Wright County Board Minutes

August 16, 2005

The Wright County Board met in regular session at 9:00 A.M. with Heeter, Sawatzke, Mattson, Russek and Eichelberg present.

Russek moved to approve the minutes of 8-09-05, seconded by Heeter, carried 5-0.

Petitions were accepted to the Agenda as follows: Item For Consid. #4, “Leadership Summit Update” (Russek). Heeter moved to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0.

On a motion by Russek, second by Eichelberg, all voted to approve the Consent Agenda:

A. ADMINISTRATION

1. Performance Appraisals: B. Aanerud, P. DeBoer, G. Gooler, D. McCalla, C. Nelson, M. Palmquist, C. Turnquist, J. Uecker, Aud./Treas.; J. Joos, IT.

2. Claim, Frank Madden, $6,001.13.

3. Charitable Gambling Application, Form LG220, MN Ducks Unlimited, Rockford Twp. Hall (Rockford Twp.).

B. ASSESSOR

1. Approve Abatement, PID #101-071-006090, Robert & Melissa McDougald (City of Albertville).

C. SHERIFF

1. Authorize Signature On Contract With Reliance Telephone To Provide Inmate Phone Services.

Bob Hiivala, Auditor/Treasurer, submitted a plat for approval. On a motion by Russek, second by Sawatzke, all voted to approve a plat, “GEORGES WOODS,” as submitted by Roger A. & Lillian L. Georges, husband and wife, fee owner of the following property described in part as: The SE1/4 of the SE1/4 of Sec. 1, Twp. 118, Rge. 25, except the W 400 ft. of SE1/4 of SE1/4; and except plat of PARK VIEW ESTATES; and except the E 435 ft. of part of the SE1/4; and except part of the SE1/4 of the SE1/4 beg. at the SW corner; with all outstanding taxes, including green acre liability, if any, having been paid; the park dedication fee has been paid (#108199); Franklin Township has filed a written agreement to accept any new roads; and the title opinion provided by James E. Tiller, attorney, has been reviewed by Thomas C. Zins, Assistant County Attorney, who finds the plat to be ready for recording.

Hiivala requested approval to transfer the old Auditor/Treasurer tax books to the Historical Society. The books are currently located in the Courthouse storage area which is subject to heat and humidity. The Historical Society would provide climate controlled conditions and easier public access to records. Leander Wetter, Historical Society President, said the Historical Society voted to accept the records at their last meeting. Sawatzke moved to approve the transfer, seconded by Russek. Hiivala needs to assure the process will meet the County’s record retention requirements. The motion carried 5-0.

Hiivala acknowledged Donna Reddemann for her 20 years of service to Wright County (hired 12-19-84). Reddemann was unable to attend today’s meeting but will be retiring from her position in the Auditor/Treasurer Department. Hiivala said the County is losing a very experienced and knowledgeable employee. The Board extended thanks for Reddemann for her service.

On a motion by Russek, second by Heeter, all voted to approve the claims as listed in the abstract, subject to audit.

Tom Salkowski, Planning & Zoning Administrator, presented a mobile home application request from Robert & Beverly Stavrum for Elizabeth Herbst under the Frail, Elderly or Disabled Ordinance. Review by the Planning & Zoning Department shows that the sewer system on the property is adequate and there are no problems from a land use perspective. He recommended approval contingent upon the understanding that when the medical hardship need no longer exists, the mobile home must be removed within 60 days. A report was provided by Human Services reflecting the need. One comment was received from a neighboring property owner opposing the request. Heeter moved to approve the request for a mobile home by Robert & Beverly Stavrum for Elizabeth Herbst under the Frail, Elderly or Disabled Ordinance. The motion includes the stipulation that the mobile home must be removed when there is no longer the medical need for the family member. The motion was seconded by Eichelberg. Richard Norman, County Coordinator, said the Human Services Screening Committee performed their mobile home assessment and determined the request met the Ordinance guidelines. Salkowski said there is a sump plan and the mobile home will be placed behind the home and out of view. This was one of the concerns the opposing neighbor voiced. He requested the record reflect that Robert & Beverly Stavrum were present for today’s meeting and acknowledged the stipulation that the mobile home must be removed within 60 days after the medical need ceases. The motion carried 5-0.

Salkowski requested the Board accept the Findings and Recommendations of the Planning Commission for denial of the following rezoning and to authorize signature on the Notice & Order of Denial: Frank & Lisa Czanstkowski (Franklin Twp.). Planning Commission on a 4/2 vote recommend denial of the request to rezone 2 acres from AG General Agricultural to R-1 Urban-Rural Transitional. Russek said the Planning Commission took a site visit. Approval of the request would create problems with a shed and the sewer would not be compliant with the Ordinance. These were two of the main reasons for denial which are outlined in the Findings. Russek moved to accept the Findings and Recommendations of the Planning Commission for denial of the rezoning and to authorize signature on the Notice & Order of Denial. The motion was seconded by Heeter and carried 5-0.

