"A RIVER RUNS THROUGH IT"

First, apologies to Brad Pitt and any fly fishing aficionados out there!

An earlier post questions whether it is in Eureka's interests to adopt the Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization (VRWJPO) Ordinances.  This post gives some background and history on the subject.

I first heard of this idea to adopt the VRWJPO Ordinances -after all!- as an observer at a Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Butch Hansen stated words to the effect that he wanted to bring this up and thought that this would be a good idea. This was of some interest to me as I sat there remembering Hansen's previous stance on the matter which was quite different if, as Supervisor Miller is so fond of saying, "memory serves."

Next, Supervisor Ceminsky brought it up at the following Town Board meeting.  He stated that HE thought it would be a "good idea" and that Brian Watson [of the Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD)] had told him that "Eureka 'should' adopt the Ordinances."  Ceminsky stated this, I thought, as though, since Watson had said this, that it should be a done deal, a no-brainer.  Really?  The County has always wanted the Townships and small cities to adopt this so that the County personnel wouldn't have to administer it themselves.  Always. Nothing new.

As a former Commissioner and Supervisor who has attended numerous meetings since 2004, I felt that perhaps the Board could use a refresher on how this went down in the first place.  (Since it didn't "go there" in response to Ceminsky's statements that evening, other than Supervisor Behrendt's objections to the proposal.) A "refresher" would be for those on the Board who were present in the Township when it happened. Supervisors Ceminsky and Madden had not been involved with it. Perhaps for them it would be new information.

Because of this, I made a statement during the Public Comment period at the next Board meeting.  What I said follows, with a few additions for clarity.  If you were not tuned in during this contentious matter, perhaps it will be of some assistance as we look to the future.

To the Board:
I have, by invitation, served on the (VRWJPO) Watershed Engagement Team for the past year along with Mike Greco of Eureka; Terry Holmes, Empire Board Chair; Mark Henry representing Pheasants Forever; Chris Shafer of Castle Rock Township; and several others.  We met monthly for an entire year, going over data related to Watershed status and how to engage the public and spread the information.

When this matter of the VRWJPO Ordinances came up the first time, I was on the Planning Commission.  I attended many meetings at the Castle Rock Town Hall with then-Supervisors Jeff Otto and Gloria Belzer, where representatives from various townships and small cities were in attendance.  This was part of the "Rural Collaborative" that has been mentioned here. We were all trying to understand this rather complicated topic.

I was at the public hearing held by the County.  The County always wanted the townships and cities to adopt the Ordinance as their own.  It was stated that way by Dean Johnson (Planner hired for the Rural Collaborative) from the very beginning.  It was "sold" as a "pass-through" to the applicants on costs. (No matter whether the Township hired an engineer or the County did, the applicant would pay the bill.)

I then became a Board member and attended the Eureka public hearing.  At both public hearings there was vehement and vociferous objection from Eureka citizens to Eureka's adopting the Ordinances. One person even testified at our local hearing, leveling his finger at each Planning Commissioner in turn, saying, "If you pass this Ordinance, I am coming-after-every-one-of-you!"  (Even as an observer, I found this alarming.) The Eureka hearing was so highly charged that the Planning Commission at the time did not even make a recommendation to the Board on the matter, one way or another!  They did not perform the duty, but left it totally up to the Board with no advice from them.  In the years I have been paying attention, this has never happened before or since.

It was always made clear to those in attendance that whether Eureka adopted the Ordinances or not, they would still stand.  It would just be the VRWJPO administering them and not Eureka itself.  It made no difference to the existence of these ordinances.  This was not a situation as in the past with a Watershed Management Organization (WMO) such as we still have with the North Cannon River.  If one community drops out of a WMO, the WMO dissolves. This happened before with the Vermillion; it's how we ended up with the VRWJPO in the first place.

Eureka "broke away" from the Rural Collaborative and pursued the matter extensively on its own with the Township Attorney, under Chair Otto. Because of this Eureka:

1) adopted the VRWJPO Water Plan, which it was required to do;
2) voted the VRWJPO Ordinance down, which was always optional even though the County strongly pushed for adoption by the Township;
3) engaged the SWCD to take the majority of responsibility for the Wetland Conservation Act administration and enforcement.  This was felt to be appropriate since they have the expertise: important point!

