Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-13-2023 City Council Minutes MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 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 Matt Johnson,Alisa Benson, and Victoria Seals. Member Richard Crosby III was absent. Representing Staff were City Attorney Soren Mattick, City Administrator/Engineer Adam Edwards,Finance Director Ron Olson, Community Development Director Laura Oakden, and City Planner Melanie Curtis. Mayor Walsh called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.,followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT AGENDA 1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 9,2023 This item was removed from the consent agenda 2. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 23,2023 This item was removed from the consent agenda 3. CLAIMS/BILLS 4. APPROVAL OF SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY UPDATE 5. APPROVAL OF RENTAL LICENSES 6. APPROVAL TO DISPOSE OF BICYCES 7. AUTHORIATION TO HIRE JENNIFER LYREK—POLICE OFFICER 8. AUTHORIZATION FOR BIG ISLAND DOCK REPAIR 9. APPROVE REHABILITATION OF GRINDER STATION 8 (1023 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD)AND LIFT STATION 10(115 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH) 10. APPROVAL OF SEASONAL WEIGHT RESTRICTIONS—RESOLUTION NO. 7338 11. 2021 ROAD MAINTENANCE PROJECT—FINAL PAYMENT AND PROJECT CLOSEOUT 12. LA22-000051 —PAUL TAUNTON,3600 IVY PLACE,AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES—RESOLUTION NO.7339 13. LA22-000071 —JAMES&JULI HILLIER, 1224 BRIAR STREET & 1245 ARBOR STREET,VARIANCES—RESOLUTION NO. 7340LA22-000066— Page 1 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. BRANDON BOLDUC,3365 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD,VARIANCES— RESOLUTION NO.7341 14. LA22-000066—BRANDON BOLDUC,3365 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD,VARIANCES— RESOLUTION NO.7341 15. LA22-000067—JON BYINGTON, 1270 WILDHURST TRAIL,VARIANCE— RESOLUTION NO.7342 Johnson moved, Seals seconded,to approve the Consent Agenda with Items 1 and 2 removed. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0. 1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 9,2023 2. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 23,2023 Benson said the City Council meeting minutes of January 9,2023 are something that has been a bit of a back and forth or ongoing issue. The first minutes that came back, I didn't approve because there were inaccuracies.And the second ones that have come out,it's kind of the same thing. There are several things in here that are not accurate.Based on our work session perhaps this is something where I don't know if the contractor is going to change or the processes are going to change or it's just going to be up to Council, as you indicated earlier, City Administrator Edwards,that we review those things. That's fine. There are inaccuracies,which is why I would not vote to approve both this meeting No. 1 and also No. 2. Walsh asked Benson if she had specific things she'd want inserted that could help solve the problem. Benson said specifically for January 9 there was a resident's name that was incorrect throughout the entire minutes. It was correct in the first revision, and now it's incorrect again. And at least one quote is attributed to the wrong person.I believe it was Councilman member Johnson that was attributed a quote that was Chief Van Eyll and also the entire exchange between myself and City Attorney Mattic regarding my abstention is not included.Also missing January 9 are the details in the Mayor Council Report with Mayor Walsh's information with regard to individual homeowners who may be bringing some issues before the City so it's inaccuracies as well as items that are just not included,understanding that this is not a verbatim report. My feeling is these are important issues to include in the minutes. Walsh suggested Benson talk to the staff and get revisions to bring to the Council so all could see them and see whether they would agree the changes were accurate. Benson said as far as Item 2 there was much less of an issue,but again,there was a motion to approve the consent agenda that was made by Councilmember Seals, and it was attributed to her. So there are just inaccuracies that I know none of us would want. Johnson suggested Benson make a practice of reviewing the minutes ahead of time and presenting any concerns to staff. Page 2 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. City Administrator Edwards added the Council receives the packet on Friday. If over the weekend you send the clerk and I an email of any of those particular issues you might have,then we can see if that's something we can address before the meeting. Walsh said he would put the onus on Benson to send an email detailing the things she'd like to see changed or Staff could verify to make sure all is correct. Benson pointed out the packet is a lot to review in 48 hours but she would do her best.And at the same time,I understand that perhaps there's discussion in the works about a transcription service.Is that accurate? Edwards clarified the City is looking at changing its vendor for managing the meeting recordings and including closed captioning. He said that's not necessarily a capture of minutes and the problem is that it is only as good as the software so there can be a lot of inaccuracies.I don't know that it reduces our need to have somebody who's a professional transcribing and creating meeting minutes for us,regardless of whether they got some text that way or they have to transcribe from an audio recording. Walsh moved,Benson seconded, to table Items 1 and 2 and direct Council Member Benson to interact with staff on the minutes.VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT 16. LA22-000065—TIM& LESLIE OARE,2967 CASCO POINT ROAD,VARIANCES Walsh reminded the audience that Community Development Reports are not public hearings although the Council may call on the applicant for information. City Planner Melanie Curtis explained the applicants and their neighbors purchased the neighboring Swenson property between their properties with the intent of splitting it and splitting the buildings on that lot to add to their own properties. The applicants are seeking two variances from the recently-adopted accessory dwelling unit performance standards in order to maintain the full