Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-02-11 CC Packet I {teryiffe CITY OF CENTERVILLE COUNCIL MEETING & WORK SESSION AGENDA Wednesday, February 11, 2015— Set Agenda =Red 6:30 p.m. or shortly thereafter OPEN FORUM 6:30 P.M.: An opportunity for members of the public to address the City Council on items not on the current agenda. Items requiring Council action may be deferred to Staff or Boards and Commissions for research and future Council Agendas if appropriate. You will be limited to two (2) minutes and we ask that you conduct yourself in a professional, courteous manner and refrain from the use of profanity. Failure to abide by this policy may result in the loss of your privilege to speak. Persons wishing to speak will be required to complete a sign-up sheet and give it to the Mayor or a Staff person prior to 6:15 p.m. COUNCIL MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. PUBLIC HEARING IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA % AWARD OF BID—2015 Street Improvement Project 1. 2015 Street Improvement Project a. February 11,2015 @ 4:00 p.m. Bid Opening—City Engineer b. Email Correspondence Mr. Mike Steigauf, 7070 Eagle Trail (Page 1) VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. January 28,2015 City Council Meeting Minutes (Pages 2-7) VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. City of Centerville January 15,2015 through January 28,2015 Claims (Check#29315-29331) (Page 8) 2. Centennial Police Department Claims through January 23,2015 (Check#10241-10257) (Page 9) 3. Successful Performance Review, Mr. Dan Schmitz/Building Inspection/Maintenance Technician 4. Agreement for Local Assessor Services By & Between the City of Centerville & Kenneth A. Tolzmann, SAMA(February 27,2015—February 27,2019 Services) (Pages 10-14) 6. League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust—Liability Coverage—Waiver Form (Tort Liability) (Page 15) VIII. AWARDS/PRESENTATIONS/APPEARANCES IX. OLD BUSINESS 1. Northeast Water Summit/Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Groundwater Management Area Project (Pages 16-111) 2. Remote Meeting Attendance/Participation(Pages 112-118) X. NEW BUSINESS 1. Water Tower Subdivision/Plat -Direction of Whether or Not to Allocate Associated Park Dedication Fees to Parks & Rec. for this Subdivision (Pages 119- 127) XI. COUNCIL & ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Administrator Ericson a. City of Lino Lakes Correspondence(Page 128) b. League of MN Cities Legislative Conference (Pages 129-130) CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call II. 2015 CITY COUNCIL GOAL SETTING SESSION XIII. ADJOURNMENT *REMINDERS** Parks &Recreation Committee Skate Night-February 7, 2015, 6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m. Free Hayrides, Bonfire, Popcorn & Hot Cocoa(LaMotte Park) Centerville Lions Annual Ice Fishing Contest w/EAA Young Eagles Airplane Rides (Lion Lynn Johnson Memorial)-February 21, 2015, 8:00 a.m. -4:00 p.m. (Centerville Lake in front of Anoka County Rice Creek Regional Park Beach) St. Genevieve's Blood Drive- 12:00-6:00 p.m. Planninf &Zoning Commission Meeting-March 3, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) (P.H. CUP 6845-20` Avenue S. -Ultimate Martial Arts Studio Parks& Recreation Committee Meeting-March 4, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting-March 11, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting-March 25, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting-April 8, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting-April 22, 2015, 6:15 p.m. (Council Chambers) (Board of Appeal & Equalization) Shake Your Shamrock 5, 8K's &Kids 1/3K Walk/Runs - March 15, 2015, 7:00 a.m.- 1:00 p.m./Kelly's Korner Sponsor(Around Centerville Lake and Out and Back) ,ete des Lacs 5, 8K's & Kids Fun Run—July 25, 2015 (Around Centerville Lake and Out and Back) jut Run Homelessness, 5, 8K's &Kids Run/Walk— September 19, 2015 (Around Centerville Lake and Out and Back) terviffe CITY OF CENTERVILLE COUNCIL MEETING & WORK SESSION AGENDA Wednesday, February 11, 2015— Set Agenda = Red 6:30 p.m. or shortly thereafter OPEN FORUM 6:30 P.M.: An opportunity for members of the public to address the City Council on items not on the current agenda. Items requiring Council action may be deferred to Staff or Boards and Commissions for research and future Council Agendas if appropriate. You will be limited to two (2) minutes and we ask that you conduct yourself in a professional, courteous manner and refrain from the use of profanity. Failure to abide by this policy may result in the loss of your privilege to speak. Persons wishing to speak will be required to complete a sign-up sheet and give it to the Mayor or a Staff person prior to 6:15 p.m. COUNCIL MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. PUBLIC HEARING IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AWARD OF BID—2015 Street Improvement Project 1. 2015 Street Improvement Project a. February 11, 2015 @ 4:00 p.m. Bid Opening—City Engineer b. Email Correspondence Mr. Mike Steigauf, 7070 Eagle Trail (Page 1) VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. January 28,2015 City Council Meeting Minutes (Pages 2-7) VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. City of Centerville January 15,2015 through January 28,2015 Claims (Check#29315-29331) (Page 8) 2. Centennial Police Department Claims through January 23,2015 (Check#10241-10257) (Page 9) 3. Successful Performance Review, Mr. Dan Schmitz/Building Inspection/Maintenance Technician 4. Agreement for Local Assessor Services By & Between the City of Centerville & Kenneth A. Tolzmann, SAMA(February 27,2015—February 27,2019 Services) (Pages 10-14) 6. League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust—Liability Coverage—Waiver Form (Tort Liability) (Page 15) VIII. AWARDS/PRESENTATIONS/APPEARANCES IX. OLD BUSINESS 1. Northeast Water Summit/Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Groundwater Management Area Project (Pages 16-111) 2. Remote Meeting Attendance/Participation (Pages 112-118) X. NEW BUSINESS 1. Water Tower Subdivision/Plat —Direction of Whether or Not to Allocate Associated Park Dedication Fees to Parks & Rec. for this Subdivision (Pages 119- 127) XI. COUNCIL & ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Administrator Ericson a. City of Lino Lakes Correspondence(Page 128) b. League of MN Cities Legislative Conference(Pages 129-130) CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING 1. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call Il. 2015 CITY COUNCIL GOAL SETTING SESSION XIII. ADJOURNMENT *REMINDERS** Parks & Recreation Committee Skate Night—February 7, 2015, 6:30 p.m. — 8:30 p.m. Free Hayrides, Bonfire, Popcorn & Hot Cocoa(LaMotte Park) Centerville Lions Annual Ice Fishing Contest w/EAA Young Eagles Airplane Rides (Lion Lynn Johnson Memorial)—February 21, 2015, 8:00 a.m. —4:00 p.m. (Centerville Lake in front of Anoka County Rice Creek Regional Park Beach) St. Genevieve's Blood Drive— 12:00—6:00 p.m. Plannin� & Zoning Commission Meeting—March 3, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) (P.H. CUP 6845-20t Avenue S. —Ultimate Martial Arts Studio Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting—March 4, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting—March 11, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting—March 25, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting—April 8, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting—April 22, 2015, 6:15 p.m. (Council Chambers) (Board of Appeal & Equalization) Shake Your Shamrock 5, 8K's & Kids 1/3K Walk/Runs - March 15, 2015, 7:00 a.m. — 1:00 p.m./Kelly's Korner Sponsor(Around Centerville Lake and Out and Back) �ete des Lacs 5, 8K's & Kids Fun Run—July 25, 2015 (Around Centerville Lake and Out and Back) gut Run Homelessness, 5, 8K's & Kids Run/Walk—September 19, 2015 (Around Centerville Lake and Out and Back) M teryifle CITY OF CENTERVILLE COUNCIL MEETING & WORK SESSION AGENDA Wednesday, February 11, 2015— Set Agenda =Red 6:30 p.m. or shortly thereafter OPEN FORUM 6:30 P.M.: An opportunity for members of the public to address the City Council on items not on the current agenda. Items requiring Council action may be deferred to Staff or Boards and Commissions for research and future Council Agendas if appropriate. You will be limited to two (2) minutes and we ask that you conduct yourself in a professional, courteous manner and refrain from the use of profanity. Failure to abide by this policy may result in the loss of your privilege to speak. Persons wishing to speak will be required to complete a sign-up sheet and give it to the Mayor or a Staff person prior to 6:15 p.m. COUNCIL MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. PUBLIC HEARING IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AWARD OF BID—2015 Street Improvement Project 1. 2015 Street Improvement Project a. February 11,2015 @ 4:00 p.m. Bid Opening—City Engineer b. Email Correspondence Mr. Mike Steigauf, 7070 Eagle Trail (Page 1) VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. January 28,2015 City Council Meeting Minutes (Pages 2-7) VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. City of Centerville January 15,2015 through January 28,2015 Claims (Check#29315-29331) (Page 8) 2. Centennial Police Department Claims through January 23,2015 (Check#10241-10257) (Page 9) 3. Successful Performance Review, Mr. Dan Schmitz/Building Inspection/Maintenance Technician 4. Agreement for Local Assessor Services By & Between the City of Centerville & Kenneth A. Tolzmann, SAMA(February 27,2015—February 27,2019 Services) (Pages 10-14) 6. League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust—Liability Coverage—Waiver Form (Tort Liability) (Page 15) VIII. AWARDS/PRESENTATIONS/APPEARANCES IX. OLD BUSINESS 1. Northeast Water Summit/Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Groundwater Management Area Project(Pages 16-111) 2. Remote Meeting Attendance/Participation (Pages 112-118) X. NEW BUSINESS 1. Water Tower Subdivision/Plat —Direction of Whether or Not to Allocate Associated Park Dedication Fees to Parks & Rec. for this Subdivision (Pages 119- 127) XI. COUNCIL & ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Administrator Ericson a. City of Lino Lakes Correspondence(Page 128) b. League of MN Cities Legislative Conference (Pages 129-130) CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call II. 2015 CITY COUNCIL GOAL SETTING SESSION XIII. ADJOURNMENT *REMINDERS** Parks &Recreation Committee Skate Night—February 7, 2015, 6:30 p.m. — 8:30 p.m. Free Hayrides, Bonfire, Popcorn&Hot Cocoa (LaMotte Park) Centerville Lions Annual Ice Fishing Contest w/EAA Young Eagles Airplane Rides (Lion Lynn Johnson Memorial)—February 21, 2015, 8:00 a.m. —4:00 p.m. (Centerville Lake in front of Anoka County Rice Creek Regional Park Beach) St. Genevieve's Blood Drive— 12:00—6:00 p.m. Plannin�& Zoning Commission Meeting—March 3, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) (P.H. CUP 6845-20t Avenue S. —Ultimate Martial Arts Studio Parks &Recreation Committee Meeting—March 4, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting—March 11, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting—March 25, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting—April 8, 2015, 6:30 p.m. (Council Chambers) City Council Meeting—April 22, 2015, 6:15 p.m. (Council Chambers) (Board of Appeal & Equalization) Shake Your Shamrock 5, 8K's &Kids 1/3K Walk/Runs - March 15, 2015, 7:00 a.m. — 1:00 p.m./Kelly's Korner Sponsor(Around Centerville Lake and Out and Back) ete des Lacs 5, 8K's & Kids Fun Run—July 25, 2015 (.Around Centerville Lake and Out and Back) jut Run Homelessness, 5, 8K's & Kids Run/Walk—September 19, 2015 (Around Centerville Lake and Out and Back) Teresa Bender From: Please Do Not Click Reply <support@govoffice.com> Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 4:50 PM To: Teresa Bender Subject: Questions, Comments or Concerns - Online Form (form) has been filled out on your site. Your Site has received new information through an online form. Online Form: Questions,Comments or Concerns-Online Form Site URL:www.centervillemn.com ------------------------------------------------- Name: Mike Steigauf Street Address, Including House Number: 7070 Eagle Trail Questions/Concerns/Comments: I just got a notice of a hearing in Dec. for a road improvement for my street and several street in the area. It says we will be assessed for some or all of this improvement. Personally if the improvement is the same as what happened on meadow lane it's worse than we have now.They only ground the edges of the road. Now there are deep holes where all the sewers are.The smooth blacktop part may look good but if you don't zig zag down the road to miss all theses created potholes it will beat up your car, and the road on each side of them. A little over a year ago we bought our house here for$275k, and the taxes are over$4500/yr. I've been paying property taxes for 35 years and for the amount the city should be able to maintain what we have without special assessments Telephone Number:: (651) 398-8982 Email Address:: This person selected the following option(s). -Do you desire to be contact by telephone? Do Not Click Reply-This e-mail has been generated from an online form. This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com 1 P1 CITY OF CENTERVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 28, 2015 6:30 p.m. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof,the City of Centerville held their regularly scheduled meeting of January 28,2015 at City Hall, 1880 Main Street. PRESENT: Mayor Tom Wilharber Council Member Jeff Paar Council Member Steve King Council Member D. Love ABSENT: Council Member Ben Fehrenbacher STAFF: City Administrator Mike Ericson - -- Legal Counsel Kurt Glaser City Engineer Mark Statz OATH OF OFFICE Administrator Ericson administered the oath of office to Mayor Wilharber in Administrative Offices on January 27, 2015 at approximately 10:47 a.m. I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Wilharber called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. PUBLIC HEARING 1. None. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Wilharber added Old Business, #4. Engineer Update on CSAH21, Check #29307-29314 and removed V. Award of Bid from the agenda stating that the item would be discussed at the next regularly scheduled meeting. Motion by Council Member Love, seconded by Council Member King to approve the Agenda with the above stated amendments. All in favor. Motion passed. P2 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes January 28,2015 VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. January 14, 2015 City Council Meeting Minutes Mayor Wilharber provided Council Members with an opportunity to amend the presented minutes. Motion by Council Member Love, seconded by Council Member Paar, to approve the minutes of the January 14, 2015 City Council Meeting as presented. All in favor. Motion passed. VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. City of Centerville January 15, 2015 through January 28, 2015 Claims (Check #29292- 29306) wNoided Check#29227 & (Check#29307-29314) 2. Centennial Police Department Claims through January 23, 2015 (Check #10221-10240) 3. Centennial Fire District Claims through January 23, 2015 (Check#6742-6760) w/Payroll Checks#6733-6710 4. Anoka County Request for Amendment #2 to Connectivity Services Agreement w/Community Anchor Institution(s) for Broadband Services at Co-Location Service Site(s) Anoka County Agreement for Residential Recycling Program Mayor Wilharber provided Council Members an opportunity to pull items from the Consent Agenda for additional discussion. Motion by Council Member Kina, seconded by Council Member Paar to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. All in favor. Motion passed. VIII. AWARDS/PRESENTATIONS/APPEARANCES 1. None. IX. OLD BUSINESS 1. Ord. #70, Second Series — Amending City Code Chapter 157, Stormwater Management & Summary "Tabled from previous meeting" Administrator Ericson stated that the Council is aware that with the renewal of the City's MS4 permit additional requirements have been placed on communities that own and operate their own municipal storm water systems and Centerville has responsibilities to ensure that they are being maintained and meet all requirements placed on them by the MPCA along with written procedures for same. More members present and SOP and issues related to MS4 permits and Engineer can answer any questions Page 2 of 6 P3 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes January 28,2015 Engineer Statz stated that Council had directed him to review the amendment and Standard Operating Procedures, he had and believes that they are suitable for the City to amend and operate under. Motion by Council Member Paar, seconded by Council Member Love to approve Ord #70, Second Series — Amending City Code Chapter 157, Stormwater Management, Summary & Standard Operating Procedures as presented. Council Member King abstained. Motion passed. 2. Discussion on Economic Development Authority/Committee "Tabled from previous meeting* Administrator Ericson stated that Council may desire to review the current structure of its Economic Develop Authority (EDA) versus having an Economic Development Committee as in years past. Administrator Ericson stated this would guide him in obtaining his goals set by Council for economic growth and retention. Council felt strongly that retaining businesses and gaining businesses was a high priority along with decreasing taxes and increasing the business community's involvement. Consensus of the Council was that this item would be discussed at the Council Work Session. 3. Schedule City Council Goal Setting Session "Tabled from previous meeting" Administrator Ericson stated that in the past, Council has scheduled several Work Sessions immediately following their regular Council meeting to discuss Goals for the upcoming year and desired to obtain direction on how to complete this task. Council stated that they would prefer to meet at least once prior to having a Joint Work Session with Committee/Commissions and scheduled them for February 11, 2015 (Council only) and February 25, 2015 immediately following their regularly scheduled meetings. Lengthy discussion was had regarding informing the public about improvement projects through newsletters, etc. Administrator Ericson stated that even though Centerville is a smaller community there are plenty of avenues for saving money and obtaining goals (interns, etc.). 4. CSAH21 Update—Engineer Statz Engineer Statz stated that he and Staff had recently met with representatives from Anoka County Highway Department and obtained a winter update on moving power lines, telephone poles, gas lines, etc. Engineer Statz also stated that work will commence on in the spring on the sanitary sewer and water lines. Engineer Statz stated that it is anticipated that all the road work will be completed by the end of July, 2015. Engineer Statz again emphasized safety during the road project is of the utmost and the roadway again will be closed to through traffic during this construction. Page 3 of 6 P4 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes January 28,2015 Lengthy discussion took place regarding the potential for temporarily closing Main Street for the Fete des Lacs parade. Council Member Paar stated that it appears that the County will not allow the closing of Main Street and an alternative parade route is being planned for 2015. Engineer Statz reminded Council that during last years' construction of Centerville Road and the 2014 Mill and Overlay projects quotes were received for the removal of the colored concrete in the downtown intersection area for $80,000. Engineer Statz also stated that the contractor for this season of the Centerville Road project has quoted $120,000. Engineer Statz stated that he would obtain a quote from the contractor approved for the 2015 Mill and Overlay project also, but Council may have to consider instead of a full reconstruct in that area a mill and overlay similar to the roadways which would be financially easier for the City to handle. Council Member King questioned whether all of these items were included in the City's costs and Engineer Statz concurred. However, Engineer Statz stated that as Council is aware it has come to light that the St. Paul Regional Water 42" raw water line is located above the culvert that is slated for upsizing where as previously thought it was under the culvert. Engineer Statz stated that it is unknown who owns and maintains this pipe but that they do not desire to replace it at this time due to other priority areas needing repair. Engineer Statz felt that a potential compromise could be obtained and he would continue to work with them regarding this item and the pipes repair at the same time as the construction. Engineer Statz also stated that Metropolitan Council has two sewer lines that run in the general vicinity of this location with one experiencing leakage in the past and caused concern. Met. Council is aware of the need to replace this piping and will be considering it along with the project. Lengthy discussion ensued regarding liability, costs, ownership, necessity for other entities to step up to the place, downtown drainage, the cost savings of joint trenching and age of existing pipes, pipes last used in 1989, installation of a smaller pipe within the existing pipe, alternative options, etc. Mayor Wilharber stated that Anoka County Highway Department updates their web page weekly and would be a good source of information for those that live or travel on Centerville Road during the construction period. Engineer Statz stated that he would be updating Staff and Council on a regular basis regarding these items. X. NEW BUSINESS 1. Res. #15-071 — Conditionally Granting the Consent to the Transfer of Control of the Cable Television Franchise and Cable Television System from Comcast Corporation to Greatland Connections, Inc. Administrator Ericson stated as the City of Centerville is a member city of the North Metro. Telecommunications Commission of which Comcast Cable has a franchise agreement with, has recently merged with TimeWarner and formed Greatland Connections, Inc. It is imperative that Page 4 of 6 P5 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes January 28,2015 the franchise be transferred to continue their services under the current agreement. All cities as members must adopt similar resolutions. Motion by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Love to adopt Res. #15- 071 — Conditionally Granting the Consent to the Transfer of Control of the Cable Television Franchise and Cable Television System from Comcast Corporation to Greadand Connections, Inc. as presented All in favor. Motion passed. 2. Ord. #71, Second Series — Cable Television Franchise Ordinance Amendment & Summary Administrator Ericson stated that the action of amending the current code/ordinance and its associated summary is in accordance with the City's right to govern their right-of-ways and federal law allows for franchises. Discuss ensued regarding necessity, form, formal process, civil litigation, federal and state laws, etc. Motion by Council Member Paar, seconded by Council Member Love to approve Ord. #71, Second Series — Cable Television Franchise Ordinance Amendment & Summary as presented. All in favor. Motion passed. 3. Discussion on Policy for Remote Meeting Attendance Administrator Ericson stated that Council Member Fehrenbacher due to his second absence requested whether there was an avenue for him to participate in the Council meeting from a remote site. Administrator Ericson stated that he contained a sample policy which is utilized in the City of Hugo for discussion. Legal Counsel Glaser stated that State Statute governs remote attendance and a policy would be good. Administrator Ericson stated that he would provide Council with the statute and costs associated with equipment purchases for their next meeting. XI. COUNCIL & ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCEMENTS Administrator Ericson a. FEMA Flood Plain Study (Appeal Data) — Administrator Ericson reported that through working with RCWD the City has received confirmation that FEMA will incorporate all modifications that have been provided to them in their insurance rate maps and etc. b. Northeast Metro Water Summit— January 29, 2015 — 7:00 p.m. Hugo City Hall — Administrator Ericson reminded Council Member of the meeting and its importance. Administrator Ericson stated that he and the Mayor would be in attendance. Page 5 of 6 P6 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes January 28,2015 C. Mr. Dean Luxenburg Correspondence—Administrator Ericson stated that this was provided for information purposes only and that he was aware that Council Members had already received it directly from Mr. Luxenburg via email. d. Res. #15-003 & Res. #15-004 (FYI) — Administrator Ericson stated that these items were included in the packet for those that were not present at the last meeting where appointments had been made. Council Member Paar stated that at the last Fire Steering meeting they discussed a 2% salary increase for (3) three full-time employees as budgeted, discussed investments,briefly considered Lino Lake's request to officially leave the district on January 1, 2016 rather than their previously requested date of January 31, 2015, additional equipment distribution, current staffing levels of stations, possibility of the Relief Association's consideration of allowing (5) five year for vesting versus the previously required (10) ten years. Mayor Wilharber stated that if the City of Lino Lakes desired to come back to the Centennial Fire District it would be considered and if they choose to operate on their own that is wonderful also. Council Member King stated that the North Metro. Telecommunication Commission is entertaining the option to pay off the building bonds early and saving approximately $6,000 in interest. Mayor Wilharber recessed the regularly scheduled Council meeting to a scheduled Closed Executive Session following a five(5)minute break at 8:00 p.m. XII. CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION—PENDING LITIGATION DISCUSSIONS 1. Kelly- 2. Sheehy- Mayor Wilharber re-opened the Regularly Scheduled Council Meeting at XIII. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member to Adiourn the Regularly Scheduled Council Meeting of January 28, 2015 at p.m. All in favor. Motion sassed. Transcribed by City Staff Member Teresa Bender, City Clerk Page 6 of 6 P7 <+1 1 1 Vf VG1\1 L.r\YILL.G uGi vO/10 3:1 t3 HM Page 1 Check Detail - February 11, 2015 Check Date Check# Vender Name Comments Amm. 2/11/2015 029315 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS Doc# 2099281.005 CUP A&K Auto $46.00 2/11/2015 029315 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS Doc# 2099281.006 Easement-7087-20th Ave $46.00 2/11/2015 029315 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS Doc# 2099281.004 Public Easement-Lake Area Utility $46.00 2/11/2015 029315 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS Doc# 2099281.007 CUP Shane's Auto $46.00 Check Nbr 029315 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS $184.00 2/11/2015 029316 ANOKA COUNTY TREASURY March 2015 Broadband $37.50 2/11/2015 029316 ANOKA COUNTY TREASURY March 2015 Broadband $37.50 2/11/2015 029316 ANOKA COUNTY TREASURY March 2015 Broadband $37.50 Check Nbr 029316 ANOKA COUNTY TREASURY $112.50 2/11/2015 029317 BANYON DATA SYSTEMS INC UB Support $397.50 2/11/2015 029317 BANYON DATA SYSTEMS INC UB Support $397.50 Check Nbr 029317 BANYON DATA SYSTEMS INC $795.00 2/11/2015 029318 CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPT Feb.2015 Police Services Check Nbr 029318 CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPT $60.627.92 2/11/2015 029319 CITY OF CIRCLE PINES Feb-2015 Police Building Payment $5,000.00 2/11/2015 029319 CITY OF CIRCLE PINES Feb-2015 Police Building Payment $235.73 Check Nbr 029319 CITY OF CIRCLE PINES $5.235.73 2/11/2015 029320 CONNEXUS ENERGY 2085 W Cedar St-Sery Thru 1-16-15 $355.73 2/11/2015 029320 CONNEXUS ENERGY 7100-20th Ave N.Trafsg-Sery Thru- 1-22-15 $76.47 2/11/2015 029320 CONNEXUS ENERGY 6900-20th Ave-Lift Stat-Sery Thru 1-16-15 $64.82 2/11/2015 029320 CONNEXUS ENERGY 6800-20th Ave-Radio for Scada-Sery Thru 1-23-15 $18.64 2/11/2015 029320 CONNEXUS ENERGY 6800-20th Ave-Radio for Scada-Sery Thru 1-23-15 $18.64 2/11/2015 029320 CONNEXUS ENERGY Street Lights-395653-219699-Sery Thru 1-21-15 $108.21 2/11/2015 029320 CONNEXUS ENERGY Street Lights-395653-219678-Sery Thru 1-21-15 $76.00 Check Nbr 029320 CONNEXUS ENERGY $718.51 2/11/2015 029321 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC Service Thru Jan.2015 $18.85 2/11/2015 029321 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC Service Thru Jan.2015 $18.85 Check Nbr 029321 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL INC $37- 2/11/2015 37-2/11/2015 029322 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT Chemicals Check Nbr 029322 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT $1,027.