Thirty Lakes Watershed District
Board of Manager Meeting
February 8, 2010

Board Present:  G. Hardy and K. Svee.  Absent:  M. Young.

Staff Present:  T. Lauer and M. Peisch

Also Present:  Adam Ripple of Rinke Noonan Law Firm, Dan Steward from BWSR, Jennifer Stockinger of the Brainerd Dispatch, Rick Johnson of the Advisory Committee and County Commissioner Rosemary Franzen.

The meeting was called to order at 9:00 am by President K. Svee in the office of the Thirty Lakes Watershed District, 17064 Commercial Park Road, Brainerd, MN.  K. Svee led the Pledge of Allegiance. 

Open Forum:  Rick Johnson read the following portion of the December 8, 2008 minutes:
MOTION BY SVEE/YUND THAT A COMMITTEE CONSISTING OF THE PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY OF THE BOARD OF MANAGERS AND THE ADMINISTRATOR (A COMMITTEE OF THREE) CONDUCT INTERVIEWS OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND THAT A REPORT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS BE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF MANAGERS BY THE SECOND MEETING IN JUNE OF 2009.  ALL AYE, MOTION CARRIED. 

Because the Committee did not make recommendations at the June 2009 meeting, R. Johnson suggested that activities of the Committee be considered null and void.

K. Svee stated that at this time there is no Advisory Committee, since it has not been named on an annual basis.  R. Johnson stated that there is no Personnel Committee because the time has passed and the task they were charged with doesn’t exist anymore.  K. Svee pointed out that at the last meeting G. Hardy made a motion to table selection of the Advisory Committee until the February meeting so he and M. Young could interview the candidates.  G. Hardy said that had to do with the Advisory Board and had nothing to do with this Committee, and that what R. Johnson was referring to is the Personnel Committee.  K. Svee thanked R. Johnson for his input.

Consent Agenda:  Including the approval of the Agenda, the minutes of the 1/11/10 minutes, Treasurer’s report and the Accounts Payable.

MOTION BY HARDY/SVEE THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE APPROVED.  ALL AYE, MOTION CARRIED.

Office Relocation:  Tabled to February meeting.
G. Hardy reported that he did call and the landlord has not gotten back to him, and for that reason the matter should be tabled to the March meeting because with only two Managers present, M. Young and the two new managers should be involved in the decision.

Adam Ripple of Rinke Noonan encouraged the managers to review the lease since it is due to begin on April 1, 2010.  He stated that tabling the issue was not a problem, but something would have to be done at the March meeting.  He said that in order for the relocation to be in effect, a three step process is required.  The Public Hearing of January was step 2, and adopting a final order is step 3.

G. Hardy asked if the signing of the lease was a legal action before it came back to the Board.  Adam Ripple said yes.  The October 12, 2009 Resolution provided enough direction for the Chairperson to sign the lease, and it was not inappropriate to sign the lease.

MOTION BY HARDY/SVEE TO TABLE OFFICE RELOCATION TO THE MARCH MEETING.  ALL AYE, MOTION CARRIED.

M. Peisch stated that in reviewing past leases signed by the Watershed District, none of them included a 90 termination clause for the tenant.  G. Hardy asked if Thirty Lakes had a lease when they met at the Courthouse, M. Peisch said there was no lease in the file.  G. Hardy recalled that Bruce Yund had been upset when Thirty Lakes was asked to leave the Courthouse, so there must have been a provision in the lease that they could ask you to leave.

K. Svee stated that he had never been asked by the County to come to the Courthouse.  G. Hardy asked if K. Svee had talked to Mr. Pence at Planning & Zoning.  K. Svee said that he had. G. Hardy stated that people would have to go to Planning & Zoning before they would come to the Watershed for a permit, and we could be next door.  G. Hardy spoke to him after the January meeting because there are some things that we have been doing with Engineers that we should be working together with the County.  Mr. Pence expressed that he would like to have Thirty Lakes next door to them because if they give a guy a permit, they say step right over here you need a permit from these folks.  K. Svee stated that to move to
February 8, 2010
Page 3

the County is not permitted by the State Law.  G. Hardy said the current office is not in the District.  K. Svee said the present location is closer to the District as required by law.    

Adam Ripple had serious concerns about not moving within the District.  The State law requires that the District office be in the District, even though presently the office is not.  The Board has recognized that the provision is in State Law, and if there is a decision to continue to stay outside the District, Thirty Lakes would be in a difficult position to argue that the Board has acted in good faith.  G. Hardy asked about spending twice the amount of money to be in the District, as the Managers are responsible to their constituents.  K. Svee suggested that we make the move, then form a Committee to get the law changed to allow us to move to the County Building.  G. Hardy stated that some day we may find a place that we can buy that Thirty Lakes could own cheaper than rent, and in going forward we will investigate that.