functionality of the existing Swenson home to serve as an ADU(accessory dwelling unit)for their home at 2967 Casco Point Road. Curtis said they have requested variances from the minimum one-acre lot area requirement as well as the condition for the utilities to be combined between the two buildings. Their property after combination will be 7/l Oths of an acre in area. The applicant's home was constructed in 2020 and they have new utilities separate from the Swenson home and they would like to maintain that. In January the Planning Commission heard this application and held a public hearing. Following the public hearing the Commission voted four to zero on a motion to recommend denial of the variances. We did not receive any comments from the public on this application. Staff found no practical difficulty to support the lot area variance to permit the ADU on the property. The minimum acreage requirement cannot be met therefore the property does not qualify for the ADU use. Staff recommends denial of the lot area variance for the ADU. The applicants are permitted to maintain plumbing facilities in the Swenson home with a restrictive covenant addressing the use as an accessory building with full plumbing facilities rather than a dwelling unit. She recommended Council direct staff to draft a denial resolution for adoption at your next meeting. The applicants and the neighbors,the Abbotts,are here tonight. Page 3 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. Leslie Oare,2967 Casco Point Road, explained they purchased the home in 2018. The Swenson's long narrow part is in between their home and the Abbotts on the other side. Swensons used the home as a cabin. Their residence is in Fort Lauderdale, so they were only there four times a year. We always had conversations with the Abbotts that if Swensons were ever to sell that we could purchase it as the guest house was originally part of our property.Abbotts do not own to the road,partially because many years ago the road was in front of the homes between the homes and the lake. So the Abbotts want to solve that and be able to own to the road to get rid of the driveway easement and be a conforming property. The Swenson property is non-conforming; all three are non-conforming. We'd like to divide the Swenson property and make two conforming properties and get rid of the density of the house in the middle.We would be getting rid of a dock permit that has created many lawsuits. We've already removed the steps to the lake and there's a deck at the top of the stairs we plan to remove and then remove the large portion of the sidewalk between the guest house and the Abbot property. The Swenson home was 32.5 percent hard cover. Our home with an existing variance is at 29.6. Our property would drop to 25.6 percent. We're just trying to do a really good thing and not have another homeowner squeezed in between us who will inevitably want to put in a boat slip which wouldn't be allowed because of the dock permit. John Abbott,2941 Casco Point Road, is the other neighbor to this adjoining piece of property. Thank you, Leslie. She explained it nicely. We have a document in your packet that explains the neighbor situation.I just would point out that in this request there's not a stick of lumber, no physical changes to the site, except for the removal of hard cover and the elimination of density that's just too thick for the neighborhood. So,there's no bathroom being added;there's no expansion of the space being added.It's restoring it to what it was in the past, except that the density goes down and the hardcover is brought into a higher level of compliance. So I appreciate your consideration. Johnson said he would be very supportive of approving this application.I have gone along with these people on their process here.I think what we have is an existing condition with that house. They're cleaning it up,getting rid of the dock. It's an existing condition that actually cleans up.a long-term problem.I'm supportive of that. With respect to combining utilities, again,that's an existing condition. I see it as unnecessary to ask them to combine them with what is already in place. Something to note about these folks is when they were trying to do this originally,they came to the City to do it the right way. That's what I respect about what they're doing. There's probably examples of this out there.People are using(such structures)in a different way.By making it an ADU and putting some restrictions on who can use it,that's a benefit to the neighborhood. The neighbors are on board. So I'm in support of the application. Walsh said this is precursor to the ADU discussion. We put the ADU language together with our city attorney and it was really more geared for new construction.But as Matt said,this is an existing condition;you're cleaning up three lots into two lots. You're not really changing anything,you're solving problems.And so like Matt,I think the practical difficulty is that you do have an existing condition that conforms to the neighborhood in general,but just not to the ADU,which is more geared for brand new construction. I would be supportive as well. Page 4 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. Seals said she is also a big fan of cleaning things up. I appreciate moving from three to two(lots), cleaning up some of the hardcover--that's always appreciated, especially on the lake. Docks are always a sensitive issue in Orono, so one less dock is not a bad thing. I would be in support of it also. Benson asked staff to speak to their recommendation again. Curtis said when staff did the analysis and went through practical difficulty they didn't fmd that there was one based on our newly-adopted ordinance to support the request. Walsh said the practical difficulty is in respect to existing conditions and combining and merging them. Our new statute or ordinance is really geared towards new construction. We knew we'd have some existing conditions that come in front of us, and this is one of those for sure. Benson clarified that the Planning Commission's recommendation was for denial based on a similar analysis to staff's and because it would be under the required acreage for an ADU. She asked about setting a precedent. Curtis said it would probably be very difficult to find another situation such as this. It's pretty rare that someone would take a single lot of out of the mix,merging