- 2/11/2015 029323 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD Water Meter Parts Check Nbr 029323 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD $203.04 2/11/2015 029324 HUGO AREA BUSINESS ASSOCIATION Mike Ericson Conference on 2-25-15 Check Nbr 029324 HUGO AREA BUSINESS ASSOCIATION $12.00 2/11/2015 029325 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATI Union dues-Feb.2015 Check Nbr 029325 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATI $99.00 2/11/2015 029326 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO INC 2013 Street Project&Utility Improvement-shortage Check Nbr 029326 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO INC $80.00 2/11/2015 029327 PRESS PUBLICATIONS Ad for Bids-2015 Mill&Overlay Check Nbr 029327 PRESS PUBLICATIONS $67.52 2/11/2015 029328 QUAD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE M. Ericson-membership dues Check Nbr 029328 OUAD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE $150.00 2/11/2015 029329 STANDARD&POORS FINANCIAL SER Analytical Services Rendered with Gen.Oblig.Improv. Refunding Check Nbr G29329 STANDARD&POORS FINANCIAL SER $9.500.00 2/11/2015 029330 SYMANTEC Symc Complete Security and Control SMB Per User Check Nbr 029330 SYMANTEC $720.00 2/11/2015 029331 HEALTH PARTNERS Feb.2015 Health Insurance Check Nbr 029331 HEALTH PARTNERS $3,416.54 Total Checks$82,986.69 P8 CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPT Check Register-Police GL without invoice numbers Page: 1 Check Issue Dates: 1/24/2015-2/6/2015 Feb 06, 2015 10-17AM Report Criteria- Report type: Summary GL Check Ck No Description Check Period Issue Date Payee Amount 02/15 02/06/2015 10241 ABRAMS&SCHMIDT LLC JAN LABOR RELATIONS 319.00 02/15 02/06/2015 10242 ANOKA COUNTY DEC INTERNET ACCESS 421.51 02/15 02/06/2015 10243 CITY OF CIRCLE PINES REIMB FOR 2015 EAP SERVICES 1,414.67 02/15 02/06/2015 10244 COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES INC FEB CLEANING SERVICE 796.22 02/15 02/06/2015 10245 DON'S CIRCLE SERVICE, INC VEH REPAIRS&MTC 235.30 02/15 02/06/2015 10246 GALES AUTO BODY, INC UNIT 112 REPAIR 22500 02/15 02/06/2015 10247 IMAGE PRINTING&GRAPHICS, INC PAYROLL FORMS & TRESPASSING N 321.84 02/15 02/06/2015 10248 KEEPRS, INC UNIFORMS 83797 02/15 02/06/2015 10249 MN CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOC B JACOBSON TRAINING WORK WITH 7000 02/15 02/06/2015 10250 MN SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION B.JACOBSON TRAINING RECORDS 7000 02/15 02/06/2015 10251 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE, INC FLOOR MATS 2445 02/15 02/06/2015 10252 QUILL CORPORATION NOTARY STAMPS 5158 02/15 02/06/2015 10253 ST PAUL POLICE DEPT-TRAINING UNI B JACOBSON TRAINING INTERROGA 265.00 02/15 02/06/2015 10254 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL FEB LIFE/DISABILITY 100.26 02/15 02/06/2015 10255 TACTICAL SOLUTIONS SALES TAX 326.00 02/15 02/06/2015 10256 TASER INTERNATIONAL SALES TAX 40.75 02/15 02/06/2015 10257 TITAN ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC BLDG MTC GENERATOR WORK 552.16 Grand Totals: 6,071.71 M=Manual Check,V=Void Check P9 Agreement for Local Assessor Services By and Between the City of Centerville And Kenneth A. Tolzmann, SAMA, In the City of Centerville, Minnesota This Agreement made and entered into this day of , 2015,by and between the City of Centerville, 1880 Main St. Centerville, Minnesota 55038, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the"Municipality", and Kenneth A.Tolzmann, Senior Accredited Minnesota Assessor 41939, 24738 Hamlet Ave. N. Forest Lake, Minnesota 55025,hereinafter referred to as the"City Assessor". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City of Centerville is a statutory city constituting a separate assessment district lying wholly within Anoka County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS,pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 273.05, city assessors shall be appointed by city council; and WHEREAS, it is the wish of the City of Centerville City Council to qppoint Kenneth A. Tolzmann the Centerville City Assessor; and WHEREAS, it is the wish of Kenneth A. Tolzmann to serve as the Centerville City Assessor and to cooperate with the Municipality to perform fair and equitable assessments of the real property within the Municipality. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed as follows: 1. The effective-period of this Agreement will be from February 27, 2015 to February 27, 2019,unless earlier terminated as provided herein. II. The City Assessor represents that he is a resident of the State of Minnesota, possesses the knowledge and training in the field of property taxation necessary o perform the duties of a local assessor, and is duly licensed to perform such duties in compliance with Minnesota Statutes 270.48 and Minnesota Department of Revenue Standards. III. All real property within the geographical boundaries of the Municipality will be assessed by the City Assessor for taxation beginning with the 2016 assessment for tax year payable in 2017. IV. The duties of the City Assessor will be carried out consistently and in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 273.05,273.064 and 273.08. 1 P10 V. In consideration of such assessment services, the Municipality will pay to the City Assessor quarterly payments (unless earlier terminated as herein provided) as follows: a) The first quarterly payment will be due on April 1,2015, the second on July 1, 2015,the third on October 1, 2015, and the fourth on December 31, 2015. b) The parties understand that to accomplish the delivery of the tax year 2016 assessment on or before January 2, 2016 (the statutory due date), all work specific to the generation of that assessment must be done during the 2015 calendar year; the same will be true for subsequent tax year assessments, i.e. all work for the tax year 2016 assessment must be done in calendar year 2015, etc. VI. For tax year 2016 assessment, the Municipality will pay to the City Assessor as follows: a) Eight and 50/100 Dollars ($8.50) for each improved parcel of residential, seasonal recreational residential and agricultural type of property. b) Two and 50/100 ($2.50) for each unimproved parcel of residential, seasonal recreational residential, and agricultural type of property. c) Fifty-Five Dollars ($55.00) for each improved and unimproved parcel of commercial, industrial, and public utility type of property. d) Fifty Five Dollars ($55.00) for each improved and unimproved parcel of apartment or mobile/manufactured home park type of property. VII. The same procedure and rates will be followed in the frequency and computation of payments for assessment services for subsequent years. VIII. The City Assessor will remit quarterly billings to the Municipality, detailing the number of parcels of each type of property assessed and charged to the Municipality, with a complete breakdown for that specific quarter. IX. Notwithstanding Section I above, the City Assessor and/or Municipality have the right to terminate this Agreement by providing six months written notice prior to the beginning of the assessment work for a tax year. Such notice to terminate must be sent by certified mail to the other party at the address set forth above. For example, to terminate effective as of the tax year 2018 assessment, the party must provide written notice of termination to the other party not later than July 16, 2016, the work on the tax year 2016 assessment to commence on February 27, 2017, the anniversary date of this agreement). 2 P11 Provided further, that this Agreement may be terminated at any time by the Centerville City Council on charges by the Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue of inefficiency or neglect of duty on the part of the City Assessor. X.. The relationship between the parties is that of an independent contractor. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to or should be construed as creating the relationship of copartners or joint venturers between the Municipality and the City Assessor. No tenure or any rights or benefits, including Workers' Compensation, Unemployment Insurance,medical care, sick leave, vacation leave, severance pay, PERA, or other benefits available to Municipality employees will accrue to the City Assessor or employees of the City Assessor performing services under this Agreement. XI. The City Assessor agrees he will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Municipality, its officers and employees, against any and all liability,loss, costs, damages, and expenses which the Municipality, its officers or employees,may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay arising out of the City Assessor's performance or failure to adequately perform his obligations pursuant to this Agreement. XII. All data collected, created,received, maintained, or disseminated for any purposes by the activities of the City Assessor because of this Agreement is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as amended, the Minnesota Rules implementing such act now in force or as adopted, as well as federal regulations on data privacy. XIII. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 1613.06 subd.4,the City Assessor agrees that the Municipality, the State Auditor, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary will have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers,records, etc.,which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of the City Assessor and involve transactions relating to this Agreement. XIV. During the performance of this Agreement,the City Assessor agrees to the following: No person will, on the grounds of race, color, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status, public assistance status, criminal record, creed, or national origin be excluded from full employment rights in,participation in,be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any and all applicable federal and state laws against discrimination. XV. a) The City Assessor warrants and represents that his is currently licensed as a Minnesota Assessor by the State of Minnesota. In the event said license is cancelled, revoked, suspended, or expires during the term of the contract, the City Assessor agrees to immediately inform the Municipality. 3 P12 The Municipality will pay only for services pursuant to such licensing requirements. b) The City Assessor will comply with all applicable federal and state statutes and regulations as well as local ordinances not in effect or hereafter adopted. c) Failure to meet the requirements of Paragraphs a) and b) above may be cause for cancellation of this Agreement effective the date of receipt of a notice of cancellation, notwithstanding the provisions of Sections I and IX above. XV. Any reports, studies,photographs, negatives, or other documents prepared by the City Assessor in the performance of his obligations under this Agreement will be the exclusive property of the Municipality , and all such materials will be remitted to the Municipality by the City Assessor upon completion, termination, or cancellation of this Agreement. The City Assessor will not use, willingly allow, or cause to have such materials used for any purpose other than performance of the City Assessor's obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the Municipality. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Municipality and City Assessor have hereby executed this agreement this day of , 2015. CITY OF CENTERVILLE By: Title: Mayor Dated: ,2015 By: Title: Dated: 52015 CITY ASSESSOR By: Title: Kenneth A. Tolzmann, SAMA Senior Accredited Minnesota Assessor#1939 Dated: ,2015 4 P13 ATTEST By: Title: Dated: ,2015 OATH OF CITY ASSESSOR Kenneth A. Tolzmann, upon oath, states that he will be diligent, faithful, and impartial in performance of the duties enjoined on him as Centerville City Assessor by law. Dated: ,2015 Kenneth A. Tolzmann Subscribed and sworn to before me a Minnesota notary public, this Day of ,2015 5 P14 o � j_EAGUE of CONNECTING & INNOVATING MINNESOTA SINCE 1913 CITIES LIABILITY COVERAGE — WAIVER FORM LMCIT members purchasing coverage must complete and return this form to LMCIT before the effective date of the coverage. Please return the completed form to your underwriter or email to pstech@lmc.org This decision must be made by the member's governing body every year. You may also wish to discuss these issues with your attorney. League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust(LMCIT) members that obtain liability coverage from LMCIT must decide whether to waive the statutory tort liability limits to the extent of the coverage purchased. The decision has the following effects: If the member does not waive the statutory tort limits, an individual claimant would be able to recover no more than $500,000 on any claim to which the statutory tort limits apply. The total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would be limited to$1,500,000. These statutory tort limits apply regardless of whether the city purchases the optional excess liability coverage. If the member waives the statutory tort limits and does not purchase excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover up to$2,000,000 for a single occurrence. (Under this option, the tort cap liability limits are waived to the extent of the member's liability coverage limits, and the LMCIT per occurrence limit is$2 million.) The total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to$2,000,000, regardless of the number of claimants. If the member waives the statutory tort limits and purchases excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover an amount up to the limit of the coverage purchased. The total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to the amount of coverage purchased, regardless of the number of claimants. Claims to which the statutory municipal tort limits do not apply are not affected by this decision. selects liability coverage limits of$ .5�� QGD from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust(LMCIT). Chec ne. The member DOES NOT WAIVE the monetary limits on municipal tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04. ❑ The member WAIVES the monetary limits on municipal tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04 to the extent of the limits of the liability coverage obtained from LMCIT. Date of city council/governing body meeting Signature Position 145 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST PHONE:(651)281-1200 FAX:(651)281-1299 ST. PAUL, MN 55103-2044 TOLL FREE:(800)925-1122 WEB:WWW.LMC.OPG P15 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - WHITE BEAR LAKE LAWSUIT Position: Washington County adopted the Washington County Groundwater Plan 2014-2024 in September of 2014. This plan specifically calls to monitor the outcome of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) lawsuit and evaluate how the final disposition will impact groundwater management decisions in the county. Washington County does not support the White Bear Lake Settlement Agreement as it currently stands for the following reasons: F The DNR does not agree that science supports the plaintiffs' theory that groundwater pumping is the primary cause of low water levels in White Bear Lake; however in the settlement agreement the DNR has agreed to support action, at great expense, to convert groundwater- supplied communities to a surface water supply. C A second study by the united States Geological Survey to analyze which groundwater wells, if any, may have the greatest impact on White Bear Lake will not be available until fall of 2016. C The impact on surface water sustainability is not addressed and should be studied before such drastic and costly actions are mandated. C The financial implications of the settlement agreement need to be addressed as actions mandated in the settlement will affect economic development. The affected communities have been planning for growth as directed by the Metropolitan Council, investing millions of dollars in groundwater-based water supply infrastructure. The settlement agreement instructs the DNR to work with the 13 communities to implement conservation efforts. Groundwater is a regional issue and reduction goals should be shared across the aquifer. E An aggregate goal of at least seventeen percent reduction in water use was set without disclosing how the target goal was calculated. e The settlement addresses the North and East Groundwater Management Area (GWMA), stating the DNR agrees the entire North and East GWMA should use surface water instead of groundwater. This decision is not based on fact or data. The studies to support this claim have not been completed. An entire stakeholder process is currently underway to develop the North and East Groundwater Management Area plan and should be completed before being addressed in the settlement. Issue: In the past several years, White Bear Lake's water levels have been at the lower end of their historic range. Experts disagree about the fundamental causes of the low levels. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) was sued in Ramsey County District Court in 2012 (Court File No. 62-CV-13- 2414), with the plaintiffs (White Bear Lake Restoration Association and White Bear Lake Homeowners' Association) claiming that, by allowing thirteen local communities to use groundwater for their public water supply, the DNR has permitted too much groundwater use in the area, thus lowering White Bear P16 Lake. Two of the thirteen communities (City of White Bear Lake and White Bear Township) elected to intervene in the litigation. The plaintiffs asked the judge to set a lake water elevation, reduce local communities' groundwater use, and require the agency to augment the lake with an additional water supply. This lawsuit was settled through mediation between the DNR and the plaintiffs. The settlement, which is subject to court approval, halts the litigation up to three years. During this time, the DNR and the two local communities who intervened have agreed to support efforts to develop a surface water supply to serve area communities. The DNR has also agreed to set a protective elevation for White Bear Lake by Nov. 1, 2016. Finally, all parties to the settlement have agreed to pursue conservation measures. The DNR has agreed to provide legislative support for a two-phased option identified in the Met Council's June 2014 Draft Water Feasibility Report to move thirteen communities from groundwater and to surface water from the Mississippi River for their public water supply. Such a proposal would have to come forward from another public entity. The first phase of the project (Phase 1) would move six communities, including Mahtomedi and a portion of White Bear Lake, for Washington County, to a surface water supply system. The Phase I project would cost an estimated $155 million to $230 million. The DNR agreed to support a legislative proposal advanced by a public entity to fully fund the feasibility and design of Phase I by August 2016. Under the settlement agreement, the target for full construction funding is August 2017. The DNR also agreed to support Phase II and to work with seven additional communities in the northeast metro, including Hugo and Forest Lake in Washington County, to move these communities to surface water. There are no timelines set out in the settlement agreement for this Phase 11 work. This settlement does not force communities to switch their water source, as there would need to be legislative support for this to happen. The settlement was crafted with direct involvement from two (City of White Bear Lake and White Bear Township) of the thirteen communities that elected to participate in the litigation. In order for any water supply proposal to go forward, the project would need legislative approval, as well as an equitable funding mechanism. Support and Opposition: Support and opposition are not known at this time. Previous Consideration: The County Board has not previously considered this legislative platform. No Action: Need to be determined. Financial Implications: Need to be determined. Contact Person: Lowell Johnson, Director Washington County Public Health and Environment 651-430-6725 Lowell.JohnsonODco.washington.mus P17 _ •a,r R W 4Pf.�♦ f �4��y rof DNR Q&A Dec. 1 2014 Media contacts: Chris Niskanen, DNR communications director, 651-259-5023, Chris.niskanen(alstate.mn.us. DNR settles lawsuit over White Bear Lake water levels The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources recently settled a lawsuit through mediation with plaintiffs over White Bear Lake water levels. Here are some questions and answers regarding the settlement and the agency's ongoing efforts to advance long term groundwater sustainability in the northeast Twin Cities metropolitan area. The Q&A provides background material about the settlement. Q:What is the background on this lawsuit? A: In the past several years,White Bear Lake's water levels have been at the lower end of their historic range. Experts disagree about the fundamental causes of the low levels.The DNR was sued in Ramsey County District Court in 2012, with the plaintiffs claiming that, by allowing 13 local communities to use groundwater for their public water supply,the DNR has permitted too much groundwater use in the area,thus lowering White Bear Lake.The plaintiffs asked the judge to set a lake water elevation, reduce local communities'groundwater use, and require the agency to augment the lake with an additional water supply. Q: What are the key aspects of the settlement? A: The settlement,which is subject to court approval, halts the litigation up to three years. During this time, the DNR and the two local communities involved in the mediation have agreed to support efforts to develop a surface water supply to serve area communities.The DNR has also agreed to set a protective elevation for White Bear Lake by Nov. 1,2016. Finally, all parties to the settlement have agreed to pursue conservation measures. Q: What is envisioned for the alternative water supply? A: The DNR has agreed to support a two phased option identified in the Met Council's June 2014 Draft Water Feasibility Report to move 13 communities from groundwater and to surface water from the Mississippi River for their public water supply.The first phase of the project(Phase 1)would move six communities-Mahtomedi, North Saint Paul,Shoreview, Vadnais Heights,White Bear Lake,and White Bear Township—to a surface water supply system. The Phase I project would cost an estimated$155 million to$230 million.The DNR agreed to support a legislative proposal advanced by a public entity to fully fund the feasibility and design of Phase I by August 2016. Under the settlement agreement,the target for full construction funding is August 2017. The DNR also agreed to support Phase II and to work with seven additional communities in the northeast metro to move these communities to surface water. There are no timelines set out in the settlement agreement for this Phase II work. Q:What does the settlement mean to lake levels? A:White Bear Lake's levels are driven by complex and interconnected factors.The DNR cannot guarantee when and how lake levels will respond to implementation of the various settlement terms. However,we are confident that the settlement is fundamentally based on sound water resource management principles. Q: Does the settlement commit the Met Council or the Legislature to fund or implement the water supply project? A: No.The settlement is an agreement among the parties to the litigation and is not binding on any other party. As the lead for water supply planning in the Twin Cities,the Met Council has examined alternatives to addressing northeast metro water needs.The DNR and the other parties carefully considered the Met Council's draft June 2014 report in developing the settlement agreement, but the Council is not party to the settlement and is not committed to advancing any legislative proposal. Additionally,the DNR and the other parties to the settlement certainly cannot obligate the Legislature. Rather,the settlement agreement is an opportunity to halt the litigation for three years,allowing time for appropriate legislative consideration and debate. P18 Q: Does the settlement force communities to switch their water source? A: No. In reaching the settlement,the DNR weighed long-term regional water needs,the risks of further litigation, and the need to ensure water sustainability for the region.The settlement was crafted with direct involvement from the two of the 13 local communities that elected to participate in the litigation. In order for any water supply proposal to go forward,the project would need legislative approval and an equitable funding mechanism. Q:What are the required conservation measures under the settlement? A: The DNR will work with groundwater permit holders within local 13 communities to adopt water conservation measures,with a goal of a 17 percent reduction in water use.This reduction would be measured against average water use over the past eight years.The plaintiffs will work with their membership and other residents who have private wells near the lake to adopt conservation measures.All parties agree to a consumption goal of 75 gallons per person per day, consistent with the Met Council's target for the Twin Cities area. Q:Who signed the settlement and how was it settled? A: All parties to the litigation have signed the agreement.This includes, the DNR,the two plaintiff groups(White Bear Lake Restoration Association and White Bear Lake Homeowners'Association),and the two communities that elected to intervene in the litigation (City of White Bear Lake and White Bear Township).The settlement was mediated by retired Minnesota Supreme Court associate justice James H. Gilbert and negotiations began in February 2014.The case was scheduled for trial in March 2015. Q: Does setting a protective lake elevation impact current groundwater permit holders in the region? A: Under state statute and rule, protective elevations are a tool available to DNR to ensure that appropriations do not unduly affect surface waters. Where a protective elevation for a surface water body is established and incorporated into a surface water permit,the surface water appropriation must cease when the water body falls below that elevation. In the case of a permitted groundwater appropriation potentially affecting a surface water with a protective elevation, the situation is more complex. DNR would first have to establish that the groundwater appropriation was causing the water body to fall below its protective elevation prior to ordering cessation of pumping. The complexity of surface-groundwater interactions could make such a clear causal connection difficult to draw. In this settlement,the DNR has agreed to set a protective lake elevation that will be used to regulate new groundwater permits or amendments to-existing permits. DNR would not be obligated to apply the protective elevation prior to completion of the Phase 1 water supply project. After completion of Phase 1,there is also an exemption if the DNR Commissioner determines that application would be unduly deleterious to public water supply. Moreover, the DNR has not agreed to establish a specific protective elevation for White Bear Lake. The protective elevation will be developed and applied in accordance with state statute and rule. Q: Does the settlement mean the DNR agrees with plaintiffs over the cause of the low water levels on White Bear Lake? A: No.The DNR does not agree the science supports the plaintiffs'theory that groundwater pumping is the primary cause of low water levels on White Bear Lake.The state's independent expert,a nationally recognized hydrogeologist, has concluded that the cause of the lake's decline in recent years is likely climate related. In addition, it is important to understand that variation in lake levels over time is important to lake health. However,the DNR does believe that groundwater resources in the north and east metro region may be oversubscribed in the future. Thus, it makes sense to act now to move communities to a more sustainable water supply system that can better accommodate future growth. Q: Did the judge ever make a factual determination on the cause of the recent low lake levels? A. No. Because this case did not go to trial,the judge has not heard or evaluated expert testimony and has made no factual determination regarding the cause of the low lake levels. At this point neither party has proved the cause of the low lake levels. Q:What else is the DNR doing to ensure groundwater sustainability in the northeast metropolitan area? A: For the past year,the agency has been working with northeast communities, businesses and other government agencies to develop a North and East Groundwater Management Area,which will result in a long-term plan for managing regional groundwater resources sustainably.That process,which is separate from the lawsuit,is ongoing and continues to be a high priority for the agency. As part of the settlement to the lawsuit,the DNR will appoint a member from each of the two plaintiffs'groups to the management area advisory team. P19 North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan DRAFT February 2, 2015 P20 Groundwater is a very important natural resource. Groundwater is vital to many aspects of Minnesota's economy and ecology. Many Minnesota communities rely Add Your Voice on groundwater for their drinking water supply. Over the past year, DNR has gotten advice at monthly DNR is responsible for ensuring that the use meetings from a team of twenty-one stakeholders about of groundwater is sustainable and protects the proposed North and East Metro Groundwater ecosystems, does not degrade water quality, Management Area. and does not limit the ability of future generations Now it's time for you to"Add Your Voice"to the to