Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-24-2020 Council Minutes MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Dennis Walsh, City Council Members Richard Crosby, III, Matt Johnson,Aaron Printup and Victoria Seals. Representing Staff were City Attorney Shana Conklin, Public Works Director/City Engineer Adam Edwards and City Administrator Dustin Rief. Mayor Walsh called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT AGENDA Crosby asked to remove No. 8) Water Tank Maintenance Contract Extension and to add to the Agenda No. 11) Resolution Designating Appointment to the Orono Parks Commission of Vanessa Keller. Seals asked to add No. 12)Removal of a Parks Commissioner Julie Ruegemer. Walsh thanked Vanessa Keller for interviewing today for the Parks Commission and congratulated her and noted they are looking forward to having her at the next meeting in September. 1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 13,2020 2. COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 13,2020 3. CLAIMS/BILLS 4. CELL PHONE USE POLICY 5. APPROVE RENTAL LICENSE 6. APPROVE OFFICER TIMOTHY DATWYLER' S RESIGNATION 7. REQUEST TO HIRE FULL-TIME POLICE OFFICER 8. WATER TANK MAINTENANCE CONTRACT EXTENSION This item was removed from the Consent Agenda. 9. BIG ISLAND DONATIONS 10. LA20-000009—DON GAMBLE O/B/O RICHARD A AND KIM A EDWARDS,2480 AND 2474 CARMAN STREET, SKETCH PLAN 11. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING APPOINTMENT TO THE ORONO PARKS COMMISSION OF VANESSA KELLER 12. REMOVAL OF PARKS COMMISSIONER JULIE RUEGEMER Page 1 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Crosby moved, Seals seconded,to approve the Consent Agenda as revised,with Item No. 8 being removed and Item Nos. 11 and 12 being added.VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. PUBLIC COMMENTS None Edwards addressed Item No. 8 which is a proposal to extend the Water Tower Maintenance contract with SCH Consulting for another 5 years, noting they are the ones who did the paint and restoration of the water tower in 2014 and there has been a five-year contract for annual maintenance since then, which is coming to an end. Edwards clarified the reason the Item was pulled from the Agenda is because they want to change the payment option to the variable five-year plan as outlined in SCH Consulting's proposal. Johnson moved, Crosby seconded,to approve the variable payment plan for a five-year contract totaling$92,250 and authorize the budgeting of$18,450 each year. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT 10. LA20-000009—DON GAMBLE O/B/O RICHARD A AND KIM A EDWARDS,2480 AND 2474 CARMAN STREET, SKETCH PLAN Don Gamble O/B/O Richard A. and Kim A. Edwards,Applicant,was present. Staff presented a summary packet of information. Walsh asked regarding Tract A, even though the lagoon separates it and it's non-contiguous if code allows to be able to add the land above the lagoon to it. Barnhart answered adding the lagoon would make it the one-acre gross. Walsh said regarding Tract B,the issue is the wetland and asked if they can fill the wetland because they can replace that wetland somewhere else. Barnhart answered he would have to confirm with the Watershed District but his understanding it they can fill that in and because it is 400 square feet or less,they do not have to replace it. If they do,they can identify another location within the Watershed to replace that wetland or buy credits. He said it is a small area and normally when you start filling in a pond there is a sequence, for example, can the wetland be avoided, can it be mitigated somewhere onsite,there are three to four steps in the process. Barnhart noted with a 400 square foot wetland it is not needed to go to those steps which are sometimes a burden to meet, especially in a community where one doesn't want to impact wetlands. Walsh asked if it's the Council's discretion, if they want that to happen regardless. Barnhart answered true. Page 2 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Printup asked if there is any land there that is used for runoff mitigation from the County Road in the Navarre area. Barnhart answered they haven't done a lot of engineering yet,but the understanding is that quite a bit of stormwater comes from the shoreline and points North through this property and may impact buildable sites. He said water does come through and he doesn't believe there is an easement or anything like that to protect that area. Walsh clarified that Tract B meets everything assuming that the wetland gets resolved. Barnhart answered true. Walsh asked Barnhart to explain the width issue with Tract A as he didn't quite understand the specifics. Barnhart answered when a property owner comes forward and wants to split their property, Staff looks at whether both lots meet the minimum requirements of the applicable zoning district. In some cases,they do and in some cases they don't, and when they don't Staff looks at the"why." Is it because the applicant is not willing to adjust a property line to meet the