HERE’S THE SKINNY ON JANUARY 28 SPECIAL MEETING

When this blog was started nearly twelve years ago, its purpose was to inform the public, with the hope that more public would become involved in their government. Thus the title, “ENGAGING Eureka in Government.” Thank you to all who read it. 

Thank you to the 17 people who listened to the special meeting of the Board and Commission on the 28th. The WSB planner, Nate Sparks, and Township attorney, Troy Gilchrist, were in attendance. Four citizens were present in person, and the remainder were on Zoom. 

Supervisor Barfknecht was absent; Supervisor Pope arrived somewhat late.  

The meeting opened with Nate Sparks giving a summary of the input from the open house. There were no copies of the responses to be had; I wondered why not. I would have thought they’d be in the “public packet.” The “packet” consisted of one sheet of paper stating the agenda. Not even a tabulation of comments that had been made.

(Later in the meeting Dan Heyda commented that some responses had stated the Board was not “transparent.” He very much disagrees with that as all meetings have been posted. My question is where are the results from the open house? Previous Boards have always reported results of surveys, for example. Aren't we entitled to get the results from the open house paid for with taxpayer money? WSB personnel were there and that was paid for, even if Eureka public officials were not paid. I don't know if they were or not.)

Mr. Sparks stated that the majority of opinions given asked for no change to the Township. Most responded that they appreciated living in a rural setting, with open spaces, wildlife and less noise. He said some respondents were open to commercial uses being added. He gave no quantities for either category. 

I had spoken with Sparks at the open house. He told me that the Board had said to him that they wanted to get input from the public and would not necessarily be going ahead with these zoning changes if the responses were negative. I’m sure Mr. Sparks believed what he told me; My opinion was that the Board was going to do whatever it wanted to do, regardless of our feedback.  

Let me remind you that the open house was held with little advance notice on the website, with no written, mailed notice, during the Christmas season on December 17 no less, and during the dinner/chores hours of 5:30-7:30. I guess I’m cynical, but that never appeared to me to be a Board really looking for input. In the past, the Commission and the Board would never have scheduled such a meeting thus. It would have been viewed as a very poor time to have an open house on such an important topic and would have been scheduled for after the holidays in this instance.

Board Chair Storlie next asked Commissioners and Supervisors to give their reading of the situation. 

Donovan Palmquist said he was disappointed more people didn’t attend the open house. He expressed "changes have to be made," and he would like to hear from more people. 

Al Novacek referred to “losing” the airport. I wonder how he believes Eureka could have provided the MAC with the municipal services of sewer and water that they required under their plan for all of their airports by a date certain. Of course, I have sat in Township meetings during which it was asserted repeatedly that the airport annexation had “nothing to do with sewer and water.” Ridiculous. 

Novacek stated that the Township "doesn’t need to keep having more meetings.” If citizens wanted to attend, they would have already, he said. He also declared that “most” want commercial uses. Judging from what Mr. Sparks said, those people, the “most” wanting commercial according to Mr. Novacek, must not have come to the open house either. Otherwise Sparks’ summary would have been different. 

Novacek declared commercial is going to come no matter what. He said the Board doesn’t ask the Met Council what it thinks the Township should do. The Board should tell them “we are going to do this,” and they can figure out how Eureka can do it. He stated the Council doesn’t see Eureka as self-governing, but rather as “a vacant lot.”

Commission Chair Melanie Storlie stated that she thinks the need is to protect what is “left of the Township.” She wished more people had attended and also mentioned the perennial comment about "head in the sand." Disappointing. 

Commissioner Heyda said he was disappointed in the numbers attending. Again, timing and notice!

Commissioner Brian Storlie asked how do different people see "rural?" Is it lack of business, fewer people? He agreed with Novacek that "industrialization" will come. It’s a question of how the Township can manage it. He expressed support for getting extended home businesses in place. 

I would point out that allowing extended home businesses as a use in the ag district (all of Eureka) is one thing; actually rezoning land use as only commercial going forward is a totally different thing. Those two approaches affect property rights very differently. Some members in office have stated often that “people should be able to do what they want with their own property.” I guess that applies just to some.

Chair Storlie thought it had been a good turnout at the open house. He stated he felt the responses written and handed in were "lacking substance." He said one said what they liked about Eureka was ag, that the biggest issue facing Eureka was ag, and that that responder wanted Eureka to stay ag. He questioned what that even meant. I don't know, seems clear enough to me: they want ag! Storlie also went on to comment on what "rural" might mean and that he felt it "varies quite a bit." He stated that St. Paul was at one time four townships. He said he knows the Met Council will be involved and that the Comprehensive Plan is involved also. That costs money, too, he said, and we have to pay the bills. That is the first time anybody on the Board or Commission ever acknowledged publicly that an amended Comp Plan would be necessary and that the Met Council does have oversight. Up until then, in my opinion, they represented all their plans as easily doable. The Met Council may be totally at odds with the Board’s plans. The Board has yet to acknowledge that in so many words.

At that time, Supervisor Tim Pope arrived. Storlie had just asked Ceminsky for his comments. Ceminsky said to go with Pope first. Pope said he had no comments.  

Ceminsky then commented that this was “all a balancing act.” He stated people think something should be done. We need commercial and more housing density, he opined. He said they had thought annexation would stop. We don’t want to force farmers out, he asserted, but we need these new uses. The Board is not spot zoning as alleged, he stated. They’ve hired a planner and have the attorney. Home business can work with these changes, he commented. (What he did not acknowledge is that home businesses don’t need a rezoning, but simply an expansion of allowable use in the ag zone, as has been discussed. Not sure the distinction is seen.)

Storlie then declared the transfers were “a disaster.” (The transfers allowed a much greater freedom to relocate housing rights than was ever allowed under the older "clustering" process. Many benefited financially from transfers, gaining income from rights they did not intend to use. Others benefited by being able to build a home. There are literally still hundreds of unused housing rights in the Township.)

Storlie stated that we need increased housing density and that would still be “rural.”. He commented that the Met Council probably wouldn’t allow one-in-two or one-in-five, but that one-in-ten acres might be possible. (Even one-in-ten makes city services economically difficult if not impossible. I believe the Met Council sees that we still have hundreds of unused housing rights, and sees the possible future for Eureka as much higher density with municipal sewer and water.  The MUSA line placement is beyond Eureka’s authority, I’m afraid.)

Storlie suggested that he and Ceminsky talk with the city of Lakeville about orderly annexation. 

Novacek was against any conversations with Lakeville about annexation at all. He declared it can be stopped with “very solid and constructive methods.” Novacek commented that “Lakeville is like a leopard, ready to pounce on us. Don’t meet with them. It’s going spread like wildfire, and Lakeville will know there’s ‘a new sheriff in town.’”

Pete Storlie said that up until now, annexations by Lakeville have been because Eureka landowners requested annexation.

Township Attorney, Troy Gilchrist, added that instituting commercial uses and increased housing can actually accelerate annexation. Cities have a lot of power concerning annexation. If a city sees this kind of change along its border it may like annexation and to develop the land in accordance with what it has done already. Gilchrist further added that conversations with cities do not commit the Township to anything.

Storlie suggested conversations with Farmington and Lakeville. Ceminsky stated there are “opportunities” in orderly annexation, and it would let the Township draw the line where it wanted annexation to stop. He also suggested that the Township might even be able to hook up to sewer and water. 

Novacek said Lakeville and Farmington will hear what we are doing. Let them come to US, he averred. He asked [the Board] to “be leaders.”

Storlie’s motion passed 3 to 1, with Novacek a “nay.”

Ceminsky moved to ask WSB (the planning firm) and the attorney to start drawing up ordinance language for commercial use and increased housing. (My viewpoint: that’s money spent without even knowing if the Met Council will okay the changes. Ceminsky has said we don’t have money for roads. Does writing ordinance language at this point use up funds prematurely?)

There is currently much detail missing so that citizens could have a clearer picture of what may be to come. We'll see what develops. Stay tuned!