A Committee Of The Whole Meeting was held on 8-08-05. Heeter moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Russek, carried 5-0:

GIS Division In IT Department. Copies were provided of correspondence from Swing and Jay Wittstock, former County Surveyor, on their recommendations on this issue (attached). Swing provided an overview of his request for placement of the GIS Division in the IT Department (attached). Cheri Nelson, Systems Analyst, is the primary GIS resource in the IT Department. Swing indicated that data integrity and maintenance is the responsibility of the Surveyor Department. The IT Department is responsible for needs assessment, system analysis and development, testing and modifications, training, ongoing system maintenance and support, and network infrastructure. Prior to his resignation, Wittstock created a job description for the GIS Specialist position. This description has been evaluated by HAY and approved. If this position were moved to the IT Department, the description would need to be rewritten. Swing felt the GIS Specialist position should be placed on hold until the decision is made on where GIS will be located. Swing suggested that the IT Department has the talent to move GIS forward. If the position description for the Project Leader were rewritten to include supervisory responsibilities, this would free up time for the Systems Analyst to address some of the GIS tasks. Where assistance is needed in the IT Department is with projects that are data intensive. Discussion led to the interview process for the County Surveyor. Swing and Fingalson expressed interest in participating in these interviews. Norman said their role would not involve scoring or rating of the candidates but to provide their recommendation. Swing polled some Minnesota counties and found that Chisago, Carver and Washington have GIS located in their IT Departments. Hennepin, Ramsey and St. Louis counties have interest. Swing serves as the only IT person on the Governor’s Council. The structure in many counties is for GIS to be held by the Surveyor or, in some cases, the Highway Department. Fingalson also polled counties on the issue and heard back from ten counties. A number of counties, including Washington, are looking at moving GIS from IT back to the Surveyor Department. Some advocate a separate department altogether. The response Fingalson has received back indicates counties favoring leaving GIS in the Surveyor Department. The main concern was accuracy. Recommendation: It was the consensus that the new Surveyor should be a part of discussions on this issue. Therefore, no action will be taken at this time. Interviews for the County Surveyor will occur on 8-17-05. Fingalson and Swing will participate in the interview process as previously outlined. Swing will provide to the Personnel Department interview questions relating to GIS. (End of Committee Of The Whole Minutes)

A Negotiation Committee Meeting was held on 8-10-05. Russek moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Eichelberg, carried 5-0:

HAY Job Evaluation Results. Recommendation: Authorize Norman to write to the Union business agents informing them of the position of the County in regards to the wage schedule for the Highway Design Technician, Contracts/Grants Manager, and clerical position in Information Technology. (End of Negotiation Minutes)

A Personnel Committee Meeting was held on 8-10-05. The following correction was made to the minutes: Page 1, paragraph 1, change from “Jeff Benn” to “Jeff Herr” (Heeter). Heeter moved to approve the minutes as corrected, seconded by Sawatzke, carried 5-0:

Legal Services, Annandale. Kelly has been in contact with Jeff Herr, Annandale Police Chief, regarding costs relating to the 2005 and 2006 contract for legal services. Kelly recommended an increase of 5% or a contract total of $35,300.00 for 2006 to cover wage and administration cost increases. This figure was used for calculating 2006 projected revenues for this service. With County approval, Benn will seek approval from the Annandale City Administrator and Council. Recommendation: Approve an increase of 5% in the 2006 contract for legal services with Annandale for a total contract rate of $35,300.00.

Pre-Paying Conference Expenses. (Human Services Board Item)

(End of Personnel Minutes)

A Ways & Means Committee Meeting was held on 8-10-05. The following correction was made to the minutes: Item II, change from “Stanley Eddy Park Lane Purchase” to “Stanley Eddy Park Land Purchase”. Sawatzke moved to approve the minutes and recommendations, seconded by Heeter, carried 5-0:

Coroner Contract Proposal. In correspondence dated 7-18-05, Dr. Amatuzio

outlined a significant increase to the three year contract due to County growth (attached). Smaller counties are paying $2.25/capita, not including transportation. With the 2005 population at 110,000, Wright County’s cost would be $1.34/capita. The following was proposed by Amatuzio, reflecting a 43% overall increase:

Year, Projected Population; Annual Budget; Percent Increase

2006, 113,735; $201,766; 36.8%

2007, 117,470; $208,391; 3.3%

2008, 121,205; $215,177; 3.3%

Amatuzio said Wright and Anoka Counties are similar, as they are both bordering the metro area and are similar in types of death. Anoka’s cost is $1.77/capita. The Coroner’s Office has lost $10,000-$15,000/year for the past five years servicing Wright County. Amatuzio spoke highly of their relationship with the Wright County Attorney and Sheriff Departments. Recommendation: Authorize a four-year contract with the Wright County Corner’s Office reflecting a 10% increase per year. This recommendation was agreed upon by Dr. Amatuzio. Cooper will forward a revised contract to Norman.