As a Township, we have spent considerable time and money on this matter. Nothing much has changed since that time.  The JPO is updating its Water Plan, which it must do every ten years. (Five Eureka citizens attended an open house in Farmington on this recently.  No Commissioner or Supervisor attended.) Eureka will be required to adopt the updated Plan at the appropriate time. As the Board contact person to the Vermillion, I had suggested to Joe Harris, Paul Krause, and Tom Wolf that they allow Travis Thiel, Watershed Specialist, to send the necessary letter to the Township on the less complicated applications, to speed up the process.  Otherwise, citizens would have to wait until the JPO Board held its monthly meeting.  At the time I proposed this, the Assistant Dakota County Attorney, Kathy Keena, said that would not happen as the County Commissioners were elected, held the authority, and would not give it over to Thiel in between their meetings. However, now it appears that that is exactly what has been happening.  Travis has sent several letters and no one is complaining about having to wait until the County Commissioners meet.


As has been expressed (by Supervisor Behrendt and others), this is a much more complex ordinance than the North Cannon, where Eureka remains a voting member of the WMO.  The Planning Commission and the Town Board membership changes frequently.  In the past, I have twice unsuccessfully attempted to make it a requirement that Commissioners and Supervisors attend, say, two training sessions during the three years of their terms. Government Training Services offer such trainings yearly. They would involve such things as basic planning and zoning, which are areas in which elected and appointed officials should be knowledgeable.  Yet this did not come to pass. Some persons attend one session and never do again; some attend many; many attend none. If we do not go the extra mile to ensure that we are informed on the basics, how informed will we be on the Watershed with its technicalities?

Because of these two reasons, I strongly favor having the experts at the VRWJPO handle this so it is done properly.  Thank you for allowing me to give my input.

FOOD FOR THOUGHT !  TROUT, ANYONE???

For more info: Vermillion website

WHOM CAN YOU "BANK" ON???

Another important point from May Board meeting:

During the Road Contractor contract agenda item, it "came to light" that last winter, an additional $14,000 (amount stated by Supervisor Miller) was expended on various front loaders and operators to remove large snowbanks that had piled up along roads in certain spots in the Township.  This money spent was stated as being above and beyond the road contract budget. 

(Full disclosure: One of the sites was directly across from my house, though I had nothing to do with it.)

 For purposes of the quote discussion at the meeting, this information was apparently brought up to debate whether quoted costs from applicants were "actual" or not.

During the rather heated exchange, Supervisor Mark Ceminsky stated that the expenditure was "on me," that he had authorized it.

It should come as no surprise to any Supervisor that he/she does not have the authority to okay such an expenditure on his/her own! You, the electorate, have selected a BOARD to make such decisions-- jointly.  Spending taxpayer money is always a Board decision.


During the time that Yours Truly served as Supervisor, the Board addressed this sort of situation on a minor scale by approving up to $2,500 on an emergency basis only, between meetings only, at the discretion of the Road Contractors. Think tree down in road. ONLY such expenditures that met these parameters were authorized by the sitting Board at the time. Anything else outside of a regular meeting such as, say, adding more gravel (as in routine maintenance) to a section of road would not, under normal circumstances, qualify as an approved expenditure. Cost? Emergency??  Probably neither would be met. This would have to be talked about and decided on, voted on, by the Board at its next regular meeting.


So what, you may ask, is a Supervisor to do?  Wait until the next Board meeting, perhaps weeks away? Certainly not.  What he/she should do is this: Ask for an Emergency Meeting of the Board.

From our Ordinances:

ORDINANCE 2: TOWNSHIP ADMINISTRATION 
Chapter 1: Town Board Meetings



2. Emergency Meetings 

"An emergency meeting is a special meeting called because of circumstances that, in the judgment of the Town Board, require immediate action involving protection of the public, peace, health and safety."

"All regular meetings, special meetings and emergency meetings shall comply
with the notice requirements set forth in the Open Meeting Law, Minnesota
Statutes Chapter 13D."