requirements? Barnhart said in this situation the Applicant is somewhat fixed by the side lot lines and again it's up to the Council's discretion whether or not they want to support a subdivision that creates a non-conforming lot. He said the issue or comment he wants to make in regards to this situation is the non-conforming width is what is there now,this subdivision does not improve it,nor does it hurt it. Barnhart said they'd get to the driveway coming up later. This subdivision does not increase the non-conformity nor help the non-conformity in terms of width for the Southern portion of the lot. Walsh said typically or historically the Council doesn't approve subdivisions that do not meet the current requirements. Barnhart replied for a lot width he cannot remember an approval,and there are other standards in play that Council has supported in the past,the driveway for example. Walsh stated as that is his background statement, what would be Barnhart's recommendation and why would he and Staff be recommending it. Barnhart answered he doesn't know if he has a recommendation,the point here is to see if Council is comfortable having a situation where they will create a lot that is non-conforming. He noted most other scenarios where they are creating a non-conforming lot it is an easy and fast no for Staff not to recommend it and Council not to support it. In this situation it's a little different in the sense that they did not create that as a conformity issue. Johnson stated the question is whether the Council will allow a subdivision on a lot that is already non- conforming to be divided even though it is a lawful non-conforming lot right now. Barnhart answered yes that is very well put and is exactly the question in the memo. Johnson said it's a non-conforming lot that extends over water to the other side, which has its own repercussions, and asked for example, if someone wanted more hardcover on one side, would they go across the bay to someone on the other side to subdivide. He said it opens up some questions for him. Page 3 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Barnhart asked to hear feedback from the Council, noting the Applicant is here and can address any questions. With the Council's feedback they will come back and the Applicant will decide whether or not to move forward with the project. Don Gamble, 10704 Water Lily Lane,Woodbury, addressed the Council and noted it's been a long, strange time since March but they have endeavored to move forward while addressing everything that is possible. Two years ago,this process started with the City and they were looking at lots on the North side having different half-acre zoning and were looking at something entirely different. He stated they've been following the guidance to subdivide the lots and noted the driveway services two homes but it runs across a third property to get to the road and that is part of the problem, which is kind of an unchangeable problem. He also said until the first meeting in March,they didn't realize they could use land North of the lagoon to satisfy the one-acre and that is what they've attempted to do here. Mr. Gamble said they have talked about the wetlands with the District and they responded that 400 feet is no big deal. They also talked about vacating all the wetlands and offsetting and other things and the District said that is a little bigger process. Therefore,this is the process to see if they can even subdivide the lots, and if they can,they will certainly work hard with the Watershed District to see what they can do right and the best way to offset if needed. He noted one of the things found in looking at records was when a culvert was put in under County Road 15, it changed the routing of water off of this property—water does not flow across it, but instead flows through the neighbor's yard. Regarding the little inlet that goes up and hits the lagoon right on the property line, he said he's gone out and stood there and it has been a rainy season and he has not seen water flowing across it. He said they will address the water flow,the wetlands with the Watershed. He stated again,they moved forward because they would like to see what the outcome will be, and this is the far simplest layout they've come up with. He stated they and are looking for some feedback for the owner. Walsh asked Mr. Gamble what he thinks the Council's biggest challenge is to make a decision on tonight. Mr. Gamble answered,to him-and he has been before this Council and many others- it sounds like the challenge is: is the Council setting some kind of precedent by allowing this or not. He said the idea of grabbing a chunk of land from across the bay never would have occurred to him and noted he is not sitting in front of issues like the Council is all the time. He clarified that until after the March meeting and after talking to the attorneys, did they even find out that it was possible to do use land across the bay, and for two years in talking to Staff he was told they couldn't use land North of the lagoon at