The URL can be used to link to this page

PRC 2011 08 09 CHANHASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING AUGUST 9, 2011 Chairman Daniel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jeff Daniel, Elise Ryan, Tom Kelly, Peter Aldritt, and Brent Carron MEMBERS ABSENT: Cole Kelly, and Steve Scharfenberg STAFF PRESENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; and Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Superintendent PUBLIC PRESENT: Tom & Pam Devine 7640 South Shore Drive Kevin & Lisa Atkinson 7407 Frontier Trail Judy Berland 6900 Minnewashta Parkway Mitch Krause 2380 Timberwood Franklin Kurver 4220 Kurvers Road David Vonfruke 131 Fox Hollow Drive Greg Dryke 105 Choctaw Circle Jack Fess 6280 Ridge Road Ken Wencl 8412 Waters Edge Drive Mark Enochs 1295 Northland Drive, Suite 200, Mendota Heights Bill Kirkvold 201 Frontier Court Brian Kirkvold 44 Center Street, Excelsior Joe Shneider 1035 Holly Lane Kristy & Brent Christenson 630 Bighorn Drive Steve Jenks 7490 Chanhassen Road Perry Forster 9505 Highview Drive, Eden Prairie Mark Page 10 Hill Street Mary Borns 7199 Frontier Trail John Schevenius 570 Pleasant View Road Pat Pavelko 7203 Frontier Trail Gary Simons 70224 Tartan Curve, Eden Prairie Steve Wanek 6615 Horseshoe Curve Ann Hogan 481 Bighorn Drive John Colford 7470 Chanhassen Road APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Daniel: Right now we need to approve the agenda, and I do believe Todd there’s some things rd that we’re going to change, is that correct? I mean add as far as the 23 agenda. Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Hoffman: Correct. We can talk about that and we can talk about the two corrections to the originally printed staff report. Daniel: Yes. Hoffman: Do you want me to do that? Daniel: Yeah, please. rd Hoffman: Chair Daniels, members of the commission. Our August 23 Park and Recreation Commission meeting will not be held as scheduled. We don’t have any agenda items and you thrd are meeting again on the 27, a Saturday so please schedule that cancellation for August 23. And then tonight the copy of the report that was distributed to the public is corrected on page 5. They’ll notice the highlighted areas at the top of the page. There was a not that was left out and then authorize inspector to. Anybody who read the report prior to this evening’s meeting or in the commission’s packet, pages, top of page 5, you need to make a note that Minnesota State law does not allow. So there’s a missing not in the original report. And then at the end of that, mandatory watercraft inspections except in the event that a licensed conservation officer or a police officer or an authorized AIS inspector Level One or Two. That’s another addition. So those three individuals can mandate inspections. Volunteer inspectors cannot. With that, that’s all I have for corrections. Daniel: Okay. Excellent. Any other changes commission? If not, let’s go ahead and approve the agenda. Carron: I’ll make a motion to approve the agenda. Tom Kelly: Second. Carron moved, Tom Kelly seconded to approve the agenda with the noted changes on page rd 5 of the staff report and announcing the cancellation of the August 23 Park and Recreation Commission meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Daniel: Todd, anything else? Hoffman: A week from, we just finished the Tour de Tonka this past Saturday. It came through our community and Lieutenant Enevold and his crew and others helped out with that. That came off with no issues so we’re glad to be a partial host of Tour de Tonka again. They come through th a variety of communities. And then also a week from Saturday on the 20 will be the Miracles Kids Triathlon at Lake Ann so the largest children’s triathlon in the country will be hosted here again in Lake Ann Park put on by Miracles of Mitch Foundation so put that on your calendar. Look to their website to volunteer. Get your kids to participate and your neighbors or come on out to the park and cheer on the participants. 2 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Daniel: Okay, thank you. Move on to visitor presentations. I see we have a lot of visitors here today and I certainly welcome everyone who’s here. For those who are here to discuss the invasive aquatic, or excuse me the aquatic invasive species issues with Lotus and the lakes, we’ll hold off until we discuss that under our new business section which will be just in a moment here. Anyone else, sorry about that. Please feel free to step up if you would like on any other topic. If not, why don’t we go ahead and make the approval for the minutes from our last meeting dated July 26, 2011. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:Carron moved, Aldritt seconded to approve the verbatim and summary minutes of the Park and Recreation Commission meeting dated July 26, 2011 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. CONSIDERATION OF RESIDENT REQUEST TO:  ENFORCE PARK HOURS AT SOUTH LOTUS LAKE PARK BOAT ACCESS  ADOPT AN AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES (AIS) POLICY  FURTHER SUPPORT THE VOLUNTEER AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES EDUCATION PROGRAM AT THE SOUTH LOTUS LAKE PARK BOAT ACCESS. Daniel: Certainly what I want to do is just welcome those who are here as visitors. Again we do appreciate your attendance tonight. What we want to do is certainly thank those who have stepped in here before. Were here last meeting and thank them for working on this project. Obviously it’s something that everyone is now aware of and we’re becoming more educated on the subject certainly than our last meeting we had, and certainly it’s a lot of effort that those volunteers have been doing as far as with regards to watercraft inspections so again thank you for that, for those volunteer hours. I also want you to understand as far as what the park commission, if you’re unfamiliar. What the park commissioner’s role is really, what we are is an appointed advisory group of the council. We don’t have authority to set you know policy. That’s more mandated. Other issues or items. Really what we’re doing is just providing suggestions, direction for the City Council, as well as with the city staff really as an advisory board of citizens. So just so that everyone understand you know any, not necessarily decisions but any motions that we do make really go to the council and the City Council ultimately is responsible for any policy that’s going to be set with regards to anything with the city, especially within our realm which is park and recreation. So just so everyone understands, in case there are any questions. Right now why don’t we go ahead and Todd, you have an opportunity to talk about, between the staff and the council here, this issue right now. Hoffman: Be glad to. Chair Daniels and members of the commission and members of the public. Visitors this evening. It’s my pleasure to respond to both the inquiries from the residents at the last meeting and also to respond to the motion that was made by the Park and Recreation Commission at your last meeting. The proposed motion this evening presented to the Park and Recreation Commission is that staff recommends that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend the City Council continue to support the aquatic invasive species education and 3 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 volunteer inspection campaign being conducted at South Lotus Lake Park public water access. To formalize that relationship between, really that relationship and any others that form in our community on our publicly owned landings, that it’s recommended that the City comply with an action step in the DNR aquatic invasive species volunteer manual and create a written agreement between the City and the volunteer groups outlining expectations and procedures for the adoption by the City Council. Now I’ll go into some background that’s been taken place on th aquatic invasive species in our community. On July 11, 2011 the City Council received comments from two residents concerning the topic of aquatic invasive species, specifically zebra mussels during the visitor presentation portion of their meeting. The Minutes with the citizen comments and responses were attached to your packet. City Manager Gerhardt sought input from the Lake Action Alliance after that visitor presentation and requested information and responses to a variety of questions. And those questions are, what is the Alliance’s, and that’s the Lake Action Alliance’s fallback plan if the proposed Lake Minnewashta inspection station turns out not to be a suitable location for public boat inspections? How can the City assist with educating and training the public in preventing the spread of aquatic invasive species. What other alternatives can the Alliance propose short of gating a public accesses? What legal authority does the City have to require all boats be inspected prior to entering the lakes and placing permanent gates at boat accesses? What happens if a boat fails inspection? What type of program can be created to assure that these 4 requirements are met? And these requirements are mandated by the use, when the City used LAWCON dollars, federal and state dollars to develop these access points, Lotus Lake, Lake Ann and Lake Susan, during this development time of those boat accesses we applied and were successful in receiving LAWCON dollars, federal dollars to develop those sites. When they give you that money it doesn’t come without strings. Some of those stipulations are that the access must be open at least 16 hours a day between the hours of 4:00 a.m. and 12:00 midnight. That no fees be charged for launching any craft. Where an access is provided within a park such as Lake Minnewashta Regional Park, uniform fees shall be charged to all users regardless of their residence. That no special regulations do not apply equally to riparian boat owners and those that use the public water access. How long would the pilot program last and what type of performance measures would we use to determine success? As of today at least Mr. Gerhardt has not received full responses to these questions for rd distribution to the City Council. Following that meeting on July 23 the Park and Recreation Commission, at the last meeting, hosted 4 residents during visitors presentation portion of your agenda. Primary topic of discussion were the operation of South Lotus Lake Park public water access and efforts of the aquatic invasive species education and volunteer inspection campaign being conducted up at Lotus Lake by volunteers and also DNR inspectors. The visitors requested that the commission respond to 3 requests. Enforcement of park hours at South Lotus Lake Park boat access, the adoption of an aquatic invasive species policy and that the City further support the volunteer aquatic invasive species education program at South Lotus Lake Park boat access. Additionally the commissioners made a recommendation that evening which I’ll read and break down into two parts a little bit later on in the report. Tonight staff is pleased to provide the following responses for the requests and inquiries from the visitors and the second part of my response, I’ll get into the response to the motion made by the commission. Visitor requests for the enforcement of park hours at South Lotus Lake Park, at the access. Chanhassen city park operating hours are 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The City provides public safety services through an annual contract with the Carver County Sheriff’s office. The officers conduct routine patrols throughout the city, throughout the day including parks and respond to calls for service as 4 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 