Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down; Highlights and Lowlights of the Eureka, August 11, 2014, Town Board Meeting

     On Monday, August 11, the Eureka Town Board conducted its monthly meeting.  The following are a few of the topics addressed at the meeting:

ROAD CONTRACTOR:
     Supervisor Ceminsky reported to the Board that Class 5 gravel had been applied to 235th street. He stated that he received calls from several citizens and he investigated the area. Jason Otte, the Road Contractor, was present and stated that he had not applied any Class 5 gravel. Supervisor Ceminsky did not provide any samples or photos to support his claim.
      Supervisor Ceminsky is NOT a Road Supervisor.  It is his responsibility to direct citizen calls and e-mails to the current Road Supervisors for a complaint response and inspection if appropriate.  Supervisor Ceminsky stated that citizens were unable to contact the current Road Supervisors, Vice Chair Behrendt and Supervisor Budenski.  Both Road Supervisors replied that no one had tried to contact them and requested Supervisor Ceminsky to forward all citizen calls and e-mails. Supervisor Budenski stated that he was in contact with Otte Excavating, Inc. almost daily. Supervisor Ceminsky did not provide the e-mails or phone numbers at the meeting.
     The contact information for road Supervisors is as follows and can also be found on the Eureka Website and the Newsletter.    
     Supervisor Budenski - 952 292 6028, brianjbud@gmail.com and Supervisor Behrendt - 952 985-5411,  corybehrendt@frontiernet.net.

ATTORNEY BILL:
     The Board reviewed the current attorney invoice and found three unauthorized phone calls by Supervisor Ceminsky to the Township attorney, Mr. Lemmons. The Attorney Engagement Policy states "It shall
be the sole responsibility of the primary (Vice-Chair Behrendt) and secondary ( Chair Miller) attorney liaison to be in communication with the attorney and done in a matter consistent with the Open Meeting Law. "  The attorney agreed to dismiss the fee for the three unauthorized calls. (I suggest that Supervisor Ceminsky and any other Supervisors who are not familiar with the Policy review it.)

JOEY MILLER INVOICE:
     An invoice in the approximate amount of $19,000.00 submitted by Joey Miller for his work on the  new Town Hall storage facility was misplaced. The Board approved the invoice for payment; however, the invoice for payment will be an additional claim on the August Claim list.

CULVERT CLEANING:
     Supervisor Budenski reported that the Town Board has secured a permit and "okay" from the DNR Hydrologist to remove debris from the culverts on 225th Street. The property owner has given permission to enter his property.

WESTWIND SCHOOL:
     Representatives from the Westwind School have withdrawn all applications for permanent/temporary structures until the end of the 2014 school year

IT CONTRACT:.
     At the August 11,2014, Town Board meeting, Supervisor Ceminsky expressed his concerns regarding the IT contract which the Township has with Buds and Bytes and Supervisor Behrendt's role in the IT updating process. Supervisor Behrendt explained that the Board agreed, at a previous Town Board meeting, to accept Mr. Behrendt's offer to correct IT issues at no expense to the Township and work with Buds and Bytes as needed. The volunteer work that would be done by Supervisor Behrendt would save the Township thousands of dollars. (Supervisor Behrendt is currently employed as an IT Director for Clifton, Larson, Allen and has degrees in Electrical Engineering and Information System Management. As a professional he is responsible for creating business and technology plans that support the daily needs of a diverse and dynamic organization.)
     Referring to the April 8, 2013, Town Board meeting minutes, the Board, at the direction of Chair Storlie, (Supervisor Behrendt was not then on the Board) authorized the Clerk to call Buds and Bytes on a "as needed basis" for computer support. The  Board also discussed entering into an IT contract with Buds and Bytes to keep computer equipment running efficiently.