Also from our Ordinances, (Ordinance 2, Chapter 3, Section 5 - TIME AND PLACE OF MEETING) although spelled out in the Planning Commission section, but which, I believe, addresses Statutes Chapter 13D, thus applying to the Board as well:

"Emergency meetings may be called by the Chairperson or any two Members in writing filed with the clerk. The demand for the emergency meeting shall specify the date, time, place and purpose of the emergency meeting. As soon as possible the clerk shall telephone all Members and leave a message that informs the member of the date, time, place and purpose of the meeting; if a Member cannot be reached by telephone, then the telephone message may be left with an adult at the residence of the member or on the answering machine of the Member at the Member’s residence. If the message cannot so be left, the clerk shall deliver a written notice to the residence of the Member and tape it to the front door of the residence. The clerk shall make good faith efforts to provide notice of the meeting to each news medium that has filed a written request for notice if the request includes the news medium’s telephone number. Notice of the emergency meeting shall be given by telephone to each requesting news medium. Notice shall be provided to each news medium which has filed a written request for notice as soon as reasonably practicable after notice has been given
to the Members. Notice shall include the date, time, place and purpose of the emergency meeting. Posted or published notice of an emergency meeting shall not be required..."

A quick phone call to then-Chair Pete Storlie asking him to call a meeting and a gathering of at least three Supervisors for a brief, ten-minute session would have solved the issue appropriately.




Of note is that the claim would have been approved by the Board at its next meeting.  I do not recall any problem with or conversation about this situation at that time.  That might have been a good opportunity for the Board to clarify for everyone's benefit what the proper method is to handle these circumstances!


POINT OF INFORMATION ONLY: Any serial discussion/approval involving three or more members of an action/expenditure that might take place outside of a public meeting would not be in keeping with the Open Meeting Law, in my opinion. As I have always understood it, the Open Meeting Law provides for the public's right to listen to and observe discussions held and decisions being made by the Board of Supervisors concerning Township business.  This is the same reason a quorum of these public bodies may not start a discussion of Township business before a meeting has been called to order and why a quorum may not hang around and discuss Township business after a meeting has adjourned.

Is it likely anyone from the public would have been there or perhaps even known about such an emergency meeting? Probably not, but that's totally beside the point, folks.

"TECH SAVVY!"

More credit where credit is due:

Also at the last Board meeting, newly-reappointed Commissioner Carrie Jennings, Planning Commission liaison to the Board for the evening was, in my opinion, of great help to the Board, especially concerning the Road Contractor quotes that were submitted by three sources: Mark Henry, Road Contractor for the past year; Otte brothers, Jason and Bryce, former Road Contractors for Eureka; and Commissioner Butch Hansen.


Carrie had her computer with her as she always does, even though wireless isn't available at the moment, (something she has frequently asked the Board about).  On said computer she had the spreadsheet formula that former Supervisor Jeff Otto had helpfully provided some years ago when he was on the Board.  What this does is to weight the various prices according to the percentage of funds a particular task usually takes. This gives truer information concerning the actual costs under any one quote or bid.

Even though the spreadsheet has been used before, Carrie seemed to be the only person present who had it available for use.  At least she immediately had it up and running. (I can remember another meeting in the past when the Board halted its consideration of quotes or bids until Jeff was called and showed up with his technology!  You try to retire...!)  In just a few minutes, she had provided the necessary information to the Board.

The Road Contractor for the year is again Mark Henry, whose quote came in considerably lower than the other two.

Jennings also used her smart phone to look up information when the Board had a discussion of  magnesium chloride vs. calcium chloride for use in dust coating.  It seems one, I believe the calcium, reduces the amount of salt put into the environment, something a geologist cares about, as we all should/do. Mark Henry provided information regarding the relative availability of the two products and info about Dakota County's use.



Citizens can expect dust coating to arrive in time for Memorial Day Weekend, weather permitting, the Board stated.

            Looking forward to it?  I am!

"GOOD, BETTER, BEHR-ENDT!"

At the Town Board meeting held last Monday, May 12, Supervisor Cory Behrendt asked the Board to pay Nanett Sandstrom, former Clerk, for approximately 20 hours to work with him on updating the Eureka website.  The Board agreed to do so.  Since the money he asked for was only for Nanett, you should understand that Cory is donating HIS HOURS of work to the Township, as he has also just recently donated computers!!! Thank you, Supervisor Behrendt, for your generosity of time and talent!  This is in keeping with Cory's previous tenure and with that of others who have donated freely of their time to Eureka in the past.  To me, this is true public service! Behrendt will eventually work with Chris Buckley of Buds and Bytes, mentioned earlier as a tech consultant hired by the Board under then-Chair Pete Storlie, to finish the project once the first work is done.