needed. Patrol coverage afforded by this contract does not permit city parks to be checked daily for operations of hour violations. In a typical scenario an officer may encounter persons in their vehicles that are parked before or after hours while on their routine patrol. Additionally officers respond to reports called into dispatch center of disturbances in parks during both open and closed hours. Further enforcement of park hours at South Lotus Lake Park boat access beyond this would require a change in the current patrol format implemented through a policy directive from the City Council. Basically our law enforcement folks can’t be everywhere all the time. When the parks open up at 6:00, law enforcement does not patrol and see if there’s anybody there early on a regular basis. They’re out on routine patrol. We have 34 park sites in our community. Same thing at 10:00 at night. We have 34 parks. They might be doing some routine patrolling but they’re certainly not out there driving through every park at 10:00 to make sure that they’re closed. Defer to community on this important issue we’ve asked Lieutenant Jeff Enevold with the Carver County Sheriff’s Office to visit us tonight and speak both to the community, the public and the commissioners about how our contract works and how law enforcement and park patrol in our community works so Lieutenant Enevold. Lt. Jeff Enevold: Mr. Chair, commissioners and citizens, visitors. Just a brief introduction. I am Jeff Enevold. I’m a Lieutenant for Chanhassen here. I oversee the day to day operations of the law enforcement folks here. We have 12 patrol deputies, an investigator and school resource officer who work up here. I would just reiterate some of the things that Todd said. We do, currently do routine patrol of all the parks. We, like everyone else, we have limited resources and we have additional requests for service. We identify you know problem areas that we like to target. We have a lot of traffic issues within the city. Currently we’ve targeted, we’ve had a rash of thefts from vehicles and thefts from garages so we’re focusing our resources on those neighborhoods right now. We do get into the parks. We do enforce the ordinances. We do, we’re already doing that so I don’t, I guess the question is what are you asking for? Are you asking for more patrol or? Daniel: Well it’s a very good question. I guess, and that’s one of the issues that got brought up is the concern about the enforcement of the park hours, especially those boaters who, and again I presume this is primarily relegated to South Lotus. You know that get in early before park hours. Primarily fishing obviously. And that they do not have personnel there because the park hours are from 6:00 to 10:00, so they can be prepared. I’m assuming they can certainly answer that question when we get to visitor presentation section but I’m assuming that’s what they’re inquiring about or looking for some support on. Lt. Jeff Enevold: Sure, and we’d be, like I said we’re already doing that and we’d be happy to continue doing it but the fact is I can’t guarantee to have an officer there at 5:30 in the morning or 9:30 in the evening when we may be focused on other troubled areas or they may be on other calls for service so we’ll continue to do what we’re doing. Hoffman: Chair Daniels and commission members, the only thing we all need to recognize, and I think we do living in our communities is that there are people in our parks before 6:00 a.m. pretty much all summer long and so the City Council, citizens tolerate this. It’s something where you know it gets light at 5:15-5:30 in June and so it’s something that currently is going on. People are recreating, utilizing the facilities and again to come back and to take a heavy hand at 5 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 any one particular spot to say no, you’re going to get a ticket if you’re in that park before 6:00, that again would take a policy directive and the City Council could do that. That would be special enforcement beyond what is currently taking place in our community and so that again would have to be something that would come as a directive from the City Council. Many activities are taking place. People swim in the parks. Walk their dogs before 6:00. They go to a boat access and they go fishing so we know it’s happening throughout in the parks before 6:00 you’ll see but it’s not the majority of use. And there certainly are times that South Lotus Lake after 6:00 a.m. and before 10:00 p.m. when there’s not an inspector present so I guess the key here is to continue the education process. Those boaters who happen to get there at quarter to 6:00 and you know hopefully they’re educated as well and then sometimes I don’t believe there’s an inspector there all the time at 6:00 a.m. and so there are boats that are launching during posted park hours also that are not inspected. Lt. Jeff Enevold: Yeah that’s a great point. You know I would have difficulty supporting a zero tolerance policy. I mean there’s always folks that are in there, you know they want to get out 15 minutes early and go fishing, go swimming and they have all these other activities they want to do so a zero tolerance policy is difficult for me to support. Daniel: Well I think we’d have to be consistent across the board unless we’re specifically targeting one park and that obviously that’d be a decision based on policy but again I think all of us as commissioners as well as residents have utilized parks before hours and I see them close on a daily basis…I mean it’s well before 6:00 and especially in the summer obviously when it’s light and you know that’s just our little park that’s across the street from us so. Hoffman: Chair Daniels and members of the commission, park ordinance hours are there primarily to be able to afford the officers an opportunity to deal with disturbances or disruptions and so if there’s activities taking place that should not be taking place and they’re after hours, they’re going to write them up for an after hours violation and disturbance of the parks. If there’s no other questions of Lieutenant Enevold we’re going to let him get back to his other duties and then we’ll continue on with our. Daniel: I was just going to suggest that. Any questions? Thank you Lieutenant. Audience: There’s a gentleman back here that has a question. Audience: I highly recommend that you use the PA system because you cannot hear you. People back here have no idea what you’re talking, what you’re saying and that’s what they came here to hear. Daniel: Okay. Audience: So if the PA system is not broken, please use it. Daniel: Do we have a PA system Todd? Hoffman: Probably speak a little. 6 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Lt. Jeff Enevold: Talk a little closer? Daniel: How’s that? Does that help? I can do that. Boy, I’ve never been accused of having a soft voice. Tom Devine: Can I ask a question…? Daniel: Yes. Tom Devine: Tom Devine, 7640 South Shore Drive. I just want to make sure I understand what you’re sharing with all of us in the audience. Audience: Okay so we can’t hear so I don’t think it is working. Tom Devine: I just want to make sure everybody understands. What you’re saying essentially then is, and I can understand the shortness of funds, shortness of time and the staff that you can’t go to 34 parks but on those parks that have the water access where the hours are controlled, you know or set, essentially what you’re saying is you’re just not in the position to be able to enforce those hours. Is that essentially what you’re capsulizing and saying? Lt. Jeff Enevold: I’m saying at certain times we would not have the resources available to enforce those hours, that’s correct. Tom Devine: Have you written any tickets or done anything at all this year on, at Lake Ann, Lotus or Susan or Riley for anybody being there prior to the operating hours? Or after the operating hours. Lt. Jeff Enevold: Off the top of my head I don’t know. I would have to go into our records and take a look at that. Again you know I have difficulty taking the discretionary away from the officers. Tom Devine: Right. Lt. Jeff Enevold: I mean they go in there and figure out what’s going on. Normally you know there’s a spirit of the law and the letter of the law. I mean I’m for the spirit of the law. You go in there and figure out what’s going on. If there’s kids in there drinking beer after hours, vandalizing, you know that’s when we’ll write a citation. If there’s somebody who wants to be in there at quarter to 6:00 and go swimming or get out with your son and go fishing, you know we’ll have to weigh that and talk to them and leave that to officer’s discretion to see what he wants to do with that. Tom Devine: Yeah typically like at Lotus Lake, you know we monitored in May, June, you know 80% of the parking stalls were filled with boats and primarily fishing boats before the park hours opened and we have not made it a pattern to call you know to report or to have you come out and ticket or whatever but the issue, you’re making the case very well for us why we should 7 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 have a gate because you know the gating thing sets the hours and then electronically you can then open and close the gate you know at will based on the hours of the park rather than just having it be you know not enforced ordinance in terms of what goes on. Lt. Jeff Enevold: It’s not my intention to support the gate or not support a gate. I’m telling you what we can do as law enforcement. Tom Devine: Yeah. And that’s the issue I think that we brought to attention last month is the fact that right now it’s just a, it’s an ordinance. It’s a law but nobody enforces it and that’s the concern and a goodly number of those parking stalls are filled prior to and after the hours that the park is open for which it’s unreasonable to expect that we as volunteers will staff at night in the dark and/or you know prior to the park hours. That’s the only thing I just wanted to clarify. Daniel: Any other questions? If not, thank you Lieutenant, appreciate it and thank you. Okay Todd then we want to move on to second column there or second paragraph here with adopt an aquatic invasive species policy that was brought to our attention. Hoffman: Thank you Chair Daniels, members of the commission. To date the City of Chanhassen has not adopted an aquatic invasive species policy. There are a variety of governmental agencies currently involved in the efforts to slow the spread of aquatic invasive species within the region and the state. Primary among these are the State of Minnesota, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Geological Survey and watershed districts. DNR employees are staffing aquatic invasive species education and inspection stations across the state. Additionally many programs similar to the Lotus Lake and Lake Minnewashta AIS education and volunteer inspection campaigns are being initiated statewide. As a commission you are in a position, if you choose to make a recommendation to the City Council that they consider adoption of such a policy, an aquatic invasive species policy for the city. That level of policy development if authorized would require the input of citizens, city advisory groups, local and county and state and regional governing bodies. And obviously that would take a good amount of time to create such a policy. The next thing that the citizens had asked for was further support of the volunteer aquatic invasive species education program at the South Lotus Lake Park boat access. This spring we engaged with a variety of meetings with the Lotus Lake Clean Water Association. Discussion topics were numerous but most primary