EUREKA TOWN BOARD BUZZ!

                                   November 13, 2018

                            Eureka Town Board meeting

     The Dakota County
Sheriff attended the meeting.
He reported minor thefts are
happening due to cars left
outside unlocked. Remember
to secure your vehicles.

    There continues to be illegal
dumping in the Township
ditches. This includes dirt as well as 
miscellaneous items.

     The Sheriff advised to secure the license number and
vehicle description when reporting an incident to the Sheriff's
Department.

     The Sheriff will address with the appropriate County
department the reported dumping of loads of dirt in the
Township ditches.

                                   
                               
                                                  
 ILLEGAL MOVING OF BUILDINGS WITHIN OR 
INTO THE TOWNSHIP:  A citizen attended the meeting 
regarding buildings he moved onto his property.
Unfortunately it seems he was not aware of the Eureka
Ordinance that addresses this issue. The citizen was 
required to obtain permits for each building and pay
a double fee of $1,400. 

     Refer to the Ordinance Book, Chapter 4, Section ll - Moving
 Buildings Into the Township.

                                 
                                                                     
COMMERCIAL ZONING UPDATE:  Mr. Hansen and 
Ceminsky presented a map and information regarding
the work they, along with Commissioners Novacek and 
Fredlund, the latter a voice of reason, have done at the 
"workshops." Mr. Hansen stated "We worked very hard 
to get this done in a short amount of time because the 
Township is notorious for dragging things out for months,
months and months." There was no information available 
to hand out to the public.

     Housing to industrial or industrial to housing is included in
the draft language and it "can go either way." Mr. Hansen stated,
"This is draft language that literally can be PLOPPED down any
place in Eureka Township." (Really????) Types of industries,
impact, building heights, designs, septic systems, water tower 
and possible grant money was incorporated into the draft language.

     Mr. Hansen stated, "According to the Lakeville Comprehensive
2030 Plan, Lakeville is going to annex portions of the Northern 
corridor.".
(In my opinion, it might be fun to play in the sandbox
building water towers etc. with no experience in planning; 
however, at what expense to the Eureka citizens? Once all the
work and money has been put into
this Commercial/Industrial endeavor, it is very possible
Lakeville will annex areas of the Northern Corridor. This
perhaps makes the area more attractive. Perhaps there might
be consideration for portions of the draft language along 
Cedar Avenue).

     Questions were submitted to the Township attorney.  The
attorney stated that the Township could not prohibit sexually
oriented businesses but can put conditions on the business.
The questions and answers were not available to the public.

      Supervisor Barfknecht inquired as to how many open houses
were being proposed and if there was enough pertinent
information to hold an open house.

     The workshop group asked the Board to approve a budget for
post card mailings and a minimum of 2 open houses and 1 with a
Planner or possibly 2 with a planner.  Hansen stated, "This is
a minimum." There is also the cost of printing postcards and
any materials needed for the open houses, attorney input, maps
and perhaps special meetings.

If this presentation had been done correctly,
 a proposed budget would have been submitted for the Board to 
consider and act on at the meeting.  (My opinion).

     Clerk Finke tried to explain the process utilized for 
addressing post cards which also includes email notices
which the Board decided on previously.  Mr. Hansen could
not resist loudly and rudely excoriating Mr. Finke
during the postcard discussion. (This happens too often
and is unseemly and very unprofessional).

     Chair Murphy, utilizing common sense and his experience in
business, suggested that because the information
is new to the Board, another meeting should be utilized
to discuss the budget, number of meetings and how much
should be invested in the total process.

     Mr. Hansen and Ceminsky disagreed and were adamant 
regarding holding an open house regardless of the busy
Holiday season.

     An open house is scheduled for November 27, 7:00 p.m., at the
Eureka Town Hall.

(Information was gleaned from the November Town Board
meeting CD which can be purchased for $5 at the
Town Hall).

     If you are interested and plan to attend the November 27 
meeting, I suggest you might want to read the previous blog 
"YOU MAY WANT TO APPEAR - OPEN HOUSE." The blog offers
many very good questions that should be considered when
addressing the possibility of Commercial/Industrial and the
$$$$$$'s that might be spent possibly for naught!

     

                                 

                              

YOU MAY WANT TO APPEAR....

The Commercial/Industrial Open House is going to be held as proposed by the "work group" of Hansen, Ceminsky, Novacek, and Fredlund, even though that means it will be the Tuesday after Thanksgiving, November 27, at 7:00 p.m.  Not the best timing, but do come and let your opinion be known.
The truth as I have known it is that the Township has had the common sense to have NEVER held an Open House during the holidays. So, even though I suggested to the Board that this was not a good time to get public input, the Board went ahead and scheduled then anyway.

Following are the public comments I made at the last Board meeting on Tuesday, November 13.

Nancy Sauber, 9445 225^th St. W., Lakeville

I have a few comments about the Commercial/Industrial (C/I) “work group.”