Stanley Eddy Park Land Purchase. The Committee reviewed a handout reflecting plat/park dedication funds, County-wide funds, and expenditures related to potential purchases of land by Ney Park and Stanley Eddy Park (attached). The County can utilize 25% of plat/park dedication funds for land acquisition. There is $164,655.75 available at this time. The County currently has a purchase agreement for the land at Stanley Eddy Park. The purchase agreement was contingent upon receipt of grant funding, which the County was not awarded. If the County is not interested in purchasing the property, the landowner would like to pursue other avenues. Funding sources for the purchase were discussed. It was felt that the Park Dedication Fund should be utilized for the land purchase near Ney Park. The Capital Account will possibly fund the construction of the Highway Department shop in Albertville. Norman said the Auditor anticipates Wright County will receive more State Aid than budgeted. Recommendation: Acquire the 34.75 acres at a cost of $180,099.00 with funding from the General Fund due to additional State Aid that is anticipated. The recommendation comes with the understanding that the General Fund will be replenished through reserves at the end of the year. (End of Ways & Means Minutes)

Correspondence was received from the Metropolitan Council inviting participation in a Regional Policy Conference, “The Developing Edge: Managing the Transitions” on 9-07-05 at the U of M St. Paul Campus. The only cost to the County would be transportation and parking. Russek moved to authorize attendance, seconded by Heeter. The motion carried 5-0.

Russek moved to adopt Resolution #05-45, approving final acceptance for Contract 0107 with Duininck Bros., Inc. and to authorize final payment of $86,583.75. The motion was seconded by Eichelberg and carried 5-0 on a roll call vote.

Russek provided an update on the recent Leadership Summit he and Eichelberg recently attended. Valuable information was presented on leadership skills. A tour was taken of the Schwan’s Plant, which is the second largest Minnesota based business. This was provided as an informational item.

Marc Mattice, Parks Administrator, brought forth discussion on the potential of the County taking possession of the old Marysville Town Hall. A resident of Marysville Township contacted both Mattice and Mattson on the possibility of utilizing the building for an art gallery. Mattice and Richard Marquette, Highway Department, researched records. Copies provided included a 1973 park deed where Wright County accepted the Marysville Township Hall site and a court ordered description of what was accepted. When the bridge was built in 1992, it was discovered that the court ordered turnover description was in error. The County met with the Town Board and agreed to swap deeds. A second deed was filed at the same time saying all right, title and interest of said real property shall revert to the County of Wright in the event the site is no longer used for a town hall. That was the agreement at that time that it would revert back to the County. This involves .216 acres and the County did retain 45 feet of highway easement. A conveyance document from the Township to the County would be required. Mattson thought that last time the vacated hall was used was in 2000. The County currently mows the site. Discussion followed on future use of the building and whether it should be torn down or preserved as a historical site, insurance, maintenance, and possible non-profit use. It was the consensus that Mattice should attend the next Marysville Township Board Meeting to discuss the conveyance with them. It was suggested that a representative from the Historical Society also attend. A Committee Of The Whole Meeting would be set thereafter to discuss this issue.

On a motion by Heeter, second by Eichelberg, all voted to refer the following item to the next Transportation Committee Of The Whole, “Refer Funding Discussion For Proposed Trail Along CSAH 17.”

Dave Lindberg, US Fish & Wildlife Service, said Wright County will receive the National Land Protection Award for their cooperation and effort in assisting with the purchase of 290 acres near Pelican Lake. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service actually purchased the property. Lindberg nominated Wright County for the award, which is given to a private citizen, group, organization, corporation or public agency and their employees or volunteers. The award will be presented as part of the National Land Conference Rally in Madison, Wisconsin on October 15th (7:30-9:30 P.M.). The Fish & Wildlife Service will pay for motel and transportation costs for two Wright County representatives to attend and accept the award. Sawatzke said he desired to attend. Lindberg was thanked for nominating Wright County and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service was commended for their efforts to preserve the 290 acres of waterfowl land. On a motion by Russek, second by Sawatzke, all voted to authorize two representatives from Wright County to attend and accept the award on behalf of the County.

Brian Asleson, Chief Deputy Attorney, said that last year the County started working on acquiring ROW for the Bernings Mill Bridge. In June, 2004, a resolution was passed authorizing the commencement of a condemnation case to acquire the necessary ROW, affecting two landowners. Through negotiations, the area included was changed and, on July 5, 2005, the Board approved a ROW plat reflecting these changes. On May 17, 2005, the Board approved of the stipulation having to do with property owned by James and Joanne Chouinard. The stipulation being presented today for approval changes the extent of the acquisition on property owned by Jeremy and Charlene Zachman. Eichelberg moved to authorize signatures on the stipulation, seconded by Russek. It was noted that the land involved was approximately an acre and most of it slopes to the Crow River. Asleson said the landowner did not sign off on the first offer presented and was represented by legal counsel. They came up with suggestions that, in the end, resulted in a better way of handling things. The motion carried 5-0.

