Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-23-2016 Council MinutesMINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members James Cornick, Jr., Lizz Levang, Aaron Printup, and Dennis Walsh. Representing Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus, Finance Director Ron Olson, Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, Senior Planner Michael Gaffron, Public Works Director/City Engineer Adam Edwards, City Attorney Soren Mattick, Consulting City Engineer David Martini, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Item Nos. 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 20 were added to the Consent Agenda. Item 9 was removed from the Agenda at the request of the applicant. Item No. 3 was removed from the Consent Agenda. Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MAY 9, 2016 Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of May 9, 2016, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 3. ORONO CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OF APRIL 25, 2016 Council Member Walsh requested the minutes under Item No. 3 reflect Council Member Levang's statement that she was against having a school subcommittee. City Administrator Loftus stated that was addressed by adding the sentence in the second paragraph, "Council Member Levang agrees that the City should maintain a balance with all the schools in the community." Council Member Levang stated she has an objection with having work session minutes as detailed as they currently are and that she does not approve of that change since the purpose of a work session is for open discussion between Council Members and it is not to be politicizing what happens during those meetings. Levang indicated she would like to go back to the former process of having minutes that are generic so an open dialogue and open discussion can occur. Levang stated she objects to the changes and to the tone of how the work sessions have been conducted. Walsh stated he disagrees with that and that the reason to have detailed minutes is for transparency. Walsh stated if Council Member Levang is afraid to talk about something, she is probably in the wrong job and that she should not be afraid to say what she believes and what she wants. Levang stated there are many different interpretations of transparency and that the work sessions are published in the paper, notice is provided online and meeting minutes are prepared. Page 1 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 3. ORONO CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OF APRIL 25, 2016 (continued) Levang stated Council Member Walsh is confounding what transparency means and she takes objection to Council Member Walsh accusing her of being fearful and not doing her job. Levang stated the citizens of the community would say that she does her job and that she takes issue with Council Member Walsh's comments. Walsh stated he is not sure what comment of his she is taking issue with. Levang indicated he made an allegation that she was not doing her job and that she is doing her job. McMillan stated since this issue was raised two weeks ago, she has given it some additional thought. McMillan noted the Council changed the way the work session minutes are prepared in 2015 as requested by Council Member Walsh so they would be more detailed. McMillan stated they are now running into the problem where the minutes are not detailed enough. McMillan noted no votes are taken at work sessions and that the Council has more discussion on policy issues. McMillan stated in her view the City Council is going down the wrong path of making work session minutes so detailed. McMillan read the following statement: "Jessica had a good system prior to2015 that touched generally on topics discussed in the work session and reported on what the consensus of the Council determined. In her note -taking, Jessica wrote about the Council as a whole and did not use individual council members by name. Rather than single anyone out, this is done to create a safe environment if there is any differing views. Many of these views are related to policy discussions where the originator is exploring an issue and may or may not end up in supporting it after hearing from their fellow council members. The intention is not to credit/discredit one person as these sessions are really for the `team' to work out issues, ending up with a consensus to give Jessica direction for further possible actions. The minutes were brief as there are not usually any formal votes taken. It should be an environment where ideas can be developed, worked through, and thought out prior to becoming official council items — both for staff and council. This revised system is creating criticism of the note -taking. This will put further pressure on Jessica and Diane to get it `right' according to what we all heard and council members disputing what was recorded. As Mayor, I am trying hard to maintain a safe environment for all of us to think openly. This act of politicizing our work sessions will slowly shut down any creative thought in our organization. I believe we had an adequate and professional process prior to 2015." McMillan moved, Cornick seconded, to direct the City Administrator to go back to the work session note -taking style that occurred prior to 2015. Page 2 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 3. ORONO CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OF APRIL 25, 2016 (continued) Walsh stated he is very surprised that the Mayor decided to put together a volume book speaking engagement about the City's note -taking process. Walsh stated at the time he came on the Council, there were basically no notes and there were times when, as a council member, if you were not able to attend the meeting, you would not know what was talked about at the meetings. Walsh stated the Mayor wants to be transparent but is afraid about having her opinions documented. McMillan requested Council Member Walsh not say she was afraid and to keep his comments about himself. Walsh stated while the Council does not take formal votes at work sessions, there are a lot of informal comments made about this direction or not this direction. Walsh commented a lot of informal votes get turned into formal votes, and from a transparency standpoint, people need to know how those votes and how those decisions are being made. Walsh stated if anyone is afraid of what they are saying, then they are probably in the wrong job. Walsh stated being a council member is a job where someone is a public servant, they are working for the public, and everything should be transparent. Walsh stated if someone is afraid of what they said, then they should not say it or get a different job. McMillan stated it has nothing to do with being afraid about what is being said but it is about creating an environment where the Council can have a creative process and not turn it into a he said or she said situation. McMillan stated if Council Member Walsh would like. a better example of how those comments can be negatively twisted, he should look at the last edition of the "Orono Watch for You." McMillan stated if it is Council Member Walsh's intention to get these notes so detailed that they can support something like that very derisive and negative newsletter, he should say that. McMillan stated she is trying to protect this organization and that she is not coming from the view of her personally. McMillan stated the council members and the staff that work for Orono should feel free to speak about things and not be criticized publicly by any organization that wants to take it out of context. McMillan noted the City Council's work sessions are not taped and have no audio backup or video backup, which makes it very difficult for the note takers to make verbatim minutes. Walsh stated there have been probably two occasions where the Council voted to amend the minutes and that the Mayor wants to go back to the stone ages. Walsh