Adam Ripple stated that the Board members have protection called Official Immunity for actions that you take as a Board.  However, if it can be shown that any of the members knowingly disregarded the law, there is potential that you are individually responsible for those actions.  If the Managers decide to stay outside the District, it’s kind of like jumping in the stock pot and turning the gas on.  If somebody were to sue the Managers, there would be potential risk there, and the Managers should be aware of that.  G. Hardy asked if there was liability at the current location. Adam Ripple said yes, to continue to stay outside of the District when the State Law requires the office be in the District.  G. Hardy asked if the liability would land on the current managers or to the ones who decided to locate here to begin with.  Adam Ripple stated that he was not sure how that would work.  He went on to say that the Managers will have coverage through the Thirty Lakes insurance policy if anyone were to decide to sue on that, but that’s a risk that the Board should be aware of.

Dan Steward of BWSR asked if the Board had considered a middle route.  St. Paul BWSR looked at this Statute and their interpretation was that the main work of the Board is done at Board meetings.  He suggested that if the Board meetings were located in a place within the District, staff could work at another location.  BWSR believed that the business of the Board was conducted at the meetings and this should be within the District.  Adam Ripple said that the law does not define Principal Place of Business.

2010 Advisory Committee Appointments:  Tabled to February meeting.
G. Hardy stated that because M. Young was not present, and because he has been advised that until the Board vacancies are filled, the two of them cannot discuss business because it would be a quorum.  MOTION BY HARDY TO TABLE UNTIL THE MARCH MEETING WHEN M. YOUNG IS PRESENT.  MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

Rules Revision Reconsideration:  K. Svee stated that the Rules Revision would address Mr. Pence’s concerns about duplication of efforts.  G. Hardy said that he didn’t state that Mr. Pence was concerned, he stated that he was concerned, and that’s why he went to see Pence.  Mr. Pence agreed that we should be working together. K. Svee also indicated that the Rules, if revised, would address all these issues.

Adam Ripple stated that the Rules are intended to carry out those provisions in the Watershed Management Plan.  He went on to explain that the current rules are outdated and don’t necessarily accomplish all of the review requirements that staff and the District’s Engineer suggest.  There may be parts that are unneeded, and things that aren’t in the Rules that should be to address concerns of the District.  He suggested taking a comprehensive look at the Rules in relationship to the Overall Plan.  At the front end, setting some priorities and goals that can help form the Rules process.  There should be a discussion at the front end in order to give staff direction as to how to change the rules.  Regarding permits, the Board should make a decision on the types of activities that have the potential to impact water quality and how the Board wants to regulate them.

There was discussion about the Chairman making motions.  K. Svee produced a dissertation on Robert’s Rules of Order which states that the Chairman can make motions participate in discussion, and the only time the Chairman doesn’t participate and/or make motions is when there is a large Board of twelve or more people because then it is more of a project for the Chairman to hold order.  R. Franzen added that at the County Board level, motions are not made unless the gavel is passed.

MOTION BY HARDY/SVEE THAT THE MATTER OF RULE REVISIONS BE TABLED UNTIL THE MARCH MEETING.  ALL AYE, MOTION CARRIED.

Sours Addition: M. Peisch reported that she and Tim Ramerth of Westwood Professional Services have met with the Engineers from Widseth Smith Nolting representing the Plat owner.  WSN is addressing the stormwater management of the plat on a lot by lot basis, with no regional retention of management.  In the past, Thirty Lakes has required plats to plan for stormwater based on the development.  Crow Wing County has no issue with the lot by lot plan.  Final approval of the plat is soon to come before the County Commissioners.

G. Hardy said that this is one of the things he spoke to Chris Pence about.  Pence indicated that he would like to see either the State or County, whoever has to act on it, go to a ten year stormwater management plan on some of this stuff rather than a 100 year.  Pence showed statistics where the 100 yr. was not near as effective as the 10 year plan.

M. Peisch stated that what is acceptable to the County and what is acceptable to Thirty Lakes has not always been the same.

The MPCA issued a Bulletin which states that leaving the stormwater management up to the individual lot owners within a plat is a practice that “should be avoided”, because if any one of the individual owners decides not to cooperate, MPCA can fine the original developer and require him to install regional stormwater management.

Rosemary Franzen stated that the County has agreed to Deed Restrictions which will inform each lot owners that they will be required to have a stormwater plan.  The County is concerned that too many trees would have to be taken out for regional stormwater management.

G. Hardy asked R. Franzen her opinion as to considering the entire plat or each lot singly, since she is a member of the Advisory Committee.  She replied that she didn’t want to take down more trees than we need to, and as long as the Deed Restrictions are in place would insure that stormwater measures were in place.