the three lots into two.It does improve the density and improves the hardcover as they have already noted. We went through the hardcover variances last year and they've agreed to remove a considerable amount of hardcover while still maintaining the necessary hardcover. In theory, I see it as a positive. But as you go through the analysis,that's where staff ended up. It doesn't conform to the acreage requirement, correct. Benson said she is just interested in weighing the options, given that it's a new ordinance(for ADUs)and understanding this is not a typical scenario,but also understanding the importance of precedents, and given that it is a new ordinance,being mindful of respecting that. Curtis said Staff does find that this is an extremely unique situation. So if you are focusing on precedents, I think for the next applicant to come through with something that's compelling enough for an approval,I think would be difficult. Benson asked if that's the case, why did staff recommend to deny? Curtis said because it's a newly-adopted ordinance. Seals said most often applicants are asking to split lots. That's a very typical request. So to me, going from three to two is a benefit to the lake and density. I know it's a little early in our ADU process so I appreciate staff sticking to the letter of the law. Benson asked about the hardcover reduction. Leslie Oare,the property owner, said the Swenson property was 32.5 percent hard cover. Our home is 29.6,which we got a variance for when we built it. By combining the old guesthouse back with our Page 5 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. house,we dropped to 25.6 percent.We just want the historical use;that was always as a guest house for our property--it was divided off in 1978. I'm not sure how that happened but we're trying to put it back and then benefit another property at the same time,because then they'll own to the road and drop their driveway easement. Johnson moved, Seals seconded, to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve LA22-000065, 2967 Casco Point Rd. Variances.VOTE: Ayes 3,Nays 1 (Benson). 17. LA22-000060,JOHN GRZYBEK O/B/O WARD EDWARDS,2474 CARMAN STREET, SKETCH PLAN Community Development Director Laura Oakden presented a sketch plan proposal and said Council was being asked for some informal feedback to the applicant regarding their proposed plan. 2474 Carman has a street frontage on Shoreline Drive and the lot is long and narrow with a lagoon that divides the land right in the middle.It also has an identified wetland on the property. The parcel as it sits today has about 1.6 acres of land above the ordinary high-water level.The lot is improved with a single-family home on the southern portion of that lagoon, and the property is relatively unique with a split zoning with the south side of the inlet being our LR1B which is a one-acre minimum and north of that inlet or lagoon area being half-acre minimum or LR1C1. The applicant is proposing to split the lot into two parcels right down the lagoon or the inlet area to facilitate a new building site north of the inlet. The north side is heavily wooded and includes that wetland and some grading area that drops off of Shoreline Drive. An application in 2020,which included this parcel and the parcel to the east at 2480, contemplated a subdivision of those two lots going from two lots to four lots.At that time Planning Commission and Council were not in favor of creating any new non-conforming parcels. With that analysis from 2020. today the existing parcel as it sits is non-conforming as relates to lot width. As proposed that northern parcel would meet the LR1C1 requirements of the half acre and the 100 foot while the southern parcel would require a lot area variance as proposed.It's .68 acres where one acre is required, and a lot with variance at 125 feet and with where 140 is required.For this application to move forward two variances would be needed. Commissioners discussed requiring a shared access between this parcel and the parcel to the east at 2480 Carman to limit access on Shoreline Drive and to work with that neighboring parcel. Overall, some of the Commissioners did support allowing the creation of a new single-family lot on that northern parcel. Commissioner Ressler noted he did not support creating a new substandard parcel with variances. Commissioners also discussed the potential for rezoning the area to be consistent with the neighborhood as this is unique with a split zoning to see if that resolves any concerns. Council should discuss if they are comfortable as proposed with the necessary variances for this application.You also should discuss concerns regarding the buildability with that area,based on the wetlands as shown.. Planning staff request feedback to the applicant identifying those issues brought up. Scott W Edwards,2474 Carmen Street, stated we've presented this before, and I guess nothing really substantially changed except for we had tried a number of other configurations. We feel the simplest way to do this and the most natural way is to split it in the middle of the lagoon. That's historical going back. These lots and the one at 2480 have always been thought of as two lots. Going back there was even,I think,two different tax ID parcels numbers, before the lagoon was dredged in the '60s,I believe. I would like to note that the wetland that is designated is a technical term. It's really just a peat bog. There's no standing water historically on that area,but we did have it surveyed,I think three or four years ago,and Page 6 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. that is the outline of the peat bog. There is a curb cut there that has been existing for some time going out to County Road 15 that splits the lot line between 2474 and 2480. So that has been existing for quite a few years and that would be the proposed access driveway that we would use for the two lots. Johnson said the creation of a new lots and with variances is not something he'd support for a new lot. Walsh said this council has stayed away from creating lots that need variances. Seals said she called staff earlier today about Items 17 and 18, and was trying to understand what was different from when the Council reviewed this parcel before. I appreciate wanting to have something there but to be consistent with what we said back when we reviewed it last time,I would not be supportive of creating additional lots with more non-conformities. Benson said she was in agreement. Walsh indicated he would go on to Item No. 18 on the agenda which is a related parcel. 