      Something about putting it in "the Cloud," for those of you in the know.  :-)

In my estimation, Cory is a modest person, and this might make him a little uncomfortable, but I believe in giving credit where credit is due.  This saves the Township siginifcant dollars.

IS IT IN EUREKA'S BEST INTEREST TO ADMINISTER THE VRWJPO ORDINANCE?

Vermillion River Watershed Joint Power Organization

​The Vermillion River Watershed is administered through a Joint Powers Agreement. Dakota and Scott Counties formed a Joint Powers Organization to exercise leadership in the development of policies, programs and projects that protect and preserve water resources in the Vermillion River Watershed.

At the April, 2014, Town Board meeting, the Supervisors engaged in a discussion regarding the permitting process administered by the Dakota County Vermillion River Watershed Board. Supervisor Ceminsky commented that the VRWJPO is in the process of updating the Vermillion River Watershed Plan. Ceminsky stated that County Commissioner Mike Slavik and “some of the people on the Vermillion River Watershed Board would like to give the permitting process back to Eureka.” Supervisor Behrendt reminded Supervisor Ceminsky that Eureka declined previously to administer the permitting process. He feels the ordinance is very difficult and complex to administer and enforce, requiring a level of expertise to implement the ordinance requirements. Supervisor Ceminsky stated the Vermillion Ordinance is no more difficult to administer than the North Cannon Ordinance. Behrendt and Budenski disagreed with Ceminsky, indicating that, although the intent is the same, the administration is more complex. (I spoke with Travis Thiel, Watershed Specialist with the Vermillion Watershed. During my discussion with him regarding Supervisor Ceminsky’s concerns as expressed at the Board meeting, I did not get the impression that there is any sense of urgency regarding this issue.)


Supervisor Ceminsky stated, “It costs the County $8,000 a year to administer the permitting process for Eureka citizens and they will have to recoup the fees at a cost to the citizens.” He indicated the cost might be less for the citizens if Eureka administered the permitting. (I believe this is only speculation: does Ceminsky have any concrete idea what fees would be charged at the Township level? He had no numbers to offer. This Ordinance was always to be a “pass through” on the expense to the applicant, regardless of who hired the engineer, etc.)


Supervisor Behrendt asked who would administer and monitor the permitting process in Eureka. Supervisor Ceminsky responded that the Building Inspector would have the authority to do so. The Planning Commission would first review the permit application before the Inspector would be involved in the process. Fees would have to be charged by the Building Inspector and, at a minimum, Eureka’s ordinance language would have to be modified concerning the necessary fees in the fee schedule. Concerns that some requirements might be outside the scope of what the Building Inspector can do are valid, in my opinion. Other concerns addressed were the licensing requirements for the Building Inspector and the possibility of engaging TDKA regarding engineering concerns and related costs. Supervisor Miller stated that it might be just as cost-effective to continue to allow the County to administer the permitting process.


Supervisor Ceminsky also stated that Brian Watson of the SWCD, administrator of the Wetlands, also suggested Eureka take responsibility for administrating the Vermillion River Watershed permitting process. Supervisor Miller asked if Brian Watson’s office would be willing to step in and help Eureka if necessary. Butch Hansen stated that “Brian Watson has to at our request.”


Nancy Sauber reminded the Board that the VRWMJPO is in the process of updating the Vermillion Watershed Plan, as is required every 10 years. A third public meeting was held by the VRWJPO in April at the Farmington Extension office, which was the closest location of their three open meetings for citizen input. Five citizens from Eureka were in attendance to engage in and offer input regarding the Plan update. No one from the Planning Commission or Town Board attended. Information on the Watershed updating process regarding Plan objectives and goals can be found on the VRWJPO website. Supervisor Miller felt it necessary for the Town Board to be aware of the Watershed’s updated objectives and goals before considering administrating the permitting process and ordinance. (As a citizen, I agree. How can the Board have a conversation with the Building Inspector if the updated Watershed Plan has not been adopted by the County? Is someone on the Board putting “the cart before the horse” without engaging in a reasonable and intelligent thought process?)


