SUNFISH LAKE CITY COUNCIL MEETING – FEBRUARY 5, 2013

7:00 P.M. - ST. ANNE’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH

Attendants:

Mayor:  Molly Park

Councilmembers: Mike Hovey, JoAnne Wahlstrom, Cathy DeCourcy and Steven Bulach

City Attorney:  Tim Kuntz

City Building Official: David Neameyer

City Planner: Michelle Barness
City Engineer:  Don Sterna
City Forester:  Jim Nayes

City Treasurer:  Mike Blair

City Clerk:  Cathy Iago
Police Chief Manila Shaver

and Members of the General Public     

1.   CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Park opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.

2.   APPROVE AGENDA:   Mayor Park asked if there were any additions or corrections to the agenda and there was no response.

Councilmember Hovey moved approval of the Agenda as amended, seconded by Councilmember Wahlstrom and carried. (5-0)

3.   CONSENT AGENDA:       The Mayor asked if there were any questions or comments relating to any items on the Consent Agenda and there was no response.  

Councilmember Bulach moved approval of the Consent Agenda as submitted, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (5-0)

a. Regular Council and Special Council meeting minutes of January 8, 2013.

b. List of Bills

c. Monthly Financials

4.   COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: Mayor Park asked if there were any comments from the public.

Dr. Charles Chesney, 5 Acorn Drive, stated that the logging operation on the property adjacent to his property has continued since the discussion of this matter at the last meeting.  He explained that there continues to be several pickup trucks, a log splitter, a tractor and a bobcat working on this property. He stated that there is a trail leading into the property and that the equipment has chewed up the land. He pointed out that they have removed live trees and that the noise continues from 8:00 a.m. until after dark. He noted that there is a caravan of trucks hauling wood from the property and that this appears to be a commercial operation. He commented that there is no oversight of the operation and that he does not believe the owner knows what is going on at the property because they live in Phoenix.  He stated that in his opinion the land is being clear-cut and that because they have taken the canopy off of the lot, the buckthorn will continue to grow. 

Dr. Chesney also advised that he asked one of the workers to move his truck and the worker swore at him; he also noted that the operation has been on-going for the past 4 months.  He noted that he complained about this operation 4 weeks ago and nothing has changed in that time; he recommended that Council should take some action on this matter.

Mayor Park thanked Dr. Chesney for his comments and advised that this matter will be discussed later on the agenda.

Tom Schlehuber, 3 Acorn Drive, stated he agrees with Dr. Chesney’s comments and advised that the workers had crossed over his property to cut the wood. He explained that his wife has expressed concerns regarding the workers and that she does not feel safe. He stated that he has walked the property and cannot believe what has been done; he commented that the property appears to have been clear-cut and the operation continues day after day.

Mr. Schlehuber advised that he had called the Telander’s, who were given permission by the property owner to oversee the tree removal, and he was assured by Barb Telander that the operation would stop, but it has continued. He stated he was informed by his neighbor, Tom Mattani, that the property owner had changed his mind about ceasing the tree removal and that is why the operation continues. 

Mr. Schlehuber pointed out that he is a biology teacher and that he has issues with trees being cut down during the winter months; he noted it is difficult to determine if a tree is healthy or diseased during the winter months. He stated he is most certain that some trees removed were healthy and suggested that the City might hire an independent tree expert, other than the City Forester, to check if the removed trees were healthy. He asked that Council walk the land to see that this landscape could not have been created without cutting healthy trees. He reiterated that he agrees with Dr. Chesney’s comments and that this operation needs to be stopped.

Mayor Park thanked Mr. Schlehuber for his comments and stated this would be discussed later on the agenda.

Dr. Chesney commented that the Planner was asked to look into this matter and contact him with the results and he was never contacted by the Planner.

Planner Brixius advised Dr. Chesney that he had discussed the matter with the Police Department and he thought they would contact him with the results. He apologized for the breakdown in communication.                     

Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments from the public and there was no response.  

5.   PUBLIC HEARINGS: None.

6.   PLANNING COMMISSION/PLANNER’S REPORT:

a.   Planning Report:  Planner Brixius stated there was no Planning Commission meeting in January due to lack of applications. He explained that at the January Council meeting staff was directed to investigate three (3) issues:

1.   Council requested information on whether or not building expansion within shoreline setbacks could be more effectively managed by Conditional Use Permits (CUP) rather than a variance. Staff determined that it would be more appropriate to utilize the variance mechanism as it provides more discretion and control in determining site specific issues related to reasonable use of the property. The CUP process would allow less discretion for Council if an applicant could demonstrate that the use in question meets conditions specified under the CUP.  

2.   Council directed staff to coordinate with the City Forester to investigate the tree harvesting activities reported by Dr. Chesney on Acorn Drive. Staff spoke with Kevin Huebscher of Kev’s Corner and was advised that he had permission to perform these activities from neighbor Barbara Telander. Ms. Telander explained that she had spoken with the owners of the property and they had granted her permission to hire Mr. Huebsher to conduct the tree removal.   The Planner stated that Mr. Hebsher had spoken with the City Forester and Police Chief and they may be able to provide a more detailed explanation of the situation. The Planner noted that dead or diseased trees can be removed from property, however; from the information provided this evening by neighbors, it appears the operation has gone beyond removal of only dead or diseased trees.

3.   Council asked whether or not fencing around swimming pools is required by state law. Staff reviewed State regulations and found that fencing is required for public swimming pools, but fencing regulations for private pools are left to individual cities to decide. Planning staff also contacted the City Attorney to confirm his knowledge of this matter and he advised that the current State Building Code does not require fencing or barriers around private swimming pools.  The City Attorney explained that several surrounding communities have ordinances that require fencing around private pools and other examples were provided in the memorandum from Planner Barness dated January 31, 2013.


Mayor Park pointed out that the cities listed in the memo were larger cities and she asked if staff had reviewed any smaller cities.  Planner Barness responded that she had not reviewed the smaller cities, but offered to do so.

Planner Brixius explained that some of his clients are smaller cities and they require 5 ft. high fencing for in-ground pools and require that above-ground pools that are 4 ft. high must have a removable ladder.

Building Inspector Neameyer stated that the cities of Mendota and Lilydale do not have fencing requirements.

The Planner reviewed the upcoming development applications as follows:   

2250 Delaware Avenue:  Planner Brixius advised that an application for a major site and building plan review was submitted for this property. He explained that the existing home falls within the required minimum 200 ft. shoreline setback; however, there is a provision in the Zoning Code that allows a shoreline setback average based on the setbacks of adjoining properties. He stated the proposed location of the new home is in the same location as the existing home and meets the average shoreline setback allowance; therefore, no variance is required. He further explained that the application appears to meet all code requirements and building guidelines.

345 Salem Church Road: The Planner explained that this property was recently purchased and the new owner wishes to expand the existing home by adding a walkway to connect to the detached garage; the square footage increase would be approximately 50 to 60 sq. ft. The applicant also wishes to replace the existing flat roof with a hipped roof, which would add approximately 6 ft. to the height of the structure and install a skylight; they do not intend to add a second story to the home. He explained that although the proposed application would be a minimal expansion of the existing structure, it would still require a variance and that staff anticipates this application will be on the February Commission agenda.

Mayor Park asked how detailed the plans would be for this application.   The Planner explained that they may not be detailed but they will show the construction, lighting, grading and septic locations.

The Mayor asked at what point full architectural plans would be submitted. The Planner responded that Council would be able to determine what is being requested with the plans submitted at this time and that architectural plans would be submitted in conjunction with the application for a building permit; those plans would show the full foundation, and include all exterior building materials.