18. LA22-000069,BRETT AND AMANDA LARSON,2480 CARMAN STREET, SKETCH PLAN Oakden said 2480 Carman is the property referenced to the east of the parcel just discussed but slightly larger. As existing today it's 1.85 acres of land above high water. The property has a new home with a building permit issued in 2022 for the southern portion of this inlet.Again, it has the challenge of that split-zoning with the LR1B one-acre minimum on the southern portion of the lagoon and the LR1 C 1 half -acre minimum on the northern portion. The applicant's goal is to facilitate a new building site north of the inlet. Similar to the 2020 application,the northern portion is conforming today. The southern portion would be substandard to area as it does not meet one acre in area. They meet the width in this application, so just one variance would be needed in the sketch as proposed.It was a similar discussion by commissioners in that they commented on a shared driveway access. Concerns about creating new non- conforming variances was also discussed. You are directed to provide feedback to the applicant based on this discussion. The applicant did submit an alternate plan which was emailed out to you this afternoon. That can be discussed as well. Seals questioned whether in dividing the parcel if the new construction would still be conforming. She asked if that house was built based on the totality of that whole lot. Oakden said she believed the applicant designed the house with the division in mind. Even if they were to divide,their intent is to meet the hardcover and structural coverage still today with that new house if they just have the southern lot. Staff has not done a full analysis of that to verify those numbers. To comment on the submitted alternate plan before you,they provided a long 25-foot width strip of land that touches Shoreline Drive that would be accountable to lot two to then meet the one-acre minimum. That would resolve the need for a lot area variance as it's proposed. However,this does create a unique flag-shaped lot with some land not attached and not accessible to the building envelope, which staff raised concern about to the applicant. Staff would also recommend a rezoning necessary with this alternate plan, as we Page 7 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. won't want to create lots with new zoning or create lots to maintain that split zoning so this new parcel should be all one zone. And then that raises questions of a sliver of rezoning between two other zoning districts and the usability of this 25-foot space. So it's more of a design discussion the Council should have for that applicant. There is the application as submitted today,which would require a lot area variance,then there's this alternate plan. The applicant,I'm sure would appreciate some feedback on as well. The new plan was submitted after the Planning Commission meeting so it did not go in front of the Planning Commission for feedback or analysis. From staff's review of it, it meets the lot area standard so no variance would be needed. But it doesn't necessarily follow the general guidance of not wanting to create flag lots or creating accessibility of this space to the building envelope,because it's not contiguous in land. Benson asked if it is possible to have the Planning Commission take a look at this since this is essentially a new plan. Walsh explained the Council was giving guidance. Then they would bring it to Planning Commission to go through the process. This is just a guidance conversation. Brett Larsen, 2040 Carman Street,was with Mark Gronberg. Larsen noted the applicant's preference would be to split the lots down the middle of the lagoon. We are building a new home on the southern portion of the lot.We had the architect and the engineer and everybody design the home to fit within that. We have setback coming at us from three different directions, so that was a limiting factor as well. So we were able to avoid needing a variance on that southern portion of the lot by tearing down the old home, moving back out of the setback, and then building within the permitted area.Realistically,the southern portion is .8 acres. We're not planning to build more than one home on it.But if we if we have to go with the second proposal,we didn't submit it to the Planning commission,but we did speak with the Planning Commission about it last month. Walsh said not in depth,though. They haven't brought it yet for a full conversation or a staff analysis to make sure it works or how it impacts the property next door, if we can even do flags that go across the water. In general,I think if it meets everything we always say it's good. But the devils in the details. So that'd be about as good a guidance I can give unless you have any other guidance. Johnson said it sounds like the hurdle is if it's a front and back lot, it needs a minimum of 40 feet in width, right? Oakden said if they were proposing a front/back lot subdivision,the back lot would need to be 150%,the zoning district area standard and then it's a 30-foot access outlet. That 30-foot access outlet you're referencing wouldn't count towards the backlot area. They're proposing to maintain this flag area and not be a backlot. Johnson said just because there's a provision in the code that kind of allows it,this isn't an example where you can use it.But,you know,with the separation of the water there,I'm not supportive of giving a lot division with this configuration with land on the other side of that lagoon. Page 8 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. Walsh pointed out it's an add-on to figure out how you can take that little piece and add it to over there, even though you can't get to it. I'm not saying don't bring it to the Planning Commission, if it'd be interesting to vet it out and kind of see how it all works. Gronberg said the Planning Commission seems to be in favor of a rezoning of the house piece down to a half-acre. Walsh said that's something we haven't done in a long time to rezone areas because it's like where do you stop rezoning? Gronberg said it's a unique situation with the lagoon that goes through. Walsh said I'm not saying it's not. You have obviously come up with a very