meet their needs. discussion. Unfortunately, groundwater is not an unlimited resource. The Draft Plan for the proposed North and East Metro In specific areas of the state, groundwater is at risk Groundwater Management Area is available on the DNR of overuse and/or contamination. website at: wwwAnr.state.n,n.us A feedback survey is available on the DNR website. The DNR has identified the north and east Twin Cities (Use link on the front page or search.groundwater management area.) Metropolitan area as a place where use of groundwater Comments can be submitted through March 31,2015. may not be sustainable if demand trends continue. To ensure sustainable use of groundwater in this area,the DNR is proposing to establish the North and East Metro Groundwater Management Area. The purpose of the Groundwater Management Area (GWMA) Plan is to guide DNR actions within the GWMA over the next five years. DNR is seeking stakeholder feedback on the Draft Plan. These are some of the questions we ask you in the online feedback survey. How clearly does the draft plan explain the following? ➢ That DNR is responsible for ensuring the sustainable use of groundwater ➢ That the purpose of the plan is to guide DNR actions in the N&E Metro GWMA ➢ What are DNR's proposed actions in the N&E Metro GWMA ➢ What is the definition of sustainable use of groundwater in the N&E Metro GWMA ➢ What are the risks to sustainable use of groundwater in the N&E Metro GWMA ➢ What are the groundwater uses in the N&E Metro GWMA How well do the proposed DNR actions address the risks to sustainable use of groundwater in the N&E Metro GWMA? Which proposed actions in the draft plan do you think are most important? Are there specific actions you think DNR should not include in the plan? Do you think there any important actions missing from the draft plan? Have you identified any factual errors in the draft plan? What additional comments or questions do you have about the draft plan? Add Your Voice — Take the Feedback Survey www.dnr.state.mn.us P21 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan i Contents 1. Introduction............................................................................................................................1-1 Problem..............................................................................................................................................1-1 Purpose ..............................................................................................................................................1-2 Process...............................................................................................................................................1-2 PlanStructure.....................................................................................................................................1-3 2. Description of the Boundary and the GWMA............................................................................2-1 Hydrogeology.....................................................................................................................................2-1 WaterUse ..........................................................................................................................................2-5 Groundwater appropriations and use....................................................................................2-5 ProjectedWater Demands.....................................................................................................2-5 Water Dependent Natural Resources................................................................................................2-8 Washington County Trout Streams........................................................................................2-8 Rare Natural Features in the North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area..........2-11 Lakesand Wetlands..............................................................................................................2-17 WaterQuality.............................................................................. ........................2-20 Jurisdictions, governance and planning...........................................................................................2-22 3. The Goal and Objectives ..........................................................................................................3-1 Objective I. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not harm aquifers and ecosystems,and does not negatively impact surface waters. .....................................................................................................3-2 AquiferSustainability.............................................................................................................3-2 Ecosystems and Surface Waters.............................................................................................3-4 Objective II. Groundwater use in the GWMA is reasonable, efficient, and complies with water conservationrequirements................................................................................................................3-6 Conservation Requirements for Municipal Systems..............................................................3-6 OtherWater Uses...................................................................................................................3-6 Objective III. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not degrade water quality................................3-7 Objective IV.Groundwater use in the GWMA does not create unresolved well interferences or wateruse conflicts.............................................................................................................................3-8 Objective V. All groundwater users in the GWMA have the necessary permits to use groundwater. ............................................................................................................................................................3-9 4. Status of the GWMA in Terms of the Objectives.......................................................................4-1 P22 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan ii ' Objective I. Aquifers, Ecosystems and Surface Waters......................................................................4-1 ClimateData and Trends........................................................................................................4-1 Groundwater-Level Data and Trends.....................................................................................4-3 Ecosystems and Surface Waters.............................................................................................4-7 Gap Analysis and Recommendations............. ..............4-9 .......................................................... Objective II.Water Conservation.....................................................................................................4-11 MunicipalSystems................................................................................................................4-11 Other Appropriation Categories...........................................................................................4-16 Gap Analysis and Recommendations...................................................................................4-16 Objective III. Water Quality..............................................................................................................4-18 Gap Analysis and Recommendations...................................................................................4-18 Objective IV. Well Interferences and Water Use Conflicts..............................................................4-19 WellInterferences................................................................................................................4-19 Water-Use Conflicts..............................................................................................................4-19 Gap Analysis and Recommendations...................................................................................4-19 ObjectiveV. Permits.........................................................................................................................4-20 Compliance...........................................................................................................................4-20 Gap Analysis and Recommendations...................................................................................4-20 S. Actions....................................................................................................................................5-1 Objective I. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not harm aquifers and ecosystems, and does not negatively impact surface waters. .....................................................................................................5-1 Objective II. Groundwater use in the GWMA is reasonable, efficient, and complies with water conservation requirements................................................................................................................5-5 Objective III. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not degrade water quality................................5-7 Objective IV. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not create unresolved well interferences or wateruse conflicts.............................................................................................................................5-8 Objective V. All groundwater users in the GWMA have the necessary permits to use groundwater. ............................................................................................................................................................5-9 6. Implementation Schedule........................................................................................................6-1 7. Glossary of Terms....................................................................................................................7-1 P23 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan iii Tables Table 1-1 Project Advisory Team ..............................................................................................................1-2 Table 2-1 Native plant communities in the GWMA closely associated with groundwater....................2-13 Table 2-2 Native plant communities in the GWMA often associated with groundwater......................2-13 Table 2-3 Rare plant species closely associated with groundwater.......................................................2-15 Table 2-4 Rare animal species closely associated with groundwater.....................................................2-16 Table 4-1 Historical and recent water levels in older municipal wells......................................................4-7 Table 4-2 Municipal Water Use Rate Types............................................................................................4-13 Table 4-3 Municipal Water-Use Information..........................................................................................4-14 Figures Figure 2-1 Boundary of the North & East Metro GWMA..........................................................................2-2 Figure 2-2 Bedrock aquifers......................................................................................................................2-3 Figure 2-3 Geologic cross section..............................................................................................................2-4 Figure2-4 Water use.................................................................................................................................2-6 Figure 2-5 Groundwater use by category(2008—2012)..........................................................................2-7 Figure 2-6 Designated trout streams and other coidwater streams ......................................................2-10 Figure 2-7 Native plant communities associated with groundwater grouped by Ecological Systems...2-12 Figure 2-8 Rare species associated with groundwater...........................................................................2-14 Figure 2-9 Lake and wetland connection to the regional groundwater system.....................................2-19 Figure 2-10 Selected areas with groundwater contamination...............................................................2-21 Figure 3-1 Safe yield thresholds for artesian (confined)aquifers..............................................................3-3 Figure 4-1 Example of historic precipitation patterns in the North & East Metro: precipitation at Minneapolis—St. Paul International Airport.............................................................................4-2 Figure 4-2 Active DNR obwells and trends in annual water level minima (1993—2012).........................4-4 Figure 4-3 Observation well hydrographs, northeastern Washington County.........................................4-5 Figure 4-4 Observation well hydrograph (2012),Jordan aquifer, southern Anoka County.....................4-6 P24 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 1 1 1. Introduction The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR)works with citizens to manage the state's natural resources,to provide outdoor recreation opportunities, and to provide for sustainable commercial uses of natural resources. The DNR works to integrate and sustain a healthy environment, a sustainable economy, and livable communities.This strategy shares stewardship responsibility with citizens and partners to manage for multiple interests. The DNR is responsible for managing the state's water resources to sustain healthy waterways, basins and groundwater resources.The DNR plays an important role in supporting sustainable groundwater use through its permit programs, information collection and analysis activities, law enforcement responsibilities, education, and technical assistance opportunities. Groundwater is at risk of overuse and contamination in specific areas of the state.To address concerns of long term sustainable use of groundwater in these areas,the DNR is defining Groundwater Management Areas (GWMA) and developing management plans. The purpose of the GWMA Plan (Plan) is to guide DNR actions in managing the appropriation and use of groundwater within the GWMA over the next five years. The GWMA represents a geographic area within which groundwater users share a distinct aquifer system or groundwater resource. Users include both those with appropriation permits and those who do not require permits to use groundwater. Problem The DNR identified the north and east Twin Cities Metropolitan area as an area of specific concern where groundwater resources are at risk of overuse and reduced quality. Multiple permit holders (groundwater users) are connected