Flynn/Park Subdivision:   Planner Brixius explained that staff has received inquiries for a minor subdivision to split Lot 4, Knutson Addition, in half and attach the halves to the adjoining properties. He stated this lot split would result in two large single family lots and would be handled as a Minor Subdivision.  He noted that the applicant has been informed of the requirements for subdivision of the property and staff explained that the easements that follow the existing lot lines must be vacated. He further advised that the City would request new easements along the newly created lots lines for each parcel.

The Planner stated that he received an inquiry after preparation of his report regarding a tear down and rebuild of an existing home at 393 Salem Church Road. He explained that the person was not prepared to submit a formal application for the February meeting and that the matter may be reviewed by the Commission in March.

Councilmember DeCourcy asked the name of the applicant. The Planner stated he met with the architect not the owner.

Council thanked the Planner for his report.     

7.   STAFF REPORTS:  a. Building Inspector: Inspector Neameyer reported that it was a busy month with nine (9) permits issued and eight (8) permits closed. He offered to respond to questions.

Council thanked the Building Inspector for his report.

b.   City Engineer: Inver Grove Heights Storm Sewer Improvement Cost Participation Request: The Engineer stated that he reviewed this proposed project at the January meeting and that no updates have been received.  He explained that he anticipates hearing back from the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization in late March regarding the cost allocation study results. He advised the cost implications to Sunfish Lake will be reviewed and comments received once the study information is available.

Public Works Activates Undertaken in the Month of January: Snow Plowing Activity: The Engineer advised that as of February 1 the current snow plow expenditures are $8,664 out of the $35,000 Budget.  He stated he received a few phone calls on the icy conditions and he asked the contractor to add more salt to the mix on those days.  He asked that Council let him know if they receive calls from residents regarding snow and ice removal concerns so that he is able to notify the contractor and provide clear direction on what should be done. 

Councilmember Hovey commented that the contractor did a nice job with the clean-up and expansion of the roadway on Charlton Road.

Mayor Park asked if citizens should contact him by email or call his cell phone with roadway information. The Engineer stated either would work. 

The Mayor indicated that residents should first call the Engineer, then the Mayor and then the Acting Mayor with complaints or concerns. The Engineer agreed.

Anticipated Engineer/Public Works Activities’ for the Month of February: 2013 CIP Project Preparation: The Engineer
reviewed the discussion at last month’s meeting and advised that the CIP identified two projects for 2013 which were included in the City’s 2013 budget.  He advised the projects involve seal coating Grieve Glen Lane, Acorn Drive Zehnder Road, Roanoke Road and the eastern section of Salem Church Road from Roanoke Road to TH 3.  The budget identified $35,000 in costs for this work along with $5,000 in street sign upgrades. He reviewed the Engineer’s cost proposal and schedule for each project as shown in his report dated February 1, 2013. He explained that Council must approve the projects prior to staff preparing the documents necessary for the procurement of this work.

Total Estimated Fee for Seal Coating Project  $2800
Schedule: Request Quotes in February; Request Council to Authorize Work in March; Project Completion in July, 2013  

Total Estimated Fee for Street Signs Upgrade Project:  $700
Schedule:  Request Quotes in February; Request Council to Authorize Work in March; Project Completion in May, 2013

Engineer Sterna explained that the schedules are rough estimates at this point and he recommended that Council adopt a motion to authorize the expenditure of up to $3,500 to prepare the feasibility reports for these projects.

Councilmember DeCourcy explained that she had called 911 to ask if the Harmon Park address had been changed and she was told it appears as 6 Sunfish Lane. She noted that is McCue’s residential address and asked if the engineer could help resolve this issue.

Engineer Sterna stated he would call Dakota County to get the address changed to 2450 Angell Road so that the emergency responders have the correct address. 

Attorney Kuntz reminded Council that they should adopt a motion authorizing the expenditure for preparation of the project reports.