stated she wants to go back to no notes whatsoever. McMillan stated she is going back to two weeks ago when he requested the minutes be amended. Walsh stated no one objected to what he had said at that time. Levang noted she did. McMillan stated she was not sure where Council Member Walsh was going with it. Walsh stated he was stating the facts of what people objected to. Walsh noted the Mayor had a prepared dissertation and apparently has given this a lot of thought prior to coming here tonight since she read off a sheet of paper. Page 3 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 3. ORONO CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OF APRHL 25, 2016 (continued) McMillan stated it means a lot to her to run this organization professionally and that is why she put her notes down on paper. Walsh stated transparency means a lot and that they are going backwards. Walsh noted the Mayor also does not want the Planning Commission meetings videotaped either. Levang noted the Planning Commissioners also do not want their meetings videotaped. McMillan stated she is going to end the discussion right now. Council Member Printup stated there was a time before 2015 when there were very few notes made of the work sessions and there was a time before that when there was nothing. Printup noted before that there were very detailed minutes. Printup stated he has been on record before that he would like detailed minutes and a recording. Walsh asked what the Mayor means by going back to before 2015. McMillan stated previous to 2015 the work session minutes covered a lot of the details but did not get into individual comments. McMillan stated the minutes reflected that the Council talked about an idea and if they came to a consensus. McMillan stated a lot of times in policy discussions it is important to be able to have an open dialogue. Walsh stated he is not afraid of what he says or to stand for something but that it appears everybody else has a problem with that. Walsh stated in his view, having a public official in a public meeting not wanting to have people know what was said, he finds that to be spurious. Levang stated she does not have any problem saying what she feels and that she does her homework on items that come before the Council. Levang stated she is not afraid and that Council Member Walsh is trying to say that those council members who vote yes are afraid. Levang stated that is fear mongering and that is not how she feels. Council Member Cornick stated the best evidence that the Council needs to go back to the other system is that right now they are spending time on problems with the Council rather than solutions for the citizens of Orono. Cornick suggested they go back to the old way and try that. Printup asked if that is the old way or the old, old way. Printup noted there were detailed minutes at one time. Cornick stated he is talking about the system used in 2014. Page 4 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 3. ORONO CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION OF APRIL 25, 2016 (continued) VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 2, Printup and Walsh opposed. Levang requested the April 25 minutes be revised using the 2014 method. Printup commented this has a bad smell to it and that they are talking about detailed notes or detailed minutes and going back to less detailed minutes. McMillan moved, Levang seconded, to approve the minutes of the April 25, 2016, City Council work session as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Walsh opposed. PRESENTATION 4. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT (LMCD) 2017 BUDGET Gabriel Jabbour, LMCD Representative, stated he is here tonight to present the draft 2017 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District budget. Jabbour noted a copy of the budget should have been provided to the City Council. McMillan asked if Mr. Jabbour feels comfortable with what is being proposed. Jabbour stated this is the first time that he has been around the LMCD, which is from 1971, that a handful of the board members took it upon themselves to prepare the budget, look at how things were done previously, and then go through it in detail. Following that process, the committee met with the rest of the board and explained where the LMCD is currently and how they got there with some historical background. Jabbour commented he is hopeful the LMCD is on its way to doing things in a better way and that there was unanimous consensus by the board that they have never understood the budget as much as they do now. Jabbour stated in 2016, the budget that was passed reduced the levy substantially. In 2016, the DNR removed $34,000 worth of grants, which is approximately 10 percent of the levy. This resulted in the LMCD having a substantial reduction in revenue. This year's budget includes payment to the former executive director as well as the interim director. Jabbour stated as a result, the LMCD is not in as good of financial condition as they should be but adjustments are being made. Jabbour stated the past business model of the LMCD is not sustainable but that they are there to keep the ship floating and that changes to that business model are being implemented. Jabbour stated one of the obstacles is that there are a number of regulations that have been approved over the years that make it difficult for the average citizen to work through. Reviewing the codes and implementing changes will be an additional expense in the coming years. Jabbour stated that is one of the reasons why the LMCD is bringing back a former technician to help the interim director and the LMCD get back on track. Printup noted the legal line went up significantly in the last year. Page 5 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 4. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT (LMCD) 2017 BUDGET (continued) Jabbour stated the LMCD received less revenue from fines but paid more in legal. A few months ago the LMCD submitted their deductible to the League of MN Cities which has not been done in the past. Part of the reason for the increase in legal fees was that Your Boat Club appealed things over and over again and is the reason for the increase. Jabbour stated five years ago very few people on the LMCD Board had an understanding of all the budget line items, but that they are attempting to educate the Board on the budget. Jabbour noted the new budget for 2017 is lower than what the levy was in 2015. McMillan commented the budget looks good considering all the changes that are coming in the next two years, particularly with the LMCD losing the grant money for milfoil harvesting. Jabbour noted the DNR is short money this year and that they provided the LMCD with limited options. Cornick asked if they are winning the battle of AIS on Lake Minnetonka. Jabbour stated the battle against AIS is a permanent battle and that he has given a lot of his personal attention, money, and effort to bringing experts in, such as research agencies. Jabbour noted a recent meeting was held with the U.S. National Parks, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and three of the biggest manufacturers, which demonstrates how serious the situation is. Jabbour stated some of the research is extremely promising and that Dr. Sorenson at the University of Minnesota has been attempting to gain funding but that he spends approximately 50 percent of his time dealing with red tape. Jabbour stated on Lake Minnetonka there are a number of positive things happening but that some of the cities have no rules or guidelines for AIS. Jabbour displayed a chart depicting the LMCD budgets and levies since 2008 through 2016. Jabbour noted the shortfall is anticipated to come from fees, fines, and grants. Jabbour stated through the years the grants were not reflected in the budget and that the LMCD met their budget because they received the grants. While the LMCD is proposing a decrease in overall operating expenses for 2017, due to less non - levy revenue and grant opportunities being anticipated, the overall levy will need to be increased. Jabbour indicated court fine revenue is also going down. Levang asked why the license permit fee revenue is going down. Jabbour stated the lake is pretty much developed, which has resulted in the decrease. Jabbour indicated the LMCD will also only be utilizing two milfoil harvesters rather than three, with the third being on standby in the event one of the other harvesters breaks down. Jabbour noted as a condition of receiving the DNR grant, the LMCD was required to harvest so many acres. Jabbour stated other changes to the LMCD include elimination of all subcommittees except for the AIS subcommittee, going to one board meeting every second Wednesday of the month, with the fourth Wednesday of the month being a work session. Jabbour indicated the changes are an attempt to make the LMCD more efficient. Page 6 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 4. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT (LMCD) 2017 BUDGET (continued) Walsh noted the transfer from the reserve fund was $64,000, which is approximately 40 percent of the fund. Walsh asked what that money got used for. Jabbour stated the revenue did not come in as anticipated so a transfer was required. Jay Green, Interim LMCD Director, stated last year when the budget was completed they were short $17,000 out of reserves to meet expenses. The amount above that is the salary for the interim director and $11,000 from the Lake of Cities Fund that was not budgeted for. Green indicated they had to cover those expenses in this budget. With the 2016 proposed budget, even with the 6.7 percent levy increase, the LMCD will still have to take money out of reserves for next year. Green stated they are looking at how to get back to not using the reserves and not depending on grants. Jabbour stated the LMCD ended up receiving less revenue and incurring more expenses than anticipated and that they overshot the budget by approximately $37,000. Jabbour stated in the past the grants covered the shortfall, and that his suggestion is when the grants come in, the LMCD should put them in next year's budget. McMillan stated she appreciates the fresh perspective that Jay Green and Gabriel Jabbour have given to the LMCD Board and that in her view it is a positive, new direction. McMillan stated the LMCD has to be managed differently since things have changed through the years. The City Council took no formal action on this item. PUBLIC COMMENTS Gabriel Jabbour, 985 Tonkawa Road, stated he is embarrassed by the City Council. Jabbour commented Orono is a City that was acting as the regional agency and Three Rivers Park is wondering whether the City is going to compete with them. Jabbour stated Orono was a City that people looked up to and that this Council is riding on the City's past successes and years and years of hard work, which is why people want to live in the City. Jabbour stated he would like to see more pride in the City and less bickering among the Council Members. Jabbour stated he would really like to see Council Member Walsh wait until the election starts before he starts running for Mayor. Jabbour stated diminishing the standing of the Mayor is not a good thing for the City since she speaks for the City, lives in the City, and works her tail off for the City. Jabbour stated the bickering is making it very unattractive and difficult for people to want to serve the City and that he would beg Council Member Walsh to knock it off. Jabbour stated he does not want to see his e-mails, letters, or the brochure that comes out and that he would beg him to knock it off. Page 7 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. PUBLIC WORKS DH; ECTOR/CITY ENGINEER REPORT 5. ANNUAL PUBLIC HEARING FOR NPDES PHASE II STORM WATER PERMIT Public Works Director and City Engineer Edwards stated the City of Orono has an MS4 permit which requires a public hearing on the City's storm water permit. The purpose of the public hearing is to educate interested citizens, meet a requirement of the permit, and to receive comments from the public on the City's storm water pollution prevention program. Under the MS4 permit, the City is under guidance and direction from the Federal Government as well as the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The MS4 permit falls under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program for operation of the City's storm water drainage system. The NPDES is a national regulator program under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and is administered at the state level by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, who then issues the City a permit called the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. The City also follows the guidelines and regulations of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, which acts as the Local Government Unit regulating impacts to wetlands. Improper storm water drainage impacts aquatic biodiversity, results in habitat loss, increased flooding, poor aesthetics, and declines in human health and drinking water quality. Some of the basic requirements of the permit are for the City to have a storm water pollution prevention program, submit annual reports, undertake ordinance development addressing storm water issues, and create mapping of the City's storm water system. In addition, the permit requires public education and outreach, public participation and involvement, monitor illicit discharge and take steps to eliminate it, regulate how construction sites deal with erosion, and have proper procedures in place to deal with the City's storm water system. Typical pollutant sources come from direct discharge or dumping of chemicals into the storm water system by individuals and/or companies. Solutions start with the individual homeowner's decisions, which is the education component of the permit. In addition, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District also attempt to educate the residents. As far as the City's activities concerning compliance goes in 2015, that included articles in newsletters and on the City's website, stormwater information on the City's website, continuation of the City's grass and leaf disposal programs, construction debris collection, erosion control inspections, street sweeping, culvert repairs, and the anticipated publication of an illicit discharge program and manual. In 2016, the City will be focusing on refining more of the mapping, with stormwater inspections taking place each year on 20 percent of the storm system, incorporation of asset management for the storm water system, improving the Public Works maintenance operations, and commencement of a storm water management plan update in conjunction with the City's Comprehensive Plan for 2018. Edwards stated the next step in the process is to submit an annual report to the MPGA. Mayor McMillan opened the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this item. Page 8 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 5. ANNUAL PUBLIC HEARING FOR NPDES PHASE II STORM WATER PERMIT (continued) Mayor McMillan closed the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. Levang noted on the City's home page, there is a drinking water report available to the residents. Levang asked whether that report is part of this permit. Edwards indicated it is part of a separate program but it is an annual report that the City makes available to the residents. McMillan commented the Public Works has been very prompt and regular in their street sweeping efforts. Edwards noted the City just took delivery of their new street sweeper. Levang moved, Printup seconded, to adopt the NPDES Phase H storm water permit. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 6. 