among them were the operation of the access and then the desire to implement aquatic invasive species education and volunteer inspection campaign. The campaign would be coordinated and funded through the Lotus Lake Clean Water Association and affiliated groups. Staff supports the implementation of that program, the education and volunteer inspection campaign at the Lotus Lake Park water access with assurances from the association’s representatives that the program would be education based and that boat or watercraft inspections would be volunteer. The City has submitted a grant, the City submitted a grant application and worked with the association for DNR education signage be posted at the access. In the interim we printed some paper signs, laminated those and posted those at all the accesses that we control. The application was approved for the signs and signs were procured and installed. Very large sign at the bottom of the access near the boat ramp itself and another sign part way up the access. Similar smaller signs were posted at Lake Susan and Lake Ann boat accesses. AIS volunteers are being trained through a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources program utilizing a manual that is attached and on site trainers employed 8 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 by the DNR. To date as far as we’re aware the Lotus Lake group has trained more volunteers than any other location in the state. It’s anticipated the efforts of the volunteers at either the city owned water access points in our community will continue the remainder of this boating season and extend into the future. Therefore to formalize that relationship between the City and the volunteer groups again is recommended that we create a written agreement between the City and these groups for adoption by the City Council. Moving forward with the recommendation put th forth by this body on July 26, recommendation that the City continue discussions with the various homeowner associations and the Lake Action Alliance to discuss implementation of a gate at South Lotus Lake Park access to operate during park hours only and evaluate costs associated with a gate at the boat access points in Lake Susan and Lake Ann, but not connecting the implementation of a gate at Lotus Lake with these other two lakes. The request to install a gate at the South Lotus Lake Park boat access is broken into two parts really. A request by the Lake Action Alliance to provide and install an electronic key card gate requiring boaters to travel to an offsite location for a mandatory watercraft inspection. At this location the boater would receive a code for the gate prior to transporting their boat back to South Lotus Lake or another water body to enter the water. Staff’s response to this is again Minnesota state law does not allow for a mandatory watercraft inspection except in the event that a licensed conservation officer or police officer asks for one or an authorized AIS inspector Level I or Level II. And that authorized inspector, that’s a draft. It’s the very last sheet in your packet is a draft policy being adopted by the DNR. The second part of the gate is a request by the Lake Action Alliance to provide and install an electronic gate that would open at 6:00 a.m. each morning and close at 10:00 p.m. each night. Staff does not support the request of installing a gated access point at Lotus Lake or either of the community’s other two city owned public water accesses. Small percentage of overall access use that occurs before or after hours, and then coupled with the complexities that would accompany the long term maintenance and operation of such a device is the basis for that position. Second part of the motion from your last meeting, it was a report on the enforcement of the park hours be provided and you have the written report and then you also heard from the sheriff, Lieutenant Enevold. The recommended action is, was presented at the start of the report. I will not repeat it and be available for questions from the commission. Or the audience. Daniel: Okay. Let’s have some questions for staff. Peter. Aldritt: None at this time right now. Daniel: Okay. Brent. Carron: I’m good. Daniel: Elise. Ryan: I do have one question Todd. It’s about the policy. When you ask about the policy development, can you list some of the groups that would be involved in development of the policy. Obviously citizens. A city advisory committee. Who would that be? Hoffman: It would be both the Park Commission and the Environmental Commission. 9 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Ryan: Okay. Plus citizens or just appointed commissions? Hoffman: And citizens. Ryan: Okay, thank you. Tom Kelly: I do have two questions. One, does the training that the volunteers receive qualify them as a Level I or Level II inspector? Hoffman: Not to my knowledge, no. Tom Kelly: And the second question is, do you have any estimates on what the long term maintenance or operation of a gate would be? Any hard numbers to know how much it would actually cost to maintain that gate on an annual basis? Hoffman: No, not any hard numbers. There’s a variety of complexities that would come with you know, does it operate? You know what happens when the power goes out? There’s just a lot of things. What happens when it doesn’t operate when people arrive? How is the City Council going to deal with this? Instead of putting a gate in at 6:00 we could simply you know move the park hours to 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 at boat accesses and then the gate would open at, you know there’s a balance between gating a public resource and not providing access to that and so there would be discussion about well is that reasonable? Should those park hours be moved? So there’s a lot of issues that would go along with gating a public resource that people want access to. Daniel: Alright. Thank you Tom. Todd I have one question myself. Do other cities, and I’ll say primarily within the suburb here and I’ll say close to proximity. Cities that are close in proximity to lakes that are currently infected, have they adopted, specifically the city themselves, a policy yet? Hoffman: Not that I’m aware of. Daniel: Shorewood has not? Hoffman: Not that I know of. They’ve taken on the issue but I don’t know. Daniel: But they’ve not, they have not developed a policy? Hoffman: I don’t know. Daniel: Is it presumed that most cities, counties and other public entities will basically adopt or assume a DNR policy that’s currently in place? Hoffman: Well I’m not sure if they’re going to adopt it but they’re certainly looking at the DNR policy and other. 10 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Daniel: Okay, as covering really what would be a policy across the board. Hoffman: Yeah, as any government entity you have to decide what you’re going to do and at the local level, local governments provide basic services. Counties provide another set of basic services. The State provides another level of services and currently lakes are governed by the Commission of Natural Resources and the DNR and so you have to understand, we can’t do everything so you know is the City willing to get in the business of aquatic invasive species policies or do you want to defer to others to do that? That’s a question that the community has to ask itself. Daniel: Okay. Great, thank you. Ryan: And currently the DNR policy is education? Hoffman: Education and they’re out there doing. Ryan: Training? Hoffman: They’re doing training. They’re doing inspections. They’ve got their portable cleaning units out now so yeah, they’re doing a variety of programs. Obviously they were slowed down by the shutdown but they’re back up and running. Most of the information that the attachments are DNR attachments that are attached to the report this evening. Or all of them. Daniel: Okay. Thank you Todd. What we can do, I’d like to take now the time to certainly move on to visitor presentations so it gives the opportunity for residents here to step up and certainly ask questions or make statements, concerns regarding this topic. I would ask each resident if they could, please limit to about 5 minutes with discussions and there certainly will be exchange and from the commission here as well. Also when you do come up, please state your name and your address, it’d be good. So please, anybody who’d like to step up and certainly make a statement. Go ahead. Tom Devine: My name is Tom Devine. I live at 7640 South Shore Drive and I’m a member of the Lotus Lake Clean Water Organization and the homeowners association and have been part of the effort since it got started here back in April. First I just want to acknowledge and appreciate the efforts that you people made last month and have made by having this second meeting and follow-up. Your actions of caring and being responsive to the issues that involve all of Chanhassen’s lakes were well received out there and I think they were well received in the media and the publications that have been made since that point. Second thing I want to quickly address is, since the meeting last month I know there was a memo that was circulated by the DNR Commissioner that said that we were acting kind of on our own or without the spirit of cooperation of the DNR and I just wanted to follow up on that and say that definitely is not the case. The Commissioner evidently was not aware of what the actions were of the staff way downstream in terms of what was going on and as I said last month in our meeting we’ve completed about, at that point about 70 training exercises at that point, all conducted by DNR personnel and those people. They’ve been aware of what we’ve been doing. They applied for 11 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 the grant for the signage and all of that so the DNR is well aware of what we’ve been doing and they have been participating with our inspections down there. So the Commissioner at the top may not be aware of all of the activities of his staff but clearly those activities are well documented in terms of what’s happened. I didn’t see the packet until this evening that each of you have got in terms of the recommendations and I want to comment on that in just a second but I want, I also want to comment on two other things that were brought up since last month. The City conducted a series of surveys of boat usage on Lotus Lake and I don’t know if the survey’s been completed since then but I’d say 6 or 7 years ago about 90% of the boats that came back in the surveys that were completed then were not Chanhassen residents but rather they were boats coming from elsewhere. From other lakes. They were residents that lived not in the city of Chanhassen by drivers or license plate inspection but rather those were profiled and it turned out most of those boats were from Minneapolis, St. Paul, other areas other than the city of Chanhassen residents as such. I think that that’s an important fact and if maybe we’re due for another study of license plates on who’s using our lakes because I think it will quickly show it’s not just Chanhassen residents, and part of this effort is to protect our lakes here in Chanhassen for the benefit of Chanhassen residents you know long term. Those boats that are used or come from other lakes, they come and go. They just move on to another lake after this lake becomes infested and that’s really what the concern is of protecting our lakes and why we’re asking the City of Chanhassen to take action as it relates to that. And let me just comment on the recommendation. I did not see the packet here until I got here this evening and you know it’s dated today. You know on the request, I guess I’m not, you know I guess I’m a little