Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-02-14 Evironmental Quality Commission Meeting MinutesEDINA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION Meeting Notice Monday, February 14, 1972 Village Hall Conference Room 7:30,P.M. AGENDA 1. Call to Order and Rollcall 2. Approval of Minutes of January 31, 1972 meeting. 3. Announcements 4. Communications 5. New Business A. Consideration of Proposed By-Laws B. Minnehaha Creek Cooperative Agreement 1. Presentation by Ray Haik Attorney for Minnehaha Creek Watershed District C. Discussion of Goals for the Commission D. Other New Business 6. Adjournment Minutes of the EDINA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION February 14, 7972, 7:30 p.m. The meeting was called to order by John Telfer, acting as moderator, with the following commissioners present Carol Beim James Bentley Robert Johnson Willard Morse, Jr. Robert Sandilla Mrs. June A. Schmidt John D. Telfer Earl W. Carson (alternate) Donald T. Johnson (alter nate) Paul Laederach (alternate)) Village staff present: Gary West Robert Dunn Greg Luce Harold Sand The minutes of the January 3/ meeting were approved as read. John Telfer made the following announcements: 1. An earth expo to be held in Southdale Shopping Center beginning May 1. This expo is to last approximately a week with numerous exhibits and special events. Mr. Telfer suggested that this might be a project that the Commission may want to become involved in. 2. A work session on disposable containers with the Municiple Advisory Environmental Commission members to be held in the Community Roam, Minnetonka Civic Center, 8:00 p.m., February 24. Mr. Gary West in- formed the Commission that this group was composed primarily of members of various commissions in the suburban area who were meeting together to exchange information and collectively study various problems with the environment. Mr. Telfer advised the Commission that he had access to a film by the Bureau of Sports, Fisheries, and Wildlife, which he would be willing to make available for the next meeting. Bob Johnson said that he would also attempt to secure the film on Nine Mile Creek for viewing at the next meeting. T•ir. Telfer handed out some additional information on background for the formation of the Environmental Quality Commission. In addition to this he read a letter from the League of Women Voter's to the Council at the time the Environmental Quality Commission was first being considered. An item of communications was added by Gary West who announced the resignation of George W. Nicholas, effective immediately. Mr. Nicholas has accepted a position in Chicago which will require him to move from Edina, and therefore he would not be eligible to participate in the Commission. NEW BUSINESS P.Y:J431#0 The Commission meeting as a Committee of the Whole held considerable discussion on the By-Laws prepared by the By-Laws Committee at their meeting February 3, 1972. The main items of discussion concerned the number of meetings that would be held each month and each year, ie. whether the Commission should adjourn during the ourmcr months or for the December meeting at which time it might be difficult to obtnin a quorum; the amount of time needed for written notice and receipt of agenda and study materials before a meeting, and the rights and duties of alter- natec to the Environmental Quality Commission. Mnutee Edina Environmental Quality Commiasen rage 2 It was moved by Mr. Frederick Richards and seconded by Bob Johnson that Section 9, Meeting of Members, be ammended to read as follows: "The Commission shall hold regular meetings monthly on the second Monday of each month at 7:30 p.m. Meetings of the Commission shall be held at least 12 times per year at 4801 West 50th Street, in the Village of Edina, Minnesota." Considerable discussion was held on the matter of meeting once or twice per month. Mr. Telfer, in favor of at least two meetings per month, Mr. Sandilla favoring one meeting plus special meetings as needed. After considerable discussion, it appeared the majority's opinion that one meeting per month on a regular basis and special meetings as needed would be the most appropriate. The motion was approved by a majority voice vote. The next item of discussion was the date by which members are to notify the vice- chairman if he is to be absent. By mutual agreement, the second paragraph of *6 was changed to read: "It shall be the duty of each member to notify the vice-chairman if he shall be absent at the next meeting by 4:30 of the Thursday before the regular Monday meeting. In the event of unpredictable absence, he shall inform either the chairman or the vice-chairman as soon as possible." Discussion was held on the amount of notice needed for meetings, and when the agendas, minutes, and study materials are to be delivered to the individual commissioners. After consieerable discussion about the time needed to adequately study materials, minutes of the previous meeting, and prior notice of the meeting date, it was unani- mously decided to change Section 12 and Section 22 to permit the deliverence of written notice five days prior to the meeting date if it were mailed, or three days if it were delivered by currier to the commissioner. Of considerable concern was the possibility of lack of quorum and the need to notify the commission members if a quorum were not going to be present at the meeting. Discussion was held on the rights and duties of the alternates to the Commission. Mr. Laederach mentioned that in his original letter from Mrs. Hallberg appointing him to the Commission, there was mention that he would have the right to vote in the event that a quorum were needed and in the absence of the regular members. Mr. West related that this had not been the original intention of the Mayor, and that