Adam Ripple stated that the NPDES Permit requires you to consider the project in its entirety.  He stated that typically a plat is looked at by the whole plat so that if there is a need to dedicate drainage easements for flow and/or future treatment facilities such as a pond or basin this can be done at the front end before the lots are sold.  Then when a lot is sold and there is a full stormwater plan, that individual gets treated differently when they actually develop their property.

Rosemary  Franzen explained that this plat is separated from the houses on the lake by Gladstone Road, and a lot of the people on the lake have indicated that they want to buy these properties to extend their properties.   She further stated that potential buyers will be able to see that there is a Deed Restriction before they purchase that the stormwater management will be a requirement.

G. Hardy stated that Mr. Pence gave the go ahead on it after their engineer had looked at it.  M. Peisch stated that the County does not have an Engineer that looks over the plans.  G. Hardy said Mr. Pence told him they did.  M. Peisch stated that Pence told her they did not.

Adam Ripple said that the Watershed District Rules can determine by the formulas for the stormwater calculations that people must run the numbers under.  Then it is necessary to rely on someone like Tim Ramerth to help go through the process to determine how the District wants numbers calculated.  Once that is in place, it removes the back & forth questioning between the District’s staff and consultants and the Developer’s consultants.  This is one more reason to be looking at the Rules.

Rosemary Franzen asked Adam Ripple if the County Board approves the plat with Deed Restrictions, how would that effect Thirty Lakes?  He replied that he had not looked at the Rules relating to this, but there are County Regulations and Watershed District regulations and they overlap, but don’t pre-empt each other.  This may be a source of friction between Counties and Watershed Districts, but if the District has more restrictive requirements, a Developer would still have to get District approval after he had been approved by the County.

G. Hardy asked what legal action the Watershed District had against them if they go ahead and build without getting that approval from the District.  Adam Ripple stated that again, he would have to look at the Rules, but typically a Stop Work Order is what can be done for stopping construction.  Typically Watershed District Rules define a violation of a Rule is a misdemeanor.  A Stop Work Order can be done by a Judge.

MOTION BY SVEE/HARDY THAT THE SOURS ADDITION WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS BE APPROVED SUBJECT TO TIM RAMERTH OF WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REVIEWING THE STORMWATER CALCULATIONS AND AGREEING WITH THOSE CALCULATIONS.  ALL AYE, MOTION CARRIED.

Staff Engineer:   Tabled to February meeting.
G. Hardy asked what the staff Engineer would do.  K. Svee stated that he would act as a consultant.  Hardy asked what he would consult on.  Svee stated engineering plans.  Hardy asked if we have done interviews.  M. Peisch asked what type of interviews he would like and asked if Hardy wanted qualifications and projects?  Hardy remarked that during the last month Thirty Lakes has used Westwood Professionals a lot.  Hardy did not want to do the same with an engineer where we are spending that much money with the rest of us not knowing anything about it.

MOTION BY SVEE/HARDY TO TABLE THE SUBJECT OF A STAFF ENGINEER.  ALL AYE, MOTION CARRIED.

Buffalo Grass Packets:  Tabled to February meeting.
G. Hardy requested to know the shelf life of this seed.  It is one to two years.

MOTION BY SVEE TO PURCHASE THE PACKETS OF BUFFALO GRASS SEED.  MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

G. Hardy stated that since it can’t be planted before the next meeting, it could wait to be purchased next month.  He did not want to second the motion so that everyone can have input.

Bass Lake 402:  A draft of a letter to Bass Lake residents was given to the Managers.  The results of the Ground Water Intrusion Overflight have not been received.  It was previously determined that there are 27 homes and Camp Lake Hubert on Bass Lake.

Dan Steward of BWSR observed that Bass Lake is shallow lake, probably responding to the increase in Phosphorus in the lakes watershed.  A shallow lake shows results faster than a deep lake.  He went on to say that good stormwater management practices can reduce the increase in enrichment by half. 

G. Hardy felt that we should have the results back before the letter is sent.

Watershed Game:  It was recommended to set a date for a workshop.  M. Peisch stated that the game would provide the opportunity for the managers to become familiar with best management practices in a relaxed way.  A U of M facilitator comes to assist with the game, and may have to be paid mileage.
T. Lauer reported that the game consists of four or five stations per game, and there are three games:  the Lake Game, the Stream Game and the River Game.  Anywhere from 8 to 20-some people can play, 16 being the goal to play each game.

MOTION BY SVEE/HARDY TO TABLE SETTING UP A WORKSHOP UNTIL THE MARCH MEETING.  ALL AYE, MOTION CARRIED.

MN Erosion Control Conference:  March 11 and 12 in St. Cloud.
M. Peisch requested approval for both staff members to attend.  G. Hardy stated he had no problem with that.