interesting creative kind of possibility. Whether it works or not,I'm not sure.But it seems like it might be worth taking them through the process. Larsen said he believes if the City creates a precedent,there's nothing to really apply it to other than potentially next door, although it's a bit different. Walsh said there are a lot of different issues,I think, on this piece,for sure. I mean,just splitting properties having non-conforming lots, attaching a strand of land that doesn't attach to it. It brings up some strange possibilities. Seals said if the applicant thinks it's worth a go,then definitely bring it back through planning. I don't think looking at it right now,I would say yes. I don't love the idea of having this weird L-shaped thing underwater. It doesn't feel quite right.But I appreciate running it through the process. We've looked at this property several times. We've said no a lot on it. I appreciate wanting to put more properties on the lake. But I also appreciate most Orono residents don't want more properties around the lake.If you guys really want to go for it,bring it back through planning and see what comes back to us. Benson said she'd say if it's been a while since you took this to the Planning Commission, if it was the previous owner,I'd be in agreement with Councilmember Seals.I'd like to see what planning says. In further community development reporting, Oakden said she had attended a few Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and other training meetings recently and has been busy trying to catch up on some internal projects and permits. There are no major updates. FINANCE DIRECTOR REPORT Finance Director Olson reported the auditors were on site last Wednesday for field work for the 2022 audit and that went as smoothly as can be expected.Reporting on building permit revenue, Olson said January of 2023 was about 45 percent higher than January of 2022. Permit revenue generally follows a bell-shaped curve, so if we follow that same bell-shaped curve this year,the one month look is positive. Page 9 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. Walsh said nothing seems to be slowing down. As we get closer to spring and warmer weather it's just going to get more active.He noted the City had maintained its Triple A bond rating which is the highest you can get. Olson said that was right. Moody's did reaffirm that. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT Attorney Mattick had nothing to report. CITY ADMINISTRATOR/ENGINEER REPORT Walsh reminded the audience these items are not public hearings. 19. ORONO FIREFIGHTERS RELIEF ASSOCIATION Edwards said Item 19 would require Council action and staff is looking for guidance from the Council on the establishment of the Orono Firefighters Relief Association.He noted in the fall of last year the Council passed a resolution stating the intent to establish a fire department. One piece of establishing a fire department is to have a Relief Association, a place for pensions for firefighters. The creation of a Relief Association does require special legislation at the State. Therefore, if we're going to pursue the establishment of a Relief Association,we need to be engaging with the Legislature. If we want this to happen this year,the language can be written and it can go through the appropriate committees and eventually be decided by the Legislature. The Fire Chief James Van Eyll,who can't be here because he's at a training event, did prepare background on some of the things that we have done so far.At a staff level reached out and talked to the State level staff both for the State Auditor's Office and also the legislative writer for The Pensions Committee to find out how this process works. And we think we have a decent understanding of that. There are a number of steps that have to happen as we go through that process, in particular engagement with our State level representatives,both in the House and the Senate. He said there are two parts to the Council action being requested. One is direction to the staff to make those interactions,those engagements with our counterparts at the state. But also there does have to be engagement at the elected official level.And so staff has a recommendation that we would appoint our fire negotiating committee,Councilmembers Seals and Johnson,to fulfill some of those duties as we try to negotiate both with our friends in Long Lake,as well as our State elected officials. Walsh added,just a little more history;we did make those motions to create the Orono Fire Department and to hire our Fire Chief, James Van Eyll.And we did the direct staff to set up the legislation to start being able to bring the pension funds over from Long Lake to Orono,which basically we need to do when we're hiring the firefighters so they can come over. That's pretty standard practice when there's new fire departments or changing fire departments,that wheels have already been created.This is a little more specific because we didn't give a motion to do it before, but this motion is now to do it right. With the specific elected officials,the State and the local level, it's just a process that we have to go through,just take some time.We've just started the process and we're kind of in the middle of it right now. And then our appointed negotiating committees with Matt and Victoria would help staff manage that process and Page 10 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. stay in touch with everybody through the legislative process to get that in place. It's a paperwork and legislative process. Seals said the only thing she would add to it is that one of the things that the firefighters have had lots of questions on is, how do we know that if we can't work out a deal sooner than later with Long Lake that we're taken care of. So one of the commitments we've tried to make to them is that we will do everything, just to make sure that regardless of where things land,that they're set up and covered. Through working with the State what we've learned is that this process is longer than we'd like it to be. It's government, right?In order to make sure that things are not last minute, and that we have time to make sure that it happens,we have to start this now. So I'm obviously supportive of it.At the end of the day firefighters are super important to the department and the community. I just want to make sure they're taken care