disappointed that the motion I think was pretty clear on what was, what the instructions were in terms of coming back and reporting to you on and I’m looking at the staff recommendations and I think that I for one would have liked to have had the opportunity to at least participated in the discussion before the staff made the recommendation to you. I think that’s part of what we’re looking for here is to get a cooperative spirit of people all working down the same road. I know where some people in the city’s stand right now relative to this, the whole issue of the inspections and what not and the gating and all these other peripheral issues but I think it gets back to the issue that we all need to sit down and work together. So rather than coming out with recommendations, giving them to you. You act on them or vote and then take them to City Council, I think you do need and want the input of the people that are really directly involved in the effort because I think it does make for a much better decision in terms of how you ultimately make your decisions as they’re brought forth. I will take issue with some of the issues here but I don’t have enough time to really do that but you know the cost of the gate, the complexities and all those sorts of things, leave that to a group of people to figure it out. If we’re charged to deal with the complexities that you’re outlining here, the long term maintenance, the cost and all that, leave that to us. We’ll come back to you and we’ll give you a report on what, how we would propose to do that because all of those issues I think are easily overcomeable and I think also when we look at the financial side of what we’re looking at, I think that those issues can also be addressed without taxpayer support or taxpayer dollars. So I just, I mention those things quickly. Two last things I just want to quickly mention. I do have a newsletter, the newsletter that we’ve been producing. There is one that’s now I found out this evening that’s been produced since this one but let me just leave you this. They’ve inspected over 650 boats. There’s, of that 80 of the boats or 84 of the boats did have their plugs in which means the ability to keep water inside those boats and transporting from one lake to another is of concern. And 60 of those 650 some boats, 10% of those boats, 11% of those boats have come from lakes where there was infested waters, 12 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 and this is really the issue for you people to look at and consider in terms of how you adopt policy going forward is you do have this transportation of boats onto your lakes here and you know what are we going to do to try to prevent that. And finally let me just mention about the, you know the law does not allow for mandatory watercraft inspections. Right now those inspections started up at Grays Bay this last week. It was well publicized in the media. I’ve got a picture here, the station that came off the website there that shows what the platform looks like. They’ve got spray equipment up there and what not. We’ve gone through the process of having all of our people trained. We did not know that there was a Level I, Level II or we would have actually put these people through that training exercise. I’m sure of the 80 or 90 people that have now gone through our process, we could get a number of Level I, Level II inspectors taken care of so that we would be in compliance with this recommendation and if the request or the staff request to deny is really based on the fact that it’s not possible. Challenge us and we will come back and we’ll get these people, we’ll get people set up, ready to go so they fit whatever the qualifications are that the DNR’s looking for. We’re not trying to evade or not follow the compliance or whatever the stated law is. What we’re trying to do is set up a program, educate people and then follow forward on whatever it is. Last thing I’d just like to quickly say in finishing here is I’ve got two other, there’s two other publications that have been done just in the last week or so. There was one in the Minneapolis paper here and there was another one up in Spicer. Now the Spicer Lake Association has gone to putting a chemical in the lake which has some kind of a bacteria in it. I think there’s a lot of things we can do before we start doing these kind of these things but again we all have to get in the same room. Talk about what these options look like and say okay well this is maybe something we’d like to try out. Maybe this is something we shouldn’t do. What’s the outcome of doing it, introducing a bacteria into the lake? What’s the long term impact of that and that sort of thing, but all of that’s information that you should be looking at in terms of what your recommendations are is to really study carefully what others are doing. And finally let me say, you know we, we really do appreciate greatly your concern, your level of urgency and the characterization of understanding what the problem was and trying to move forward. I hope you go back to your original motion of what you asked last week and say okay let’s go back through this motion you know specifically and see what we need to do to direct staff and bring forth the answers really to what the questions were in the original motion because they’re not really addressed in my quick read of what this is right now and I think those are the issues that you really should go back and try to understand. Thank you very much and I do appreciate your time very much and I appreciate the fact that all of you made the effort to be here for a second you know unscheduled meeting to take information from all of us. Thank you. Daniel: Thank you Tom. Hoffman: Can I just clarify one thing? Daniel: Yes. Hoffman: I think for everybody in the audience to understand, I think it’s…to understand that sitting here today as staff, staff does not take direction from the Park and Recreation Commission. I’m more or less a secretary of the City Council and the City Manager to respond to requests from the City and Park and Recreation Commission. Their role is to make a 13 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 recommendation to the City Council. That is their singular role. I’m employed by the City Manager. I take my direction from the City Manager, not from the Park and Recreation Commission. That’s just an important clarification for everyone to remember. Thank you. Daniel: Sure. Steve Jenks: I’m Steve Jenks. I live at 7490 Chanhassen Road and I too am a member of the Lotus Lake Homeowners Association and the Lotus Lake Clean Water Organization and I’m a co-founder of the Lake Action Alliance and we talked about what the Lake Action Alliance was before. In reviewing the packet tonight we do owe the City Council a response to some questions that were laid out and I’ll take that on as a responsibility and I’ll have that delivered before the end of the week and I’ll be happy to copy Todd and if you would forward that on I would appreciate that. Hoffman: Be glad to. Steve Jenks: As to the purpose of the gate and the cost for the gate, I wanted to clarify that the two purposes from our perspective were to control the non-operating hours of the park as they’re posted, and so therefore the overnight hours and to do it in a way that was automated so that truly it didn’t involve the sheriff and his team in terms of having to make a decision about what priority project to not do so they could go close a gate. That doesn’t make any sense. I didn’t think it made any sense to anybody 2 weeks ago. I don’t think it does tonight either. And then to enable participation in the future, should we overcome all the other obstacles, to enable participation in an AIS, an aquatic invasive species pilot project in the future that would, that we discussed last week with, that would include the 3 lakes and all the pieces of that. Further, we stated to the City that we would bear the cost for that gate so really money and cost shouldn’t be an issue for the City and so we’re raising those funds and we’re happy to tell you that we’ll be able to do that so we would install it and manage the ongoing expenses. The only piece that we’re asking the City for, and we think you’re going to want to have control over is the electronic part or the electrical work involved in the installation, and certainly we would work with where it went. How it worked. All those sorts of things. The technical pieces of it with the City. We certainly don’t want to leave you out of it but we don’t want money to be a gating piece in that decision per se. Thank you very much. Daniel: Thank you Steve. Appreciate your time. Joe Shneider: Good evening. I’m Joe Shneider, 1035 Holly Lane. I spoke with you the last time as well. I would just like to make sure we’re very clear on this. The DNR is in fact working on aquatic invasive species very aggressively and if you believe that that’s going to save our precious Chanhassen lakes from aquatic invasive species, you’ve got another thing to be thinking about because it’s not going to happen. It didn’t happen so far with Eurasian water milfoil. It didn’t happen with curly lake pond weed. It’s not going to happen with zebra mussels and it’s not going to happen with the numerous other invasive species that are coming down the pipe. Yes, there’s been a lot of press. There’s been as much press about the DNR getting decontamination facilities as there has been about the request that we have to do the 3 lake pilot project. The decontamination process, just to give you a perspective on it, these are for boats 14 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 leaving some landings. Some landings at Lake Minnetonka. There is one decontamination machine. There are 13 landings on Lake Minnetonka. Right, so we are kidding ourselves if we think this is going to make a difference in protecting our lakes from aquatic invasive species. The DNR has a number of inspectors identified now as capable of requiring a mandatory inspection and doing a more aggressive inspection. This is brand new and I will tell you I am as livid about this as I can be. I am one of the 60, 70, 80, 100 volunteer inspectors. I gave personal and confidential information to the DNR as a part of that training and to be finding out later that I have virtually no capability blew me away. Why would they need personal and confidential information if they weren’t going to give us some level of capability? Well now they’ve redefined their levels of capability. Todd’s exactly right. That’s a draft document. I’ve had it for weeks now and they don’t have this approved yet so Level I and Level II AIS inspectors don’t exist. The training doesn’t exist for that. So this is a moving target and it is moving very slowly so our request that we made last time is very simple. Maximize the effectiveness of the invasive species program at the Lotus Lake Park. We’ve got the inspectors to run during the business hours. All we were asking for in the primary objective was to control the non-operating hours so that those volunteer hours are effective. An automated gate. Not asking for police. An automated gate that opens at park hours. Whatever time you choose that to be, and closes at park closing, whatever time you choose that to be, solves the problem. Can you make an automated gate work? Yes you can. Can you say that there are all too many problems with an automated gate? Sure you can say that too but you know what, automated gates work and lots and lots of 24 by 7 operations around the country. Around the world. This is not rocket science so to say that money is a problem, you’ve just heard it from the Lotus Lake guys. Money is not the problem. They can get it installed. They will pay the maintenance for it. It just seems like we’re kidding ourselves if we’re saying we’re not going to do anything. We’re going to count on the DNR. That just seems crazy. I don’t think we’re protecting our lakes. Thanks. Daniel: Thank you Joe. Greg Dryke: It’s really short. Greg Dryke, 105 Choctaw Circle. I’m the manager of the inspections and I just wanted to clarify something that’s been going back and forth at these Level I and Level II. I had a training done by DNR contact, Maureen Nekowski, if that’s her name, last Monday and she told me that they are in fact moving forward within the DNR right now on their Level I and Level II training. Right now they’re only training themselves in interior but she told me they’ve got a schedule planned out. They’re doing it. It’s been passed so just point of clarification. Joe Shneider: And no volunteers will be eligible to be Level I or Level II inspectors. Greg Dryke: Yeah, I didn’t know the eligibility but. Joe Shneider: No volunteers are going to be Level I or Level II inspectors because the Commissioner of the DNR has said that. Hoffman: That’s what’s stated here under authorization. Authorization for commissioner delegation authority. 