16-3832 CITY OF ORONO, VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING Barnhart stated the Parks Commission is in the process of developing an off -leash dog park within the Lurton Park. The plan includes a 47 -inch high fence, an expansion of the parking lot, as well as picnic tables and benches. Since some of the fencing is located within the wetland and lakeshore setback, a variance is required. The Planning Commission has not reviewed the variance application. The Council, by unanimous vote, may waive reference of the application to the Planning Commission and hold the public hearing. Barnhart stated this application was not brought before the Planning Commission since the City wanted to move forward on the park as quickly as possible. If the decision to waive the review by the Planning Commission is not unanimous by the Council, the application will be discussed at the June meeting of the Planning Commission. Levang moved to waive the review by the Planning Commission. McMillan noted the City Council will hear public comments tonight if anyone in the audience would like to speak to this application. McMillan asked if the City Council has the ability to send something back to the Planning Commission if the Council discusses it tonight. Barnhart stated what the Council would be doing tonight is voting on whether to waive the requirement for the Planning Commission to review this item and that they do not have to vote on the variance if they choose not to. Barnhart noted Staff did notice a public hearing for tonight on this matter but that the Council does have the option to send it back to Planning Commission. In Staff's view, there has been proper notice for the Council to hold the public hearing. McMillan stated the thought is to hold the public hearing tonight but that the City Council has to first waive the review by the Planning Commission Page 9 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. 16-3832 CITY OF ORONO, VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING (continued) Walsh asked if the residents in the audience would be willing to have the City Council hold the public hearing tonight. McMillan stated a waiver of the review by the Planning Commission does not necessarily mean that the variance will be approved tonight and that the City Council is voting to waive the review by the Planning Commission. Mattick stated there is no statutory requirement regarding a public hearing on variances, but under the Orono City Code, it says that normally the Planning Commission will hold the public hearings. Mattick stated in this situation the City has said they are still going to hold the public hearing but not at the Planning Commission level. Mattick noted the Planning Commission serves as an advisory body to the City Council and that the public hearing will be held directly before the City Council tonight. Following that public hearing, the Council will still have to vote on the variance. The City Council will not be waiving the public hearing and the City Council will get to hear the public comments directly. Printup stated he would like to hear from the public regardless if it is a formal public hearing or not. Levang stated the City Council will still need to decide whether to have the Planning Commission review the application even if the public hearing is held. Levang stated she would prefer to get started on the application as soon as possible. Cornick seconded the motion. Levang asked if the City Council could table the application and send it back to the Planning Commission if the Council decides they cannot make a decision tonight. Barnhart indicated that is correct. McMillan stated she would like to get some public comment and then perhaps send it back to the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Walsh opposed. Mattick noted a unanimous vote of the Council is necessary in order to waive review by the Planning Commission. McMillan stated this application will need to be sent to the Planning Commission. Barnhart stated he will provide a short presentation for the public on what is being planned for the park. Barnhart indicated the blue line on the overhead represents the fence. The parking lot is proposed to be expanded, with the City Council approving that two weeks ago. Also planned are the addition of some benches and picnic tables. The fencing requires a variance on the east and west side. Page 10 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. 16-3832 CITY OF ORONO, VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING (continued) The property has not been surveyed and Staff is assuming that the property line is the edge of the wetland and the edge of the lake, based on aerial photography and on site inspection. The fence would need to be 35 feet back from the wetland and 150 feet back from the lake, which would put the fence well into the park. On the west side, the wetland extends like a finger into the park property. The fence is proposed to be located almost adjacent to the wetland. The intent behind locating the fencing this way is to accommodate the trails throughout the park as well as minimize visual impact of the park from the lake and wetland. The fence is proposed to be located along the north and south property lines. Those two sections of the fence do not require a variance. The fence is proposed to contain the usable portion of the park for the park user while also maintaining the goal of the ordinance, which is to preserve views into the property from the wetlands and from the lake. Another goal is to maintain the existing vegetation. Barnhart stated two variances are necessary. One variance is required for the lake yard setback and the other variance is from the setback to the wetland. The proposed fence is a woven wire, 47 -inches in height. The fence is intended to blend into the environment so it is not highly visible. Levang stated she would also like to have Chair Meyers provide any comments he feels appropriate. Rick Meyers, Park Chair, stated the Park Commission has been talking about this dog park for months and that this is the plan that has been developed because it utilizes the land the best way for a dog park. Meyers stated dog parks are a beneficial thing and that the Lurton family approached the City and requested it become a dog park because they wanted to see more use of that park. Meyers indicated the City is attempting to accommodate the Lurton family's wishes. Meyers indicated the Park Commission held some meetings with the family and they requested the City go forward with the dog park. The dog park has also been discussed at the Park Commission meetings as well as at the City Council level. Meyers stated there either appears to be some objection against the whole idea of a dog park or else regarding the location of the fence. Meyers stated the City Council will hear the residents' comments and go from there. Meyers stated this item can go to the Planning Commission and the residents can have the discussion with them and then it will come back to the City Council. Meyers noted the Park Commission is also an advisory board, and that as a Park Commission, they decided there was a need for a dog park. Meyers commented this is a great piece of property and that having a park by someone's house raises the adjoining properties' value by $5,000 apiece. Meyers stated dog parks are very popular and are an amenity that many surrounding communities are currently doing. The Park Commission felt it was a good idea, the right property, and the right time to move forward. Meyers stated the City Council concurred with the need for a dog park and are ready to move forward with it. Page 11 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. 