Commissioner Hansen was concerned that the Planning Commission needs to enforce the wetland ordinance. He stated
“Eureka does not go through the process as they are supposed to, so ...” and “We brung [sic] up to the Board before as a Planning Commission telling you that we needed to enforce the Wetland ordinances.” (It is my opinion that this is a very good indicator as to the importance of allowing the County to continue to administer the permitting process utilizing their experience and expertise to make certain it is administrated and enforced properly.)

Supervisor Madden stated “I know a lot of people who live on the Vermillion River who would like to be on an Advisory Board.” (What Advisory Board?) Supervisor Madden was taking selective photos of audience citizens during the discussion. Was he engaged in the discussion process, or was he working on his photo album? He turned over his name tag and later in the meeting took his belongings and walked out before the meeting was finished. (Have you ever been to a City Council meeting where a Council member takes photos of citizens during a robust and vital discussion?)


Chair Miller asked Supervisor Ceminsky to contact the Building Inspector, Darrel Gilmer, and engage in a discussion regarding the concerns that were discussed and Gilmer’s ability to administer and enforce the Vermillion Watershed Ordinance.


(As a citizen, I would encourage the Building Inspector to come before the entire Town Board to allow for an unbiased and clear conversation as to his capabilities regarding administration and enforcement, thus allowing questions and follow-up from all Board members.)

EUREKA TOWN BOARD MEETING

THE MAY EUREKA TOWN BOARD MEETING 

                      WILL BE HELD ON

          MONDAY, MAY 12, AT  7:00 p.m. '

                    

                            YOUR TAX $s AT WORK!

                    

NEWLY ELECTED PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICERS

At the Planning Commission meeting last evening, Chair and Vice Chair elections were held for the upcoming year.

Charles "Butch" Hansen was elected Chair by a three-to-two vote over other nominee, Carrie Jennings, who has served as Chair previously.

Lu Barfknecht, Chair for the past year, was unanimously elected Vice Chair; she was unopposed.



There was a relatively large audience for the meeting.  Some were observers from the public, while several others had business before the Commission.

Newly hired Clerk, Barb North, served as Recorder: Linda Wilson's last day was yesterday.

Thank you, Linda, for pitching in under difficult circumstances!

THE LINEUP HAS CHANGED...

At the last Town Board meeting various appointments and hirings took place:

At the last Township election, you voted to separate the position of Clerk/Treasurer.  This has been enacted.

A new Town Clerk was hired: Barb North.  I cannot give you any more information about her such as past work experience, as the Board did not share this with the public.  Introduce yourself next you're in.

A new Town Treasurer was also hired: Marsha Wilson.  Again, I cannot give you any more info than that as the Board did not share such details as past work experience with the public. "Welcome" to Marsha.



If you have followed the blog, you are aware of the "upheaval," and I would say controversy, regarding the Building Inspector position.

Darrel Gilmer, Township Septic Inspector, was hired as the Township Building Official.  Darrel has been active in this field for quite some time.  He did ultimately agree to the two-year term of the contract, instead of only the 90 days he was willing to commit to previously.

The Township can have only one Building Official, by statute.  Mr. Gilmer does not do commercial inspections.  The Board hired Greg Staber as Deputy Building Official, in charge of commercial inspections. Greg asked for a one-year contract term, with an option to renew for the second year.  This is due to Eureka's low volume of such inspections and his accompanying insurance cost increases.


Two Planning Commission seats were up for appointment, those vacated by Commissioner Jennings and Commissioner Frana. Many thanks for the time and commitment over the past three years! 

There were four applicants for these two postitions: Philip Cleminson, Fritz Frana, Bob Frederickson, and Carrie Jennings.

Dr. Carrie Jennings, geologist and former Board Supervisor as well as Commissioner, was reappointed.  As a geologist, she has valuable background, knowledge, and experience that is unusual in a Township Planning Commissioner.

Phil Cleminson, former and current Task Force member (Transfer and Agritourism), was appointed to the other position.  During his interview, Phil stated that he has "absolutely no agenda." 



And the pitch...