15 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Joe Shneider: Right so just to put the fine point on this, unless the DNR is going to get dramatically more staff, you are not going to have the kind of inspectors that can require an inspection or can turn away a boat. Deny access which is what the wording in the chart is. So they’re coming down with this. They’re coming up with new training. They’re coming up with new programs. New levels and it is a long way from being at your lake in any volume to make a difference. Daniel: Okay, thanks Joe. And thank you Greg. Okay, anyone else who would care to discuss. Mitch Krause: Mitch Krause, 2380 Timberwood Drive, Chanhassen. I think if you work on this, as they’ve said before, I support the recommendations you’ve made and I’d like to thank you for that. I’m opposed to any gated access in any lakes in Chanhassen. Thank you. Daniel: Thank you Mitch. John Colford: I’m John Colford. I’m at 7470 Chanhassen Road. I think the number, I mean we’ve been saying the DNR’s not going to be very effective but I think the number in the paper was 17 inspectors for 3,000 boat launches statewide and that’s the budget increase has created 17 inspector positions for 3,000 boat launches so, I mean clearly that’s next to useless. Boat launches are gated in the Twin Cities. They’re gated in Three River Park Districts. They all have, well not all of them but many of them, including parks with lakes, with boat launches, have automated gates at the park entrance and they open you know at park opening and they close at park closing. They have motion sensor technology to let people who are in the park after hours out. So they exist. They exist in our communities. They exist in our communities around boat launches so a gate would not be unprecedented. Thanks. Daniel: Thank you John. Gary Simons: Gary Simons, 7024 Tartan Curve, Eden Prairie. I think I’m 12 houses away from Chanhassen. Just wanted to thank everybody here for their concern about the lakes. I can’t think of anything more valuable to our recreational communities than keeping our lakes clean and with the fear of not only zebra mussels but the big head carp scare the living daylights out of me as a waterskier. So I want to thank you. I’m one of these people that I guess is not in Chanhassen that uses the lake. I’m all of a mile from the boat launch. We use it frequently. We think it’s a wonderful lake. We’ve been here for only 2 years. Didn’t even know it was there when I bought the house and it made my day when we finally, because it’s a great spot to hang out. We found the inspectors to be very, very knowledgeable and helpful. They kind of surprised us the very first time they were there but we didn’t mind them taking a look at our boat. I think it’s a great idea to try to keep everything that shouldn’t be in the lake out of the lake. But at the same time I’m a little worried on some of the hours and the idea behind if there is any sort of off-site inspection that we need to take place because I’m sure like many families that are around the lake who trailer it in, it’s one of those hey, it’s a nice night at dinnertime. Let’s go into the water for the evening and if our evening is precluded from going into the water because we have to go to some very off site inspection and don’t get in there, summer’s short. Evening’s are short. You like to be able to use it. We use it quite frequently. We’ll drop in at 7:30 or 8:00 at night and spend an hour, hour and a half and we’ll be back out of there so I just want to make sure that 16 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 you keep that in mind as you determine whatever policies you have going forward. If there’s ways that a gate could be used that would allow us to maybe stay there until the stars start to come up before we pull out, that would be terrific. Thanks. Daniel: Thank you Gary. Dave Vonfruke: My name is Dave Vonfruke and I’m from 131 Fox Hollow Drive and I’m not a property owner on a lake here in Chanhassen but we, our family does have a cabin on the White Fish chain and they’re dealing with things akin to this too. You know invasive species affect all lakes and I care about those as well as the ones in Chanhassen but my, what I just wanted to state here is one of the attitudes of people up there that we’ve run into, because we have been doing inspections and stuff up there over the last few years to try to combat this too. Is people taking the attitude, well I’m not going to inspect my boat or I’m not going to do this because the lakes are going to be infected anyway so who cares and that’s that so that’s one of the things that’s really kind of concerned me is that attitude that well all these species are going to get into the lake anyway so why bother so to combat that sort of attitude I would definitely stress you know inspections in some point to just combat I guess apathy so nobody’s really mentioned that but that’s something that you know I saw people having that kind of attitude. My jaw dropped. So I would just stress action over inactive. Daniel: Okay, thank you Dave. Bill Kirkvold: My name is Bill Kirkvold. I live at 201 Frontier Court in Chanhassen. I took part in the DNR so called training for boat inspectors here early this spring. In fact it was the opening day of fishing and I’m appalled by the fact that the DNR presented this as some kind of worthwhile training when indeed I come to find out today that it’s really worth nothing and I would encourage you to do something about this problem. Not because of me living on Lotus Lake but the fact that the DNR, if we wait for the DNR to do something, I think as a previous person also stated, it’s going to be a long time before they get their stuff together and really have something that’s effect. I think we need to take a leadership role here and look and see what’s the task that’s really needed. We can’t sit back and wait for the DNR to say yeah well I think we’ll come up with a policy sooner or later. We need to act now. Daniel: Thank you Bill. Pat Pavelko: Pat Pavelko, 7203 Frontier Trail. As Todd and Jerry probably know I do a lot of walking in Chanhassen and the other day I was walking and I always walk by Lake Ann and I go by the beach and I walk by Carver Beach on Lotus Lake and as I was walking by I thought with the invasion of the zebra mussels, all the people that use the beaches. Lake Ann, Lotus Lake and we’re just not talking Lotus Lake. We’re talking the Chanhassen lakes with the invasion of the zebra mussels those beaches will practically be closed. The zebra mussels are like razor blades and once the lakes get infested you’re not going to get rid of them. Lake Ann is a very, very high commodity here in Chanhassen and that beach is used a lot. We just mentioned Miracles of Mitch Foundation that’s going to have their fundraiser, the world’s largest kids triathlon. Lake Ann gets infested with zebra mussels, they won’t be having the triathlon at Lake Ann any more. The kids will not be able to use the beach. They won’t be able to swim. I mean this, we’re 17 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 looking here at a crisis and I don’t know if the City realizes the crisis that we have and it can’t be put on the back burner because it’s, they’re going to be infested if the City doesn’t take a leadership role in stopping the spread. It’s very easy for a boat that’s fishing on Lake Minnetonka and to say you know what, it’s getting busy out here. Let’s go to Lotus Lake or let’s go to Lake Ann or go to Lake Minnewashta and let’s fish. It won’t be that busy. That one boat that goes to Lake Minnewashta or Lake Ann, you’ve got a major, major problem. So the leadership here, you guys have to, you have to lead. You have to stop the invasion of these mussels. Thanks. Daniel: Alright, thank you Pat. Brian Kirkvold: Brian Kirkvold, 44 Center Street in Excelsior. Just one quick comment and I’ll quote the DNR on this. Zebra mussels are preventable so for someone to say that it’s inevitable, it’s just not true. If you watch where the lakes are, the zebra mussels are present a couple of years ago versus now, you’ll notice they follow the freeways and they follow where people are traveling to. Those destination spots but Heidi Wolf, Tom was in the meeting, Steve Jenks was in the meeting, Heidi Wolf of the DNR, zebra mussels are preventable. Daniel: Alright, thank you Brian. Please feel free certainly if there’s anybody else who’s like to comment or certainly ask questions. If not, what I’d like to do now at this time is just take a few minutes to discuss amongst the commission here as far as some of the issues and comments that the residents have brought to us tonight. Also with regards to the proposed motion, or actually leading up to the proposed motion by city staff and the commission here with regards to the aquatic invasive species topic. Peter, we’ll start with you. Aldritt: I guess I want to say thank you for all your guys time and efforts put into this project. I see you care about the lakes as much as all the other citizens and the councilmembers up here I’m sure. And I would, I guess I’d like to see as far as putting a gate in, and carrying on further maintenance of it, would Lotus Lake Alliance, would they be able to take on that maintenance farther down the road or would that have to be, fall on the city? Okay, so down the road if it needed to be repaired or maintained, you guys would be able to take care of that. That’s all for me right now. Daniel: Thank you Peter. Brent. Carron: I guess we’ve got a couple different issues here outside of the, well the one main issue I see is got some people looking for a gate with access key, or a code and then some people just looking for a gate for non-operational park hours. I don’t really know how to address individual ones or one other than the other. Is that what I’m hearing? You guys are looking for the gate for the just non-operational hours? Open and closed during. Steve Jenks: Let me clarify for you. Carron: Okay. 18 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Steve Jenks: Our purpose would be two fold but the reality is the gate that we would provide to control the overnight hours would enable us later with no changes to participate in the pilot program that we’re talking about so I can separate those issues. If the City decides not to move forward with the pilot program, you still have a gate to control the overnight hours. Does that help? Carron: Okay. Yep. Steve Jenks: Thank you. Ryan: Chair Daniels, could we possibly have some comments