MAWD Legislative Breakfast:  March 10 & 11 at the St. Paul Capitol.  R. Franzen pointed out that there was an overlap in dates.  G. Hardy asked what the advantage would be in attending the Breakfast.  M. Peisch replied a manager would learn about legislative updates, new laws, new proposed laws and the opportunity to meet the elected representatives.

Adam Ripple pointed out that MAWD prepares a platform during their conference in December of things they want the legislature to do in the upcoming session.  M. Peisch pointed out the document recently prepared by the MAWD State Board which established priorities for legislative issues.

Bad Debt of 2008:  G. Hardy asked if writing off the debt meant that we would pay them.  M. Peisch stated that services have been paid for, but we were attempting to collect expenses from someone else.  The expenses were incurred when A. W. Research reviewed a plat and stormwater plan.  G. Hardy wanted reassurance that this would not happen again.

MOTION BY SVEE/HARDY (WITH RESERVATIONS) TO WRITE OFF THE BAD DEBT OF $1,564.02 FROM 2008.  NO OPPOSITION.

Other Issues:  K. Svee wanted to qualify something and referred to the change within the Board structure after an action has been taken.  He used the example of a City adopting an Ordinance, wherein they have the First Reading and the Second Reading of the Ordinance in public.  If there is a change on the Board between the First Reading and the Second reading, he has seen the Ordinance stop because the new members didn’t qualify the actions of the first meeting.  So that is not unusual to find that type of thing going on. 

Svee asked “Why don’t we make a motion that we don’t spend any money?”.  G. Hardy replied that when we spend money, let’s make sure we’re good value for the money we spend.  Svee suggested that there be no more per diems or expenses for the Managers.  G. Hardy said that $75 a month for each one of the managers was saved by going to the one meeting a month.  K. Svee suggested that the whole thing be abolished.  He would be the first one to make that motion, that the managers don’t have any expenses, the only people who would have an expense would be staff.  G. Hardy said that three more managers that will have something to say about that, but that it’s probably not an all bad idea.  Hardy brought the subject up because he saw a lot of phone calls on a bill (from Rinke Noonan, Attorneys), and wondered if some of that couldn’t be condensed.  He pointed out a 1.9 hour phone call.  M. Peisch pointed out that it was not a phone call, but rather researching and drafting a memo regarding the purchase and finance of real estate which had been passed out to the managers. 

K. Svee suggested a dissertation and/or a condensation of where we’ve been and where we’re going to the new managers from the attorney.  G. Hardy said that we would certainly want to fill them in.  He felt that he and M. Young came in pretty blind about a lot of things and really we’re told an awful lot, what we’ve read in the stuff, we had to dig it out and find it.  He went on to say that he was looking down the accounts payable list and he saw $2,023 this month, and there were several different dates.

R. Franzen stated that most committees she is on have an orientation for anybody who comes on new, and it doesn’t have to include the attorney.  K. Svee said he thought that it does.  K. Svee said that once the new members have been appointed by the County Commissioners, it behooves the Administrator to get a time set up for that.

Dan Steward suggested that BWSR does have a watershed district specialist further up in the Red River Valley, and he could be contacted if it would be helpful in putting together a session on the Watershed Act and where it came from and its general purposes.  That would be background on the Statute and the authorities and duties.  G. Hardy said that this was something he and M. Young hadn’t had.

Adam Ripple said that MAWD puts out a great handbook and every manager should have a copy.  He felt that as board members, you have the responsibility to understand the business they are carrying out, and the handbook is a good resource.  He also said that MAWD typically has New Manager Training Sessions at their annual conference which is really helpful “nuts & bolts” practical guidance.  He suggested that a meeting be called and held in the workshop format and dispense with the formalities of a full board meeting and just have some good discussions about what the district is doing, and what it’s all about.  The Watershed Management should also be an important topic at the workshop.

G. Hardy reported on the meeting at Staples which was about the watershed of the Crow Wing River.  He was interested that the Homebrook, Corybrook which is north of Pillager, all of those streams come down and enter Margaret Lake, hit the Gull River, into the Crow Wing River.  The project is mostly DNR.  What they were doing was going way upstream on everything that feeds into that river, and doing tests and looking for diseases.  He was interested in how they can study the quality of the water and they have different stations where they do this, so they can tell if something is coming into a stream somewhere in between these. 

R. Franzen had a question about this quorum. She stated that tomorrow the County Commissioners will be appointing two new managers.  After that, will two people be able to speak to each other?  Adam Ripple stated that the Bond and the Oath are required from the managers at their very first meeting.  He stated that it would be fine to have people talk, as long as it’s not three.

MOTION BY SVEE/HARDY THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 10:10 AM.  ALL AYE, MOTION CARRIED.