of. Benson asked the City Administrator if there is a possibility or is there an issue with doing this in 2024? Edwards said if Orono wants a Relief Association that's established so that we could potentially start recruiting and pulling in firefighters in 2024,we need to be in the 2023 legislative session to get that through. Benson said given that,I'm going to talk about my concerns. This predates my time on Council, but last fall in September 2022, Orono Council passed a resolution of intent to establish a fire depai tnnent.And then there was the purchasing of the ladder truck and then the hiring of a chief late in the year.And then in the beginning of this year,we voted to spend about$192,000 to refurbish the ladder truck.And it's still undetermined as to whether or not or when this truck will be able to be used given ongoing negotiations with Long Lake Fire. We find ourselves here tonight dealing with what I'd call another administrative concern or somewhat of low hanging fruit as it is paperwork to establish a fire department for the City of Orono.And to date,despite the critical importance of this issue,there has been no presentation to Orono residents outlining why we're here.And what are the viable options for service going forward,both quality of service most importantly, and also cost. There has been no cost analysis. This action to me seems to be premature given that the City of Orono has yet to inform our residents about why we're moving in this direction of an independent fire district. Where I'm coming from is until it's known that an independent fire district is the safest and most cost effective answer to fire service for a city,the notion of making permanent changes under what feels like a somewhat false sense of urgency to this Relief Association seems an unnecessary use of staff time. This action also sends a clear message that negotiations with Long Lake Fire are unlikely. And it also sets in motion a number of consequential actions and decisions that will move us further down this path that we're not certain our City needs to be on. Where I'm coming from with regard to this issue is I don't see any reason why this type of administrative requirement couldn't be tackled, and you did answer that,next year, if,and that's a big if, the City of Orono is still in a place where we feel an independent fire district is the best course of action for our residents. Seals said this is not permanent, so let's not use that word,because what we're doing is setting up a mechanism so that our firefighters are supported regardless. The word permanent is not quite accurate. I also don't think, and I don't want to speak for you,Matt, but we are completely open to still meeting with Long Lake so let's not put words in either of our mouths. The next thing on the agenda actually speaks to Page 11 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. a full presentation that will come in short order that's done by staff. So agreed,I could see where it could come out of order.But also,we're not on timelines that I'm dictating. The government dictates when their legislation happens. I think that is a little bit of a mischaracterization to say it's permanent. Staff actually has a very robust plan to share a full picture on all the options. And,frankly, if that option to go with Long Lake comes out on that timeline,having this in place doesn't hurt them. So I don't think we should jump to the conclusion that it's permanent, or that negotiations are shut down,because these are the things that are coming very shortly.I don't know,Matt, if you want to add on to that, Johnson said he was prepared to make a motion to direct staff to move forward. Johnson moved, Seals seconded,to direct staff to move forward with the special legislation process and appointing Victoria Seals and Matt Johnson to work on the process.VOTE: Ayes 3,Nays 1 (Benson). 20. FIRE DEPARTMENT NEEDS ASSESSMENT Introducing Item 20,Edwards said the City perhaps could have put these two items in the reverse order on the agenda to discuss. The intent here is to get formal direction from the City Council for a fire department's need assessment, again,with the Council action of last fall directing the intent to establish a fire department, and then the hiring of a fire chief to help develop what that future fire department looks like. The next logical step is that we need to complete a needs assessment.And our fire chief has already started working down that path.But prior to expending an inordinate amount of staff time in any direction we wanted to bring this to you. The Council action outlines what the assessment scope work is proposed to be and talks about some other deliverables.And then in particular,paragraph five talks about the timeline in which we would complete the needs assessment. And then we'd come back to touch base with both the negotiating committee and the Council, and eventually a formal presentation at the very end. For those who can't see the Council action,we're proposing a timeline that would end in June, at the June 12 Council meeting with a final report and presentation to the City Council with some intermediate steps, obviously, in between. Seals indicated the timeline calls for a draft report May 22 to City Council, and then another a final report and presentation on June 12. Edwards said the way that we laid out the timeline is we'd have some progress check-ins with the negotiating committee. We would then bring a draft of the of the presentation and the report to the Council in a work session-type environment to get some informal feedback before finalizing the final version for approval or not at the June 12 meeting. Seals stated she appreciates that there are a few check-ins planned in the timeline. There's a lot of notice to have for the Council and the community so they can look forward to what's coming. She said she also appreciates that Edwards has involved other staff like the finance director and fire chief.You guys will have a very robust presentation that compares all the different options on the table.Pulling in Long Lakes' offer,which she said is important to be included, she encouraged the other City Council members who have any questions to send them to the key staff so they can make sure that those are included in the Page 12 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. actual presentation and can be answered ahead of time