from all of us first just one what was said and then move forward with each request and take it one by one so we’re all talking about the same thing at the same time? Daniel: We can certainly do that. Ryan: Okay. Daniel: Probably a good idea from an organization standpoint. With regards to enforce park hours, and really there’s two ways to do that and we’ve had Lieutenant Enevold come here and discuss sheriff officers position on that issue so and really the other alternative, which certainly the Lake Alliance Association wants to discuss is the addition of a gate or the implementation of a gate of some sort to control park hours so Elise. Ryan: Before I go there, first of all I would like to thank everybody for coming tonight. It’s great to see such cooperation and community involvement and obviously we like hearing your concerns. Your passion for the city in which you live or visit and personally before, after the meeting that we had last time I did some due diligence and asked people in the community that live on the lakes, as well as people that trailer their lakes, just to get an understanding of where their coming from a convenience standpoint. From a homeowner’s standpoint and you know, and I found an overwhelming support for where you are at so that was interesting to me and help me understanding that your viewpoint as well as some of the recommendations. One of the other pieces that I’d like to talk about is just from an environmental standpoint. I’m a big believer in less government but in this situation I don’t believe that the environmental will take care of itself. I believe that it’s the citizens job to help move some of those things forward and I appreciate your efforts to push the DNR and speak to your community partners and leaders and share your concerns and help educate us, because there’s obviously a lot of issues that the City, County and State officials deal with on a daily basis and so some things do slip through the cracks so I appreciate you guys bringing this to our attention so we can take, you know put those safeguards in place and protect the environment. And then this was mentioned by a couple different people this evening, which I do believe in that we should be leaders as opposed to followers. I think we have wonderful assets in this community that we should protect and it would you know be a wonderful situation to be a leader to have the rest of the state to follow us and set the example for how to protect one of the most fabulous natural resources we have in the state of Minnesota. With that said I know Tom I believe that you weren’t pleased with the recommendation for this evening but as we, as we walk through each piece of it, I know the first 19 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 one is about enforcing park hours. And with the, with you know great appreciation what our law enforcement does within this community I do agree with the Lieutenant and don’t support having the zero tolerance policy and having them come to the lakes. However, I do support at this time some sort of a gate but I’d like to discuss that as we move you know kind of through the, through this process but I don’t, I just don’t support having the extra enforcement at the lakes at this time. So that’s my stance on that so thank you. Daniel: Great Elise. Tom. Tom Kelly: I do have a couple quick questions and a comment. In terms of who would control the gate, there’s got to be a guy that actually programs in those times. Is that guy a city guy or is that guy an association guy? I guess that’s my question on the gate. Who actually controls the gate? You’re going to buy it. You’re going to install it. You’re going to maintain it but does the city actually control the gate? Steve Jenks: I would agree to that. I don’t see any reason why not. We don’t want to control the hours. That’s the City’s to do I think. Tom Kelly: Alright. I don’t mean. Steve Jenks: Right, I mean that’s how I see it. Tom Kelly: Alright. Second question I have is, with the, with what Todd had sent out about state law does not allow for mandatory watercraft inspections so what the volunteers are doing right now is essentially asking if a boat would like to be inspected and the boat owner could say no and put the boat in the water? Steve Jenks: State law doesn’t allow for a citizen to control a requirement for inspection. Tom Kelly: Okay. Steve Jenks: A DNR inspector at the right level of qualification can. Tom Kelly: Can do it. Steve Jenks: Can require an inspection and can require a decontamination as well and can refuse access to the lake. Tom Kelly: Okay, so all the boats that you are inspecting and what is. Steve Jenks: On a volunteer basis. Tom Kelly: That’s all, and the boat owners are volunteering to turn their boat or they’re not required to turn the boat away. 20 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Steve Jenks: Right. We’re not getting in any boats. We’re not you know opening compartments and that sort of thing. Tom Kelly: Okay. Steve Jenks: We don’t do anything that the boat owner doesn’t allow us to do and we don’t, I mean we’re not, I think it’s a liability issue for us as well as it is for the DNR. There’s some questions as to what we can and can’t do that way so we don’t want to step over that line any more than anybody else would. It would be a problem. Tom Kelly: Right, okay. One comment I want to make is, is I walk my dog and sometimes at Bandimere Park at 5:30 and you know I don’t want to get a ticket for walking my dog prior to the posted hours, but the chances of me affecting the ecosystem of Bandimere Park by walking my dog at 5:30 is infinitismo and I don’t necessarily believe that’s the case with the lake so I do agree with Elise. I understand saying if you restrict one public access you have to restrict everything with parks and lakes but I think this is a special case and I ask the commission to consider that zebra mussels is a separate case that doesn’t really affect the vast majority of our parks that we have public access ordinances to. Daniel: Okay. Great, thank you Tom. And Peter with regards specifically to the enforcement of park hours, is there any other comments that you want to share? Aldritt: No. I guess I agree with your comments too on the gate. I think it’s important to kind of take action on enforcing those hours and with what the sheriff has stated, you know obviously they have other priorities to watch over in the city and this gate would allow those hours to be enforced with little impact to the sheriff. Daniel: Brent, anything else you’d like to share? Carron: Yeah I just, I’m inbetween. I think a gate to operate operation hours is, I could maybe tolerate that. The problem I have is, to say that we’re as an association are going to bear the costs of the gate, bear the repairs but yet it’s still the City’s gate. The City’s going to take, if the power goes out the City’s got to, is going to have to deal with it. If it breaks, the City’s going to have to either bill the homeowners association of whatever and there could be some flack back and forth on you know costs or, I’m just looking at it as a standpoint where, I’m inbetween. I think it’s a good idea as far as just operating hours only. Not during the daytime but then I also have a side of the City where the City’s going to bear the responsibility. The City, I mean you’re going to have to have someone check it. Make sure it’s working properly. There is some bear on the City as far as responsibility and that’s kind of making me teeter right now with the gate, and I guess I’m bringing this up because I don’t know how to get around it. Daniel: Yep. Tom Devine: Let me just address that if I may. Carron: Sure. 21 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Tom Devine: You know we’re breaking new ground and I think the issue is, I think what we’re trying to put forth is, there’s a willingness to provide resource at non-taxpayer expense to try to make this work and the issues of, I think it’s appropriate that the City actually you know program the gate and set, you know set the pad or whatever it is that you know makes it work electronically. And whether that’s done, some gates are handled electronically from a remote locations. I’ve heard all sorts of different things about the gates. That’s part of the homework that we really need to look at in terms of what it is. The issue is we’re willing to take on and work with whatever the sources are to make the thing work mechanically. To make sure that, it isn’t about trying to deny access to anybody. It’s about trying to make the thing work and I think what we have to do is have enough flexibility to try something and see what happens you know. That’s what the pilot’s about is to try to work through those issues and I think it’s a cooperative effort. Certainly if people that live by the gate, if the gate doesn’t work or something, they’re going to report it and you know who’s the service contract with that’s going to be taking care of it and that sort of thing. I think what we have to do is be flexible enough to say we’re all in it together. We want to make the thing work effectively. It isn’t about trying to put a stumbling block in front of everybody but at least the resources have been put forth or they’re being committed to to try to make this whole thing come together. I think that’s the thing you’ve got to look at is what are the resources and billing this group or charging this or whatever, we’ll work through that and make it happen you know. I’m sure that that’s the willingness that all of us have. And if it doesn’t work, you take the gate out. You say okay, it didn’t work. You know whatever it is, it didn’t happen. The whole idea is to try something to see what it is because we cannot staff or put you know young girls in these parks after 10:00 at night or having people there before 5:00 in the morning or 5:30 and I want to point out, you know there’s 10 stalls down there and 2 handicap stalls. That was an agreement that when that boat ramp was built was a very complex agreement that was laid out with the neighbors in terms of what that was and the hours, the enforcement of the hours was one of the stipulations that was made to the person that sold the land to the city, state or federal government or whoever ended up paying for it on what was going to happen there and those stalls, it’s not unusual to have 4, 5, 6 boats all launched before 5:30 in the morning, which is 50-60 percent of the boats that are allowed onto the lake. Those fishing boats are in there before the hours so it really is about helping to control the on and off of the lake you know and that’s why the gate thing is there. And I certainly understand the Lieutenant can’t go down there and be in every one of the locations, and that’s why the gate is, I mean they have them in parking ramps all over town. I mean it’s a new technology. It’s there to help us. Carron: One other thing is that with the gate is one thing but then I guess we, I would feel more comfortable talking with the association as well as far as seeing what their actually plan is as far as having someone at the launch. Someone you know watching it during park hours and how many holes are there going to be? Obviously there’s going to be scheduling conflicts and that sort of thing but if we do put in a gate to hold people back to park hours, how many hours are actually going to be watched during open hours? With the volunteers. Daniel: Okay. You know with regards to the enforcement of park hours by the sheriff’s office, and I agree with I think most of the commissioners sentiments here that, given the scope of the duty that they have and currently I’d say priorities, and especially being the safety of our citizens 22 