through their use of groundwater and their effect on water resources. The DNR manages water resources to assure an adequate supply largely through permitting and tracking water appropriation and use. The Water Appropriation Permit Program balances competing management objectives that include development and protection of Minnesota's water resources. Key challenges for the DNR in managing groundwater appropriations and use in the North& East GWMA include the following: • Demand: projected growth in water demand, particularly in Washington County and parts of southern Anoka County • Natural Resources: potential for negative effects on groundwater-dependent natural resources such as wetlands, lakes, and streams • Conservation: a need for improved and expanded application of water conservation • Contamination: reduction in the availability of clean groundwater • Information: gaps in the information needed to determine the sustainability of groundwater use P25 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 1-2 Purpose The purpose of the GWMA Plan is to guide DNR actions in managing the appropriation and use of groundwater within the GWMA over the next five years.The sustainability of water resources also depends on many other activities by state and local governments, organizations such as watershed districts, and by private land owners. Although the Plan is narrowly focused on DNR's responsibilities and actions, it is recognized that DNR's actions fit into the larger framework of water resource planning and management.Regular review and revision will follow after the initial implementation period as detailed in Section 6-Implementation. Process The Plan lays out a framework for addressing the groundwater management goals and objectives of the DNR Groundwater Management Program (Strategic Plan) in light of the particular challenges within the area. A project team of DNR staff drafted the Plan with advice and feedback from a Project Advisory Team (PAT). DNR staff includes members from the Division of Ecological and Water Resources (EWR) and the Division of Fish and Wildlife. The PAT is comprised of stakeholders from state agencies, the Metropolitan Council, county and city/township governments, a lake conservation district, a watershed district, industry, and the federal government (Table 1-1). In response to legislative changes made in 2014 (Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.287, subd. 4)the membership of the PAT was reviewed and changes were made part way through the planning process to increase the number of team members holding water appropriation permits. Fourteen PAT meetings were held from October 2013 through March 2015. Following development of the draft Plan with input from the PAT, the DNR is seeking wider stakeholder review and comments through March 2015. Following the stakeholder review,the DNR Commissioner will review the plan for final approval. Table 1-1 Project Advisory Team Name Affiliation Permit Holder Project Advisory Team Mike Bailey Bailey Nurseries Yes Brad Barott Barott Drilling No Bryan Bear City of Hugo Yes Larry Bohrer' City of Columbus Yes John Bum arner* U.S. Geological Survey No Jessica Collin-Pilarski Washington County No Brian Davis Metropolitan Council Yes Jo Emerson' City of White Bear Lake Yes Mike Grochala City of Lino Lakes Yes Barbara Haake' Rice Creek Watershed District No Jane Harper White Bear Lake Conservation No District Ryan Lemickson Minn.Dept.of Agriculture No P26 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 1-3 Name Affiliation Permit Holder Jennifer Levitt City of Cottage Grove Yes Mark Maloney City of Shoreview Yes James Markoez White Bear Lake Homeowners No Association Greg McNeelyz White Bear Lake Restoration No Association Terry Noonan Ramsey County Yes Paul Putzier Project Manager- DNR, EWR No Jay Riggs Washington County No Conservation District Steve Robertson Minn.Dept. of Health No Bill Short White Bear Township Yes Brian West RockTenn Yes Jim Westerman' City of Woodbury Yes DNR Staff Support to the Project Advisory Team Glen Champion DNR, EWR N/A Kate Drewry DNR, EWR Central Region N/A Brian Nerbonne DNR, Fisheries Section N A Hannah Texler DNR, EWR Central Region N A 1 Joined the Advisory Team in September 2014 z Joined the Advisory Team in December 2014 Plan Structure The remainder of the Plan is divided into five additional sections. SECTION 2 - DESCRIPTION OF THE BOUNDARY AND THE GWMA summarizes background Information on groundwater connected natural resources, water use, and governance that were used to select the GWMA boundaries.The information also sets the stage for identifying the groundwater management challenges in the area. SECTION 3 -THE GOAL AND OBJECTIVES states the Plan goal and describes five objectives that the DNR will pursue to achieve the overall goal of long term, sustainable groundwater use in the GWMA.Together, the five objectives describe sustainable groundwater appropriation and use based on directives given in Minnesota Statutes. SECTION 4-STATUS OF THE GWMA in Terms of the Objectives provides additional information about conditions within the GWMA that relate specifically to the five objectives.This information includes a summary of current understanding of the status of each objective within the GWMA, discussion of gaps in knowledge or activities, and recommendations for how to fill those gaps. SECTION 5 -ACTIONS states the actions that the DNR will take over the next five years toward achieving the five objectives. These actions address the highest priority needs identified from the evaluations described in Section 4. P27 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 1-4 SECTION 6 - Implementation provides a schedule for the DNR to perform the Plan actions as well as goals for achieving measureable outcomes. This section also describes the review and revision process for the Plan. SECTION 7 - GLOSSARY of terms used in the Plan. P28 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-1 2. Description of the Boundary and the GWMA A geographic area was defined within which to manage groundwater resources.The boundary for this GWMA was selected by using a combination of physical,governmental, and planning elements. Establishing a boundary allows us to identify and analyze factors that affect long term water use, and to identify specific actions that reduce the risk of unsustainable groundwater use. Elements considered in selecting the boundary of the GWMA included the following: • Hydrogeology • Water use • Water dependent natural resources • Water quality • Jurisdictions, governance and planning The boundary selected for the North & East Metro GWMA includes all of Washington and Ramsey counties, 10 cities in southeastern Anoka County, and the portion of Hennepin County east of the Mississippi River(Figure 2-1). Vertically, the boundary includes all parts of the groundwater system above the Eau Claire geologic formation.A more detailed description of the elements listed above is given in the documents: Draft Working Boundary N& E Metro GWMA and Updated Draft Working Boundary N& E Metro GWMA. Section 2 of this Plan provides summary information on the elements that were used to select the boundary for the North & East Metro GWMA. Hydrogeology Hydrogeology defines the natural conditions and boundaries of the groundwater system.The boundary includes the following: • The horizontal extent of the Prairie du Chien—Jordan aquifer between the hydrologic boundaries formed by the Mississippi and St. Croix rivers, except for localized outliers of these bedrock formations(Figure 2-2) • The hydrogeological transition area in southeastern Anoka County and Forest Lake in Washington County adjacent to the margin of the Prairie du Chien—Jordan aquifer • All aquifers above the Eau Claire Formation confining unit (Figure 2-3). The Mt. Simon aquifer (located below the Eau Claire Formation) is not included because it is hydrologically separated from the shallower aquifers within the area.Appropriations from the Mt. Simon are also restricted by statute in the seven county Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Topographic watershed boundaries were reviewed. The watersheds are integral to groundwater health but generally do not match the hydrogeologic boundaries to the regional groundwater system. P29 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-2 c Wyoming c t t w VAS7Nw-ON Forest Lake Columbus Scandia Ham Lake fAn Coon Rapids Blaine Hugo �p � A v0ri4-. I Fridley. yr I t . hit r 0 Bear " 0 Stillwater Lake 0 �` NEa'< Little z Cana a Roseville 0 Maplewood Minneapolis~ .�� St Paul bakdal FA,.tSEY Woodbury rl� ' � AKO� 1 � Afton Bloomington Cottage Grove 1 Eagan WASHINGTON _ DAKOTA a Hastings — North&East Metro GWMA Working Boundary County Boundary March 05,2014 Figure 2-1 Boundary of the North & East Metro GWMA P30 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-3 r- - - - - - - - I -I I- - - - - - r- 1 I I I I r I I I I ( 8_P%TO'd 1 1,.1iLL�_::.Cb SHEREJR!•,E i r i I I � I I C - ` ISArJTI _ ; A R — ' CMISAGO 1 I 11'kSH r' J t ! j ' r+CI FODI ti�XOTA � / -/�'^- / t --i \` \t ~••'tea v I t 1 r + SC.OTi I North&East Metro GWMA Working Boundary County boundaries Line of cross-section Prairie du Chien-Jordan head contours(ft). Prairie du Chien-Jordan March 2008 Tunnel City-Wonewoc(Franconia-Ironton-Galesville) Tunnel City-Wonewoc head contours(ft), Mt.Simon March 2008 March 05,2014 Figure 2-2 Bedrock aquifers Modified from Mosslerl, potentiometric head contours from Sanocki et al.', and cross section location. 'Mossler,l.H.,2013. Minnesota Geological Survey Miscellaneous Map M-194, 1:125,000 scale. 2 Sanocki, et al., 2009. U. S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009-5226. P31 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-4 r< .J Z 0 ALL• �� \� ;4 oU dF3ti �Z oo y a `r J, L. 44, e.P l « Y N A M Z O L a� IL W Y b Z LL U >� W 4 `e�ilry E i OV Figure 2-3 Geologic cross section Modified from Runkel et a1.3 Note the position of the Eau Claire Formation, a regional confining unit. 3 Runkel et al.,2006. Minnesota Geological Survey Open File Report 06-04. P32 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-5 Water Use Current and projected water use informed the boundary recommendation in the following ways: e The boundary includes areas with intensive groundwater use, and it includes the majority of the largest permitted users in the hydrogeologic system bounded by the Mississippi and St. Croix rivers (Figure 2-4). Substantial growth in water demand is projected in areas served by the aquifer system. The boundary includes the areas where the largest growth in water demand is expected. Groundwater appropriations and use There were 259 active permits to appropriate groundwater in the area at the beginning of 2014. The average reported groundwater use in the area over the 5-year period from 2008 through 2012 was approximately 29.0 billion gallons per year (BGY). This compares to total permitted groundwater appropriations of 62.5 BGY in 2012. Total average groundwater use over the 5-year period was 30.6 BGY after adding domestic well use estimated by Metropolitan Council for 2010°(1.6 BGY). Groundwater use is shown in several categories in Figure 2-5. Projected Water Demands Water supply plans and water use projections compiled by the Metropolitan Council in 2008 projected municipal water use will increase 23 percent by 2030 compared to average use reported for 2008-2012. Total water use was projected to increase 20 percent over the same time period.The highest increases in water demand by 2030 were projected in Woodbury, Hugo, Cottage Grove, Blaine, and Forest Lake. The Metropolitan Council is in the process of updating projected water demands through 2040, considering updated demand projections from public water suppliers. There is always uncertainty in the population projections used to make the water-use projections. For example, the Metropolitan Council population forecasts for 2040 show more growth in the core cities and inner suburbs compared to the forecasts available in 2008. What is clear is that population and water-use will continue to grow in several suburban communities that use groundwater. Substantially amended permit volumes and/or new permits would need to be issued to meet projected 2030 demands with locally supplied groundwater. The Metropolitan Council projections did not anticipate large increases in surface-water use, but growth in supply was assumed to be dominated by local groundwater supplies. Privately owned,domestic groundwater use was projected to increase slightly but would make up less than one percent of total water use in 2030. °Metropolitan Council, 2013. Public Water Supply System Demand Projections—Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, Minnesota: www.datafinder.org/cafe. P33 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-6 ISANTI st r•. .,_ f,NOKA B U � O ura:oC B C._ O Sc C n A C C East 5-t^6 O QQ0 ° O CHISAGO O nrASHI"JG10110 /, o � V ° Coiuml O p 4 .:ani,, t� C Go � Fogs-Lytic e Od L r o Laos B St C ix r �+ q B yuye \ O10 - � jib .Frac y�t e' (TI0 . .t' 1 ht.,-e: G-t 0 _i 00 O G 1 c C! ". u f a _. Oa..P,.. " �' sD o oO O r 4 O 4Vcst L:ke's^d z oatoa`o o D o d a_pa -0 0 IV 71 Groundwater Use by Permit f p Proportional to 2007-11 Use Total Use,2007-11 (MGD)' 0 0 00-0.5 3.0-50 ate- s; t 0.5-1 7 5.0-59.5 1.7-3.0 _ - -- North&East Metro GWMA Working Boundary County Boundary St.Paul RWS Supplied Minneapolis Supplied 0 5 10 Miles Figure 2-4 Water use Total water use (2007-2011) aggregated by cities/townships sharing a public water supplier(including private domestic use estimated by Metropolitan Council, in average millions of gallons per day and groundwater use by permit. P34 Draft North 0' East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-7 ' r'---- --- --------------------------------- ! rmz%i ,.` 3% ` au / Water Supply(multiple pnomes) Pollution Containment(Priority s) Non-Ag Industrial Processing(Priority 5) 0. .