Loading...
11-25-24 CC WS MinutesCITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 2024 5:30 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING Mayor Labadie called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Labadie; Councilmembers Labadie, Callies, Maddy, Sanschagrin, and Zerby; City Attorney Shepherd; City Administrator Nevinski; Parks and Recreation Manager Czech; City Clerk/HR Director Thone; Planning Director Darling; Director of Public Works Morreim; and, City Engineer Budde Absent: None B. Review Agenda Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he would like to switch the proposed order of the agenda items because he felt the water connection program was more pressing than drafting the Council bylaws. Mayor Labadie asked if the Council was also open to the idea of recessing and reconvening the Work Session following the regular City Council meeting, if necessary, in order to get through the full Work Session agenda. There was consensus of the Council to reconvene the meeting, if necessary, following the regular City Council meeting in order to get through both agenda items. Zerby moved, Sanschagrin seconded, approving the agenda, as amended. Motion passed 5/0. 2. WATER CONNECTION PROGRAM City Engineer Budde made a presentation on ways the City may be able to incentivize residents to connect to municipal water through existing service stubs or connections. He outlined the City's current practice for water connections and noted that they have not been required. He reviewed details on the number of current connections and households that have water available to them, but have not yet connected. He stated that staff felt that it may be a good idea to send out a questionnaire to residents in order to get input from them on their desire to connect to the City water service. He explained that if residents were interested, staff could follow up with information related to potential costs for their specific property. He noted that some of the things that they wanted to communicate to residents are about some of the benefits of connecting to municipal sewer and water, for example, when the power is out, municipal water still functions. He briefly reviewed the ages of the wells in the City and noted that many of them are forty years old, or older. He noted that staff was also proposing that residents could be allowed to keep their existing wells in order to use it for irrigation purposes. He explained that one of the comments that staff CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 2of17 has heard is that the City does not have very good water, which is somewhat subjective. He noted that the City does tend to have a bit of rust in it and is a bit harder, but those are the easiest elements to take care of with water softening. He stated that there is a lot of variety in private well water, but noted that if residents connected to City water, their existing treatment systems would not be obsolete because they would still function with the City's water. He noted that the current connection fee is ten thousand dollars and explained that staff felt this amount should be increased. He stated that currently, the City allows residents to assess their connection fee and any of the costs to get from the property line and into their house is a direct cost that they would have to pay to their contractor. He stated that one of the ideas that staff has come up with was to include more of the financing with the City's portion in order to allow residents to assess the connection charge as well as what it takes to get up their house. He noted that they would still have the option to pay it off directly. He explained that staff had not been able to identify any outside funding sources for a project like this and explained that it was not currently included in the CIP, and from a construction standpoint, he felt it would be ideal to have a project to be under one -hundred seventy-five thousand dollars which would allow the City to solicit quotes from reputable contractors so they know they would be getting a better level of service rather than taking a chance on a low bid contractor. He played a video that gave a general idea of what a water service install would look like. Councilmember Callies stated that she felt this idea would work better if there were curb stops in place and asked how this would fit in with neighbors petitioning. She stated that the City's current policy was to either pay the connection fee or the cost of construction of the service line, which can be cost -prohibitive. City Engineer Budde stated that it would depend on site -specific examples. He gave the example of the development across the street from Councilmember Callies that made watermain available to her and some of her neighbors. He stated that in this case, they would have to drill underneath the roadway and put a curb stop on Councilmember Callies' side of the street, but there would be nuances of whether to allow cuts into the street to make some of the connections happen. He explained that he felt that they may not want to do that for the first go around. He gave the example of Smithtown Road where they were stubbed out, but then sidewalks were constructed on top of them, so there will still be cases where they would have to rip up concrete panels and some driveways in order to be able to make the connections. He noted that the City Code is a bit hard to follow and was a bit confusing because if you do not have a service stub, they need to petition in order to connect and explained that he did not know how to handle that right now, unless this would become a CIP project. Councilmember Callies stated that the people along Birch Bluff and Strawberry Lane did not have to petition in order to hook up and did not have to pay for the cost of the sewer pipe. She stated that she felt this was an issue that should be considered because, technically, that scenario is not provided for within the City Code. City Engineer Budde explained that he had always interpreted the City Code that if watermain did not exist near their property, so if they wanted it, they would have to pay for the full cost of extending the watermain, which gets very expensive. Councilmember Callies stated that what was being proposed tonight was that they would initially send out a questionnaire and asked if it would go to everybody or just the residents that would be the first ten per year. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 3 of 17 City Engineer Budde explained that his idea was that the City reach out to anyone that was depicted in light blue on the map he had presented, which are properties that have watermain near their property to find out if they were interested in hooking up in order for the City to continue to have a conversation with them and talk through the logistics of it. He stated that this would just be the first step and noted that there may be residents that back out because it was too expensive or there may be logistical issues that the City does not want to deal with, such as busting the sidewalks right now and instead try to cluster some of the projects in the future. Councilmember Zerby stated that Gideon Glen was depicted in light blue on the map, but he would consider that non -developable. City Engineer Budde stated that some of those are parcels that are owned by the City or the HOA where sometimes there would be an irrigation connection that would be desired. Councilmember Zerby clarified that Gideon Glen was a park. City Engineer Budde stated that all of the other City parks likely have some form of irrigation. Councilmember Zerby stated that City Engineer Budde stated that they would send the questionnaires to all the properties depicted in light blue and explained that he felt this could be omitted. City Engineer Budde confirmed that they could pull out City -owned properties that have no desire to connect to water. He explained that the intent was not to connect parcels for irrigation purposes, but to get them on actual municipal water. Councilmember Zerby stated that he also had a question is related to Public Safety and Public Works and noted that they are on Tonka Bay water as a large commercial user and could create a good amount of revenue. City Engineer Budde noted that they have looked at how to get water to that facility. Public Works Director Morreim showed the Council on a map what they would have to do to get water to that facility. City Engineer Budde stated that they had done some preliminary pricing a few years ago and it came to about two -hundred thousand dollars to put a watermain underneath in order to connect. He stated that it would be something that they could do in the future, but noted that he felt that there was `lower hanging fruit' with some of the services that were already stubbed in which he felt they should focus on for this particular project. Councilmember Zerby stated that the City used to have some sort of pamphlet or flyer in order to educate people on the benefits of municipal water over well water and asked if the City still had that material and noted that it used to be available in the lobby. City Engineer Budde stated that he has not seen that information. City Administrator Nevinski explained that the City does have some of that information and believes it had been updated and put on the website. He stated that if they do end up sending a letter, he felt that they should update that information as well, to ensure it was accurate. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 4 of 17 Councilmember Zerby stated that he thinks part of the solution is education, but thinks that they also need incentives rather than disincentives. He explained that telling people that they were going to increase the water cost three times within the next ten years so they should get on now or pay more later is a `stick' rather than a `carrot'. He reiterated that he would like to see some sort of incentive and suggested some form of rebate program. Mayor Labadie stated that the staff report said that the current ten thousand dollar fee did not really cover the full hook-up cost and asked how the City could do some sort of incentive without losing even more money. She asked if there were other cities that have that type of program so Shorewood would not lose its shirt by offering it at the lower rate. City Engineer Budde stated that he did not know how other cities do it other than just giving anyone who connects now a discount, but the issue may be that anyone who connected previously did not get the discount. Mayor Labadie referenced the proposed questionnaire and asked if they proceed with that, what the City's game plan would be if the feedback showed the City that nobody was interested. She referenced the Glen/Amlee/Manitou project, the Strawberry Lane project, the Woodside Road project, and the Birch Bluff project, which were all relatively new projects which meant that those residents have most likely reviewed the concept of hooking up to City water. She stated that for other neighborhoods in other areas may not have recently received this kind of education, but for the other larger neighborhoods, they have been aware of the opportunity and have chosen not to connect to City water. She reiterated her question about what would happen if the City sent out the questionnaire and no one was interested and the City's Water Fund was not substantially sustaining itself. She noted that claims have been made recently that the City has done projects that only benefitted certain groups which was not true. She reminded the Council that this was what had been done when they had discussed unified garbage hauling. She explained that they had sent out a survey and said that they would do what the residents wanted, but were now being accused of not doing a broad enough survey or asking enough people about their opinions. She stated that she just did not see a questionnaire working with the tone of water. Councilmember Zerby stated that he felt that they always lose them with the first question which is `how much?'. He stated that they lose them because the City's answer is that they do not really know and noted that in the staff report, they stated that the cost to hook up could be anywhere from six thousand to sixty-nine thousand dollars. He asked who would give an answer of `yes' when they get that kind of information of the potential price range. Mayor Labadie stated that for the unified garbage hauling situation, the City hired a professional survey company to draft the questions. Councilmember Zerby noted that in that situation, the City never even had cost information. Mayor Labadie clarified that her point was that even though the City had used a professional company for the survey they were now being accused of not doing a good enough job. She explained that she can just see a questionnaire being weaponized against the Council and City staff. She clarified that she was not saying that she did not want input from residents, but she was not sure that a questionnaire was the proper method for the community. She stated that this is a major hole in the City's budget that was only going to continue to grow. She noted that the City cannot continue to provide infrastructure improvements without residents kicking in. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 5 of 17 Councilmember Sanschagrin suggested that the City take a more targeted approach where they go for the properties that have older wells that are near existing stubs. He stated that those may be easier to install and the costs may be under the current ten thousand dollar price tag. He asked if there were any other factors that would make for a positive cost -benefit analysis for residents. He asked if staff had ever looked at this way and if they have any clusters that they would suggest the City go after directly. He noted that they could even make it a bit of a competition between clusters to see which can get the most people hooking up. City Engineer Budde stated that he had not put that much thought into it but noted that there were probably areas that he would target, for example, along Smithtown Road. He explained that his thought was that if the City was going to go through the process to create some of this type of communication, the City may as well send it out to anyone who was potentially eligible. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he felt that the City could do both approaches because they were not mutually exclusive. Mayor Labadie gave the example of the City getting two people in the Glen/Amlee/Manitou area, two people on Woodside, and two people in Minnetonka Drive who want to hook up. She asked how many the City needed interested within a neighborhood in order to justify going in or if the thought is to simply do it house by house. She asked if there would be a cost savings to the City if they can get more than a handful here and there that were interested. City Engineer Budde stated that he felt that there would be a cost savings if they can have them more tightly clustered, but also did not think there would be a huge cost because the equipment being used was relatively easy to move around. Councilmember Zerby asked if they could find a contractor that would give the City a flat rate that they could put into the program for specific neighborhoods. Public Works Director Morreim stated that he would say that the answer to that would be `no'. Councilmember Zerby noted that the houses in the Glen/Amlee area were all built around the same time and were all about the same distance back from the curb. City Engineer Budde stated that the City can probably get a cost per foot to install it, but there are unknown things that they run into, including how the inside of someone's house was currently plumbed, including being up to current building codes. He explained that what he had been envisioning was that in some of the communication that goes out, the City would try to hone in on the cost and would not say that it would be between six and seventy thousand dollars. He stated that they would try to spell it out a bit more and say at a minimum it would be ten thousand for the connection charge, the cost per foot to get up to your house would be a certain amount, and the cost for inside the home would be an unknown until it was looked at specifically. He stated that they would also need to throw in a caveat that it is possible that there are things that they may encounter that they would not know about until they have looked deeper. He explained that he had intended to hone in the cost to the price range for some of the homes so they would be able to have a better understanding, but the biggest factor will most likely be how far their home is setback from the roadway. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 6 of 17 Councilmember Callies stated that she was still not clear on what the advantage would be to the homeowners, or the City, for residents hooking up to City water. City Engineer Budde stated that the advantage would be for the City to do the leg work on the coordination with the contractors and helping them come up with an accurate price for installation, plus the incentive of potentially financing more of it than just the ten thousand dollar fee. He explained that the thought was that if the City has one contractor that comes in and does ten services, that will be more economical than each individual property owner going out and trying to hire their own contractor. Councilmember Callies referenced the cost of Bolton and Menk doing the design on the individual projects and noted that would also not be insignificant. City Engineer Budde stated that he was anticipating about thirty to forty percent of the construction costs would be related to Bolton and Menk's efforts, but noted that would be scalable because the more interest there is, the more effort there will be for Bolton and Menk to help facilitate these efforts. Councilmember Callies asked if the City would send notice to everyone in the City, even those who would not be able to hook up. City Engineer Budde clarified that they would not send the notice to people who were already hooked up to City water or people who would not be able to hook up. Councilmember Callies asked if the Council had ever considered having a policy that required people to hook up to City water. Councilmember Zerby stated that one of the thoughts that he has been having is basically to `sunset' wells. He gave the example of a well needing to be replaced, but if there is City water available in the street, they would not be allowed to replace the well and would have to hook up to City water. He noted that he believed that Bloomington had a similar program and noted that he felt that this would at least move the needle a bit. Councilmember Callies stated that, in some cases, it will be cheaper for people to put in a new well so they may be imposing a significant burden on those residents. Public Works Director Morreim stated that Councilmember Zerby's suggestion would move the needle, but it would only be slight. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he would like to see the communication pamphlet that the City has about City water and noted that he had not seen it yet. He stated that felt that this was a big piece of the puzzle. He explained that he had spoken with a resident who had gone through this transition recently and one of the motivating factors for his decision to get on City water was that he was not able to get financing and noted that he had described the process as being very confusing. He stated that he would like to make it easy to understand, so he felt the first step was to make sure that their communication was well articulated and actually outlined the benefits to residents. Mayor Labadie asked if a questionnaire already existed. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 7 of 17 City Engineer Budde stated that the questionnaire did not exist. Mayor Labadie asked who would be responsible for the questionnaire if the Council decided to proceed with that step. City Administrator Nevinski stated that he felt that staff would most likely end up drafting the questionnaire. Mayor Labadie stated that if they choose to move forward with a survey, she would anticipate that the questions come before the Council in order to analyze them and give input. Councilmember Zerby stated that he still felt that the economic piece needed to be included because everyone will ask how much it will cost them. Mayor Labadie stated that she felt that information about the incentive should also be included in the questionnaire. She stated that there was a Work Session last year where the idea was raised about the possibilities of requiring a hook-up when the home sells. She noted that she had spoken with some local real estate agents who told her that they did not see that charge as a disincentive because it could be rolled into closing costs. She stated that she felt that City just had one shot at grabbing resident's attention before they threw the flyer into the recycle bin and also did not think that they should plan on sending any follow-up flyers. Councilmember Callies asked if the City may have some money in the reserves to put towards a program that would incentivize residents. She stated that there would always be the issue that the people who had already done it. Finance Director Schmuck stated that the incentive could be the ten thousand dollar hook-up fee today, but will be increased in order for the City to be where they need to be. She stated that the people hooking up with the incentive would still be paying the same as what the people paid who hooked up last year. She stated that she understood the point made earlier that it is more of a stick rather than a carrot, but that would also be the case if the City required them to hook up when they sold a house. Councilmember Callies stated that the hook-up fee is quite minor when compared to the potential cost of getting the water up to the house. Councilmember Maddy stated that the City was still at 1996 rates for hook-up fees. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if part of the seventeen thousand dollar statistic that staff had highlighted already included the stubs. City Engineer Budde confirmed that it included the service stub out to the curb stop. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he had broached the subject of offering a well -testing program to residents, but got the impression that the City was hesitant to do that. City Administrator Nevinski stated that he was not sure that the City had the capacity to get into doing well testing because it is regulated by the Department of Health. He stated that he did not want to use scare tactics but also was not sure how many people would take the City up on this CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 8 of 17 offer. He explained that he felt that offering well testing would be the City getting outside of their own lane. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if the City could at least identify a few options that people could use for well testing and encourage residents to test one a year. He stated that he was not talking about using scare tactics but felt that people should be testing their wells once every one to two years. City Administrator Nevinski stated that he felt that they would want to be careful about that messaging because they would want to make sure that, as a City, they do not recommend one company, unless they actually invited companies to submit a proposal and specifications, but reiterated that he was not sure this was a realm that the City should be involved in. Councilmember Callies asked where Councilmember Sanschagrin was trying to go with this idea and asked what the City would do once they found the `bad guys' that had junk in their wells. She noted that she was also not sure if this information should really be published. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he has been contacted by residents who have expressed concern that they have high arsenic levels in their water, they have tested their water and cannot drink it. He stated that part of the Council's mission was to promote the safety and well-being of the residents and he was just talking about sharing some information. Councilmember Maddy asked if the City had any idea where the arsenic plumes were located in the City. City Engineer Budde stated that he has some sense of where the arsenic plumes are located and shared a few example locations. Councilmember Maddy asked if it may be beneficial to throw this information out there to the public because he cannot imagine any parent with children in their home that would not drop twenty thousand dollars in order to make sure that there is annual testing because they live in an arsenic plume area. He stated that he felt that if the City knows that there is arsenic somewhere in the community, they should share this information with the message that it was not a guarantee, but also remind them that they can hook up to City water. Public Works Director Morreim stated that recently the City had sent out letters regarding their lead service inventory and part of that was language from the Department of Health that had information related to water testing. He stated that he would want to review what they did because he thinks they had recommended a water testing facility. He stated that the City would not be involved in the testing and the resident would be doing the testing, sending in their sample, and paying for it themselves which means that they would get the results, not the City. He reiterated that he would like to review this information before they consider making a recommendation on this. Councilmember Zerby asked if the City could partner with a testing firm and listed off some the companies in the area. He stated that he can remember a time when the City had testing kits available at City Hall for people to pick up and send in. Planning Director Darling stated that the City still has well -testing kits available. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 9 of 17 Councilmember Zerby noted that may need to be part of their education efforts. Planning Director Darling noted that the City requires rental housing to have testing done every three years. Finance Director Schmuck noted that on the City's website, there is a page for private wells. She stated that there is also a list of certified labs that can do testing, a link for information on arsenic in their wells, and an owner's guide to wells. She stated that she felt that the City was putting this information out there but was not sure that people were actually seeking the information. Councilmember Zerby stated that he felt a mailer was a good place to start with the people the City was looking to get hooked up to the system. He stated that a possible simple incentive may be to offer a half-price well kit and stressed that he felt that City needed to do something besides just telling people to go to the website. Councilmember Callies stated that she also has concerns about the questionnaire, but agreed that they needed to start somewhere. Councilmember Zerby stated that he was not sure what the survey would actually tell the City because unless there is a compelling reason to hook up to City water, he felt that the answer they would get is that people do not want to do it. He noted that he felt that the City needed to proactively get them more information and make it more accessible. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he felt that the City just need to get this information to residents and asked if they may be able to utilize the newsletter to educate them. Councilmember Callies stated that she felt the chief reason that people were not interested was because it cost too much. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that would be where an incentive program that would help with the financing would be helpful. City Engineer Budde stated that one of the reasons that it is so expensive is because Shorewood has large lots. Councilmember Zerby noted that Tonka Bay also has large lots and he believed that they were one hundred percent hooked up to city water. City Engineer Budde stated that was probably because they had made that a requirement. Mayor Labadie stated that she also believes that the answer is going to be a resounding 'no' and did not believe that it is a lack of education but the cost, that has made people not hook up. She stated that the City could not offer it at a lower rate and actually needed to increase the cost. She explained that she agreed with Councilmember Zerby that for the people who have not taken the opportunity to hook up, she did not think the education portion would really matter. She clarified that she was not saying that the City should not provide it. She noted that she would strongly encourage any Councilmembers who are meeting with residents about this issue to encourage them to come speak to the full Council and staff. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked about the possibility of holding an Open House on this topic. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 10 of 17 Mayor Labadie stated that she felt that would be great, but also did not think the City was at that point yet because the Council still needed to make some decisions and give staff some direction. City Engineer Budde cautioned that every property would be unique, so to have an open house, they would have to price out a lot of residents in order to have a firm understanding and be able to really answer questions. Councilmember Zerby stated that the City already knows that the current policy of waiting to see if people hook up has not worked and was not keeping up with the City's expenses. Councilmember Maddy asked if it was really bad, at the end of the day, that the City was losing money over this. He stated that the City could just provide good water to everyone and say that they will be paying for it either way through their property taxes, but if they want to hook up, they will be welcomed. Councilmember Zerby stated that it was not paid through their property taxes because it is an Enterprise Fund. Mayor Labadie stated that when the City has four million, nine hundred thousand potential dollars out there, that is money that the City would be using for other projects. Councilmember Maddy noted that the City's capital expenditures have already covered a lot of the infrastructure costs. Public Works Director Morreim clarified that it was paid through the Enterprise Fund. Councilmember Maddy asked if the Enterprise Fund had paid for areas like Birch Bluff and Strawberry Lane. Public Works Director Morreim confirmed that the Enterprise Fund had paid for the water portion of the projects. Finance Director Schmuck noted that meant that the user rates needed to increase to be able to have this fund be sustainable. She stated that the people who did hook up were paying a higher price. Councilmember Maddy stated that the City did not want to punish the people who hooked up because of the ones who did not hook up. Public Works Director Morreim stated that the City was doing that, at the moment. Councilmember Maddy asked if there was a way for the City to fix that. Mayor Labadie stated that she did not think they could fix it without more people hooking up. Finance Director Schmuck stated that the City could create a rate that they charge to everybody that has service in front of their house and a consumption rate for the people that use water. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 11 of 17 Councilmember Maddy stated that charging everybody who had access even if they were not connected made sense to him. Finance Director Schmuck stated that could be a policy that the City established, but noted that was not what the City currently does. City Administrator Nevinski gave an overview of some of the points that the Council had raised as part of their discussion. He stated that he has gotten the impression that the Council was not comfortable moving forward with a survey questionnaire. He suggested that perhaps staff should formulate the program that have presented with additional details and asked if they may want to offer the ability for people to assess the entire connection cost and not just the hook-up fee. Councilmember Zerby stated that he believed that the Council has discussed about five potential new policies. He noted that he felt that the City should offer some type of well -testing incentive and also give notice that there was a planned increase in the connection fee. Councilmember Sanschagrin suggested that they could also mandate that, if a property subdivides and there was water available, they were required to hook up to City water. City Engineer Budde stated that to take that even further, they could say that if water was not available, then an option could be that they cannot subdivide their property until water becomes available. Councilmember Callies expressed confusion about what the City was considering `available'. Councilmember Zerby stated that what he meant by available was if there is a new house being built and there is water at the curb, then hooking up would be required. Mayor Labadie noted that they were running out of time because of the upcoming regular City Council meeting and questioned if the Council had given staff adequate direction. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he still liked the idea of doing some type of survey in order to collect information. He noted that he was also in favor of exploring all the different policies that have been outlined, including analyzing the pros and cons of each of them. Mayor Labadie stated that she would be in favor of staff coming up with survey questions and presenting them to the Council. She stated that she would also like to have a rough estimate of how many homes the City would send this survey to, how much staff time it will take, and how much postage it would take. She stated that she felt it was important for the City to document how much this was costing the City because she did not want this to turn around and anyone be able to say that the Council had done this without any regard to cost and the taxpayers' money. Councilmember Zerby shared some example questions that he felt would work well to gather information. Mayor Labadie stated that because it was likely that the next time this would be discussed would involve the two new Councilmembers she asked that staff somehow bring them up to speed on the conversations that have already taken place. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 12 of 17 Maddy moved, Callies seconded, to recess the City Council Work Session meeting until after the regular City Council meeting. Motion passed 5/0. The City Council Work Session meeting was recessed at 6:46 p.m. and reconvened at 8:17 p.m. 3. DRAFT COUNCIL BYLAWS City Administrator Nevinski reminded the Council that they had discussed this topic at their October 28, 2024 Work Session meeting, but had to stop their discussions due to time constraints. Mayor Labadie suggested that they continue moving sequentially through the draft bylaws just as they did at the last meeting. She moved the discussion onto i. Public Comment Period/a.k.a. Matters from the Floor. She referenced the 'for consideration' box that staff had included about reviewing different formats for receiving public comment. She noted that many of their neighboring cities have a public comment period that is completely separate from their meeting and is typically done prior to the meeting. She stated that she believed that many of them also have very precise rules regarding things like the number of people who are allowed to speak, must sign up ahead of time, and the amount of time they are allowed to speak. She stated that she was unsure if any of the cities film this public comment. Councilmember Callies stated that she was familiar with what Mayor Labadie was explaining, but felt that it was usually done in larger cities. She stated that she did not have a problem with the way the City was currently handling public comments during the meeting. Mayor Labadie clarified that she was not suggesting that they make changes, but was pointing out that Shorewood does this differently than surrounding cities. Councilmember Zerby stated that he was also fine leaving the public comment period at the beginning of the regular City Council meeting. He noted that when he started on the Council it was done at the end of the meeting and felt that moving it to the top of the meeting was a good decision. He stated that he was not sure how they landed on the three -minute time limit, but would be okay leaving that alone as well. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he would like to expand the amount of allotted time to five minutes. Councilmember Callies stated she would prefer that they not expand it to five minutes. She asked if instead of actually limiting the time they are allowed to speak if they could instead say that speakers were `encouraged' to limit their comments to three minutes. Mayor Labadie stated that she believed the time limit came about because the Council was not allowed to cut anyone off due to content and this was a way where everyone could be treated equally. She stated that the thought process was that this would be a way that the public would know what to expect and also what was expected of them. She noted that many cities have a time limit and believes that three minutes is pretty standard. City Attorney Shepherd stated that he would agree that three minutes was a pretty standard time limit. He stated that the question for the Council to consider is what would be a sufficient amount of time for someone to voice an issue that they needed to hear about. He clarified that it may not be the last time the Council hears about it but would their time limit give enough time for residents CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 13 of 17 to raise a concern to the Council. He stated that he likes having a time limit is a good make to ensure that all speakers were treated equally without regard to what they are actually saying. Mayor Labadie noted that the time limit also protected the City from claims that they were discriminating or cutting people off because they were opposed to their ideology. Councilmember Zerby stated that he agreed that having a time limit would be good, but felt that three minutes sometimes seems like a race. He noted that people have shared that they have recorded themselves and practiced in a mirror in order to try to get their statement in under three minutes and suggested that they add an additional minute. Councilmember Maddy stated that he has never been a big fan of this and noted that when he served on the Planning Commission they would hold public hearings and people would talk about the issue and he was able to learn a lot, but on the Council, they get people who come and many times do not even look at the Council, but speak to the cameras and the crowd. He stated that he felt that they were lending their mouthpiece to just those people who have enough time to show up at a meeting and talk at the Council. He explained that there were eight thousand other people in the City who did not have time to go to meetings and he did not want to forget them. He stated that he did not want to give too much air time to the people who have the time to come up here and talk about their `beef'. He stated that he believes it makes sense to limit the time residents can speak and thinks three minutes is a good amount of time. He noted that if it is anything longer than that, people can just send the Council an e-mail. He stated that he felt e- mails work better than grandstanding which is frequently what he sees at the Council meetings. He noted that he believes Hennepin County and other cities have moved this to more of a town hall meeting prior to the actual meeting instead of including it in the broadcast. He stated that he gets a lot of a -mails from constituents and takes them just a seriously as he does the comments from someone standing at the podium. There was consensus to leave the time limit at three minutes for public comments. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if the Council would be discussing Appendix B and noted that there was an item under number seven regarding asking clarifying questions. He stated that he liked that idea because he knew that there had been some confusion in the past as to whether the Council was permitted to ask questions or not. City Administrator Nevinski stressed that the questions should be clarifying and noted that they want to avoid getting into a debate or making any decisions. Mayor Labadie moved the discussion on to item j. and noted that these items were pretty guided by Statute. City Administrator Nevinski stated that they have it set up so Public Hearings are similar to Matters from the Floor, but noted that they could decide to allow more time for comments during a Public Hearing. Mayor Labadie noted that most of the Public Hearings happen at the Planning Commission. City Administrator Nevinski agreed that most of them are related to land use and would occur at the Planning Commission. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 14 of 17 Councilmember Maddy stated that he wanted to make sure that they do not shut people down because, especially if the applicant is there, three minutes will not be enough time. He stated that if it is something on the agenda, he wanted to make sure that they did not cut them off. City Administrator Nevinski asked if the Council wanted to just keep it open-ended. Councilmember Maddy asked if this document would also bind the Planning Commission. City Administrator Nevinski stated that once the Council gets their bylaws squared away, he felt it would make sense to go back to the Commissions with bylaws for them, as well. There was consensus of the Council to remove the statement that speakers and the Council must follow the same rules in Public Comment Period and allow the Mayor to manage how long the speaker goes. Councilmember Zerby stated that usually during a Public Hearing many times there is a dialogue between the public and the developer which has not been called out within the bylaws. He asked if they wanted to be silent on that or not. He noted that many times the Mayor has called the developer back to the podium in order to address some of the resident concerns. City Administrator Nevinski stated that it was not explicitly called out and he felt it did not need to be limited, but the Council would maybe not take additional comments from the public at that point. He noted that if they felt this needed to be clarified more, staff could do that. Councilmember Maddy stated that he has had more than one meeting go completely off the rails where people are speaking out of turn within the audience. He asked if there was any reference on how to deal with that situation within the bylaws. He stated that he has seen this be more of a problem at the Council level and the interruptions have become common. He asked if the Council wanted to create a policy around this or if they should just ignore these individuals. He asked how other cities dealt with interrupters or people shouting during meetings. City Attorney Shepherd stated that there may be a few oblique references to meeting management in the bylaws, but generally speaking, that is up to the presiding officer to manage the meeting. He stated that they could gavel them down, or recess the meeting if the crowd has gotten unruly, and they were not able to get any work done. Councilmember Callies noted that Appendix B says that speakers are required to follow the direction of the presiding officer. Finance Director Schmuck noted that Section 4 has standards of conduct that states that it is the responsibility of the Council, as a whole, to apply and manage the standards of conduct, which means that it would not all be on the shoulders of the mayor. Councilmember Zerby noted that the League of Minnesota Cities just put out an article regarding the code of conduct and read aloud a portion of the article related to sanctions and the importance of having a process for violations. He noted that there was not anything included in the bylaws about what they would do when things go wrong. City Administrator Nevinski explained that they really just have the sentence that the Council needed to manage and police itself. He noted that staff was trying to keep this document relatively CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 15 of 17 concise but noted that the time to prepare for these types of things is when things are going well, so they could go back and try to put something together for the Council to consider. Councilmember Zerby stated that it would be nice to have something in place. Mayor Labadie stated that she agreed that the time to deal with this was before they were actually having some of these issues and noted that there have been some very ugly situations that have happened in neighboring cities. She clarified that she was not worried about this happening with either the current Council or the incoming Council. Councilmember Zerby suggested taking a look at the two cities that were mentioned in the League article to see if there may be some language that they could pull to use in Shorewood. The Council discussed the orientation process for incoming Councilmembers and moved the discussion onto item k. Public Comment on Agenda Items. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he liked the idea of introducing an agenda item and getting public comments. He noted that the way Matters from the Floor has worked that if it was on the agenda, technically they cannot comment on it so this would give people the opportunity speak. Mayor Labadie stated that she felt that would essentially open a public hearing again. Councilmember Callies stated that she did not think they needed to announce it like that, but the Council could take comments, if someone wanted to speak regarding something that is on the agenda. She clarified that she did not think they needed to open up public comment on every agenda item, but could allow comment, if someone has indicated that they would like to speak. City Attorney Shepherd stated that, to him, this just describes the process that they currently have in place in that the presiding officer `may' allow comment, but agreed that he did not believe that they would need to allow it on every item. The Council discussed situations where people could be allowed to speak during the Council meeting and moved their discussion onto item m. Maintenance of Order. Councilmember Callies asked about the statement `No person is allowed to speak who has not first been recognized by the presiding officer.' She asked if this section included Councilmembers or if that was people in the audience. Mayor Labadie stated that she did not want the Council meetings to become more formal than they already are because she likes it when the Council can have free -flowing conversations, but did feel that more formality with staff and the residents has helped get things in control. Councilmember Maddy stated that he liked the idea of giving the presiding officer the discretion to handle this. Councilmember Callies reiterated her question about whether this section was intended to apply to the Council. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 16 of 17 City Administrator Nevinski stated that he felt it was nice to have structure but noted that there is some flexibility to be more formal, if necessary and reminded the Council the bylaws can be reviewed and amended. Mayor Labadie moved to the discussion onto the next items in the bylaws. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked for clarification on item o. Placing Items on an Agenda and stated that he did not believe how it had been worked in the draft bylaws was their current practice. City Administrator Nevinski stated that was correct and explained that this created the opportunity for a Councilmember to bring up a point of interest that they would like the Council to consider. He stated that the way it was proposed in the bylaws was that if there was support from another Councilmember, then staff would bring it back on a future agenda. The Council discussed ways that they would like to get things added to the agenda. Councilmember Sanschagrin referenced section VI. Administrator of Rules and explained that he was confused about how voting would work in relation to vacant seats. City Administrator Nevinski stated that there was information out there that clarifies when a simple majority vote was needed or a majority of the entire Council as well as when a vacancy applies. He stated that staff can take a closer look at that so they can be clear and everyone is on the same page about the voting requirements. City Attorney Shepherd stated that they can take a closer look, but did not believe that they should account for a vacancy within the document. Councilmember Callies referenced Section IV, item f., Ex Parte Communications and Due Process. She stated that she felt the new language was better than it was before and asked if the idea was for it to be in addition to the fact that Councilmembers were not supposed to be discussing things amongst themselves, but there has been some discussion about whether or not it was appropriate for Councilmembers to meet with the public ahead of time on issues. She stated that it is part of their job, but when they communicate to the public what their view is before it has come before the Council, she felt that was a problem because it had not yet been at the public meeting. She explained that she has having some trouble with the wording of the first sentence. City Attorney Shepherd stated that he felt that this reference to `member' referred to a member of the public. Mayor Labadie stated that she had a question related to Appendix B, 6, that referenced the use of the sergeant -at -arms to remove a speaker and asked who that individual would be. Councilmember Zerby noted that typically they would have to appoint a sergeant -at -arms. Mayor Labadie stated that the City had never appointed a sergeant -at -arms and noted that if the City was not going to appoint one she questioned whether they should remove that language. City Attorney Shepherd stated that he would recommend striking everything after the second sentence. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2024 Page 17 of 17 Councilmember Sanschagrin referenced the rules of order and stated that he thinks that they were copied and pasted, but he felt that there were some things included that may need clarification or be removed. He gave the example of number eight where it made a statement and then added `we recommend restraint'. He asked if those were things that the City should define those things. City Administrator Nevinski stated that this was taken from a book that had recommendations but that did not necessarily mean that the Council would have to adopt those recommendations. City Attorney Shepherd stated that he would agree with Councilmember Sanschagrin that the parenthetical statements could probably be removed. Councilmember Maddy noted that those statements were best practices. The Council discussed various items within the rules of order. City Attorney Shepherd noted that he felt it would make sense to go through the items that contain parenthetical statements to clarify some of those items. The Council listed off specific rules that they would like to see amended or removed. There was Consensus of the Council to strike items 20 and 21 from the Rules of Order; strike the parenthetical statement from item 12; amending item 10 to say, `A second is needed.'; strike the parenthetical statement from item 8; and strike item 16. Mayor Labadie asked if the idea was that the current Council would deal with this at their next meeting rather than having it be done by the new Council. City Administrator Nevinski stated that he felt that after they get the items that the Council had just discussed cleaned up, it would be ready for the next Council discussion. 4. ADJOURN Maddy moved, Zerby seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of November 25, 2024, at 9:20 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. ATTEST: r FnOer Labadie, Mayor Sandie Thone, City Clerk