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 more so than the certain aquatic species in our lake, or invasive aquatic species in our lake, that certainly is a priority number one and I think certainly it, I agree with him from the spirit of the law that, or least from the aspect of the spirit of the law that certainly it needs to be left to each sheriff, or each officer to make that judgment call. With regards to the enforcement or the implementation of a gate, from my perspective it is something I am against. My reasons are fairly simple and I think they became more to light and certainly I’ll certainly let…comments on that. One happens to be that I do believe that there is the ultimate goal that of trying to implement this into the pilot program and I know Steve that you certainly made a comment that that is not something the City’s interested in. We have…with park hours but I do believe that is certainly, that’s certainly the ultimate goal and from my perspective that’s unacceptable and it’s from one very simple reason. I have a mother who fishes and she’s 67 years old and fishes. She goes to Lake Ann and Todd’s probably seen her out there fishing and she has no interest in driving to Minnewashta and then having to go to Lake Ann or Lotus Lake. That will in my mind deter her from doing something that she likes. That decision was pretty simple on whether or not I support that program. So, and I think she’s just a microcosm of how other people feel about that particular policy. The other comment that was made tonight that certainly brought to light is, and I do believe there’s some concern about restriction. My view with regards to Lotus Lake, Lake Ann, Lake Susan is that’s a Minnesota lake that happens to be in the city of Chanhassen. When people buy boat permits they don’t buy Chanhassen boat permits. They buy a Minnesota permit and that permit allows them to fish on every single lake in this state that we get access to. Without restriction and I fully do believe that so with those two things really come into play I, it’s hard for at least, and again this is my opinion. I’m 1 of 5 here tonight and 1 of 7 on the commission, I find it difficult for me to consider that currently. There was a comment made about Bryant Lake Park and Three Rivers. Absolutely. Same thing with Carver County Park and Minnewashta. They do have gates. They’ve gated the parks themselves. So certainly that, and if you consider Lotus itself, for example Lake Ann is pretty simple to gate. It’s a single access point and it’s quite a long ways to get into it. Lotus Lake for example, if you were to gate that facility, you’re also gating potentially a neighborhood as well. I mean I’m just looking at the scope, well I guess the access point when you take a right going down but your parking’s on the other side of the road and that same road is shared residents, if I remember correctly. I was just there on Friday. So again there’s some complexities I just don’t think need to be, if we were to, if the commission certainly were to consider it obviously it’d be further discussed but I just see that you know there’s certainly, as I like to use the term and we use it a lot, slippery slope going down that direction as far as with the gate. It doesn’t necessarily mean that I don’t want to consider the importance of the invasive aquatic species. I learned to swim on Lotus Lake so certainly I grew up, and even though I’m a 40 year resident here so this is also important to me. So you know and you’re actually right. One of the questions I had for Todd was what about the beaches. That’s the very first priority from my standpoint. Lake Ann, it is a commodity and part of it is, you know and his response to me is we don’t know. I mean you can look on Lake Michigan. You can see pictures and I’ve gone on the internet and looked, there are some horrific pictures of what we see on the public beaches but Minnetonka’s had it for a year and you know Robinson Bay is highly infected I do believe. Yet we’re still swimming over at Excelsior beach so please. Yes Joe, please step up. 23 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Joe Shneider: If I can. Couple points. Number one, the adult zebra mussels typically don’t die for about 5 to 6 years and it’s only at that point in the cycle that you would get volumes of shells on the beach so you’ve got. Daniel: It’s a wash up issue. Joe Shneider: You get some now from let’s call it premature death but you’re going to get substantial amounts in 5 to 6 years. So that just gives you a perspective. Daniel: Sure. Joe Shneider: We’re not there far enough in the cycle yet at Lake Minnetonka. Daniel: Okay. Joe Shneider: I think the second point is, if I can commissioner I would really ask you decouple potential during operating hours use of a gate and any controls which we have no right to do at this point in time. It’s a desire but there is no right to do that. Separate that completely from the concept of gating the non-operating hours which will not affect your mother at all unless she’s there before park hours. Daniel: Yeah and that won’t happen either. So certainly, you know again that with specific to the gate and really what I see, that’s just where I share my thoughts on. What I’d like to do and maybe it might make sense is we may have to, I suppose as we go through each subject we should probably, since we have various opinions on each one of these, maybe make a motion for each three. Would that be an agreement of the commission so we can address each one individually. Why don’t we come back and let’s move on to adopting, you know questions regarding policy of adopting aquatic invasive species policy. Hoffman: Chair Daniels? Daniel: Yeah, please Todd. Hoffman: Just two points before the commission makes a recommendation, and also for conversation with the audience members. And one point was made early on and one was made later and we’ve recently talked about it again. The first point is the position of the DNR Commissioner. Our recollection is that he was talking about the pilot program to mandate that people go to Lake Minnewashta. That he did not support. I don’t believe he was referring to the volunteer inspection program. Second issue is, what are our, zebra mussels spread and they’re found in Lotus Lake or they’re found in Lake Ann, what are these lakes going to look like 10 years from now, 20 years from now, 50 years from now. What are the beaches going to look like and again in my conversation with Chair Daniels, we don’t know but I think there are clear differences that we can all at least appreciate. The pictures that we’re seeing from the Great Lakes, there is a very large amount of water, space, area and then substrate for these organisms to live on. Our lakes are primarily mud bottoms, and/or sand in some areas. These things require, either vegetation or they’re not really, from what I’ve seen, very aggressively making 24 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 colonization with either sand or gravel and so a lake like Lake Minnetonka probably has lot more sand and gravel and rock but lakes like Mille Lacs obviously have a lot more so you’re going to have a volume of water. You’re going to have a lot higher volume of these organisms. I don’t believe, and I just want to deter any fears. I don’t believe Lake Ann, if Lake Ann gets zebra mussels is ever going to be not able to be swam at that beach. The volume of zebra mussels that would wash up, in my opinion just wouldn’t be great enough. You could clean the volume that would make their way to that beach and so I can’t guarantee that but I think that’s something if you think about it. A water body like at Lake Ann really has no rocky shores or gravel areas. It’s all vegetation. Mud bottom. The colonization of zebra mussels is going to be much different in each individual water body if they happen to make their way into those different places so I just wanted to have everyone keep that in mind. Daniel: Please. Pat Pavelko: Just one clarification is that this is aquatic invasive species. It’s not just zebra mussels. It’s also perhaps you’ve heard of quagga mussels. It’s very similar to the zebra mussel. They’re located near the Great Lakes. They’re coming this way. They attach to soft bottoms so you have the zebra mussel on harder surfaces. Quagga mussels on soft bottoms so, and there’s additional invasive species coming after that so. I’ve got a whole pamphlet of them here. Audience: We said we did… Daniel: So with the adoption of aquatic invasive species, having a discussion about that. Elise, please. Questions, comments? Ryan: Well, I mean I don’t have a lot to say about this. I definitely support having an area, adopting a very aggressive invasive species policy. I think forming a committee or a group with the citizens involvement, with the advisory committees and get the local, county and state and regional governing bodies involved. I think this should happen sooner than later to you know, to I know a lot of things take time but to allow this to progress I’d like to move on this, or make the recommendation to move on this quickly and aggressively. Daniel: Okay, Tom. Tom Kelly: I agree with what Elise just said. No additional comments from me. Daniel: Brent. Carron: I agree. Daniel: Okay, Pete. Aldritt: I agree also. Yeah, I think it’s important to move. This is something fairly simple. Well not very simple to employ but a good way to increase education and allow citizens to help out and do their part too. 25 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Daniel: And Todd, really what, when you’re looking at, in the proposed motion that we had prior, that you have laid out or that we’ve discussed, it recommended that the City comply with accepted DNR create to step. If some sort of policy was to be in place, is what the, from the City standpoint, both with you and Lake Action Alliance had discussed, is it something to adopt? When you’re talking about continued discussions and education is that something to adopt a policy like this? I mean is this what the ultimate goal what you’re trying to accomplish having a city policy or not? Hoffman: That’s not the intent in the staff’s recommendation. Daniel: Okay. Hoffman: I’m not sure what the numbers are at the State level. It was 4 million. Now I believe it’s maybe 7 million but they’re investing a great deal of money. I think it’s over 7 million now for aquatic invasive species. The entire budget of the City of Chanhassen is under 10 million dollars for an annual operating budget. That’s within all sorts of things so it really is again is a policy. If you want to make a recommendation to the council that they form an AIS committee and to form some type of policy that’s your discussion and then that’s the decision of the City Council. Daniel: Correct. And I think that’s one of the things again we have to remember. Everything that we’re discussing certainly is recommendations to the council. Ryan: Right. Daniel: …implemented or certainly sets a policy so please understand that. And as far as from my standpoint, I’m open either way. Again I do agree this is certainly an issue, one that needs to be discussed further, along with further education I think. That’s the additional intent of what the DNR’s been trying to do with regards to doing a simple thing like removing the plugs. I mean I guess where you’re looking at, when you’re trying to address a large contingency of, or a large population that have boats it’s kind of taking it down to the simplest form is your first step in action and obviously the simplest thing is removing your plug when you leave a lake. That the plug has to remain out until you’re ready to launch again. Whether or not you put the plug back in is