1. By Ordinance, since this group was appointed by the Board, this should be a Special Committee of 5 people, minimum. (Ordinance 2, Chapter 4)
2. As such, it is subject to the Open Meeting Law. Contrary to that, there have been no recordings of the meetings per Township policy. There are no posted agendas or minutes on the website. Not all currently scheduled meetings are even on the website at present. A meeting was held last night (November 12) on a federal holiday, which is not allowed. Even more important, there have been no public copies of documents being discussed. These have not been “open meetings.”
3. How much money has been spent by this group? Was it all pre-approved by the Board (as is necessary in the normal course of business)?
4. It is quite something to listen to comments such as: [Should this C/I area] be on the section lines? Maybe the quarter-quarter lines? Let’s go up to the railroad. Should it go to 235^th or all the way to 250^th? Do you ever envision a C/I area around Town Hall? Based on what? A planner is sorely needed.
5. There has been mention of setbacks, but not of performance standards generally. Anything goes?
6. There has been mention of new roads, curb and gutter, sewer and water, water towers, uses ranging from sexually oriented businesses to fast food restaurants and so on. Where is the factual basis for these discussions? To blindly act on the “Everybody knows that such-and-such is going to happen” rule is irresponsible.
7. “Market forces” have been mentioned several times. Instead of listening to amateur and largely uninformed opinion, the professional market study from the earlier C/I Task Force should be updated. That would be responsible leadership.
8. Do we have a realistic idea of the costs and benefits to the Township? As outlined in the earlier C/I Task Force document, a fiscal impact study should be conducted to get a clearer picture of this. That would be responsible leadership.
9. It is premature to hold an Open House at this time, not to mention it would be during the holidays. If the Board intends to go through with this, professional guidance should first be sought. With zoning authority comes certain responsibilities to all the citizens of Eureka.

Thank you.

In case you need a reminder, look at the earlier blog on this. The "work group" is talking about all the way across the northern border of the Township, down Dodd Blvd., and down Cedar Avenue, even to 250th St. W.

Some of the costs incurred could be construction of streets, maintenance of streets, including plowing and patching or resurfacing pavement.

What other questions occur to you? Come and ask them.

AMATEUR HOUR IN EUREKA!

+

Once again, I attended the (November 5th) meeting of the "work group" on Commercial/Industrial uses that the Board appointed a couple of months ago. This time, I was joined by three other citizens. After going through the document that the group has been editing (and the public has not seen), the group moved on to looking at maps of the Township for placement of the Commercial/Industrial zones.

Since these maps were laid out on the side table, I moved forward to stand to observe the discussion and the locations pointed out. As the meeting went on, I took notes of what was being said. (Although Mark Ceminsky has previously told the Board that these meetings are being recorded, this one was not, nor has any other one I've attended.) I will give information in bullet points as it was delivered and as I took notes.

*The group looked at a map of the Township that had sticky notes of different colors stuck to it. The different colors denoted the different levels of intensity of use. Note that they originally had industrial as "Heavy Industrial" and then changed it to "just Industrial." I would suggest that "Light Industrial" is the term they perhaps intend and should be using.

*It was stated that "there are two ways to do this." One is to say this is the area in which we will "allow" C/I, but only when and if the landowner requests this use. The other is to say, "All this area is zoned commercial."




*Ceminksy said he thought the group should map the different areas of intensities. Hansen stated that the Township is "not going to have that step-down every time." (See earlier post.) Fredlund stated that the whole southern edge of the area looked at north of 225th St. would have to be "neighborhood commercial" as there are residences there, north and south of the street.

*Hansen stated that there is already heavy industrial [sic] in Lakeville. The question is are we going to allow it in Eureka. If there is a house there, then can do only neighborhood commercial (next to the house).

*Ceminsky again offered that the group should set up the different areas. Hansen disagreed and said that (the way he is proposing it), "We're still in the driver's seat." Novacek tried to clarify by saying Mark is saying we're going to set up a zone here. Hansen replied that the group has been agreed that landowners will be able to decide when and if there might be C/I uses. "We can't say you can't build a house."

You should note that one of the questions that the group is submitting to the attorney is whether instating these uses can be done in the way they have described- that is, leaving it up to the individual landowner when and if C/I is requested. Given the number of times Hansen emphatically stressed that the group is agreed that it will not "force" zoning on anyone, I have to say that the idea popped into my head that the onus might be shifted to the attorney in his response to their question. "We wanted to leave it up to the landowner, but the attorney says no."
Again, repeating what my colleague stated in her post, the group might be well advised to learn about spot zoning. During a meeting, Novacek said he didn't get why spot zoning was so bad. Fredlund countered with, "I think it is illegal." Hansen then stated that HE has "never seen in writing" why spot zoning would be illegal to do.

*Ceminsky commented that the Township is zoned ag now and that the long-term plan "has to be more defined."





*Novacek said there is an "element of chaos" and that the other side of that is that there is the "element of forcing it. We want something in the middle." (I wondered what THAT might be!)

*Then there was a discussion during which it was suggested that this "would figure itself out." (REALLY?) Ceminsky stated that he was uncomfortable with Hansen's statement that this "would figure itself out." Hansen replied that otherwise "then you're going to force people into rezoning their property." Just say we're going to "allow" C/I uses in this area.

*Fredlund asked what if a certain parcel is already put into industrial uses and then an adjacent landowner wants houses? Hansen replied, "First come, first served." Fredlund again stated that the edge along 225th would have to be neighborhood commercial as there can be more houses along 225th in the future.

*Ceminsky stated that he and Hansen are "in the same trade" and "people need visuals." He wanted something more defined on the map. He had transparent sheets that he wanted to place over the map to draw in the different areas of use.

*Novacek said that the 225th area is the most likely for C/I development. "It's coming anyway...It could all go to houses...(depends on) if the market forces bring it." It was suggested 2,000 feet either side of Cedar Avenue could be C/I as well.

*The group pointed out the borderline that it had discussed at one of its first meetings. To the west, it was delineated along just the northernmost quarter-quarter lines, then dropped  down to include Scotts Miracle-Gro and the airport property, and then back to northernmost quarter-quarter lines to the east.

* The thought was expressed that four businesses could effect the step-down just among those four businesses.

*The group stated that there are 1080 acres along the "northern corridor," 1400 acres possible along Cedar Avenue, possibly 560 acres in a gerrymandered area along Dodd and over to north of 225th and west of Dodd. Hansen stated that (these) are "the three that everybody wants to do." In adding up acreage, the group included the airport property that at this point remains in Eureka. Since this is MAC property, I didn't understand the sense of this. (Not to mention Hansen wants a friendly annexation of that area to Lakeville anyway. Regardless of what he wants, the airport will be annexed to Lakeville, even if it is in chunks as allowed by law.)

*Novacek again stated that the Township has to manage the "market forces or it'll run over us."

SAY, HERE'S AND IDEA!: HOW ABOUT UPDATING THE MARKET STUDY FROM THE EARLIER TASK FORCE ON C/I? This was done professionally by Jon Commers of Donjek through TKDA. Mr. Commers met with various commercial real estate brokers in the area and got their feedback on the possibility of C/I uses in Eureka.
Someone who doesn't see studies as roadblocks thrown in the way but as the smart way to do something like this would perhaps agree!





*At this point, Hansen offered something very interesting. He alluded to "the three people who've really put pressure on me to do this." He said he has told these individuals that "this has to be done in phases."

At one point Ceminsky referred to "giving landowners more options/opportunities with what to do with their land along the northern border." Does this include landowners who want to live there, I wonder, or just a "chosen few?"

* Lakeville and annexation is an issue. Has it occurred to the "work group" that landowners along the northern border could still request annexation once they are deemed C/I and thus perhaps more attractive to Lakeville? At a Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner Funk mentioned this very idea that came out of the earlier C/I Task Force. Hansen did not agree.

I have a few further comments of my own:
First, I believe this "work group" of four appointed by the Town Board is really a Special Committee as referred to under our Ordinances. See Ordinance 2, Chapter 4. As such, it should have a minimum of five members, is subject to the Open Meeting Law which means copies of documents under discussion for the public, perhaps recordings since we do that in Eureka, and minutes to be published for the public to see.

This "work group" is going to request money from the Board to send out notices for an Open House to be held before Christmas. I find this very premature. They don't have much that is clear even to themselves at present, and more importantly, the Township hasn't even engaged a planner yet. Hansen says this "work group" is saving planner money as they are doing the groundwork first. In my opinion, they are WAY out of their depth and wasting their time. The "work group" wants answers from the attorney before an open House, but although it has said this will go to the planner, haven't presented it to the Board for its input or to send to the planner as yet. I believe they plan to tell the Board at its November meeting what they want to present to the public at this Open House.

The group has spent money on maps. Has this been pre-approved by the Board? That money cannot be spent without that approval. Has this been done? How much oversight is the Board exercising over this group?

ADDENDUM TO "ATTN. ALL CITIZENS!"

As the only audience member, I attended the Commercial/Industrial "work group" meeting on October 31st. At the meeting the next meeting dates were set:

Wednesday, November 7th

Monday, November 12th and 

Tuesday, November 20th.

All meetings start at 7:00 p.m. and typically last until around 9:00 p.m.

IT IS, PERHAPS, OF SPECIFIC INTEREST TO THE CITIZENS ALONG THE ROADS MENTIONED IN THE TITLE OF THE LAST POST THAT THE INTENTION FOR THE MEETING ON THE 7TH IS TO START LOOKING AT MAPS TO "PLAN" THE AREAS  AND THE TYPES OF C/I THAT WILL GO THERE. THESE WILL BE IN THE DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE TOWNSHIP TO BE CONSIDERED.

Also, it was discussed at the last meeting that the intention is to not rezone until and unless the landowner requests it. HOWEVER, it was also said that the "ugly truth" is that it may come down to imposing the zoning anyway. As I said, everything is debatable.

You may want to show up sooner rather than later!