16-3532 CITY OF OROI\O, VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING McMillan stated she walked the park on Sunday, and asked whether the Park Commission considered having the small dog area to the right of the storm water pond. McMillan stated by relocating the small dog area, it would eliminate the need to have a fence within another fence. Meyers stated it might also take less fencing. McMillan stated then it would not look like a fence inside of a fence. Meyers stated the plan can be tinkered with but that the Park Commission would have to go back and view the property. Meyers stated it is nice for the dogs to have a woodland experience as well as the open area. Levang stated that area might also have some shade. Meyers stated the intent with the small dog park was to help preserve the prairie land. Edwards stated the subject before the City Council now is the variance request for the fence and that moving the small dog fence could be done if it is determined to be appropriate. Edwards indicated the feedback he received from the Council, the Park Commission, and the Lurton family was to preserve some of the prairie area. Edwards stated if that is not a concern, they can certainly redesign the fence. McMillan stated in her view it would be more attractive to have the small dog section off to the right. Meyers stated the Park Commission also formed a subcommittee prior to the Lurton approaching the City and that they researched dog parks in a number of the surrounding areas. The committee's research found that there is not excessive barking or other problems associated with a dog park. For people who wish to visit the park, they will need to go through a permitting process and pay a fee. Meyers noted Orono has 24 parks and that this park is underutilized. McMillan stated she would like to hear from the public and then send this application to the Planning Commission. Loftus stated she can provide the agreement the City has with the Lurtons amending the uses of the park, which was signed by someone representing the Lurton family and the Land Trust. Dianna Milianta, 3515 Sixth Avenue North, stated she would like to read some excerpts irom an article that appeared in the Lakeshore Weekly News published on October 31, 2011. The article talked about how, as an avid animal lover, Susan Lurton enjoyed seeing them in their natural element. The following is a quote from Phil Lurton, her husband: "We could see the property from our place and Sue did not want development over there on that property because it was beautiful and she looked across the lake at it all the time." Another quote from the article states that: "Sue's main thing was love for animal, said Bill. That was part of the reason why she didn't want to see development, because of the animals who lived in those areas, like deer and fox and whatever else we used to see. Milianta stated just five years ago the Lurton family was talking about how this park was made for the animals as Sue intended, but then the City decided to make a change and fence in the whole thing. Page 12 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. 16-3832 CITY OF ORONO, VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING (continued) As a result, the wildlife will not have a place to live and will not have a path to travel through the area. Milianta stated it is not just the deer and the fox but that she sees deer, fox, squirrels, bunnies, turkeys, raccoons, and all kinds of birds. In the winter there are coyotes that travel across the lake and through that property. Milianta stated if that area is fenced in, those animals will not be able to get through there. Milianta stated Sue's main thing was love for animals, which is why she did not want to see development, and that she wanted a place for the wildlife to live. Milianta stated by erecting the fence, the animals will be routed down along the road and there will be a lot more dead animals. Milianta stated a dog park is totally against the original intent of the property by erecting the fence and that the original covenants say the property shall be preserved and used only as natural paths of an environmental park. The City shall create a plan for the park that reflects the passive character of the park and the City shall provide improvements as set out in the Park Plan, which included a picnic table, property hiking, trails, and the parking lot. Milianta stated fencing this area in and allowing dogs to run through there goes against hat Susan Lurton's original intent was, and that she is curious to know why the family wanted to make that change. Milianta stated that park is used even though you may not see a lot of cars there. Milianta stated it is a different kind of park than the other parks in the area. It is a place where people can go and meet in the open area by the picnic table, but when you step into the woods, it is immediately peaceful and quiet. Milianta stated one or two people will walk at a time but that there are not big groups of people camping and being loud. The park is mainly used in the spring and fall. Milianta stated she lives behind the park and sees people using it and that she is not sure how the Park Commission researched it or how they determined it was underutilized. Milianta stated she is very much against the variances. Laurel MacLachlan, 3565 Sixth Avenue North, asked what impact studies the City has done regarding the wildlife and other items. MacLachlan stated it is her understanding that Orono has approved some higher density properties in the area, so the likelihood of that park getting used more is high. MacLachlan noted a lot of the Orono properties consist of two to five acres. MacLachlan stated she has dogs herself and that she would not specifically take them to that dog park because they can run all they want on her own property. MacLachlan stated that is why she is wondering who the City is targeting and whether they are truly targeting the citizens of Orono. MacLachlan questioned whether the City is doing this in an attempt to raise money by attracting dog owners from other areas to use the park. '_MacLachlan stated if the City wants to put dogs in the park, they can use a smaller area so other people can enjoy the paths and the picnic tables without being in the middle of a dog park. MacLachlan asked if Orono truly has a need for the largest dog park in the area given the fact that there are other dog parks in some of the nearby cities. MacLachlan stated she does not see that the citizens of Orono have a need for this large of a dog park. MacLachlan noted this park has not been there that long and that it takes people a while before they become aware that it is a park. MacLachlan stated people currently use the park and that it is a peaceful area. If it is turned into a dog park, it will no longer be peaceful. MacLachlan noted large dogs will be able to jump that 4 -foot fence. MacLachlan questioned what impact studies have been done and what the City's plan is for all the animals. MacLachlan stated the fence will limit access by the wildlife and that some of the animals will be scared off or hunted by the dogs. Page 13 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. 