as much as possible. This is a really good step of getting that full body of work out to everybody. Who knows how it will shake out? Benson said to her number four on item 20,the other deliverables, is kind of the crux of the issue. What it says is that the study will include cost comparisons of the various negotiating offers that have been proposed since negotiations began with Long Lake.And that's just the issue,that we find ourselves in the position of moving forward in every way,both administratively and with procurement of equipment, without having done a most basic needs analysis and assessment of the financials.And to me,this feels akin to deciding to move to a new home without deciding whether or not you can afford it or if it's a good choice. I fully agree that having a needs assessment is an important thing to do.I think this would have been appropriate a year ago, or more,when these discussions first started,because it's unfortunate,from my perspective,that with everything at stake with our City,with fire service,with safety of our residents, with the firefighters, and with the finances involved here,that this type of work hasn't been done until now. So I'm in agreement with the needs assessment. I think it's coming at a time where we are running up against deadlines.And again,my hope is that the focus is on this number four other deliverables, Seals asked if the Council is okay with the timeline, or finds it too long or too short? Benson said she doesn't think she is okay with the timeline. The notion,given that we're in contract until the end of 2025, given the fact that we've just passed the decision here to move forward with the State legislature,things are starting to bottleneck here. The time to pull back and look at a needs assessment financially, for the safety of our citizens,we're in that critical time here. We've talked about in past meetings that when Long Lake did give a response,we were quite clear, as a Council,that was the time to open it up to the public;that was the time to really engage with our citizens. Those are the individuals that put us here, and those are the individuals that we answer to. So it was quite clear to me in meetings past that the time to open it up to the public was when Long Lake gave a counter-offer,which they did. So the needs assessment as it stands,I think is a great thing to do. My preference would be that the focus in large part is on that financial assessment,especially with our Director of Finance, on option A versus option B. Or however you want to put it,going it alone building our own depar tinent from the ground up,versus staying in contract with Long Lake partnership. However we do it because logically to me, and what I've heard from residents and constituents I've talked to, is that it's not clear that we do have an option. It starts to feel as if we've moved down the road so far that we're not able to look at safety and finances from an objective point of view, and to take our time doing it,because this is obviously a critical issue, and one that I don't feel in any way comfortable rushing. So to answer your question, which is a good one,I think I have no argument with a timeline. But I'd like it to not put us in danger again of being in a place where we're stuck. Seals said the Council has asked staff for a very thorough cost comparison, making sure that they really look at whether this is worthwhile. James is an expert for us in what does fire service need to look like for the City of Orono?What does a good fire service look like?What should we be paying?How should we be staffed?What would duty crews look like?The goal is that that's what they bring to us. So I think regardless of whether it should have been last year, last week,the question in front of us is, and I believe this is what you're asking is,are we comfortable with this timeline and these deliverables?And I would say yes and I can make a motion if that's what you're looking for. Page 13 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. Seals moved,Johnson seconded,to approve the fire department needs assessment, deliverables and timeline as written in the document.VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0. 21. 2022 HENNEPIN COUNTY YOUTH SPORTS GRANT Edwards said last fall,the City Council passed Resolution 7305 requesting the Hennepin County Youth Sports Program consider us for a grant of$200,000 for a project to provide pickleball courts and more importantly for the grant,youth hockey facilities. That grant would have been for monies to use in the 2023 construction season.The 2023 construction season is rapidly approaching. We are currently noticing, and Hennepin County has noticed,that there have been some delays in fundraising.And there may still be some questions about the end state of these facilities and this project. We've had a number of staff-to-staff discussions with Hennepin County Grant staff on this. And so based on the uncertainties, what we're recommending is that the City Council authorize staff to pull the grant application from contention for this construction season. We can, of course,then resubmit it for future construction seasons, once we have a more finalized plan that seems less contentious. Walsh said he thought that would be a smart play. Our goal is always to be upfront with the Counties that we're applying to for grants because we apply for grants all the time with all our different parks.It's multi- grants and multi-facilities,and we have another big one that will be coming up for sure with Hackberry. It's taken us some time to get through the process.And it's hard to raise money when you haven't gotten through the process yet. On March 6,the Parks Commission is going to have their work session to go through all the good,bad and ugly as to what they like,what they don't like, see what things checks the box,what hills may be too high to climb,what may be the next best alternatives,the pricing,how that works. That's going to be the meeting that is going to vet this then give recommendations to the Council to either continue the process in a different direction or just not do anything. It's the smart play to pull that right now,because we're a little bit behind in the timeframe,and we don't want to take money from somebody else that could be in the process and get the money that's ready to go. Seals said it makes sense. That's a large amount of