Councilmember Bulach moved to authorize the City Engineer to prepare documents relating to the 2013 seal coating and street sign upgrade projects at a cost not to exceed $3,500, seconded by Councilmember DeCourcy and carried. (5-0)

2014 Street Reconstruction Project: The Engineer reviewed the discussion at last month’s Council meeting relating to the roadways that were identified for reconstruction work in the CIP. The work proposed for 2014 includes reconstructing a portion of Windy Hill Road and Upper 55^th Street, along with milling and overlaying Windy Hill Court, Windy Hill Road, Upper 55^th Street and the western section of Angell Road.  He suggested that Council discuss the project in greater detail so staff has input on how to proceed.  He noted that if the project is to move forward, Council should order a Feasibility Report. The report would identify the options available to rehabilitate the roadways, the associated costs and financing options to fund the project.  He stated that as part of the Feasibility Study, the City would hold a public hearing to discuss the findings, costs and potential assessments to the abutting residents.  

The Engineer stated that if Council desires to move the project to the next phase, he would prepare a brief proposal that identifies the engineering costs for the feasibility report, plan preparation and construction cost, and present the information at the March Council meeting for their consideration.  He reviewed the process for ordering a project of this nature and pointed out that Council has the option to reject the project at anytime during the process.

Councilmember Bulach asked if preparation of the feasibility report would be part of the monthly engineering fees or would be an extra cost.  The Engineer stated it would be an extra cost and that he could prepare a cost estimate for the March meeting.

The Mayor asked if Council could place a “not to exceed” amount on the report preparation. The Engineer responded yes and explained that the feasibility report would outline all administrative and engineering fees, estimated project costs, possible assessments, and options for financing the project.  He also noted that part of the project costs may be included in the assessments. He stated he would distribute to Council and staff a Municipal Guide for improvements that his firm had prepared for clients. He further advised that he would be updating the City maps and that if Council or staff finds any discrepancies in the maps they should contact him.

The Engineer advised that Council would be asked to schedule a public hearing later on the agenda to review the City’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program Plan (SWPPP) and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). He explained that the hearing is required as part of the City’s permit renewal.

Council thanked the Engineer for his report.

b. CITY FORESTER: Forester Nayes reported that he issued five (5) burning permits this month. He explained that he reviewed the activity report at 6 Acorn Drive and assisted the Police Chief in the preparation of the police report. He stated that he found only dead or damaged trees were removed along with a substantial amount of buckthorn. He commented that two (2) boxelder trees were also removed.

The Forester recommended that a Council representative attend the Emerald Ash Symposium with him on February 12; he explained the fee for attendance is $25, however he attends for free. The Mayor asked if the City would pay for Council attendance; the Clerk responded yes and stated there are monies available for attendance at this type of seminar.

The Forester stated that he found information published by the DNR relating to wildfire issues and suggested placing the information in the newsletter and also on the website. He stated that representatives from the DNR have agreed to attend the Arbor Day Program to discuss this matter with residents. He suggested that perhaps the Environmental Commission could study and develop a Community Wildfire Protection Plan and coordinate the plan with neighboring cities.

Forester Nayes advised that he may have an Eagle Scout candidate interested in a service project within the City, such as reforestation in a City park. He advised that no branches or trees were down on streets following the recent freezing rain. He also reported on the new citing of Emerald Ash Borer across the river to the east of the St. Paul airport.

Council thanked the Forester for his report.

Mayor Park suggested that at this time the discussion of activities at 6 Acorn Drive ensue. She noted that staff has advised permission was granted to the contractor to undertake the tree removal project. She questioned what options the City has at this time to halt the process and what could be done to prevent this type of activity in the future. She questioned if a permitting process or some type of written permission form should be made available.

Planner Brixius stated that the City does not have a permit process to taking down trees on a large scale. He suggested that written permission from the property owner should be mandatory in the future before this type of operation begins. He further suggested that a permitting process could be developed that listed regulations controlling the hours of operation, parking, definition of types and number of trees removed, and reforestation if deemed necessary.  He further suggested that invasive species, diseased and dead trees should be identified by the City Forester prior to beginning the operation.

Mayor Park suggested that a time limit should also be placed on the operation; the Planner concurred.

The Planner explained that the current ordinance does not have protections in place and pointed out that if a tree is diseased or dead a resident should be able to remove it from his property. 

Councilmember DeCourcy asked the size of the parcel at 6 Acorn Drive. Dr. Chesney stated is it approximately 3.5-acres and noted that in the last four months they have only cleared half of the parcel.

Mayor Park recalled that reforestation is required in some instances. The Forester explained that if someone removes five or more trees, hardwoods or evergreens, they must be replaced. He commented that nothing of this scale has ever come before the City in the past.

Mayor Park asked the City Attorney for his comments on this matter and suggestions for how to proceed.

The Attorney explained that if Council wishes to draft an ordinance, they could direct the Planning Commission and staff to prepare the document and conduct a public hearing. He explained that Council should determine which regulations for removal of trees should be placed in the ordinance. He read the current ordinance definition relating to tree removal and noted that if 6 or more significant trees within the setback area are removed, they are required to be replaced. He advised that the exception to this is the shoreland ordinance which has specific regulations. He further noted that if ten or more trees are removed over a two-year period of time, it is subject to the approval of the city Forester. He noted that although there are some regulations in place, they do not address diseased or dead trees, nor do they address other adverse effects such as how the removal affects the landscaping, parking, noise, etc.

There was discussion relating to how the Forester judges the types of trees to be removed. Forester Nayes explained that in his opinion some trees, such as boxelder and cottonwoods, are not considered desirable and he would remove them from his property.  He explained that if a dead or damaged tree is in a woodland setting on a property, he would leave the option to the owner whether or remove it or leave as a wildlife tree.  He noted that in the past when he is required to give permission for tree removal, it has been done verbally.

Chief Shaver pointed out that in some instances enforcement would be an issue even with an ordinance in place because this operation is on private property and his officers may not be granted permission to enter the premises to see if the trees meet requirements for removal.

Attorney Kuntz indicated that the City would need permission from the court to view the property but commented that if a significant amount of trees are being removed, it would be visible from the street.

The Planner indicated that there may be regulations in the nuisance ordinance relating to time of operation and parking violations; however, he suggested that long term the city would have to make a distinction on what measures to take for this type of operation to occur.

Councilmember DeCourcy commented that in her opinion this type of operation would be considered a logging business.

Planner Brixius agreed that it more resembles a logging operation; however he explained that residents may contract with a business to remove diseased and dead trees from their property.    

Dr. Chesney commented that several live trees were cut down within the 100 ft. of the setback from the road, but he pointed out that the recent snowfall had covered the live tree stumps so they would not be visible until the spring.

Mayor Park asked staff to outline options for resolution of this matter.

The Planner suggested that the immediate issues could be handled by staff reviewing the nuisance regulations in City Code to determine if there are any regulations relating to hours of operation or noise that would apply to this situation and they could meet with Dr. Chesney to flag the tree stumps he deemed to be live trees. If they are found to be live tree stumps, the City could request the contractor to cease operation, and if they are dead or diseased, they could continue.
He explained that the long term solution would be to review regulations that relate to removal of trees in conjunction with site plan applications and also review other vacant properties where this type of operation may occur. He advised that the long-term solution would be for Council to direct staff to prepare a draft ordinance regulating this type of operation.

Attorney Kuntz explained that if more than five significant trees were removed from the property within the 100 ft. setback and without being in compliance with a major site plan application, and if the City can verify this, the City could proceed by filing a complaint with the contractor that he is in violation of the current ordinance.  He agreed with the Planner that a draft ordinance could be prepared with input from the Planning Commission and a public hearing be conducted prior to its adoption by Council.  He suggested that the Planner could also review the existing ordinances as they relate to nuisances to determine if the operation is in violation of the ordinance.

Councilmember Bulach asked if there was any way to temporarily shut down the operation.