16-3832 CITY OF ORONO, VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING (continued) MacLachlan indicated they just recently heard about this and that they did not receive a letter saying the City was looking at changing the intent of the park, which also goes against Sue Lurton's original intent for the park. MacLachlan stated she would like the City to reconsider. MacLachlan indicated she is not completely opposed to a dog park but that she is opposed to fencing in the entire park and making it for dogs only. MacLachlan stated in the Orono community, unless there is a study that shows that lots of Orono residents are going to be using it, then the City is going to be creating this dog park for somebody else and not the Orono residents. MacLachlan indicated she would like to see answers to that before the City goes ahead and requires people to purchase permits, which is one way the City is looking to make money off the park. McMillan stated it is not anyone's intent to make money off of this park and that it is to provide an amenity. McMillan stated the permit fees would go towards maintaining the park. Walsh commented the City's intent was well intentioned and that they are proposing to put in more fencing than the City will receive in income. Walsh noted this is the first time the City has had a public hearing on this but that public input is important. MacLachlan stated if they knew earlier, they would have appeared at the meetings and commented on it. MacLachlan noted the residents did not receive a letter. MacLachlan stated perhaps a fence is not considered a building project, but when they do a project, they have to pull all the appropriate permits and provide notice to all the neighbors. Walsh stated there might be other people that could be affected and that it is important to attend the Planning Commission meeting in June. Levang noted the Lurton family approached the City and asked for a change to the park, which was a strong motivation for the City to move forward on it. Walsh stated the City also needs to listen to the neighbors since this is a community park and will have impacts on the neighbors. Walsh stated he does not believe the City has completed an impact study but that Staff could provide answers to some of the other questions. McMillan recommended the residents put their concerns in an e-mail to the Council as well as the Planning Commission. McMillan stated the dogs are supposed to be under control and the owner is supposed to be with the dog. McMillan stated she would encourage the neighbors to e-mail their concerns to the City and that this item will be on the agenda for the June 20 Planning Commission meeting. Meyers stated if the residents have a lot of concerns, what the Park Commission used for a reference was Three Rivers and how they run their dog parks. Meyers indicated he has visited 10 to 15 different dog parks to see how they operate and that the questions that are being raised are questions that have been asked every time a dog park is proposed. Meyers stated the deer can easily get over a 4 -foot fence and that erecting a fence is not going to eliminate the wildlife. Page 14 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. 16-3832 CITY OF ORONO, VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING (continued) Meyers commented the fence may change the environment a little bit but that there are a lot of natural areas in Orono, such as French Creek and Lowry Woods. Meyers stated whenever there is a change, it can be disturbing to the neighbors, and that he went from having total privacy to having 450,000 people going by his house every year. Milianta asked if the City did a market study to determine the interest. Meyers stated at the intergenerational forum last winter they talked about something that all age groups and all backgrounds could do and bring people together. Meyers stated dog parks are a good communal place. The City already has softball fields and other recreational parks. Meyers stated as far as environmental impact studies, the City does not complete environmental impact studies for natural parks. Milianta commented she is very disappointed and that the amount of work and forethought that went into the decision is very poor. Milianta stated it seems like the City just made a decision to spend $100,000 of taxpayers' money to erect a fence and that she is very disappointed. Meyers noted park dedication fees would be used to fund it. McMillan closed the public hearing at 8:33 p.m. McMillan noted this item will be before the Planning Commission at its June 20 meeting. The City Council took no formal action on this item. 7. LURTON PARK FENCING McMillan stated the City will need to delay this item until after the Planning Commission meeting. Edwards stated the City has received two quotes and that Staff is recommending the low bid. Edwards stated Staff can simply go back to the contractors and resolicit the bids at a later time. Levang stated if the bids are good for 90 days, she would prefer to table the matter so Staff does not have to spend time obtaining new bids. Edwards noted even if it was tabled, he would still need to contact the contractors to see if their bids are still good after the 90 days and that it would be just as easy to solicit new bids. Walsh moved, Printup seconded, to deny the bid for the Lurton Park Fencing. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Walsh left the meeting to address residents outside the Council Chambers at approximately 8:30 p.m. and returned at 8:38 p.m. Page 15 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. *8. 2016 ROAD MAINTENANCE (HUNTER AND TAMARACK Printup moved, Levang seconded, to authorize the solicitation of bids for the Hunter and Tamarack road projects. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 9. SPRING HILL SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION This item was removed from the agenda at the request of the applicant. *10. WELL NO.4 DESIGN Printup moved, Levang seconded, to authorize the solicitation of bids for the Municipal Well No. 4 project. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTORICITY ENGINEER REPORT Edwards reported on the following activities by the Public Works Department: Completed pothole filling on Fox and Watertown Performed culvert repair on the Old Crystal Bay Road tram Completed right of way mowing - Installed speed bumps Hydrant flushing has been completed Completed a number of utility locates Routine maintenance at the different parks Edwards reported he has been working with the Community Education Department who will be sponsoring a junior golf program out at the Orono Golf Course. Edwards noted that program was active a number of years ago, discontinued, and is now being reinstated. Edwards stated Girl Scout Troop 16214 has planted a pollinator garden at Livingston Park and that the Orono Thunder Soccer U13 and U4 teams came out to Lurton Park and Navarre Park and placed wood chips on the trails. PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT *11. DISPOSAL OF FORFEITED VEHICLES Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve the disposal of a 2009 Cadillac Escalade, VIN#1GYFK26259R100784, through the Auto Auction. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT — Planning Commission Representative Kevin Landgraver Page 16 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 12. #15-3786 MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE — LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK I (PRAIRIE VIEW LANE), PROPOSAL TO DELAY ROAD CONSTRUCTION: CONCEPTUAL REVIEW Senior Planner Gaffron stated the property owner directly east of Mooney Lake Preserve, Mr. MacMillan, has purchased the two lots adjacent to this property. Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, are adjacent to Mr. MacMillan's property and would be served by a private access road that comes up to a cul-de-sac, with a private driveway to Lot 2. This road was approved by Orono to be constructed as part of the Mooney Lake Preserve subdivision. Mr. MacMillan is proposing to delay construction of the Prairie View Lane cul-de-sac and has been working with the developer and City Staff to establish parameters for that to happen. Also being proposed at this point is to only construct the storm water pond in the northwest corner and the first 300 feet of road. The proposal specifically includes some conditions about when the rest of the road will be built. One of Staff's main concerns with the initial proposal was Lot 1 being built with a house only requiring a driveway and Lot 2 not getting built. There is currently a letter of credit in place to guarantee construction of this road and the other Mooney Lake Preserve improvements. The City should not be expected to hold this security, or some other form of security, for an indeterminate amount of time until road completion is triggered by a proposed home on Lot 2. The solution to this proposal is to place the future obligation to complete the road entirely on Lot 2, which leaves the owner of Lot 1 free of the obligation. If Lot 1 gets built on first with simply a driveway extension, the owner of Lot 1 must be on notice that when Lot 2 is developed, his driveway will become a road at the expense of the owner of Lot 2. The road completion should occur prior to issuance of the building permit. The road should be completed to the extent that the base and first lift of bituminous are in place. Staff would also recommend that no Certificate of Occupancy be issued for a home on Lot 2 until, one, the final wear course is in place or, two, the owner of Lot 2 has established security with the City to ensure the final wear course is completed. The request involves the following elements: 1. The developer, George Stickney, is to construct the southerly 300 feet of road as well as stormwater pond, per the existing Development Agreement. 