     Supervisor Ceminsky admitted he had a private conversation with Chris of Buds and Bytes and questioned why Supervisor Behrendt was not communicating with Chris. Supervisor Behrendt explained that he attempted to communicate with Buds and Bytes via several e-mails over the past 2 months without a response. (Supervisor Behrendt had copies of the e-mails.) He stated that he finally received an e-mail from Chris about a week ago (apparently after Supervisor Ceminsky, without Board agreement, called Buds and Bytes.)) (Perhaps Supervisor Ceminsky ignored his responsibility to first communicate with Supervisor Behrendt, a common courtesy, before calling Buds and Bytes with his concerns. This would not violate the Open Meeting Law. In my opinion, Supervisor Ceminsky should speak with the Board before designating himself as the Buds and Bytes contact. Eureka has a Board of five, not one.) ) Supervisor Behrendt reminded Supervisor Ceminsky that there needs to be communication with him if there is an issue. The response from Buds and Bytes answered only about one-half of Supervisor Behrendt's questions.
     Supervisor Ceminsky stated that Supervisor Behrendt was doing "stuff" on the office computer with files and data. Ceminsky stated he wants to keep the process "clean" and does not feel a Supervisor should be working on computers. Supervisor Behrendt reminded Supervisor Ceminsky that Nanett, the previous clerk who was training in a new clerk, was rearranging files and that Supervisor Ceminsky had agreed to allow him to work with Buds and Bytes to resolve issues. He explained that he was not dealing with data, but the presumption is that he would not be malicious and only effectively work with the hardware entity as a professional IT person. His intent was to utilize his IT experience to save the Township money. He stated he was never working on the computer without someone else in the office, adding that if Supervisor Ceminsky did not "trust" him, someone else was welcome to carry on in his place. Supervisor Behrendt then stated that he was "done" with his volunteer time due to the lack of trust and that engaging Buds and Bytes to complete the process would cost the Township thousands of dollars that the Township did not budget for.
     Supervisor Behrendt donated computers and equipment to the Township to replace the outdated equipment that was being utilized. Commissioner Hansen, on more than one occasion, questioned why the Township was not purchasing new equipment as allowed by vote at the Annual Meeting.  Supervisor Behrendt explained that the equipment that was donated by his company was new; however, the equipment could be returned and the Township could purchase other equipment.
     Supervisor Behrendt donated time away from his professional position during his work day to start the process of updating a mixed bag of eight year's of complex codes. The Township will now have to pay thousands of dollars to engage Buds and Bytes to manage the website/webmaster and they will have unfettered access to the Township data.
     Chair Miller indicated that the Township would prefer to keep the donated new equipment. He stated that Supervisor Behrendt had done a good job putting everything together and that he "did not deserve this abuse." Chair Miller acknowledged that Supervisor Behrendt was authorized to donate and install the new equipment, and to tie together various obsolete programs. Buds and Bytes' contract will be reviewed.
     My comment:  Supervisor Ceminsky, are you on the Board to cost the Township money or to save the Township unnecessary spending due to the generous efforts of a financially conscientious Supervisor and citizen?  The majority of the time it is better to work with someone to accomplish a result rather than spend energy trying to make others look incompetent. Commissioner Hansen, please obtain the facts before making assumptions and public statements.
     My comment: Supervisor Behrendt, I appreciate and value your commitment of time and your generous donation of new computer equipment. You conduct the business of the Township with a voice of reason, fiscal responsibility and integrity. Is it possible that a few of the other Board members are there to "carry the water bucket" for their buddies? At times, I wonder. I believe the majority of citizens would agree that you take your Oath as an official seriously. Thank you.

AUDIENCE DISTURBANCE:
     Supervisor Madden, with the encouragement of Supervisor Ceminsky, reminded the Board that a citizen in the audience was "creating a disturbance." (A citizen moved from one seat to sit next to another citizen and whispered two words to the citizen in front of her.)  He stated the Board needed to concentrate on "what they were trying to do here." He said he brought it up because "he was having a hard time following the discussion."
     At a previous meeting, four Supervisors were engaged in a discussion (See the photo at the top of the Blog) regarding a very large issue in the Township. Supervisor Madden was too busy laughing and writing notes to the clerk on the back of his agenda to get involved in the discussion.
     My Opinion: "I find this behavior  of Mr. Madden's very distracting. I also find it very distracting when a Planning Commission member, while sitting next to the attorney, continues to engage Mr. Lemmons in a conversation; not allowing the attorney to focus on the Board discussion. This member, in particular, speaks and interrupts without being recognized, whenever he so desires as if he is a "sixth member of the Board."  Supervisor Madden, please focus on the more important issues.
     Citizens take time out of their busy schedules to attend meetings in order to conduct business or to become informed of decisions being made by our public officials. Citizens should be treated with dignity and respect.  It is unfair to expect citizens to sit for four hours and not speak to another citizen sitting next to them.  If the conversation is going to be loud and lengthy, requesting the citizen/citizens to step outside the meeting room is reasonable.
     Supervisor Ceminsky had the small tables, which citizens utilized to work on computers etc. during the meetings, removed from the building. He explained that "he felt everyone should sit together." Now that the storage facility may soon be completed, it is a good time to bring a couple of tables out of the storage unit and allow the citizens to utilize what rightfully belongs to them in spite of Supervisor Ceminsky's "feelings."