money.You'd hate to see another Hennepin County city not get awarded and us get awarded and not be able to use it. I also would not like to see future requests looked at differently,for example Hackberry. So I think it's smart. She also mentioned the March 6 Parks Commission workshop. I think there's obviously an interest in pickleball.I don't know if the location is ideal. I've heard both sides of the coin. But really,that's where that conversation should happen. She said it is her understanding concerning the Hennepin County grant that if the City didn't have hockey there,the grant really wasn't as viable. Edwards said that is correct because the grant the City was specifically going after was a youth sports grant. They did tell me on the phone that pickleball is not yet something they categorize as a youth sport and that youth hockey is very much so. So that was what that grant application was resting on,that youth sport component. Seals noted that she thougt it makes sense to pull it out of contention. Page 14 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. Seals moved,Johnson seconded,to authorize staff to request the Youth Sports Grant Application be removed from this round of consideration. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0. PUBLIC COMMENTS Nancy Brantingham, 3185 County Road 6, Long Lake, said during the public comments at the January 9 Council meeting she requested that the Orono City Council hold an informational meeting similar to the one held by the City of Long Lake to inform residents about Orono's decision to end the current relationship between the two cities related to fire services.At that time, Councilman Johnson stated that as soon as Long Lake had made a decision regarding Orono's offer the City would inform citizens regarding the fire depai tiiient's situation. I responded to the Councilman that with all due respect, it is not necessary to wait until things are settled to inform citizens about this situation. Indeed, citizens should be informed and have opportunities for input before final decisions of this importance are made. The City of Long Lake took just such an approach last fall providing information about the entire process and the available options and allowing ample time for citizen input. That said,I would now request that the City of Orono hold a public hearing for our citizens and I respectfully request the following: one,that the Council explain how and why the decision was made to terminate the current arrangements with Long Lake;two, what the true costs of going it on our own will be;number three,why the Council has shown no obvious interest in exploring other options, including the formation of a multi-community fire district as neighboring cities appear to be doing. Brad Erickson, 2485 Independence Road in Independence,Minnesota, said I have a business at 2160 West Wayzata Boulevard and have had for many years now. If you see something, say something,that's how I was brought up. And it seems to be a common theme going forward with our government and shit that's going on in our government. It's been a long 10 months since I first discovered the now infamous Holocaust video sent to me by you,Mayor Walsh. The comparisons of current day America to Nazi Germany and the extermination of 6 million Jews makes me sick.And it's shameful. I never would have imagined such filth and disgusting rhetoric being disseminated from the office of the Mayor of this town. Nor would I have imagined it heading straight to the Capitol in Washington DC on January 6,2021. But that is exactly where it led.Approximately six months ago a man from a local prominent family approached me about Mr. Crosby and a mutual friend traveling to Washington DC to take part in the events that unfolded on January 6,2021 and they were bragging about it with others upon their return, including selfies that were taken out there on the steps.I immediately requested a meeting with Mr. Crosby at my attorney's office,which Mr. Printup arranged, and attended on August 3, 2022 for 2.2 hours. Contrary to Mr. Crosby's version, however,he was less than forthcoming about his involvement with the January 6 matter and instead spent most of the time pleading with me to forgive you,Mr. Mayor, for the video you had sent me.Yes,you did.Are you denying that you sent me that?You should. Only after unsuccessfully negotiating with me and out of concern for his own political future, Mr. Crosby and you, Mr. Walsh, set about to publicly defame and discredit me. This started on August 22, approximately two weeks after the January 6 meeting and took place in this very chambers.After the initial attempt by this mayor to attack my character failed,I was forced into legal action and set off in a whole new direction which led to places no one could believe unless they had seen it for themselves. While it is truth for some to believe that January 6 was no big deal and constitutes fake news, for the majority it is an enormous stain on our democracy here and around the world; in other words,this is a big deal and must never Page 15 of 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,February 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. happen again.And now we as a city have a big problem; an elected official that sits right there who is part of this,how big a part he won't say for sure. Walsh told Erickson his time was done and directed him to take his seat. Chelsea Wetrick,Independence,Minnesota, stated when asked a question you have to act in truthfulness, all of you do. But questions have been asked,and you just don't answer them.You guys have your own agenda and you just sit and roll your eyes at people and call them names.You have no right to do that. People want to know what's going on. We want answers and we expect you both to give answers. Walsh closed public comments. Ms.Brantingham returned to the podium and said she would respectfully request that you allow the gentleman who asked for a chance to address the Council to do so. Walsh said we've closed public comments.If people want to behave and come up and talk appropriately, then maybe. Otherwise,maybe we will just cancel it in general. Mayor and Council reports were not given at this meeting. ADJOURNMENT Walsh moved, Seals seconded,to adjourn the meeting at 7:23 p.m.VOTE: Ayes 3,Nays 1 (Benson). ATTEST: Anna Carlson,City Clerk Dennis Walsh,Mayor Page 16 of 16