2. A single private driveway could be extended from the end of the improved road to serve a house on Lot I without the need for further road improvements; If a house is built on Lot 2, the full road must be completed. 4. Owners of Lot 2 are required to be responsible for installing the full road prior to issuance of a building permit for Lot 2. 5. The obligations for road responsibility to be recorded as covenants in the chain of title of Lots 1 and 2. 6. Lots 1 and 2 will be subject to a joint access agreement and joint maintenance. Page 17 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 12. #15-3786 MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE — LOTS I AND 2, BLOCK I (PRAIRIE VIEW LANE), PROPOSAL TO DELAY ROAD CONSTRUCTION: CONCEPTUAL REVIEW If the Council finds this arrangement acceptable, they should direct the developer and the property owner to provide draft revisions to the Mooney Lake Preserve Development Contract and Covenants for Staff review. Once Staff finds those revisions acceptable, this item will be brought back to the City Council for final action on the revisions. McMillan asked why only 300 feet of the road would be built. Gaffron stated part of it has to do with a natural drainage break and that they are proposing to only build the road up to the point where it drains to the south. The road could probably be 400 to 500 feet long but Mr. MacMillan's intent is to avoid having pavement all the way up to those lots. The road will also be jogged so it would have less impact on the trees. Walsh asked who was going to pay for the road originally. Gaffron indicated it would be Mr. Stickney and that the City has a letter of credit from him. The road going to Lot 2 would be a private drive and does not need to be built until the lot is developed. Walsh asked how much that piece of road would cost. Gaffron stated it would likely cost between $20,000 to $40,000. George Stickney, BPS Properties, stated the reason that Mr. MacMillan purchased Lot 2 as well as Lot 1 is that a driveway was going to be put into the outlot and that he did not want to see that happen. An extensive amount of grading would also be needed to construct the cul-de-sac as currently proposed and Mr. MacMillan did not want to see that happen as well as the center island with landscaping. Stickney indicated they agreed in staff meetings that as the developer they should construct the road, landscape it properly, and then build the pond so that if someone ever has to extend the road, it could be done with a hammerhead since it will only service two properties. Stickney stated the possibilities of getting one house built there are not very great and cannot be counted upon. Stickney stated as part of the agreement they wanted to make sure the pond got constructed along with the first 300 feet of the road to ensure the water drains properly. Walsh asked how much it would cost to finish the cu -de -sac. Stickney indicated approximately $50,000. Walsh stated he would like to see the $50,000 put into a trust account of the City which could sunset after ten years or so. Stickney stated he will be out of the picture so it makes no sense for him to do that. Stickney stated the idea behind this arrangement is conservation, and had this proposal been in front of him earlier, he would not have suggested constructing the cul-de-sac or the road. Stickney stated the driveway extending to Lot 2 would cost approximately $15,000 and could be handled by the next owner of the property. Page 18 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 12. #15-3786 MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE — LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK I (PRA_i UE. VIEW LANE), PROPOSAL TO DELAY ROAD CONSTRUCTION: CONCEPTUAL REVIEW (continued) The most expensive thing is building the pond, which would get done. Stickney indicated he has discussed this with the City Attorney and the family's attorney and they have everything covered. Steve Hornig, 2830 Breezy Heights Road, Woodland, Minnesota, stated the property owner of these two lots lives in the house to the east. Mr. MacMillan was concerned about his privacy and has no intention to do anything with the two lots that he has just purchased. When the lots were acquired, Mr. MacMillan was mainly focused on his privacy but then later on started looking at the building of the cul-de-sac, the amount of grading that would be necessary, and the retaining wall. Since those items would alter the natural lay of the land, Mr. MacMillan suggested those items not be built. Discussions were then had with the developer and Mr. Stickney has indicated he is comfortable with it. The financial consequences of this will rest on either Mr. MacMillan or the future owner of Lot 2. Hornig indicated the real estate attorneys who put together the covenants have worked with Mr. MacMillan's attorney as well as the City Attorney to make sure there are no loopholes to leave the burden on the City. Walsh asked if the City Attorney is comfortable with that. Mattick stated he normally does not like putting off obligations to the future, but given the length of time the lots may be held, the value of the lots, and the fact that they would not get a building permit until the road is built, he is comfortable with it. Walsh stated having the pond constructed probably mitigates the rest of the issues. McMillan stated in her view it is a win/win since it leaves the land undeveloped and creates less hardcover. McMillan noted if a road is constructed, people can drive on it, which can raise security issues. McMillan stated she also likes the idea of constructing the stormwater pond up front. Stickney stated the MN Land Trust is very excited about not having the cul-de-sac and the road built. Levang asked why it needed to be a cul-de-sac when it would only serve two homes. Gaffron stated the lots become back lots and a driveway can only serve one back lot, which resulted in the need for it to become a road. The length of the road suggested it needed to be a cul-de-sac, but in recent discussions with the fire chief, he has indicated he is open to using T's instead of cul-de-sacs. Levang stated she would like to see the need for a cul-de-sac go away but that decision does not need to be made now. McMillan asked if the covenants should be changed to reflect no cul-de-sac. Gaffron indicated Staff has not vetted that at all and it would require fiu-ther review. Page 29 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 12. #15-3786 MOONEY LAKE PRESERVE — LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1 (PRAIRIE VIEW LANE), PROPOSAL TO DELAY ROAD CONSTRUCTION: CONCEPTUAL REVIEW Printup moved, Cornick seconded, to direct the applicants to provide draft revisions to the Mooney Lake Preserve Development Contract and covenants for Staff review. Once Staff finds those revisions acceptable, this item should be brought back before the City Council for final action. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *13. #16-3808 RICK DENMAN ON BEHALF OF CASCO VENTURES, LLC, 3800 CASCO AVENUE, VARIANCES — RESOLUTION NO. 6626 Printup moved, Levang seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6626, a Resolution Approving Variances from Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-350, for the property located at 3800 Casco Avenue. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *14. #16-3818 DALE MULFINGER (SALA ARCHITECTS) ON BEHALF OF CHRIS AND LESLIE NEUGENT, 710 BIG ISLAND — RESOLUTION NO. 6627 Printup moved, Levang seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6627, a Resolution Approving Variances from Municipal Zoning Code Sections 781279 and 78-1680 and Denying Variances from Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1279 and 78-1680, for the property located at 710 Big Island. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *15. #16-3829 JOHN AND SARAH LINDAHL, 2465-2485 NORTH SHORE DRIVE SUBDIVISION: LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT — RESOLUTION NO. 6628 Printup moved, Levang seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6628, a Resolution Approving a Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement at 2465-2485 North Shore Drive. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Walsh reported he attended the last Planning Commission meeting and that the new chair did a good job running the meeting. Cornick stated he was going to comment about certain letters that came out this month but that someone else said it better than he could earlier in the meeting. Levang stated as Public Works Director Edwards indicated, the Girl Scouts did plant a butterfly garden at Livingston Tower Park. Levang stated Park Commissioner Bryce Johnson, Adam Edwards, Mayor McMillan, and herself were there to oversee the planting. Levang stated she has already received a number of positive comments by people who have passed by. In addition, the local newspaper will be doing a story on it. Levang reported the City also had 25 girls from the Orono Thunder help place wood chips on the trails at Lurton and French Creek. Levang commented Lurton Park is a very beautiful, peaceful place, and that she is grateful the Lurton family donated that land to the City. Page 20 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT (continued) Levang stated work is starting on the donation garden and that she would like thank Jim Cox and Jim Gilman for donating four truckloads of horse manure that was then spread as well as some other fertilizer. Levang stated she would also like to thank Jane Delaney and Sue Schwaba for donating some fencing and the City of Long Lake for hooking up the water. Levang indicated the vegetables will soon be planted and that she has already been receiving calls from the agencies that they donate produce to. Printup stated it was frustrating that the funding for Highway 12 got political but that he is thankful to State Representatives Hertzog and Osmek for fighting hard for the funding. Printup stated the other side of the aisle played some political maneuvering and the funding was lost. Printup stated in his view it would be worthy for the City to send a letter to the governor asking for a special session. Printup stated the City Council has an opportunity tonight to make a motion directing Staff to re -send the letter from Chief Farniok as well as send a letter to the media and the governor stating that the City of Orono would like him to call a special session to discuss the matter. Printup stated this is a good opportunity for the City of Orono to take the lead on this matter. Levang indicated she would be supportive of the letter since that stretch of the highway is unsafe and a lot of the people she has talked to have had near misses or arc now starting to avoid using the corridor. Levang stated a letter would be something the City could easily do. Walsh stated he would also be supportive of it. Walsh noted his neighbor's niece was killed on Highway 12 last year and that the funding is important to improve the safety along that stretch of road. McMillan asked if Orono should attempt to get a coalition together with some of the other cities. Printup stated the Chief of Maple Plain has also suggested that but timing is of essence. McMillan stated a special session can happen at any time. Printup stated the governor has stated he would think about a special session, which is why it is important to move forward on this matter as quickly as possible. Printed recommended the City Council direct Staff to write a letter stating Orono's position on the Highway 12 funding to be sent to the governor's office as well as the media. Printup stated the funding all along was a bipartisan effort and that the political maneuverings that went on has led to disheartening people about the way government functions. Levang stated it got put in the omnibus, which was the problem. Printup stated the City has the opportunity tonight to draft a letter or resolution. Loftus stated Staff can draft a letter and send it tomorrow but that the City Council would need to approve a resolution. McMillan noted the next Highway 12 Coalition meeting is June 3, which would a chance to find out what the group would like to do. McMillan noted she received a few e-mails about it and that people were not happy about the outcome. McMillan stated the upcoming meeting would be a chance to discuss whether it would be better to do a cooperative effort. Page 21 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. MAYOR/COUNCHI REPORT (continued) Printup stated he would like to direct Staff to write the letter, and then as a coalition something else can go out. Printup stated he does not believe redundancy would hurt. Printup stated there have already been comments in the media by the Maple Plain Police Chief, and that if Orono does not act tonight, they will be losing an opportunity to do something. Printup moved, Walsh seconded, to direct Staff to write a letter requesting Governor Dayton call a special session regarding funding for Highway 12. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. McMillan noted the City has received some good donations for benches for the golf course and that the golf course will look very nice this year. McMillan stated she also noticed on County Road 15 there are now lighted signs marking the pedestrian crosswalk at Tanager and that she is assuming Hennepin County put those in. McMillan stated she is happy to see those and that they will help alert motorists to the crosswalk. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *16. GOLF COURSE DONATIONS — RESOLUTION NO. 6629 Printup moved, Levang seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6629, a Resolution to Accept Golf Course Donations. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *17. CORRECTIVE RESOLUTION FOR NO. 6567 — RESOLUTION NO.6630 Printup moved, Levang seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6630, a Corrective Resolution of the City Council to correct Resolution No. 6567. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *18. PERMITS/LICENSES Transient Merchant License Applicant: Mark Lazarchic/Renaissance Fireworks, Inc. Activity: Sale of Consumer Fireworks Location: 3435 Shoreline Drive Date: June 24 through July 5, 2016 Time: 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve the above listed license. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *19. CLAIMS/BILLS Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 22 of 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 23, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT *20. RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO CHAPTER 344.01— RESOLUTION NO. 6631 Printup moved, Levang seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6631, a Resolution Exempting Adjoining Property Owners and Occupants from Minnesota Statutes Chapter 344 When Their Land Condensed Together is Under 20 Acres. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1 i J.RTOW V1 Levang moved, Printup seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 9:10 p.m. ATTEST: !.� r e Tiegs, City Clerk Aaron Printup"ActingMa Page 23 of 23