all. He said the benefit of this is the City is getting one-acre lots in an area where they will be the only ones. Mr. Gamble said the fact that there are some funny parcels North,the actual parcels they are creating are actually very viable,very usable and a benefit to the community,noting it is half-acre zoning up there and he was a little surprised that they couldn't just subdivide them off but he has learned a lot. He said he can understand the challenge for the Council;however, it would be a shame not to figure out how to utilize these lots because if there isn't some way of configuring it,then that parcel of land is basically locked up until something is allowed. He said he hasn't pursued anything else and thought he'd put it before the Council last time asking what they would like to see. He noted the owner is trying to come up with something the City will allow, stand behind and that is of value. Mr. Gamble stated they've worked within the confines to make it as good as they can and the reason they're still discussing it is because it's a sketch plan review and they are still open,but want to move forward with what the Council thinks they can allow. Page 4 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Walsh said it's certainly a unique piece of property and that is part of the challenge they are trying to grapple with,because even when they divide the land it doesn't solve all the issues one normally wants to solve in a subdivision. He said especially with the weird configuration of the land and the width issues, some of that is going to suffer. Walsh stated it looks like the Applicant has come a long way and he recognizes what Johnson said regarding whether you can grab land across the water; whether that's reality or not, he is not sure. Mr. Gamble said this is all one lot and he doesn't know how they look at the land under the lagoon, it's a contiguous lot through that lagoon and it isn't grabbing land from somewhere else to make it work, it is taking the lot that is actually there. Walsh said it's completely separate, and it would be like having a pond and you can't get to the other land, noting it's kind of like Fletcher's, as they have the little island and you can't get there unless you get on a boat and get to the island to get picked up. Mr. Gamble said he remembered the bridge they put in once and said he thinks they had to take it out as it blocked the waterway. Walsh said technically they could almost say the same thing, if it's one parcel and one PID(Property Identification Number)and the property owner could say they own everything underneath the water and it's connected so it's a similar thing. He said when it's completely displaced by water it's hard to make that mental connection. Printup said between Togo Road and Northern Avenue they ran lots going through a wetland,rather than making the wetland an outlot, so the properties were a little bit smaller. Instead what happened is the properties went right through. He asked how you would get to the other side, he doesn't know. However, the properties sold and he thinks they are being built on to this day, noting it's a very strange setup down there. Walsh said the Applicant is very close to having it all work and then they wouldn't even need to be here before the Council. He said he asks himself the question, knowing that this has a couple of things that don't quite meet what a subdivision would be without having a variance, what is the reason he would say OK to this and he wouldn't say OK to anything else. What is creating that practical difficulty that would say this is the exception to the rule because it's so unique, for example to say the Applicant has gotten 95%done but just can't get the last 5%. Walsh said he doesn't know if he has that answer yet as this is so unique. Crosby stated he thinks the land on the other side of the water is something he could not get past. He thinks of his own lot and he is on a lagoon, but it would be like him trying to own a piece on the other side, it just doesn't make sense. There is no land to get there. Johnson said even if they take the lagoon out and someone comes to the Council and says they have a non-conforming lot and they'd like to subdivide it,they would say no because they will not allow a further intensification of something that is already non-conforming. He said this is a terrific piece of real estate and they have exceptional privilege for hardcover, noting he saw the hardcover calculations for one but not the other. He said if they run the calculation for just the South part,they are over 25%hardcover for the amount of area they have there. Johnson stated that it comes down to the fact that it's non- Page 5 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. conforming and if someone else came with a non-conforming and said they meet everything, but— Johnson said the"but" is what holds it up. Walsh said they had some recently were there was a non-conforming line and someone wanted to change the line to make it an even worse non-conforming and the Council