Election Results, Annual Meeting Highlights and more!

Three hundred and seventy five citizens took the time out of

their busy day to vote for a candidate for Town Board Supervisor!

The election results are:  Lu Barfknecht   208 votes
                                        Alan Novacek    166 votes
                                        Other             1 vote
                  
                                              

                            2019 Annual Township Meeting

The 2019 Annual Township meeting followed the closing of the
polls.  Cory Behrendt was the moderator and the meeting was
conducted with dignity, order, civility and at times a little humor!

The following are issues that were discussed and motions
were voted on:

Security system - Motion to install a security system with
identifiable access with video. The motion passed unanimously.

Electronic access to the file/records room: Motion
to obtain costs estimates for the installation of an electronic
log-in system and record of what access is for. Motion passed with
one dissenting vote.

Commercial Industrial work group and TKDA Planner:
There was discussion regarding the proposed $14,000
expenditure to study the feasibility of Commercial/Industrial
zoning in Eureka Township.
A motion was made by Gene Dietz "To suspend any further
expenditures in 2019 for the purpose of establishing a
Commercial/Industrial zone in Eureka Township. The Township
would have a ballot referendum at the 2020 Township election to
give all citizens an opportunity to vote yes or no on further
expenditures to establish a Commercial/Industrial zone within
the Township in the next five years. CUP's for non agricultural
businesses will continue to be processed by the Township
Supervisors as they have done in the past."
Mark Ceminsky stated the Township cannot issue conditional
use permits for businesses.
The motion passed 36-18. (In the past, Mr. Hansen has "hung his
hat" on motions passed at the Annual meetings. It will be
interesting to see if his commitment continues void of any personal
agendas).
                                                                       

Township Levy:  A motion was made to approve a levy of $679,584
with legal review. The motion passed 36-12.

Motions made and passed at the Annual Meeting are
not binding but will be heard by the Board of Supervisors
and taken under advisement.

Other issues brought forward by citizens:
There was a concern over the length of Town Board meetings which
at times can go past midnight. Many controversial issues are
belabored at the meetings. A citizen suggested a more
regimented approach to business.

Citizens also suggested the Township engage in 21st Century
communication solutions in order to embrace transparency. Mark
Ceminsky stated emails are sent regarding meetings and are
posted on the website. (Looking at the website on Sunday, March
17, there was NOTHING posted on the Website regarding the
rescheduled Board of Canvass meeting on Monday, March 18, 
the Work Group C/I meeting on Wednesday nor the Reoganization 
meeting on Thursday evening. We can do better)!

Jeff Otto gave an update on two issues he explained need urgent
attention that he had presented to the Board and Planning
Commission members at a free 4-hour training seminar he
conducted Oct. 30. The seminar explained what Jeff characterizes
as the single most complex aspect of our zoning, the recognition
and protection of possible grandfathered housing rights and how the
transfer program works.

He first described the need for a comprehensive computer database to
accurately track housing rights, transfers and protection of possible
grandfathered housing rights. He pointed out how the old simple map
approach to tracking transfers is no longer practical now that housing
right transfers since 2013 (originally known as clustering) may
involve small parcels as either sources or destinations because many
small parcels are not even shown individually on the map. There also
are other important pieces of helpful information that simply can't be
represented on a map for lack of space.

Jeff offered to create the database at no cost for his time, including his
analysis of all housing rights and properties in Eureka and then
programming the database for Township use. He is considered our resident
expert on this subject, having been directly involved in all aspects of
researching and writing the Ordinance language, working closely with
our Township attorneys and two study teams. He pointed out that any
consultant would need to be trained and then checked for accuracy, plus
then be given the specs for the database and how it needs to work to
support the Town Clerks and officials. He estimated it could easily cost
$30,000 for a consultant to produce the analysis and computer
program. What he asked of the Board to initiate the project was a fresh
map like TKDA has done for us in the past and a free fresh download
of Eureka property data from Dakota County essential to the analysis.

Jeff also indicated that the database would easily be able to produce a
master list of the status of rights and properties that could be published
on the website. He will make the first available when ready and hopes
that it might be republished annually by Town staff.

The second initiative Jeff advocated is a text amendment to the grand-
fathering portion of the Ordinance to make applying for such status
strictly an option for a property owner and not a status that can be forced
on the property owner. This is because the guideline of the State Supreme
Court Case Law the our Ordinance is based on, it is now realized,
was a protection for sub-standard parcels that can actually take away
a housing right in some situations involving large properties. Jeff
indicated that this actually happened once and must be corrected.
He indicated this will be easy to progress because the research has
already been done and explained in detail to Board and Planning
Commission members during his October seminar when he also
proposed the draft language. Jeff indicated he has a couple of tweaks to
make to the language, but it is basically ready for attorney review and a
pubic hearing.

After the meeting ended, Mike Greco and Carrie Jennings each
approached Jeff with ideas on how the County is now in a better
position to produce maps that may avoid the estimated $1,000 cost
of involving TKDA. Jeff is working with Mike and Mike's working
contacts in the County to make this happen or at least at less cost.

They also indicated that a recent project was completed with Castle
Rock that may heip with our Eureka effort. Jeff indicated he would
follow up on that also, but was less optimistic that this would be of
much help since no township has a program with the rules and
flexibility of our transfer program. The bulk of the time in this
project is the analysis and application of Eureka rules to properties.
Jeff stated a fresh map is a project tool, not the goal for this
project.

Thank you, Jeff, for the time and effort you put into
this presentation for a better understanding of a complex
zoning issue.