakel. Mayor Zerby stated the EFD Board is and has been well run. He then stated he knows that the Board has had discussions for a long time about the need to set aside contingency funds in the event of the need for future mandatory contributions. He noted he was a member of the EFD Board for two years after the 2008 market event. He expressed his appreciation for the work Councilmember Siakel has done as a member of the EFD Board. He stated the EFD’s volunteer firefighters deserve an increase. He thanked Siakel. Councilmember Woodruff stated he feels suitably chastised for comments he made during the February 10, 2014, Council meeting regarding this topic that he thought were appropriate. He then stated the message for him is that in the future when guidance is given or sought by a representative to a commission that it should be done in the form of a motion and have Council vote on it. It would make it clear what is authorized. That is what some cities do. Woodruff then stated that Councilmember Siakel pointed out that the EFRA Board can increase the PYOS pension benefit without the EFD Board’s approval. Should that occur the EFRA would be solely responsible for any shortfalls in the Fund. He went on to state that even though the previous shortfalls were funded out of reserves it was out of the cities’ pockets. The reserves were there to be spent for something else. The reserves should be spent for something necessary or to reduce the cities contributions CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES February 24, 2014 Page 14 of 14 to the Fire Department. To consider it free money to be used anyway people want would be fiscally irresponsible. Councilmember Hotvet noted that she does not support making everything a motion when giving guidance. To her that is micromanaging. Director Brown thanked the Public Works personnel for their efforts during last Thursday and Fridays significant snow event. Many of them worked 13 — 16 hours to keep the City's roadways safe. They did an excellent job under challenging conditions. Councilmember Sandberg asked how the City's salt situation is. Director Brown explained salt is in very short supply. Next year's contracts will include guarantees. Staff has managed to get a different form of salt for about twice the price and it has diluted the mix in order to try and get through the season. Mayor Zerby thanked Director Brown and his Public Works team for their efforts. He noted that he continually receives compliments from residents on how quickly and how well the City's roadways are cleared. Comncilmember Siakel stated she does not remember ever receiving a snow alert message from the City. She noted she thought it was well written and to the point. Director Brown stated the City's Communications Coordinator came across that and suggested the City send out the alert. The City will continue to use that. Attorney Keane explained that he has been in consultation with Administrator 7oynes for some time about the fact that effective March 3, 2014, he is going to be affiliating his practice with law firm Kutak Rock LLP. That is a larger firm, larger platform and more compatible with the work that he does. He plans on continuing to serve as Shorewood's City Attorney and he will be backed up by others who have experience in municipal practice. He anticipates a seamless transition. He will continue to provide the same level of service that he has provided. His rate and retainer structure will not change. He noted that he will work with Clerk Panchyshyn on a resolution for an amended designation for Council's consideration on March 10, 2014. 13. ADJOURN Hotvet moved, Siakel seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of February 24, 2014, at 8:39 P.M. Motion passed 510. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder Scott "rby, May ATTEST: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk