CONSENT AGENDA

Manager Klingelhutz moved, seconded by Manager Shekleton, to approve the consent agenda, consisting of the August 13 and August 20, 2009, minutes and Resolution 09-089, approving the District’s 2010-11 Capital Improvements Program.  Upon vote, the motion carried.

REGULAR AGENDA

Committee Meeting Reports  

Manager Keeley reported that the Awards Committee met on Tuesday, September 2.  She noted that an insufficient number of nominations was received in each of the Watershed Heroes categories and only through the efforts of staff were additional nominations procured.  Manager Keeley noted the need for Board members to be more involved in nominating projects next year.  She said no nominations came from Board members this year.  Manager Keeley reviewed the winners in each of the categories and stated that the format for the event will be the same, with some changes to the menu.  The managers discussed possible master of ceremonies candidates. 

Manager Shekleton reported that the Information Technology Committee has reviewed a draft work plan but is not yet ready to recommend further expenditure.  The committee will meet again September 10 to review final information it needs for a proposal to the Board.  Manager Shekleton stated that the committee is preparing to move forward with the Share Point project, at a cost of roughly $7,500.  He said the committee asked staff to develop a request for proposals for a new website.  Finally, Manager Shekleton stated that the committee’s standing meeting dateis the third Wednesday of each month.

Manager Blixt reported that James Wisker did a wonderful job of running the most recent Citizens Advisory Committee meeting.  Mr. Wisker stated that the committee discussed the cooperative efforts with the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District on the agricultural BMP program, and the recently publicized efforts of a dentist in Zumbrota to ensure that stream-buffer ordinances are enforced.  He noted that the members of the CAC also are interested in BMPs to reduce endocrine-disruptor pollution of waterbodies and exploring promotion of these practices through the Carver Soil and Water Conservation District to farmers.  He stated that the committee remains interested in aquatic herbicide use and is worried that the scope of the cost-benefit literature review staff is preparing will be too narrow.  He said some members wish to see the scope before it is sent to the Board for approval.  Mr. Wisker stated that there is also some movement to better define the role of the CAC and formalize its proceedings. 

Reviewing the upcoming schedule, Manager Calkins said the IT Committee will meet at 4:30 on September 23 at St. Louis Park City Hall; the Building Task Force will take a tour of Markim Hall at Macalester College at 4 p.m. on September 15; the Rules Task Force will meet on September 24 if materials are ready for the discussion of Rule N.

Permit 09-164:  Three Rivers Park District

Mr. Steve Christopher appeared and summarized the District’s consideration of the application from the Three Rivers Park District for an erosion control project in Lake Minnetonka Regional Park.  He reminded the managers that the project entails routing of runoff from a trail system, driveway and parking area into a stormwater pipe placed in the ravine through which the runoff now flows.  He said the ravine would be filled to a depth of 10 to 12 feet. Mr. Christopher stated that the Board reviewed the project at two prior meetings and on each occasion determined to seek additional information prior to making a determination.  Mr. Christopher said that the project implicates District Rules B and G and that staff finds that the project meets the criteria of both rules, including the minimal impact criterion of Rule G.  Mr. Christopher said the increased runoff flow rates causing erosion at the site are due to earthworms having destroyed the duff and four recent rain events of 4.5 inches or greater.  Mr. Christopher stated that subsequent to the Board’s August 20 review of the project, Mr. Panzer and Managers Keeley, Calkins and Casale visited the site visit to review possible alternative solutions to the erosion problem.  The managers reported on their observations from the site visit. 

The managers discussed whether the project design meets the minimal impact criterion of Rule G.  The managers determined that the applicant has not demonstrated that site conditions preclude the removal of diseased and non-significant trees to allow plant growth necessary to address erosion problems through bioengineering.  The managers also found that the erosion could be addressed by controlling the flow of runoff at specific points in the area adjacent to the recreational path and from the asphalt flume that collects runoff from a parking area and roof tops, then armoring certain sections of the lower part of the ravine.  Manager Klingelhutz added that he had visited the site on his own and also felt that the proposal does not represent the minimal impact solution.  Manager Klingelhutz moved, seconded by Manager Casale, to deny the permit application.  

The managers discussed the applicant’s willingness and ability, if the motion on the floor is approved, to return to the District with another project design.  Mr. Erik Nelson, Three Rivers Park District, appeared and stated that the park district does plan to armor the washout area at the project site.  Manager Calkins stated that while the permit implicates only rules B and G, significant runoff-rate issues are presented by the conditions on the project site as well and he believes those must be addressed in the revision of District Rule N—Stormwater Management.  Manager Calkins asked if the District’s stated preference that natural watercourses not be piped is a basis for the Board to deny the permit.  Mr. Welch explained that while the Board has adopted a policy stating that first-order streams should not be enclosed in stormwater pipes and that policy is being incorporated into in the revision of Rule G, the Board must approve or deny the permit currently before it based on the application of the criteria in Rule B and G.  Upon vote, the motion carried.

Manager Klingelhutz moved, seconded by Manager Shekleton, to find that the Board of Managers denied the permit application based on the applicant’s failure to demonstrate that its proposal represented the minimal-impact solution to the erosion issues sought to be addressed.  Upon vote, the motion carried.

In response to a question from Mr. Christopher, the managers agreed unanimously that a permit application for any new project designed to address the erosion issues in this area should be brought before the Board for review.

Watershed Heroes Award Recipients

Manager Keeley presented the 2009 winners selected by the Awards Committee.

Excellence in Development: Stonehenge USA, One Deephaven;

Innovation in Government: City of Mound, Downtown Redevelopment;

Outstanding Partner: Leinenkugel’s, 2009 Minnehaha Creek Cleanup and Media Campaign, Chris Gotziaman;

Youth Naturalist: KICK – the Keep It Clean Kids from Gleason Lake Elementary;

Outstanding Contribution: Mary Nolte, Fulton Neighborhood Association;

Lifetime Stewardship: Gabriel Jabbour.

Manager Shekleton moved, seconded by Manager Blixt to approve Resolution 09-086, recognizing the Watershed Heroes Award recipients.   Upon vote, the motion carried.

Approval of City of St. Louis Park Local Water Management Plan

Mr. Kale presented the staff report on the City of St. Louis Park’s plan, noting that he had distributed a revised proposed resolution to the Board.  Mr. Kale stated that the city proposed to meet its phosphorus-reduction goal through continued application of 50 percent phosphorus-reduction policy applied city-wide.  Mr. Kale stated that while the city indicates that it has successfully regulated stormwater management via the policy, District counsel advises that a policy is not enforceable, and the revised resolution includes a condition that requires the city to commit in its Local Water Management Plan to pass an ordinance that would achieve the phosphorus reduction.  Mr. Kale explained that his discussions with city staff and its consultant indicate that in the city nondegredation plan currently under review by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the city proposes the 50 percent reduction.  When the plan is approved by the MPCA, the 50 percent reduction will integrated into the city’s stormwater pollution prevention plan and will thereby be enforceable.  However, Mr. Kale stated that the more direct assurance of phosphorus reduction comes from requiring the ordinance.  Nonetheless, he said, he is also comfortable with approval of the plan without the added condition.

Manager Blixt solicited the input of St. Louis Park staff with regard to the condition proposed by Mr. Kale.  Laura Adler, Engineering Program Coordinator appeared and stated that the city disfavors an ordinance, adding that it has addressed successfully stormwater phosphorus reductions through policy in the past and it strongly prefers to use the policy provision.  Mr. Evenson asked whether it would be prudent to allow the city two years or some time to complete the revision and adoption of its stormwater ordinance. 

Manager Shekleton raised the question of the timeline for the approval of the city’s plan.  Mr. Kale explained that the District already has taken an extension of the initial 60-day review period and therefore it is necessary for the District to act on the city plan.  In response to a question from Manager Blixt, Mr. Welch explained that while the city did not really have the opportunity to appeal the District’s local plan decision, it could return to the District and present a different means of meeting the phosphorus reduction requirement and seek approval of the new approach.

Manager Blixt moved, seconded by Manager Keeley, to approve Resolution 09-087, approving the City of St. Louis Park’s Local Water Management Plan on the condition that the plan commit the city to developing and adopting an ordinance implementing the city’s stormwater-management redevelopment policy within two years.

Meg McMonigal, the St. Louis Park Planning and Zoning Supervisor, appeared before the Board and stated that the city received a copy of the revised request for board action and resolution late in the day.  Ms. McMonigal stated that she is uncomfortable with the amount of time city staff has had to review the revised resolution. She added that the city has had great success achieving stormwater control through its policy, and the city wishes to see its plan approved.  Ms. McMonigal stated that the city plan counts on redevelopment at very small sites to achieve its stormwater reduction and that strict enforcement of an ordinance on such sites is very difficult.  The managers and staff discussed the option of an additional extension to the review period for the city plan.  Mr. Welch stated that the District’s options are to approve the plan, approve the plan with the conditions or deny the plan and send District and city staff back to work on the plan and bring it back to the Board at a time when the city is ready to do so. 

Manager Casale stated that the city is referencing in its memorandum attached to the request for Board Action a number of best management practices that it is performing and he suggested that the reductions achieved by those BMPs be identified so that the managers can rely on them for achieving phosphorus reduction goals stated in District plan.  Ms. McMonigal stated that she would prefer to have the plan approved with the condition as stated by Manager Blixt so that the city can work on how to address the condition with District staff rather than have the plan denied.   Upon vote, the motion carried. 

Manager Blixt moved, seconded by Manager Klingelhutz, to approve resolution 09-088, authorizing the president to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with the City of St. Louis Park stating the terms of the District’s approval of the city’s local water management plan.  Upon vote, the motion carried.

Upcoming Board Agendas and Priorities

Mr. Evenson presented a schedule of upcoming Board items and a list of discussion items raised by the Board in past meetings for prioritization by the managers for scheduling in 2010 and beyond.  Mr. Evenson pointed out that a number of items on the schedule are labeled as “consent agenda” items.  He noted that critical to the success of these is review, before the meeting, of the materials sent in the packet prior to the meeting.  He encouraged any manager to ask questions of staff in advance of a meeting so the item can remain on the consent agenda or to remove any item if he or she believes it needs full Board discussion. 

Manager Klingelhutz stated that in order for the Consent Agenda items to remain consent agenda items, the supporting materials or resolution cannot change at the last minute.  Mr. Evenson agreed and stated that any walk-on items or changes to items on the agenda will never be on the consent agent.  He added that informational items may not need discussion if Board members review the reports that will be provided in advance. 

Manager Keeley stated that she is concerned that the Board will lose momentum on its strategic planning efforts if, as scheduled, it does not meet with Mr. Brimeyer again until October.  The managers added a September 16 meeting to continue strategic planning.

Manager Calkins stated that the District has an approved budget and that as Board members review the list of agenda items and potential agenda items they should be mindful that there are ramifications to the budget if priorities are shifted.  Mr. Evenson noted that staff issue analyses often require significant effort and staff resources are shifted to respond to Board direction.   

At the conclusion of the discussion of agenda items and potential future agenda items, Manager Calkins noted that the District’s current Rule N looks only at rate control where it enters a waterbody or at the boundary of a particular applicant site.  He stated that the rulemaking process for Rule N should address the issue of rate control within a particular project site.

Manager Klingelhutz asked counsel to report back to the managers on the District’s ability to trade tangible assets for intangibles, such as the opportunity to educate.  The Managers agreed that counsel should conduct a limited review of the matter.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the meeting of the Board of Managers adjourned at 9:50 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Lee Keeley, Secretary