the letter received from Mrs. Hallberg had been in error. General discussion ensued during which, the commission members expressed the opinion that perhaps this was an area for the Commission to request an amendment to the Ordinance to clarify this particlar point. This portion of the meeting vas continued until later time as the invited greats Mr. Ray Balk and Mr. Riugham of the Minneheha Creek Watershed District arrived for their part of the agenda. Mr. Haik, attorney for the Watershed District, gave a brief history of the district, and the particular proposal on which the Commission is requested to make' a recommendation by the Village Council. This proposal, being a joint powers agreement between the five communities bordering and disected by Ninne- hallo Creek. Mr. Haik attempted to point out the advantages of thin cooperative agreement and the work that is being proposed, particularly the advantages of financial savings to the Village of Edina in terms of property loss end damage due to adnormal creek flooding. Also mentioned as a benefit would be the development of rest arean for canoeists along the creek, possibility of hiking, bicycle and horseback riding trails, and the removal of numerous obstructions present in the creek. Minutee. Edina Environmental Quality Commission Page 3 Several questions were asked by the commissioners of Mr. Haik, including questions of the amount of budget the Watershed District has available for such use, and the amount of tax revenue which could be raised by a one mill levy over the Watershed District which eculd be used in the actual construction of facilities such as the Gray's. Bay Dam, and rest stations. Mr. Haik said that a further advantage of the cooperative powers agreement concept would be that it might make federal funds available for these projects which would eliminate the teed for levying a special tax on all the property in the Watershed District. The levying of such a tax could 'se quite difficult and entail a good deal of time and expense. Mr. Haik expla-ned that the seed money would be to hire a planner to prepare a comprehensive plan for the development of 1innehaha Creek and the preparation of a federal grant application to finance this deVelopment. Mr. Balk went on to say that it has been their experience in the past, that if -the grant were made, most of the seed money would be returned to the communities as a portion of the administrative costs in the grant, although it was Mr. Haiks opinion that this money should go into a revolving fund to keep the governing board operating and functioning. At this point Mr. Telfer interjected that he had discussed the matter with Mr. Alden Smith, Commissioner for the Minneapolis Park Board, who expressed optimism that the Park Board would be interested in participating in this project. He questioned Mr. Haik as to the effect upon the proposal if Edina and/or Minneapolis and the Minne- apolis Park Board did not participate in this project. Mr. Haik'e reply was that it would appear that it might have some affect upon a federal grant, however, he felt that this was a project worthy of pursuing even though federal grant are not made available, and if federal money were not available, the project could be financed by the Watershed District with a 1 mill levy over the whole Watershed District for a period not to exceed 15 years. This 1 mill levy would mean approximately *400,000 per year and would be available for petitioning projects. Mr. Hingham, Director of the Watershed District stated that the primary advantage to Edina, Minneapolis, and the Minneapolie Park Board would be that we would have a voice in the planning in what takes place upstream which will effect what happens downstream, and not simply sit back and watch what is being done to us. Further discussion was held between Mr. Haik and the members of the Environmental Quality Commission. Mr. Telfer suggested that a committee be appointed from the members of the Environ- mental Quality Commission to study the proposal and make a recommendation to the full Commission. Discussion was held as whether this recommendation should be in the form of a resolution to the Village Council. Mr. Telfer and several other members of the Commission spoke in favor of adopting a resolution supporting Edina's entering the proposed cooperative power's agreement. Mr. Bob Sandilla voiced a considerable amount of concern for this proposal as he felt there was not adequate information available at this time, and that we had only heard one side of the story. Me felt that there was perhaps an opposing view point. He felt this opposing view point should be heard and investigated before the Environmental Quality Commission took action upon a reso- lution. The motion was made by Bob Johnson and seconded by June Schmidt that a resolution be sent to the Council that the Village of Edina enter into a joint powers agreement with the Minnehaha Creek Governing Committee. Additional discussion was held and it was • Ninates Edina Environmental Quality Commission _Page 4 -duggested that the Park Board also give consideration to this matter at their next meeting. Bob Sandilla again expreesed reservations in propriety of sending such a resolution to the Council: 1. when the Commission is just becoming or- ganized, and 2. when the Commission does not have facts pTesented from both opponents and proponents of the proposal. Bob Sandilla moved and Clifford Johnson seconded that this matter be tabled until the next meeting. The motion to table this matter carried three to one. A special meeting was celled for February 28, 1972, 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room to continue the work on By-Laws, and for the election of officers. Clifford Johnson moved, Fred Richards seconded the adjournment. Meting was adjourned.