said they do not do that, noting one can make it better, but not make it worse. Crosby stated they make it more conforming, not less conforming. Johnson said that is why it's a hard thing for him to ever get behind approving something that is already non-conforming. Mr. Gamble stated that is exactly right, it is non-conforming the way it sits,and there is nothing that will make each lot conforming. The subdividing of the property is not worsening it at all that he sees, it's just providing another buildable site on a piece of land and gives it some purpose. Otherwise, like they've mentioned, it's like the island at Fletcher's. In this case, he said it's even a separate code and at some point,the City Council said this is different and at some point,the group looked at zoning and zoned this separately from the peninsula houses. Walsh noted that was before their time. Johnson stated the North side is zoned differently. Mr. Gamble said it is zoned half-acre, so it's a different zoning entirely. Walsh said part of the catch is that they are not trying to create more lots just to create more lots, and noted the Council has been pretty hard on following the rules and if it's stuck, it's stuck. He said they have tried to solve some problems. Printup said to Johnson's point,the Applicant can still use that calculation to benefit the other side of the lagoon. Barnhart replied and said,except that there is the 0-75' zone that will impact what they can do on that lower portion, so they may allow for more of a calculation of hardcover or they may be constrained by their proximity to the lake. Johnson noted the entire property is in variance. Barnhart said yes,the whole property is in variance. Printup noted they are used to it. Walsh said he doesn't think that is the inhibitor,it's just that they're in the starting block that there is a non-conforming property. Mr. Gamble said that is not unusual in the sense that the Council has moved property lines and done things with non-conforming lots to improve both lots,not creating a new one to do that, and this isn't Page 6 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. creating non-conformity. He said not doing anything isn't fixing the situation as far as what exists around the lake. Walsh said it sounds like there are two non-conformities. Barnhart said he's hearing some discomfort from the Council in terms of creating a lot that will be non- conforming from a width standpoint. He said there is also some discomfort on having some buildable portion north of the lagoon. He said that takes care of it from a guidance standpoint for this tract. On the next page of the packet(Lot 1), Barnhart said it obviously conforms from an area and width standpoint, but Lot 2, if they read the Code very strictly, frontage on the lake needs to be 100 feet or 140 feet depending on where that line falls, noting this line would not fall. He said if the Council is not comfortable with the layout that shows this type of"finger,"he would like to hear that and then he can advise the Applicant. Seals asked to go to the Hennepin County Property Map hybrid model and pull up the address to see the visual. Walsh said typically they tell people to come back with a subject that meets everything and they're ready to roll, but he doesn't think this can do that. Mr. Gamble said that is part of the question he had in March,where do they go from here and that is why they got the legal advice and found they could use land North of the lagoon to qualify to get the lot to one-acre, which is unique, noting that the majority on Lake Minnetonka are not an acre. He said they did meet that and the second lot meets the 140-foot width on the front and he believes the zoning on the back only has to be a 100-foot width. Walsh stated he doesn't mind having any hoops an Applicant has to jump through to get it to conformity, but it's still not conforming. Barnhart said it would be the width on existing Tract B and potentially the width on the new Lot 1 on the other side. He noted there is a boundary between LR1 C l and the other zone. Crosby asked if the Northern lot has buildable size. Seals asked if you combined those two as one does it make it conforming. Barnhart stated the two Northern lots are both conforming now, he noted where they're rubbing up against an immovable object is the two lots to the South of the lagoon and trying to make them conforming. Short of acquiring land property from the West, which is not under the control of the Applicant,they cannot make those conforming. However, it's not uncommon where a property owner doesn't have quite enough and may need to negotiate with a neighboring property to acquire additional land. Crosby asked if the same owner owns the lot to the North. Barnhart answered no. Page 7 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Printup clarified there are two different people altogether and the only one the Council is looking at is on the right of the map on screen and above it. Barnhart stated the problem is the lower lots. Crosby said they need