The City Attorney suggested that staff should relate to the contractor that they need to have permission from the City Forester prior to substantial tree removal and that removal of live trees is regulated in the City Code.

Dr. Chesney pointed out that it is not possible to view the live tree stumps due to the snow and they cannot be identified until spring. He commented that he is not a forester, but in his opinion, these were live trees that were removed.

Councilmember Bulach commented that if the City waits until spring to take action, more acreage will be cut down.

There was discussion relating to the conversation with the adjacent neighbor who stated the operation was completed.

Chief Shaver explained that he located the property owner in Phoenix and was advised that he gave permission to Barb Telander to do whatever was needed for forest removal on the site. He then contacted Barb Telander and she advised that the contractor was done with the job; he was unsure why the operation continued. He encouraged residents to call the police when the contractor is operating at the site so they could address these issues. 

Dr. Chesney stated he called the police and talked to a Lieutenant who responded to the scene; he commented that nothing happened at that time. He then advised he called a second time and some papers were exchanged between the police officer and the contractor and everyone left the property.

Forester Nayes stated he heard from the Telander’s that the contractor would be doing the clean-up phase and he issued a burning permit to her, but advised that it could only be used when 6-inches of snow was on the ground. He also was under the impression that the cutting phase was over and the operation had now moved to the clean-up phase.

Mayor Park again asked what could be done to stop the operation at this time.

Councilmember Hovey suggested that someone contact the Telander’s or the landowner and ask them to stop until the City can determine if live trees are being removed.

After further discussion, Council concurred to direct the Mayor to contact Barb Telander and ask her to cease the tree removal on this property. It was further determined that she should be advised that this issue has caused extensive concern with neighbors adjacent to the property and that the City wishes to verify if the operation is in violation of any existing ordinances and that Council wishes to review and draft regulations to control future operations of this magnitude to preserve the rural atmosphere of property within the City. 

Mayor Park suggested that the Planner be directed to prepare regulations relating to substantial tree removal.  Council concurred with her suggestion.

The Planner stated he had taken notes on the issues relating to this type of operation and he would prepare a document highlighting the issues that were discussed.  

The Attorney suggested that Council take formal action on these matters.

Mayor Park asked if there was any further discussion and there was no response.

Councilmember Wahlstrom moved to direct the Planner to work with the City Forester to prepare regulations relating to substantial tree removal on private property within the City that is not in conjunction with a major site plan review application, seconded by Councilmember Bulach and carried. (5-0)

Councilmember Bulach moved to authorize the Mayor to contact Barb Telander to request that the tree removal at 6 Acorn Drive cease operation until such time as the City has had time to verify if any live trees had been removed from the property, that the operation is not in violation of any existing ordinances,  and until staff has had an opportunity prepare regulations to control the substantial removal of trees from private property that is not in conjunction with a major site plan review application,  seconded by Councilmember Wahlstrom.

In discussion, the City Attorney pointed out that the Mayor should explain to Barb Telander that realistically the operation should be done for the winter months so that staff may verify if live trees were taken; he noted that staff may have to monitor the property to insure the operation does not continue.

Mayor Park called for a vote on the motion.

Motion carried. (5-0)          

c. PUBLIC SAFETY: Chief Shaver reviewed his report dated January 29, 2013. He stated that false alarms increased over last year; however, he noted that 4 of the 5 alarms were from a single residence.  He advised that there was a theft of mail from the church and reminded residents to use the post office versus their mailbox for outgoing mail to curb identify theft. He also reminded residents to shred mail with personal information to keep their data safe. 

Councilmember Hovey asked if there had been any resolution to the dog shooting that occurred last year. The Chief responded that although there was a possible suspect, the police found no evidence to prove this person was the shooter. 

Council thanked the Chief for his report.