A Public Hearing was held relating to a petition from the City of Monticello to outlet into County Ditch 33. Asleson said that in 2003, the County received the petition to outlet storm water from Carlisle Village Development into the ditch. The area the development is being built upon has always drained into Ditch 33 but is not among the assessed and benefitted acreage on the ditch. In 2003, a public hearing was held and the matter was tabled. Since then, a portion of the development has been built. The storm water from a portion of the area is being directed into the City’s system. Storm water from another portion of the development is pumped across a dike and into the City’s system. The City has now sent in another petition to do the same thing that was proposed a couple of years ago. The City has since completed a comprehensive study of the Ditch 33 watershed which was presented to the County Board earlier this year. The requirements of today’s Public Hearing included publishing notice in the newspaper for three weeks and mailed notice to the assessed and benefitted landowners on the ditch. The purpose of the Hearing would be to explain the City’s proposal and take public comment.

Phil Elkin, WSB & Associates (representing the City of Monticello) referenced correspondence dated 6-24-05 relating to the petition along with a map reflecting the sub-watershed boundaries of Ditch 33. He referenced their efforts to provide storm water service to the development. Due to the condition of Ditch 33 and the development in the area, the City constructed their own outlet to the Mississippi River (reflected as the blue crosshatched area on the map). This area was formally serviced by Ditch 33 and is now serviced by the City’s storm water pipe. Elkin said the front pump in the Carlisle Village Development is too low to be gravity fed into the City’s storm water system. There are approximately 30 acres that the City would like to continue to drain to Ditch 33. Ponds have been built to reduce the rate or speed at which water enters the watershed and the acreage draining to that location of the Ditch has been reduced. This is what they based their argument on to request drainage to the Ditch. The alternative would be to pump water back to the City’s system. The City’s Engineer did not want to go that route due to various reasons. The City also received another proposal for development of land which would provide a new outlet to the Mississippi River. With the proposed wetland, the water will not move to the river as fast as what the pipe carried it. During the process, they began focusing their efforts on this new outlet. Their plan was to use monies collected from Carlisle Village toward the sump pump. The study of Ditch 33 was completed and it reflects 10 different sub-watershed districts. Elkin said they now have a better understanding of the area. The plan will be consulted when addressing future development’s water management as it relates to Ditch 33.

Elkin provided an overview of the map and the various districts. He noted that some tile systems feed into the system from the Ditch. Where the pipe converts to an open ditch, the tile is broken. There are two main pipe systems or tile systems which feed into the Ditch and are marked Area A and B. Area A reflects a 72” culvert under I-94 and Area B is a pipe that was recently replaced by the SWCD. In a report reflecting the results of a Mn/DOT test track, they measured the water coming through the pipe at location B. This was previously a 21” drain tile pipe that was severely clogged and broken. This pipe released at 3.6cfs. If all the sub-watersheds going to pipe B released at 3.6cfs, with a 4” rain it would take 30 days for all of the water to reach Branch 2. He said this shows how poorly the system was draining. The new pipe is an 18” pipe and delivers 18-22cfs (replaced 1.5 to 2 years ago). Sawatzke questioned the pipe size and a person in the audience felt it was a 22” pipe.

Area B drains sub-watersheds 1-8 and Area A drains sub-watersheds 10 and 10A. This is the critical point Elkin wanted to make as it relates to Carlisle Village, that it goes to a separate system than the remainder of the watershed. The flow in that system does not impact the flow coming out of Pipe B. What they determined from the study is that they want to size a new outlet with a 48” pipe and keep the existing culvert system open for two reasons. The first is for the emergency overflow for the site. There is a 30’ elevation difference from the hill to the low point. The second is because of the open ditch and many view this as an amenity. They prefer to lower the water flow for this purpose and also use it as a backup for emergency purposes. The green area on the map was identified. With the development of the area, they would take 50 acres that was previously ag and provide wetland restoration. This will assist with cleaning the water going to the Mississippi River. With regard to the outlet, they want to come up with a mechanism on how future development ties to the Ditch 33 system. Right now, the cost of the pipe that is proposed for the development and the oversize will be paid by the City and the Carlisle Development. The additional money would be assessed as development occurs. This would not be assessed to existing homeowners on the ditch. The plan would include wetland restoration and restrictions on water flow. This would be a system that the City could control or manage storm water runoff without affecting the existing inflow from the ditch. Their goal is to maintain the existing level of service and to also provide service for future development. Any future developments would need to be coordinated with the City so it would not impede the City’s system.