those portions to be somewhat conforming even though they're non-conforming, and asked if that is correct. Walsh noted they are currently conforming, but they want to subdivide. Barnhart clarified that one is non-conforming right now,noting the one on the left of the map on screen is non-conforming because of width. Walsh said once they start subdividing,they are at 50%of the four lots being non-conforming. Mr. Gamble noted the one on the right onscreen has the acreage requirement and the new lot is 100 feet wide and meets the zoning requirement. Barnhart said he thinks what Walsh is referring to is the"finger"that goes North of the lagoon as it is 25 feet wide and the requirement, even if it's a favorable zoning location,would be 100 feet. Mr. Gamble said that is part of the South lot, rather than the North lot. Barnhart agreed that it is,but it's also lake-frontage and that's where the minimum width would come in. He said this lot has four frontages, which they do not see a lot of. Crosby asked to clarify that Lot 2474 is non-conforming and Lot 2480 is conforming. Barnhart answered yes. Johnson noted to make the split it becomes non-conforming because the"finger"goes up the side and does not meet the lake width. Crosby asked if the Council has ever done this in the past, noting that right now for conformity,they are calculating the land North of the lagoon. Barnhart answered yes,they are including some of the land North of the lagoon for both lots. Crosby asked if it's a possibility to combine them into one lot, although that obviously wouldn't be a lakeshore lot. Walsh stated you just can't get four lots out of it. Crosby agreed. Barnhart said he thinks the challenge with this parcel is where the boundary line is for Lot 2474 south of the lagoon. He noted they are limited by that amount of land and they cannot create or add more land to Page 8 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. make it wide enough and that is ultimately the issue. He said if they had another 20 feet perhaps,there would be space for four lots. Seals noted she thinks the Council is in agreement that they do not see four lots, but are trying to help the Applicant find three lots. Crosby noted on the map if they drew a line across the top lots, could the top half possibly be a lot off of shoreline, it would not be a lakeshore lot, if it's big enough to be conforming. Then they would be talking about a total of three lots rather than four. Walsh said they're trying to give guidance but the Council doesn't need to design it. Crosby said he understands that and he's asking if that is a possibility to basically put the two half lots together to make one lot off of shoreline. Barnhart said that is similar to what was proposed in March and the issue is not the area North of the lagoon,the issue is that the amount of land on the peninsula and the amount of land where the boundary line is constrains the subdivision of this lot because there is not enough buildable acreage South of the lagoon with the required width. Earlier, Staff had identified a potential of combining both of those lots to create one conforming lot, and then they'd have two lots on the North for a total of three. He said that's the best way they can do it, but looking at it,there are two separate property owners and they'd have to work together on getting to that point, or acquire additional land from the private residence to the West to get the area and width. Short of those things happening, Barnhart doesn't see a subdivision happening here. Walsh said Barnhart hit it right on the mark:they just don't have enough land to the South to make it work. He stated if the owners can figure it out and combine to get three lots that may be the best option. Mr. Gamble asked if they look at 2480, and move the boundary up so there is not 125-foot width,then there would be a buildable lot to the North off Shoreline Drive, if they meet all the width and square footage requirements. Walsh said if they meet all the requirements,they don't need the Council. Barnhart stated if Lot 1 was North of the Lagoon and was not a lake lot, he believes it would meet the requirements. Mr. Gamble said he likes hearing the Councilmembers speak among themselves and it furthers the depth for the Applicant. Walsh noted it is a unique situation and if they can get something worked out,the Council is all for it, but it has to fit in the box correctly. Printup asked to see the map onscreen and located a wetland, noting there are lots that go straight through the wetland. Johnson noted that is a wetland,not a lake. Printup answered that trying to make it fit in the box, sometimes doesn't work. Page 9 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Walsh noted that lot actually had wetlands that one could get through, but just couldn't build on. He said he remembered that coming through the Council. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Crosby congratulated his daughter and Johnson's daughter on purchasing their first homes, noting their kids are growing up. Printup said good luck to the former police Officer Timothy Datwyler,who is leaving the department and thanked him for his service. He also noted hiring a new police officer will be exciting and a good addition. He noted he had a great trip in South Dakota. Seals thanked the Fire Department for putting out a blazing boat fire on Lake Minnetonka. Crosby said the boat fire made"Boneheaded Boaters of the Week"(nationwide clip). He encouraged all of the boaters to run their blowers, it's very important. He said the Fire Department did a great job and were able to save all the boats nearby. Seals noted she is still getting emails regarding the water bill and said the City hasn't communicated it well. She read an email she received which read: "We've been blindsided and burned by water so hard and in fact,impossible to budget when your quarterly bill was $15,000,that was a 100%increase over last year[Seals noted the July bill used to be$4,500). We have been told two reasons; one is that the City did not get enough money that they usually do in their water budget. [Seals noted that is not the case.] We were told it went into roads and bridges [Seals noted they love their roads but that is not where the money went.] Second was that Orono charged the multi-dwelling buildings to a higher bill, possibly to keep at bay more of those types of dwellings." Seals said communication between the City about utilities and the impact on residents is lacking and Seals said this is something they own and it's not good,noting there are future increases coming and they need to really debate. Walsh said the future increases are really small, except for the Met Council. Seals noted there is one more big increase. Rief stated this year is was 20%. Walsh stated the Met Council was 30%. Johnson noted the"blindsided"comment is the part that is tough. Seals noted the amount is the amount,but then there is the fact that the City isn't communicating very well. Seals also noted another issue is Mediacom,noting they are not a good vendor to Orono in so many ways. She stated she's heard the complaints year after year and she thought,how bad can it be...until it happened to her when she was presenting to the President of her company and it all died. She said she gets it, it happens. However, what is more painstaking, and she cannot imagine what their residents are thinking, is when the company says"No ma'am,we'll come out in a month to look at it." She said the funny thing is it turns back on at 10:00 p.m. at night and is active all night long and then around 9:30 a.m. Page 10 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. it shuts off again. She said the point is,this is unacceptable, especially in the environment they live in today to tell residents they will come out in a month to see if they can fix it,noting that doesn't necessarily mean it will be fixed. She said she doesn't know if the Council needs direction or to look at other options,but many residents are working from home, she can't be the only one. Seals noted she sees people ranting and raving. Crosby stated he's had friends and residents tell him they need other people in there. He knows it's a difficult task and they've gotten a lot done in the first terms, but this has got to be something the Council gets accomplished in this term. It's not that they won't get it done,they will get it done. He said they need to help get someone else in the City, Comcast or anybody, noting when they're making Comcast look good,they've got problems. Seals noted she had Comcast when she was in St. Paul and she thought it couldn't get any worse, noting she was wrong. Crosby said he gets it,they are a rural area, but they need to get competition out in Orono and that needs to be one of the major things they work on. Rief said he's been in contact with a couple of residents on different sides of the City and one emailed Rief a summary of his communications with Mediacom and he needs to chat with Attorney Mattick on whether there's violation within the franchise agreement. Seals noted she understands that service goes out from time-to-time,but she doesn't get how the company can say it will be a month before they can come out. Rief stated if the Council gets complaints, please forward them to him as he can get directly to the Senior Vice President and try to address it there. Crosby stated capitalism and competition makes people better. Rief has heard across the board from everyone as far as customer service,Mediacom will come back and do what they need to do within the bounds of the agreement, but he does not think the satisfaction of their service is there. He said he received a voicemail from someone from another company interested in providing internet services so he will set up a time to chat with him and discuss it. Walsh said the Council will see if they call back, noting they've had meetings with one of the big ones, and out in Fox Hill around 40 residents paid around$2,000 each to install fiber. Walsh said he met with the company and said Orono could perhaps budget$100,000 