-' A^ *Domestic Wells(Priorities 1and 2) Golf Course and Landscape Irrigation (Priority 5m6) \ 0the,Categories(Priorities 5and e) \'n� Agricultural Irrigation and Food Processing(Priority y) Dw~a�nnWand �om�wve| Maintenance(Priorities 5and 6) Power Generation(Priorities 1and 4> | ' - - - - — - Figure - Figuno 2-5 Groundwater use by category(2008-2012) Breakdown of average groundwater use /2008-2012\ into several categories. Note that domestic well use was estimated, whereas uses in other categories were reported by permit holders.Allocation priorities shown in parentheses are based on Minn. Stat., sec. I03G261. P35 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-8 Water Dependent Natural Resources The GWMA boundary was influenced by natural resources in the area, particularly the surface water features that are sensitive to changes in groundwater levels.The boundary includes surface water and ecological features connected to the hydrogeology. Managing groundwater appropriations will have a direct impact on the health of these natural resources.The following features within the North & East Metro GWMA will benefit from inclusion: Six designated trout streams of eastern Washington County, along with seven non-designated streams that support a coldwater community including trout • Wetland complexes across the entire area Lakes that may be sensitive to changing aquifer levels Sixteen types of groundwater-associated native plant communities f State-listed rare plant and animal species associated with groundwater ® Numerous additional plant and animal species that inhabit streams, lakes, and wetlands that are associated with groundwater Washington County Trout Streams The DNR has the authority to designate trout streams. Designation provides increased protection from alterations and appropriations. In addition,the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) maintains higher water quality standards for coldwater streams to protect these sensitive systems. DNR has designated six trout streams in Washington County: Falls Creek, Gilbertson Creek,Old Mill Stream, Willow Brook, Brown's Creek, and Valley Creek (Figure 2-6).They range in size and character based on geology and land use. Tributaries to listed trout streams within the same sections are also designated as trout streams (Minn. Rules, part 6264, subp. 4), although the tributaries may not support trout or have perennial flow. Falls Creek, Gilbertson Creek, Old Mill Stream, and Willow Brook are all small streams that support self- sustaining brook trout populations, along with an occasional burbot, a fish species that also requires coldwater habitat.These streams have a mixture of public and private land in their watershed, and appear to be in good health based on the fish communities present.These streams are all spring-fed from bedrock aquifers along the St. Croix River Valley. Valley Creek in Afton is also spring-fed from bedrock aquifers. In the headwaters,there are predominantly brook trout and slimy sculpin (a small coldwater fish species),while in the middle and lower portions of the stream brown and rainbow trout predominate.American brook lamprey, non- parasitic lamprey species found in coldwater streams, is also present.This fish community is indicative of a healthy coldwater stream. Brown's Creek differs from the other Washington County trout streams because it originates in a large wetland complex.The upper reaches of Brown's Creek are unsuitable for trout because of the relatively warmer water temperature flowing from the wetland in summertime and the low dissolved oxygen P36 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-9 levels. Further downstream, springs from the surficial aquifer flow into the stream and create marginal conditions for brown trout. Where the stream begins to flow down into the St. Croix Valley, it intercepts groundwater from bedrock aquifers and conditions become most suitable for trout. Brown's Creek is currently listed as impaired for aquatic life due to a fish community that includes many warmwater fish species.The brown trout population occasionally shows some natural reproduction, but is supplemented by annual stocking of yearling trout to maintain a population that is large enough to support a fishery. There are seven streams in Washington County that have not yet been designated as trout streams but that support small populations of trout and other coldwater organisms (Figure 2-6). Most are completely surrounded by private land.The MPCA classifies these streams as coldwater streams for water quality and aquatic life standards. Six of these streams are in northern Washington County in the vicinity of Falls, Gilbertson, and Willow Creeks, and are similar in their geology and fish communities.The exception is Trout Brook near Afton State Park. It is similar to Brown's Creek, in that it originates as a warmwater stream that is cooled by groundwater from deeper aquifers as it flows into the St. Croix Valley.Trout Brook has a fish community of warmwater species, as well as a low-density brown trout population. P37 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-10 ' >r Columbus •Forest Lake Q c CJ Zavoral s CreL�- Scandia. Clapp;Stream SI•Lash Flag Anoka S nrg Creel. Blaine Arcola Creep Stillwater' e Minneapolis. St.Paul a Rr nG'� 7oot Bloc? Designated trout stream Designated trout stream tributary Non-designated trout stream Other DNR Public Watercourse North&East Metro Q GWMA Working Boundary 0 5 10 Miles April 03,2014 Figure 2-6 Designated trout streams and other coldwater streams P38 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-11 Rare Natural Features in the North &East Metro Groundwater Management Area Three groups of native plant communities in the North & East Metro GWMA are closely associated with groundwater: wetland complexes in the Anoka Sand Plain, seepage plant communities, and wetland plant communities associated with lakes and streams. Some of these communities contain rare plants and rare animals. The DNR's Minnesota Biological Survey identified and mapped many of these native plant communities and rare species, but more comprehensive surveys are needed to complete the picture of where these features occur in the North & East Metro GWMA. The Anoka Sand Plain (Figure 2-7, Table 2-1) is a broad sandy lake plain with level to gently rolling topography that includes many types of wetlands. Especially significant are complexes of open, shallow wetland native plant communities.These complexes of Wet Prairie, Graminoid Rich Fen, Low Shrub Poor Fen, and Sedge Meadow(referred to collectively as Wet Prairie Complex in this Plan) contain some of the most significant populations in the state of 17 state-listed rare plant species (Figure 2-8,Table 2-3). Seepage plant communities are associated with St. Croix River bluffs and terraces (Figure 2-7,Table 2-1). These communities are rare in the state and contain a number of rare plant and animal species (Figure 2-8,Table 2-3, and Table 2-4). There are also a number of wetland plant communities associated with lakes and streams that can also be influenced by groundwater(Figure 2-7, Table 2-2).They range from tamarack swamps and hardwood-dominated wet forests to open herbaceous vegetation-dominated communities such as Sedge Meadow and Northern Mixed Cattail Marsh. P39 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-13 Table 2-1 Native plant communities in the GWMA closely associated with groundwater Native Plant Community Ecological System *Conservation Associated with Name Status Rank Seepage Areas? Black Ash—Yellow Birch— Wet Forest S3 no Red Maple—Alder Swamp (East central) Black Ash—(Red Maple) Wet Forest S1, S2 yes Seepage Swamp Wet Sandstone Cliff Cliff/Talus S1 yes (Southern) Wet Limestone—Dolomite Cliff/Talus S2 yes Cliff(Southern) Graminoid Rich Fen (Basin) Open Rich S4 no Peatland Graminoid—Sphagnum Rich Open Rich S4 no Fen (Basin) Peatland Low Shrub Poor Fen Acid Peatland S5 no Seepage Meadow/Carr Wet Meadow/Carr 1 S3 yes *S1 =critically imperiled; S2= imperiled; S3 =vulnerable to extirpation; S4= apparently secure, uncommon but not rare; S5=secure, common,widespread, and abundant. Table 2-2 Native plant communities in the GWMA often associated with groundwater Native Plant Community Ecological System *Conservation Associated with Name Status Rank Seepage Areas? Black Ash—Yellow Birch—Red Wet Forest S4 no Maple—Alder Swamp (East central) Tamarack Swamp (Southern) Forested Rich S2, S3 no Peatland Willow—Dogwood Shrub Wet S5 no Swamp Meadow/Carr Sedge Meadow Wet S4 or S5 no Meadow/Carr Wet Prairie (Southern) Wetland Prairie S2 no Alder—(Maple—Loosestrife) Forested Rich S5 no Swamp Peatland Northern Mixed Cattail Marsh Marsh S2 no Northern Bulrush—Spikerush Marsh S2 or S3 no Marsh *S1 =critically imperiled; S2 =imperiled; S3 =vulnerable to extirpation; S4= apparently secure, uncommon but not rare; S5 =secure, common,widespread, and abundant. P40 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-14 Copynghl 2017 Stat-of Acnnesofa Oepadmen(of Natural Resources(DNR)Rarelealuresdata-neP.-ledbythe 0ms r MILLE LACS UPLANDS of Ecotog-1 and Water Resources lAmnesota DNR and x C current as of December 10 1017 These data are not based on an - exhaushve­enloryoltnestate The lack or dale for any geograph c C;i{.Sl.GO area shall not be construed to mean that no srgni!nt feeluras presenf ;Hii.G`Cy •Columbus) •Forest Lake a Scandia. t ANOKA SAND PLAIN I f I Anoka I ` Blaine, ► I 'w • I r_ r I I I I I I � • Stillwater ,s I I r i k� I Minneapolis• I ST.PAUL-BALDWIN PLAINS T { St Paul S BIG WOODS c<,o741 I �'r •� J r Rare Plants R Rare Animals Designated Trout Stream Designated Trout Stream Tributary North 8 East Metro f"t GWMA Working Boundary March 05,2014 0 5 10Mdes OAK SAVANNA TH FFLANDS Figure 2-8 Rare species associated with groundwater P41 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-15 Table 2-3 Rare plant species closely associated with groundwater Rare Plants Common Name **Rarity Rank General Habitat Type Poa paludigena Bog bluegrass T Seepage swamps Hydrocotyle americana American water- SC Seepage swamps pennywort Decodon verticillotus Waterwillow SC Small lake margins, stream edges, floating mats Potamageton bicupulatus Snailseed pondweed E Small lakes Potamageton Diverse-leaved E Small lakes diversigolius pondweed Rotala ramosior Tooth-cup T Small lakes,sandy shores Agolinis purpurea Purple gerardia Watchlist Wet prairie complexes Agrostis hyemalis Winter bentgrass E Wet prairie complexes Aristida longespica var. Slimspike three-awn E Wet prairie complexes geniculate eotrychium rugulosum St. Lawrence grapefern SC Wet prairie complexes Fimbristylis autumnolis Autumn fimbristylis SC Wet prairie complexes Juncus morginatus Marginated rush E Wet prairie complexes Platonthera flava var. Tubercled rein-orchid T Wet prairie complexes herbiola Polygola cruciate Cross-leaved milkwort E Wet prairie complexes Rubus fuller Bristleberry T Wet prairie complexes Rubus missouricus Missouri dewberry E Wet prairie complexes Rubus semisetosus Swamp blackberry T Wet prairie complexes Rubus stipulatus Bristle-berry E Wet prairie complexes Scirpus pedicillatus Woolgrass Watchlist Wet prairie complexes Scirpus triglomerata Tall nut-rush E Wet prairie complexes Tricophorum clintonii Clinton's bulrush T Wet prairie complexes Viola lanceolate Lance-leaved violet T Wet prairie complexes Xyris torte Twisted yellow-eyed E Wet prairie complexes grass **E= Endangered;T=Threatened; SC=Special Concern; Watchlist= Not on endangered species list but tracked in the Natural Heritage Information System P42 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-16 Table 2-4 Rare animal species closely associated with groundwater Rare Birds Common Name **Rarity Rank General Habitat Type Porkesia motacilla Louisiana waterthrush SC Seepage streams Pholaropis tricolor Wilson's phalarope T Wet prairie, rich fen, sedge meadow Gallinula chloropus Common gallinule SC Marshes Sterna forsteri Forster's tern SC Marshes Setophaga cerulea Cerulean warbler SC In this area: hardwood forests with streams and/or ephemeral wetlands Rare Mussels Simpsonoias ambigua Salamander mussel E Rivers, dependent on mudpuppies as host Rare Salamanders Necturus maculosus mudpuppy Sc Rivers and streams Jumping Spiders Paradamoetas fontana A species of jumping Sc Seeps, marshes, wet prairies spider Caddisflies Limnephilus rossi A species of northern T Springs, streams, lake margins, caddisfly marshes Ochrotrichia spinosa A species of purse E Streams (other habitat casemaker caddisfly unknown) Parapsyche apicalis A species of netspinning T Fast-moving cold small caddisfly streams Dragonflies and Damselflies Ophiogomphus St. Croix snaketail T Large,fast,warm-water susbehcha streams with cobble, gravel, sand substrates Amphiagrion saucium Red damsel Proposed Seepage areas SGCN Cordulegaster oblique Arrowhead spiketail Proposed Seepage areas, spring-fed SGCN forest streams Butterflies Lycaeno epixanthe Bog copper SGCN Acid peatlands **E= Endangered; T=Threatened; SC=Special Concern; SGCN =Species of Greatest Conservation Need P43 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-17 Lakes and Wetlands The GWMA is rich in lakes and wetlands.The specific characteristics of each feature are highly variable (depth, acreage,watershed, etc.).All of these surface water features are subject to natural variations such as precipitation and weather. Surface water features with connections to groundwater may be subject to changes due to natural variations or pumping. In 2010 the Metropolitan Council applied a screening method to categorize the potential vulnerability of surface waters to pumping from bedrock or buried Quaternary aquifers'. Lakes and wetlands were categorized into four broad groups based on the difference between surface water and shallow groundwater levels and underlying geology. • The two categories of lakes and wetlands expected to be most influenced by regional aquifers are in the discharge and flow-through groups. Discharge features primarily receive groundwater inflow with limited groundwater outflow. Flow-through features both receive groundwater inflow and discharge groundwater outflow.These features are likely to be affected by changing groundwater levels (natural or human induced) in areas where they are not protected by underlying, low permeability aquitards. F Indeterminate or recharge water bodies mostly loose water to the regional groundwater system. These features are typically less responsive to pumping from bedrock or deep aquifers, but changes in aquifer heads(pressure) may diffuse to these water bodies in areas where they are not underlain by sufficiently low permeability aquitards. • Disconnected water bodies, are very weakly connected to the regional groundwater system and are not considered vulnerable to pumping impacts. e Discharge,flow-through, and indeterminate or recharge type water bodies were considered to be potentially connected to the shallow groundwater system.Those water bodies that were considered also connected to deeper aquifers were rated as potentially vulnerable. This initial screening could be modified or refined with site-specific data and/or updated regional models. Lakes and wetlands that were rated as potentially vulnerable are distributed throughout the GWMA(Figure 2-9). There are some larger zones of water bodies rated as not vulnerable, such as the southern part of Woodbury and adjacent areas, most of Grant, and the southwestern half of Blaine. While potentially vulnerable lakes and wetlands in general could be affected by regional groundwater- level decline, water levels in smaller basins could also be vulnerable to localized drawdown due to their small area and storage volume. The method used in the Metropolitan Council 2010 study was a conservative approach. Some features were rated as vulnerable based on a possible connection to the regional aquifer system but may not be highly sensitive to pumping from bedrock or deeper buried Quaternary aquifers.The analysis did not consider other factors that can influence the sensitivity of lakes and wetlands to drawdowns in the major aquifers. 