8.   NEW/OTHER BUSINESS:

a.   Consider Resolution Approving Addendum to Independent Contractor Agreement between the City of Sunfish Lake and Living Sculpture Tree and Shrub Care, Inc. for City Forester Services: Attorney Kuntz explained that Council had delayed action on this matter and directed Councilmembers Bulach and Hovey to review a proposed salary increase for the City Forester Position.

Councilmember Hovey reported that he and Councilmember Bulach met with the Forester to discuss a proposed hourly rate increase. He explained that he reviewed hourly rates for private contractors and for other municipalities that hire private contractors and found the hourly rate was approximately $85.00. He noted that the Forester’s current rate is $42 per hour.

Councilmember Bulach stated he checked private landscaping fees in other cities and found their rates for this service to be approximately $65 per hour. 


Councilmember Hovey noted that Mr. Nayes took over for the former forester and that he has a higher skill set for the position and has been more pro-active in the position. He recommended that the hourly rate for the forester be increased to $50 per hour; he noted this is still below the average and would still be under the budgeted amount for 2013.

Councilmember DeCourcy commented that she did not believe it was appropriate to discuss salaries at an open meeting.

Clerk Iago pointed out that municipal salaries are public information.

Mayor Park asked if there were any further comments or questions and there was no response.

Councilmember DeCourcy asked if she should abstain from voting on the matter and the City Attorney responded yes.       

Councilmember Hovey moved adoption of Resolution No. 13-04 titled, RESOLUTION APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SUNFISH LAKE AND LIVING SCULPTURE TREE AN SHRUB CARE, INC. FOR CITY FORESTER SERVICES and to approve a salary increase to $50 per hour for the position for 2013,  seconded by Councilmember Wahlstrom and carried. (Ayes: 4 Hovey, Wahlstrom, Bulach, Park; Nays  0; Abstain 1 DeCourcy)

b.   Consider Request from City Clerk for Registration and Lodging Fees to Attend the Minnesota Clerks and Finance Officers Association (MCFOA) Conference in March, 2013:   Clerk Iago reviewed her memorandum dated January 30, 2013 requesting funds to attend the Minnesota Clerks and Finance Officers Association (MCFOA) conference in March, at a cost not to exceed $500.00.  The Clerk advised she has been unable to find a roommate to share the costs, but she will continue to look for a person. 

The Mayor asked if there was any further discussion and there was no response.

Councilmember DeCourcy moved to approve the request for reimbursement of funds for Clerk Iago to attend the MCFOA conference in March, 2013, at a cost not to exceed $500, seconded by Councilmember Hovey and carried. (Ayes: 5-0)

c.   Schedule Public Hearing at the Regular Council Meeting on April 2, 2013 to Review the City’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program Plan (SWPPP) and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES):

Engineer Sterna explained that to the Council that the City is required to conduct an annual public hearing to educate the public on the permit requirements and to receive comments. He recommended the public hearing be held at the Regular Council meeting on April 2, 2013 and that a Council motion would be in order to set the public hearing date. He stated his office would prepare the notice and asked if the Clerk would publish and post the notice.  Clerk Iago responded yes.

Councilmember Wahlstrom moved to schedule a Public Hearing at the regular Council meeting on April 2, 2013 to review the City’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program Plan (SWPPP) and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) as required, seconded by Councilmember Bulach and carried.  (5-0)

d.   Other: The Mayor stated she had mailed the post-cards for the City’s Winter Holiday Celebration and explained that she has collected several door prizes that were donated by residents.

Treasurer Blair stated he was submitting his resignation at this time and that he would be also be retiring from his regular fulltime position. He explained he would continue to work in the position through a transitional period to allow the City to find a replacement. 

Mayor Park and Council commended Mike for his dedication and years of service to the City.

The Mayor asked there was any further business and there was no response.

9.   ADJOURN: Councilmember Hovey moved for adjournment at 8:45 p.m., seconded by Councilmember Wahlstrom and carried.  (5-0)



___________________________                                                ___________________________

Molly Park, Mayor                                                             Catherine Iago, City Clerk