a year and do a neighborhood one at a time and start knocking them out and the company was going to call the City back and never did. Walsh stated the company was so excited and then they saw the density and wouldn't return calls or emails. Printup said it's worth another shot. Walsh agreed and said it's frustrating. Crosby said it's not like the houses in Fox Hill are butting up right next to each other, if the company can get that area done. Page 11 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Walsh noted regarding Mediacom,two weeks ago his interne was out for a week, and said while Mediacom was fixing someone else down the road,they came and cut his cables. He called the company and they said no,they wouldn't do something like that. A week later someone came out to his home because it's attached to his fire system and the guy said"it looks like we cut your wires." Seals said speaking of fire, she didn't know if the Councilmembers saw Saturday's edition that Long Lake got a massive award of$152,000 to replace their breathing apparatus. Walsh noted Orono has gotten a number of grants over time. Seals said this is a big grant and she knows they need their equipment replaced and asked how the City of Long Lake is helping Long Lake Fire to make these things happen. Crosby noted they have to ask and request the grant. Walsh noted the question is if anybody is paying attention. Seals said she looks at Bederwood and their grants and Big Island and noted the money is out there, and it seems silly to leave it on the table,but they should at least ask. Rief stated he thinks they did apply for that same grant with the SCBA (self-contained breathing apparatus)and he said the only difference in the detail that he noticed, and he hasn't talked to Greg Peterson,but Long Lake's SCBA gear was 17 years old and Orono's is 15 years old. He said everything expires at 15 years so Long Lake's would have been expired and therefore a higher priority,noting perhaps that is why they received the grant versus Orono. He said he has not received an official notification that Orono did not get the grant,but he will check this week. Johnson asked if the City made progress on the land they were looking at. Rief said he has been in communication with one of the Attorneys from Soren Mattick's firm, he is working through that process and should have some information soon. Johnson said Taylor just passed her real estate license down in Florida if anyone is looking to buy a place down there. Drew has moved from Washington to the free state of Texas. Walsh noted he mentioned the many birthdays in his house at the last meeting and said the girls don't just get one birthday so it's like four birthday parties rather than two. He said he had family over on the weekend and spent a lot of time on the water. He noted they have a three week break between this meeting and the September 14,2020 meeting and told everyone to enjoy the weather and get out on the water and use the blower on their boats. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT Rief noted that Togo Road has been under construction and they've made progress on East Long Lake Trail to get the pilings in. Their assumption was around 20-some feet but instead it was 48 feet to get stable ground for the pilings. He just received a draft from Attorney Mattick of what he has labeled as "Orono Cares For Schools Grant," on how they would help distribute the CARES money and how they can divide the money out to the two largest school districts to help them with some of their expenses. He Page 12 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Thursday,August 24,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. said across the road they will receive $98,000 of CARES money and he knows West Tonka got a bit more money but they worked it out equally, whatever they determine that amount is. He noted it's just the draft form today and he will talk to Attorney Mattick to see if there is anything additional to add before sending it over to the school. He proposed more of a reimbursement type allocation, and noted essentially all of the money must be spent in the CARES Act by November 15,2020, so the November 9, 2020 meeting will be the last approval of those expenditures. Walsh said they should be spending it before that time as school starts in a week or so. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT Attorney Shana Conklin thanked the Council for letting her join them this evening, and stated she has been with Campbell Knutson for the last 7 years and she works in the background on Orono projects but has not been able to come to a Council meeting in person and said it's nice to be here. She noted she is originally from South Dakota and is familiar with the area as she drives past Orono on her way to Aberdeen. ADJOURNMENT Printup moved, Seals seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 7:08 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. AT ST: ip nna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh,Mayor Page 13 of 13