AGRI-TOURISM:
     The Board engaged in a discussion regarding developing an agri-tourism ordinance.  Attorney Lemmons provided the Board with a draft report he developed utilizing input submitted by the Task Force and individual Task Force members. Attorney Lemmons did state he was concerned about making Agri-tourism a permitted use because of all the potential uses.  He stated he felt an Interim Use Permit for Agri-tourism would be much better. Supervisor Behrendt expressed several valid concerns and stated he felt the Board should have the option of reviewing the proposed ordinance following an Open House before moving forward with a Public Hearing. He had concerns the Board is taking what is a very complex issue too lightly, as well as the possible effects Agri-tourism might have regarding zoning.
     Expenditures were approved to allow the Planning Commission, Task Force members and Sherri Busse from TKDA to host an Open House allowing citizens to participate in an informational Agri-tourism discussion. Within 60 days a Public Hearing will be held to address the citizen concerns and make a decision on the feasibility of an ordinance to be presented to the Town Board for discussion.  Be alert for a posted Open House date.

TOWN HALL GARAGE/STORAGE BUILDING
     The storage building is not complete at this time. The Town hall property where the current storage unit is located has been sold to Atina and Martin Diffley. Chair Miller agreed to to move the storage unit onto the current Town hall property for a fee of $100.00.  The unit will be moved by the end of August.
Chair Miller asked as to when the new storage building will be completed. Commissioner Hansen was unable to answer this question. Commissioner Hansen stated that an amount around $4,100 would be needed to complete the next step. (No quotes were provided to support the dollar amount.) The Board authorized up to $4,100 for completion of this portion of the project.
     I reviewed the Town Board minutes from April, 2014, when Supervisor Ceminsky made a motion to move forward with the building project. Commissioner Hansen is listed as the general contractor on the building permit application.  He offered to manage the project free of charge. Pete Storlie was the Board Chair during this period. 
     The Commercial Inspection Record  states that the "permit holder/contractor/owners is responsible to call for inspections."  I found, in the project file, one inspection report dated 5/29/14 by Inspector Darrell Gilmer. The Commercial Inspection Record also states that the "permit packet, including the approved plan, and this inspection record must be posted in an accessible location before calling for inspections. No inspection will be performed and a re-inspection fee will be charged if this card and the approved plans are not available to the inspector."
      The Township Building Inspector, Darrell Gilmer, reminded Commissioner Hansen at the August Town Board meeting that only one inspection had been requested and that the required inspections need to be completed.  The Commercial Inspection Record was not posted in the building, but was filed away in the project file in the Office as of August 19, 2014, when I reviewed the file at the Town Hall.
I was also unable to locate a construction schedule. Is it not appropriate to expect the Contractor/Project Manager to provide to the Board a construction schedule at the beginning of the project and also call for inspections when required during the construction period? 
     My opinion: Perhaps, for future projects, hiring and paying a project manager/contractor would keep the process "clean" and professional. The project folder was void of quotes and, in specific, competing quotes, as well as lien waivers. Is it possible competing quotes were not obtained? Perhaps they are filed in another area. Is the Township Project Manager/Contractor following the proper procedure? If not, why would the Township Officials expect citizens to do so throughout the duration of their building process? I believe this is an issue to be concerned about rather than a couple of citizens chatting a few words during a meeting or a generous Supervisor donating his time and expertise to the citizens of the Township.  While I was sifting through a couple of files in the Town Hall Office, a citizen told me " Eureka not only has a reputation in Dakota County, but all over  the State."

     Can the citizens expect the storage facility to be completed by the next Annual Meeting?