Elkin said most people are concerned with the impact that ponding will have and reducing the flow. Currently, the bottom of the pipe draining from the green area on the map is at an elevation of 919. The lowest part of the pipe installed by the SWCD is at 927.95. That represents an 8’ drop between the invert and the new pipe. He said the wetland restoration would not back up water in the rest of the watershed.

Sawatzke questioned the funding designated for the new lift station or for a new outlet. Elkin responded that this would be $160,000. Bret Weiss, WSB, said the proposed pipe project would be scheduled for 2006 construction. Sawatzke said if the County authorized movement of water to that area, today there is no new pipe to the river. In the wetland area north of A&B, water will pond. It may not impact many of the homeowners on the ditch, but there are some property owners (including the developers) who could be affected. Some of the water encroaches into this area and becomes threatening. Elkin said they would look at creating a berm to the southwest. Easements would have to be obtained from the property owners in the wetland area. He referenced the map and the road, saying that a road would go in at the point where the existing ditch becomes an open culvert system. He said they would create a berm so ponding was against the road and not the property. There would either be a control structure or manhole which would restrict the water flow through that area.

Sawatzke inquired whether the developer owns the triangular piece of property or whether it is owned by the residential development that currently exists. Brad Paumen, Paumen properties, said he owns the 8 acre parcel with Mark Woolston. This is part of an outlot of Riverside Acres. They anticipated the installation of the pipe to the Mississippi yet this year. He proposed that as long as they have the equipment out there, that the entrance for the inlet be repaired (broken pipe and debris). He anticipated it running at 50% capacity. The pipe they plan to install would be 48”. There is currently either a 24” or 30” pipe. With the new pipe, he estimated the water would flow at three times the current capacity. Currently, the water backs up and the vegetation dies. They would like to enhance the area with regulating the open water. Sawatzke asked what the City or developer would be doing to prevent children from dangers associated with water. Right now, it is not a problem but would be with development. Elkin said the final outlet will not have an exposed pipe. Sawatzke referenced the current ditch that is an open ditch. Weiss said they would review this and make sure that portion is safe.

Russek inquired whether they felt the system could handle the flow with the reduction in the size of pipe from 72” to 48”. Elkin said he was unsure why a 72” pipe was used under I-94. Only areas 10 and 10A drain through this pipe. Mn/DOT installed that pipe and he was not sure what hydrology plan it was based upon. The pipe rarely gets to half full. Weiss said Mn/DOT does use larger pipes to assure the freeway system is not flooded and it could also be a cattle or sheep crossing. The outlet design incorporates a large area for ponding. The water is metered out at a preset rate and that is why a 48” pipe can be used. They do not want all of the water to enter the river at once. Russek said he has seen holding ponds fail with large rains. Weiss said they have them designed to accommodate this. The emergency outlet can be used as an overflow.

Elkin said there is no culvert crossing in the area, the only connection is a tile line. That is how it reaches the low area. There is currently enough storage in that area to manage the water. Weiss said it will flow across the road in extreme events. With the improvement, the road would be improved and there would be a culvert connection.

Russek referenced the berm at the lower end of the pond to control the water and asked what was behind the berm. The maps were referenced. Elkin said they will model an event that has a 1% chance in a year. They will establish basement elevations so they will not be flooded. On the other side of the ditch, all of the back yards drain to the ditch and then to the river.

Rick Pettis, 8856 Hamilton Ave., Monticello Twp. referenced water flow on the maps and said that water ends up in his yard and also in his neighbors yards. He knew patchwork repair had been completed on the drain tile. He referenced wet fields and mosquito problems. They were informed that they would not be impacted by the development in 2003 (area between Haug and 95th). The area is 1/3 developed and now there is a request to develop more. He asked how much more water the development would ask to drain to Ditch 33 before their project is completed. Pettis said when the City annexed Township area, they annexed the entire portion with the exception of the Hamilton area. He said there are 20-24 homes that are being affected by the water runoff. This problem was supposedly going to be fixed by repair of Ditch 33. Pettis requested that the City annex the Hamilton area, repair Ditch 33 south to the Mississippi, and spray for mosquitoes.

Ron Rosenberg also has water problems at his residence. He is forced to move out of his home various times of the year when flooding occurs. He asked whether the developer was prepared to purchase his home or continue to pump water. Rosenberg referenced the property across from his and said that has never dried out. He wondered how the area could handle more water.

Weiss responded that they have the ability to put in a lift station in Carlisle Village which would pump the water to the City’s system or Ditch 33. What the City would prefer would be to work with the developers on a new 48” outlet to the river to provide a future opportunity to repair Ditch 33. He said water from Carlisle Village will not affect the properties in the Hamilton area. Those homes are 8’ higher than the area which will be used for ponding. Weiss said the City’s water was not impacting these properties, nor was water from the Carlisle Village or Sunset Ponds (new development). Water problems in the Hamilton area would be separate from the proposal being discussed today. With regard to the Hamilton area being annexed by the City, he said those homeowners could petition the City. At the time of annexation, the Township did not want to annex the properties in that area so they were negotiated out of the agreement between the City and Township. He said he was not sure that the City was at fault for the mosquito problem. Sawatzke said the land did not get annexed into the City because those living in the Township did not want it. It was not the Township that requested this but the residents.