your own responsibility and how fast your bilge may work but nonetheless you know that will be again another education that everyone is going to have to go through. So when we consider some policies obviously we have to, also have concern what’s the policy that is going to be specific to what we’re going to try to do here in Chanhassen. What we’re trying to accomplish and also what makes best practice and policy for everybody else and all the other citizens within, or residents within our city because again that’s you know our first charter. And although I talk about what, that the lakes are access for everyone, when we create a policy from that standpoint it’s really what, how it’s going to be implemented in the city of Chanhassen so I’m indifferent either way but it certainly, it’d be interesting to see what type of feedback we get as we continue down these discussions. I think it’s something that we don’t want to halt and we want to continue to discuss so. 26 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Ryan: For a question Todd. So for, when we make this recommendation, should we be specific to the council on who that group is or is that, can we be as specific as? Hoffman: That’s up to your discretion. Daniel: Again, whether the council wants to change it or not, their own discretion. Ryan: Right, but the more specific we are, okay. Daniel: Things can change obviously but thank you Elise. Ryan: Sure. Daniel: Alright. If there are any other comments with regard to the AIS policy why don’t we move onto the support of the volunteer aquatic invasive species education program specific to South Lotus Lake Beach, so or South Lotus Lake boat access. So Brent, why don’t we start with you. Any comments? Carron: No. Not regarding that. I would just go along with what the recommended action would be and that would be to continue to support for this bullet point. Daniel: Okay. Peter. Aldritt: Yeah, I agree with Brent. Go along with what the recommendation is. That states it clearly. Daniel: Elise. Ryan: I agree. I’d like to make that recommendation but I’d also like to make a public thank you to Todd and the City for working hard with the different lake associations. I know you have all thanked him and I know that there has been challenges but there, you know I think we educate each other and I think Todd and his staff have done a great job in working with lake associations as well as informing us as a commission so I’d like to thank Todd and the staff for their work on this. Daniel: Thank you Elise. Tom. Tom Kelly: I agree. I don’t have any additional. Daniel: And certainly I agree with the rest of the commissioners. I mean you know this is an important subject obviously and one that’s been brought to our attention very quickly here. Although it’s, you know we all read about it in the paper, I agree that we certainly need to take some sort of leadership role with regards to addressing this issue. So I guess you know to continue the discussion and support of the volunteer program, I agree with completely. You know I wish there were some DNR program in place that gave you, you know to be honest with you, some authority to at least make those inspections. I don’t think there’ll be anybody here 27 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 that will certainly object to that. So again as far as the volunteer program that is in place, you know that’s something again I want to see the City certainly work out very closely with, from my opinion, with the various organizations and associations so with that do we have any other questions for staff? Okay, or any other comments as a whole? And certainly if there’s any other opportunities one last time that anybody would like to make a comment, please feel free. If not, we’re going to go ahead and make a motion. Todd I think we’re going to probably have to venture off the script a little bit here since I think it would be a lot easier at least an organizational standpoint to address each proposed motion. For each one of these three subjects. If you don’t mind and because again there’s certainly various opinions. Go ahead Tom. Tom Kelly: I recommend we start at the bottom and work our way up. The third one and. Daniel: Yeah, let’s go ahead and do that. So Tom since you made the suggestion I’m going to leave it up to you. Tom Kelly: No, I’m actually not going to make that motion. I’ll let someone else make it. Daniel: You’re sure. Tom Kelly: Yep. Daniel: Okay. Well and I think part of that motion really is a portion of what’s been laid out beforehand and that’s really to formalize a relationship between the City and volunteer groups conducting education and voluntary inspections. The City has recommended that, it’s been recommended that the City comply with an action of the DNR AIS Volunteer Manual and create a written agreement between the City and volunteer groups outlining expectations and procedures for adoption by the City Council so from that standpoint with regards to the volunteer inspections and the continued education and working with the City on this issue, why don’t we go ahead and make a, well I guess that is a motion. Why don’t we find, second it. Carron: I’ll second it. Daniel moved, Carron seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City comply with an action step in the DNR AIS Volunteer Manual and create a written agreement between the City and volunteer groups outlining expectations and procedures for adoption by the City Council. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Hoffman: To clarify. Daniel: Please. Hoffman: That motion was made to the City Council correct? Daniel: Correct. With regards to the adoption of an aquatic invasive species policy, I think there might be, this is I guess is kind of where I’m indifferent. I think if there’s some specific Elise 28 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 seemed to comment a little bit more than some of the other commissions. If there’s something that you’d like to lead or have an idea on. Ryan: Tom, did you write this motion down or not? Tom Kelly: No, I did not, no. Ryan: Okay. One quick question or comment before I make a motion for this. Steve I know you said that you will answer those questions by the end of the week. Will you make sure you answer those questions by the end of the week please. Steve Jenks: I’d also add that Todd Gerhardt is dragging some answers to me in that same list of questions so we’re both remiss. We need to talk to each other and I don’t say that to be mean. We’ll work this out between us. Ryan: Okay. Alright. Steve Jenks: There’s on my side of the equation there’s a group I’m working with and so if you can imagine there’s 4 or 5 different drafts for what the answers are but I can get those done. Ryan: Okay, just that the questions that were in the packet that we received, I think having some of those answers would be very helpful. Steve Jenks: Absolutely. Ryan: As we move forward. Steve Jenks: Yeah, I’m happy to support that, thanks. Ryan: Okay, thank you. Daniel: Okay. Elise. Ryan: So it would, the commission would make a recommendation that the City Council moves forward with the very aggressive approach in terms of timing and developing a policy with the input of the citizens, city advisory committees and local, county, state and regional governing bodies to adopt an aquatic invasive species policy. Daniel: Okay. Second. Tom Kelly: Ryan moved, Tom Kelly seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommend that the City Council moves forward with the very aggressive approach in terms of timing and developing a policy with the input of the citizens, city advisory committees and local, 29 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 county, state and regional governing bodies to adopt an aquatic invasive species policy.All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Daniel: Okay. Let’s move onto the, really address the issue, I think what it comes down to is the gate at South Lotus Lake Park boat access. If there wants to be a motion that wants to be moved. Tom Kelly: Sure. I move that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends to the City Council to approve the installation of an electronic gate at the public access at Lotus Lake to enforce the posted lake access hours. This gate will be purchased, installed and maintained at the expense of the Lake Action Alliance group with the only initial expense to the City being the electrical hook-up. Additional gate management issues will be worked out between the City of Chanhassen and the Lake Action Alliance group. Daniel: Okay, get a second? Ryan: Second. Tom Kelly moved, Ryan seconded that the Park and Recreation Commission recommends to the City Council to approve the installation of an electronic gate at the public access at Lotus Lake to enforce the posted lake access hours. This gate will be purchased, installed and maintained at the expense of the Lake Action Alliance group with the only initial expense to the City being the electrical hook-up. Additional gate management issues will be worked out between the City of Chanhassen and the Lake Action Alliance group. All voted in favor, except Daniel and Carron who opposed. The motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2. Daniel: I think that’s about it. With regards to our, the aquatic invasive species discussion specifically to the three points that we just got done talking about so certainly we again appreciate those residents who had an opportunity to stop by tonight and take time out of your busy Tuesday night to further discuss this and give us an opportunity to listen so again thank you. If there are any questions please contact the City. Also as well you know feel free to talk to your City Council representatives. Hoffman: Just so everyone is aware on how things take place now. The Minutes will be typed and prepared and then the recommendations from the commission will be forward to my office and the office of the City Manager. The City Manager will discuss those with the Mayor and then they make a decision on whether or not this issue is placed or the timing of when they’re going to place that on a future City Council agenda. Daniel: Okay, thank you Todd. As far as new business Todd, anything else that needs to be discussed? Is that it? Hoffman: That’s it. Audience: I have one question. 30 Park and Recreation Commission - August 9, 2011 Daniel: Please. Audience: Before we adjourn. In the interest of moving quickly, which I believe all of you agreed you know we want to move quickly as far as the aquatic invasive species. Can we do something to encourage the City Council to act quickly in the motion to, so something to jump start it? Daniel: Todd you’re more familiar with procedure than I am. What type of. Hoffman: I think your motion’s presented that. Daniel: No as far as I think what he might be looking for further is just you know what does it take to, you mentioned that it’s going to be up to the City Council themselves to set the agenda correct? Hoffman: Correct. Daniel: Okay and whether or not, and when they take this, when they want to take this. Hoffman: Yeah it’s their decision. As a citizen you’re best recourse or your best action is to contact them. Daniel: Correct. And that’s exactly right, alright thank you Todd. Okay. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMITTEE REPORTS. None. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS: None. ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET. None. Tom Kelly moved, Carron seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Park and Recreation Commission meeting was adjourned. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Rec Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 31