Sawatzke referenced the problems at the Rosenberg and Pettis residences. He has seen the problems first hand and hoped they could come to a solution that would accommodate everyone. Sawatzke felt the City’s request was three years late, that they should have been talking about outlets and funding prior to the development being 2/3 complete. Now the County is in a reactionary position. Sawatzke said after review of the watershed study, he had been convinced that the request would have no impact on those properties. Pettis felt this was a band-aid approach. Sawatzke said he understood their concerns, but this is a proposed solution to potentially make things better and not make them worse.

Pettis said the discussion in 2003 included repair of the ditch at an estimated $2 million (from south of I-94 to the river). Today, the cost being discussed is $160,000. The response is that $160,000 would be from this development. Paumen indicated their share was $750,000.

Randy Benoit, Monticello Farm Estates, lives by Area 7 on the map. In the past 10 years, he has lost a lot of property from water. There has been much discussion with regard to drainage on the north side of I-94 but not any for properties located farther back. Several years ago, 4-5 inches of rain fell preventing many residents from gaining access to their homes. Benoit said they have not addressed drainage behind the ditch. There are trees in the ditch blocking water. He referenced the Carlisle Village development and the pesticides from lawns that will end up in the water in the ditch and ultimately the river.

Russek said the purpose of review today is addressing areas lower on the ditch system. Concerns upstream would be another issue. The purpose is whether to allow Carlisle Village to discharge into the ditch further down. Benoit felt the proposal would cause other problems. Sawatzke said the engineering will have to be verified. Based upon the information presented, the water would run around the ditch and be 8’ lower than Rosenberg’s property. Sawatzke was concerned several months ago with the same issue but now feels water will not affect Benoit’s property. Substantial improvements have been made north of the freeway. Kerry Saxton from the SWCD has been out there trying to establish a pathway from 83rd Street to a pond closer to the freeway. They will work with property owners on this. The other alternative would be to run a tile along the current path but that would create problems for some property owners who have built upon this area. Benoit questioned whose responsibility it was to clean the trees and debris in the ditch. He said property owners were assessed for the culvert and it has not helped. Sawatzke did not agree with this.

Jim Beutler owns a field in Area B. He referenced the map and the ditch. He will not provide an easement as he stands to lose 7.2 acres with no compensation. He referenced the ditch and said it was full and the area is wet.

Mary Reed, 8250 Jason Ave. NE, lives across from Randy Benoit. She agreed with his statement that repairs done to the ditch did not have any effect on their properties. Her property floods on the east side each spring. If the development is allowed to drain to the ditch, she questioned whether they will place a strip of catch vegetation between the ditch and the Carlisle Village properties as is proposed by HF 1019. Elkin stated the drainage pattern for the development goes from the homes to the storm water treatment ponds. Reed has seen the ponds and they do not have vegetation. Elkin said they were just created last year so vegetation has not been established. The water flows from the ponds into the wetland area, under the culvert under Hwy. 18, and then into a larger wetland. The water quality issues have been addressed through MPCA rules and to best management practices for both wetlands and discharges to natural waterways. Sawatzke said Reed makes a good point with regard to erosion. The County is looking at implementing something County-wide.

Mark Berning farms property in Section 1. Two years ago, he cleaned out his portion of the ditch. Vegetation was put in to prevent it filling back in. He thought there was a problem with Area B. He hoped the improvements would help the outlet as there are many problems along the ditch. He hoped that parts of Sections 4 and 6 will flow through Area A down the road if they are looking at future development. His main concern was with the 48” culvert. He had a hard time believing that 48” would take care of the entire part of Ditch 33. He would like to see the City clean out the bottom part of Ditch 33 if they are taking that responsibility. He referenced the 100 year flood. He felt the engineers should look at a 500 year flood. Berning said he has seen rainfall events occur in Otsego in the 1980’s and in St. Michael a couple of years ago. Unless the engineers have figured wrong, he has seen many homes flooded.

Elkin said the ditch area was established in 1917 and was not planned or designed for an urban storm water system. It was designed for draining low areas in ag areas. There has not been a time when the ditch has been entirely maintained and repairs have been completed piecemeal. What the City would like to do is create a reliable storm water system. He said nothing on Ditch 33, whether sections 1, 2, 3 or 8, will improve until there is a new outlet, plans for land use conversions, and plans on how to drain areas on the outskirts. They are building the framework for a system that can be relied upon for both now and the future.

Paumen referenced comments on the Buetler property and said miscommunication had occurred. He had previous contact with the Buetlers on the 48” pipe and assumed that they were in agreement with the flow easement. The flow easement was set at the wetland mark. In recent contacts made, he learned a quit claim deed was involved. He would contact the Buetlers to work this out. The new outlet would provide three times the capacity and with the existing line, the estimated flow at four times the capacity.

Kurt Deter is retained by the County Board to address drainage issues. He is an Attorney in St.Cloud. He said that although the ditch is named “County Ditch 33,” it is not owned by the County. Any repairs required are requested by the benefitted landowners and are assessed to them. Deter referenced M.S. 103 and said the Board follows rules under this statute. He said the Board needs to consider whether to allow outletting to the Ditch. Deter referenced Subdivision 4 (second page) and said that is the part the Board must address 08-16-05 today (they must hear the evidence). The drainage authority may authorize the municipality to use the drainage system as an outlet subject to the conditions that are necessary and proper to protect the rights of the parties and safeguard the interests of the general public. He said it would be possible for the Board to authorize the outlet and set condition. This is a Board policy decision and the subdivision lists what the Board should consider. The issue today is whether the Carlisle Village should be allowed to outlet under these conditions. He understood that if water flows through an area that is not assessed, it cannot outlet into the system. The Board would need to decide whether to assess or to have the water pumped. They may set the condition that an outlet be installed. He referenced discussion on wetland area or impoundment within the Ditch 33 system. That would have to go through a statutory hearing per M.S. 103E.227. If an impoundment were created within a county ditch system, there is a procedure to make sure there are necessary flow easements. That would be separate from today’s hearing. There are steps to follow dependent on what is being requested and statutory framework to follow. The purpose was to decide under those requirements whether to bring the development into the assessed area or whether it made more sense to have the money go toward a future outlet or a pump going the other way. If they did authorize an outlet, they would need to determine an outlet fee. If Carlisle Village would become part of the assessed area, they would pay their share like the other assessed landowners. Whatever order they would decide, it would need to conform with 811 and they could set conditions. If an outlet was authorized, the second step would be to address the assessment and outlet fees.

Sawatzke asked whether the 60-day rule would apply to this sort of request. Deter had never had this issue raised in his 25 years of experience. He did not believe it would apply but felt it would be safer to say it would. He did not feel the 60 days would allow them to get into a drainage system. It was a good point and they would need to look into those factors.

Weiss said they need to do something with the Carlisle Village, either to build a lift station or open the outlet so it can discharge downstream. They have the funds in place to build the system. They wanted to know how the Board wanted to proceed on this. With regard to the new development area owned by Paumen, Weiss said Paumen has been paying assessments on Ditch 33 and has the right to develop the land. Paumen would not need to install as large of an outlet. However, the City and Paumen were doing so to allow repairs to the ditch. If they were not allowed to discharge into the ditch, they would probably not put as large of an outlet in but rather would only install what was needed for the development. He said they need to move forward for approval for a lift station or toward a more permanent solution. Eichelberg asked whether future developments would be assessed a fee to connect to the system. Weiss said if requests came from those that supported improvements just to reclaim their land, the City would not request payment. If there is a request for expansion of a development, services would be obtained through the City and a trunk fee would be assessed. If the County approves of the request, they would not ask for payment from any downstream landowners. A fee would only be assessed with a new development or commercial area. He said the existing City Council has indicated they may be willing to fund some improvements. Anything outside of the City could not be funded by the City.

Dee Lasham questioned whether a vote of 2/3 of the benefitted landowners was required to move forward with the request. Deter responded that this would not be the case with a County ditch. The County Board is the drainage authority on county ditches. There is not a 2/3 vote requirement in ditch law. If people are having problems and want to petition for a new outlet to Ditch 33, those landowners pay associated costs. The County cannot expend money for Ditch 33 per statutes.

Asleson asked the Board whether they want to refer the issue back to staff to develop a recommendation for future consideration. They could meet with the City on such things as the outlet fee, the future Paumen development, and the possibility of transferring a portion of the ditch to the City. Sawatzke said he was not ready to make a decision today as he wanted more of an opportunity for landowners to make additional comments by mail or phone. He saw the potential for a win/win situation. Weiss suggested the City could host an informational meeting with residents.

Russek moved to continue the Public Hearing to 9-06-05 at 9:45A.M, seconded by Sawatzke. Sawatzke said with regard to the Board making a decision that day, he did not feel they should feel pressured to do so. He said the City should have been making the request two years ago. The application at that time did not meet the requirements and the City has waited a long time to get to this point. The motion carried 5-0.

The meeting recessed at 11:36 A.M. to a Closed Session to discuss the St. Francis Catholic School property. The Board reconvened the Regular Session at 12:03 P.M. There being no additional Agenda items Commissioner Mattson, Board Chair, adjourned the meeting.

Bills Approved

A-1 Marine. $901.02

Accurate USA 272.50

Albion Township 1,207.90

Ameripride Linen/Apparel 607.67

Ancom Technical Center 2,522.28

Pennie Anderson 125.00

City Annandale 1,151.80

Aramark Correctional Serv. 4,986.30

Kirk Asplin Oil Co. Inc. 183.77

Assn. of Minnesota Counties 350.00

Auto Glass Center Inc. 762.14

Auto. Garage Door/Fireplace 1,010.00

B & B Products-Rigs/Squa 6,783.10

B & D Plumbiing/Heating 172.00

BLM Technologies Inc. 1,836.06

Boyer Truck Parts 283.82

BP Amoco 1,021.33

Buffalo Bituminous 1,833.57

Buffalo Township 846.00

City Buffalo 3,577.71

CDW Government Inc. 684.79

Center Point Energy 2,239.85

James Chouinard 293,029.81

Clearwater Township 1,099.30

Cliimate Air 10,819.47

Cokato Township 561.76

City Cokato 1049.10

Collier 2Way Inc. 489.50

Comm. of Transportation 5,082.14

Concept Seating Inc. 755.00

Crow River Tools 188.35

Cub Pharmacy 1,611.82

Culligan of Buffalo 163.66

City Delano 5,343.70

Dental Care Assoc. of Buff 411.00

Diamond Mowers Inc. 245.02

Duininck Bros. Inc. 86,583.75

E-Z Flush 522.60

EMEDCO 514.68

Excel Systems LLC 19,413.61

Farm-Rite Equipment Inc. 133.13

Maria Felger-Ramos 110.25

First State Tire Recycling 1,266.91

Franklin Township 3,314.20

French Lake Township 1,192.00

Frontier Precision Inc. 198.89

Raymond Glunz 200.00

Gopher State One Call 163.85

Greenview Inc. 13,285.67

H & H Sport Shop Inc. 168.00

Hance Utility Services Inc. 515.83

City Hanover 1,672.30

Hay Group 1,568.00

Denny Hecker’s Monti Ford 1,358.16

Karla Heeter 224.58

Patty Henderson 127.17

Henn. Co. Treasurer (ACF 1,320.00

Hewlett Packard 1,616.78

Hillyard Floor Care Supply 257.90

Holiday 8,300.24

City Howard Lake 1,402.00

Intereum 637.40

J Craft Div. of Crysteel Mfg. 223,657.47

Klatt True Value Electric 102.68

Kramers Hardware 142.95

Kris Engineering Inc. 4,567.18

Lake Region Coop Oil 357.39

Lawson Products Inc. 666.69

Michael Lindquist 500.92

LPG & NH3 Supply Inc. 119.28

M & E Engineering Inc. 1,242.15

M-R Sign Company Inc. 1,176.06

A. J. Machinery Co. Inc. 146.92

Ninoska Mancebo-Meyer 200.00

Maple Lake Township 1,602.40

City Maple Lake 617.00

Marco Business Products 1,030.70

Marks Standard Parts 1,447.15

Martin-McAllisters Cons. 350.00

Marysville Township 1,548.40

The Metro Group Inc. 4,246.37

Minnesota Copy Systems 391.71

Mitchell 1 447.30

MN County Attorneys Assn. 124.46

Nextel Communications 1,699.77

Northern Safety Tech 346.90

Office Depot 997.14

Omann Brothers Inc. 40,691.28

Pannier 2,147.00

Pats 66 157.76

Lynn Peavey Company 400.00

Performance Office Papers 226.42

Photo I 1099.72

Precision Prints of Wright Co. 134.93

Prosource One 1,726.42

Quinlan Publishing Co. 309.77

Qwest 852.75

Ranger Joes 109.90

Reeds Auto Electric 241.32

Reds Cafe 288.88

City Rockford 2,449.00

Royal Tire Inc 2,343.00

Jack Russek 124.34

Russell Security Resource 122.50

Ryan Motors Inc. 930.89

SBC Paging 534.87

Sherwin Williams 211.72

City South Haven 337.80

Southside Township 1,089.40

Specialty Turf & Ag 224.72

SRF Cons. Group Inc. 3,241.83

City St. Michael 5,048.40

State of MN Intertech Grp. 965.00

State of MN-Info Tech Div 226.99

Tires Plus 435.27

Total Printing 1,316.72

United Locating Services 120.00

University of Minnesota 8,293.00

Verizon 930.38

Victor Township 974.20

Viking Coca Cola Bottling Co. 192.00

Waste Management TC W 429.39

City Waverly 429.00

Woodland Township 408.41

Wright Co. Auditor-Treas. 150.00

Wright Co. Highway Dept. 338.77

Wright Co. Journal Press 301.60

Wright-Hennepin Electric 3,265.94

Zack’s Inc. 809.13

Zarnoth Brush Works Inc. 1,035.18

Ziegler Inc. 1,106.82

41 Payments less than $100 2,356.67

Final total $837,134.22