'Barr Engineering,2010. Evaluation of groundwater and surface-water interaction—guidance for resources assessment: prepared for Metropolitan Council. P44 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2.18 For example, there are large differences between water elevations in some vulnerable water bodies and the heads in the underlying Prairie du Chien aquifer.These large water elevation differences indicate limited hydraulic connection at those locations, but they were not discerned from the hydrologic and geologic data used. Surface water runoff and outflow versus groundwater inflow and outflow were also not considered in the analysis. Lakes and wetlands that include groundwater as a significant source or natural outflow will be more sensitive to aquifer fluctuations. P45 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-19 fColumbu - For, ��' .. _ ,� • , �S,.ake c Scandla, 'X/-(ii4,i'/a_•r"A �;/.•-' .e +y//,"'Zjr4 r'1 Anoka ` G'(.�y: ;s/ /.'!i':a �rL• .t e Blaine ,+'- r .,�,•, ., rF a E' s Lf 1 ✓ „� Stillwate' F i Y .fit'�',• .•�• ( �"••�q'n_ , % L Minneapolis. r s}a St.Paul Connected Indeterminate r Disconnected } Y Vulnerable Coldwater/trout stream f \ Other DNR public watercourse �i •"et- North&East Metro GWMA working boundary 0 5 10 Miles December 15,2014 Figure 2-9 Lake and wetland connection to the regional groundwater system Classification by Barr for Metropolitan Council (2010) P46 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-20 Water Quality Water quality affects the availability and cost of groundwater in the GWMA. Contaminated groundwater may not be available for use by individuals, industry or cities unless it undergoes treatment.Consumers may have to use deeper aquifers or rely on surface water sources (e.g. Mississippi River). Contaminated groundwater also presents a risk to the connected ecosystems(lakes, streams and wetlands), impacting the species that live there and the people who use these water bodies to hunt, fish, and recreate. Although locations of groundwater quality concerns were not used to define the GWMA boundary,the boundary does not divide or cross major areas of groundwater quality problems or limitations.Special Well Construction Areas (Figure 2-10) and Southern Washington County PFC(perfluorochemicals) contamination plumes are included in the GWMA boundary. Special controls on the construction or modification of wells are enforced in the MDH designated areas to protect water supplies from known contamination. The MPCA maintains a record of plumes that may impact water availability in the GWMA, including both smaller plumes and the large (multi-acre)groundwater contamination plumes in bedrock aquifers identified in Figure 2-10. In some cases, pollution containment wells are used to limit movement of contaminated groundwater into less contaminated or uncontaminated areas of the aquifers. Pollution containment wells with DNR appropriation permits are indicated on Figure 2-10. P47 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-21 -Forest Lake *Columbus s Scandia i I Anoka I �r e Blame I ------------ Spring Lake�Park •Mo rids View I Fridley TCAAPr Shoreview New Bnght n Htlllopl I r Arden Hills I Stillwater* •C umG.a Heights St A thonye i Ba rt Ii l RLaud rdale f t Lake aytown/Wes I t Elmo Lakeland Minneapolis O Qale� St Paul e Q Lake Elmo/ kJ'"v Lanptall mak a e L k land Shores Lakeland Lake[ d Shores', Afton• •Newport ' St. Paul Park -) Pollution Containment wells and Newport St Paul Park Ct General area of PFC contamination -1 PFCs exceed drinking water advisory levels ;"; ❑ Special Well and Boring Construction Area Q North&East Metro GWMA Working Boundary 0 5 10 Miles Hastings Figure 2-10 Selected areas with groundwater contamination Special Well and Boring Construction Areas,areas of PFC contamination, and DNR permitted pollution containment wells P48 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 2-22 Jurisdictions, governance and planning Cities and counties play a critical role in planning and managing for long term water supply and water sustainability.The DNR determined that the GWMA boundary should not 'cut' or'bisect'those important governance boundaries, to the degree possible and in the context of the natural hydrogeologic boundaries.The legislature has also designated a specific water-supply planning role for the Metropolitan Council within the Seven County Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Jurisdictional, governance, and planning frameworks informed the boundary recommendation in the following ways: The boundary conforms to city and county boundaries where possible to connect directly with municipal water supplies and land-use planning jurisdictions(Figure 2-1). • The exceptions: a. Anoka County—selected hydrogeological boundaries cross Anoka County, but current and/or projected increases in water use are relatively low in areas of the county not included in the GWMA. b. Hennepin County and the City of Minneapolis—only the portions of the city& county east of the Mississippi River are within the major hydrogeological boundaries of the GWMA. The boundary is within the Metropolitan Council jurisdiction, connecting the GWMA with the water supply planning functions of the Metropolitan Council. Watershed Districts and Watershed Management Organizations play an important role in both surface and groundwater management in the GWMA. However,the watershed boundaries do not directly conform to the groundwater system boundaris.The DNR recognizes the important role surface water management will have in developing long term sustainable use of groundwater, but the GWMA boundaries do not conform to watershed management district or organization boundaries where those boundaries cross the Mississippi River or city or county boundaries. P49 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 3-1 3. The Goal and Objectives Section 3 describes the goal and objectives for groundwater management, including supporting statutes and rules.The goal for the GWMA expresses a future desired condition for the area. The goal for the GWMA is: In the North& East Metro Groundwater Management Area, the use of groundwater is sustainable and therefore does not harm ecosystems, water quality, or the ability of present and future generations to meet their needs. The goal is drawn directly from the Minnesota Statutes for groundwater appropriations, Minn. Stat.,sec. 103G.287, subd. 3,4 and 5.These statutes describe protection of groundwater supplies, designation of groundwater management areas, and a standard of sustainability. Groundwater use is defined as sustainable if that use: • Does not harm aquifers and ecosystems • Does not negatively impact surface waters e Is reasonable, efficient and meets water conservation requirements • Does not degrade water quality c Does not create unresolved well interferences or water sue conflicts To attain the goal for the GWMA,this Plan sets five management objectives that define how these statutory requirements can be met. All of the management objectives must be achieved simultaneously to ensure sustainability of groundwater use. These objectives are: I. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not harm aquifers and ecosystems, and does not negatively impact surface waters. 11. Groundwater use in the GWMA is reasonable, efficient, and complies with water conservation requirements. lll. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not degrade water quality. IV. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not create unresolved well interferences or water use conflicts. V. All groundwater users in the GWMA have the necessary permits to use groundwater. The remainder of Section 3 describes each of the objectives in more detail. P50 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 3-2 Objective I. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not harm aquifers and ecosystems, and does not negatively impact surface waters. Groundwater and surface waters together make up a connected hydrologic system that is affected by climate, geology and soils, land use and land cover, water use, and water quality changes.Therefore, impacts to aquifers, ecosystems, and surface waters resulting from water appropriations are related under this objective. Aquifer Sustainability The first part of this objective deals with preventing harm to aquifers.The purpose is to ensure that groundwater continues to be available for use in the future while protecting ecosystems and surface waters (described below). Groundwater use always reduces storage unless there is an equivalent increase in recharge through surface-water infiltration. Limits on appropriations can help ensure aquifer sustainability. In Minnesota Rules, parts 6115.0630 and 6115.0670,the concept of safe yield is used as the measure of limits on allowable groundwater use. The concept looks at the impact that water withdrawals from an aquifer have on aquifer water quality, levels, and pressure (sometimes referred to as 'heads'). It does not address potential impacts to other resources such as surface waters. Safe yield is defined separately for water-table aquifers and for artesian (confined) aquifers (see Section 7 for glossary of terms). For artesian aquifers, a water elevation level in an observation well (obwell) may be set as a threshold for aquifer protection that ensures compliance with safe yield (Figure 3-1).To protect the aquifer from being drawn down too far, 25 percent of the 'available' head (water height above the top of the aquifer, before pumping) must remain in an observation well. A warning threshold of 50 percent of the available head may be established to allow time for contingency plans to be put in effect if water levels decline. For water-table aquifers, safe yield is a total-use rate that does not exceed the long-term average recharge rate (Minn. Rules, part 6115.0630). In short,output (pumping) for the aquifer does not exceed input (recharge) over the long term. Again,this does not account for impacts surface waters, which are addressed in the next section. Pumping from artesian aquifers (such as the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers) typically causes water from the water-table aquifer to flow down into the artesian aquifers. Therefore, safe yield should be determined based on both direct and indirect withdrawals from water- table aquifers. Water levels that have stabilized to a pattern of variations above the threshold indicate compliance with safe yield. Understanding pumping history and measured water levels is important when evaluating compliance with safe yield. Declining water levels that remain above the threshold are expected in some situations, even while use remains within the safe yield.This occurs if pumping rates gradually increase overtime, the system has not come into equilibrium with recent pumping rates, or natural fluctuations create a temporary downward trend. P51 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 3-3 In most circumstances limits on groundwater pumping will be defined by the protection of surface- water resources and dependent ecosystems or by preventing water use conflicts ratherthan by safe yield for water-table aquifers. Water-table well Deep well Land surface Water table J A 100%available head Water level in E confined aquifer Water-table aquifer B 50%threshold C 25%threshold Confining layer ToA o` er cteh rJsdrteD 4asit!"9 a,* Com'meo imtesian)aqui cr Figure 3-1 Safe yield thresholds for artesian (confined) aquifers The available head (A) is the distance between the top of the confined aquifer (D) and the water level (E) in the deep well.The 50-percent threshold (B) is halfway between these same points;the 25-percent threshold (C) is one-fourth of the way. Water levels in a confined aquifer must not stabilize below the 25-percent safe yield threshold. P52 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 3-4 Ecosystems and Surface Waters The second part of Objective I deals with harm to ecosystems and negative impacts to surface Waters when groundwater is overused.The groundwater system is part of the water cycle, eventually destined to discharge to surface waters such as rivers, lakes, wetlands, or springs. Taking groundwater from water table and most artesian aquifers diverts water from surface waters or wetlands.Overuse of groundwater can significantly alter surface water features and the biological communities, recreation, and other uses that those waters supports. Surface water appropriations are governed by Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.285. Groundwater appropriations are governed by Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.287. Groundwater appropriations may also be subject to additional limits based on their surface water impacts as follows (Minn. Stat, sec. 103G.297, subd. 2): Groundwater appropriations that will have negative impacts to surface waters are subject to applicable provisions in section 103G.285. The DNR will use the surface water protections described in Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.285 as the minimum threshold for negative impacts when evaluating groundwater appropriations. However, surface-water pumping(appropriation) has a direct and immediate effect on flow or water level in the surface water features from which the water is withdrawn. When a surface appropriation is suspended there is an immediate effect on the water levels. The same is not true for groundwater appropriations. Determining whether groundwater appropriations have negative impacts to surface waters is complex. Generally, the effect on connected surface water features is both delayed and spread out or'flattened' in time and is typically distributed among multiple water features. Several thresholds that exist in law are helpful in determining if negative impacts are occurring in surface waters: 1. Appropriations from lakes listed in Bulletin 256 are limited to a total annual volume of water amounting to 1/2 acre-foot per acre of water basin (6 inches over the surface area of the water body) (Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.285, subd. 3).Also, appropriations from lakes less than 500 acres must be discouraged (Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.261, item d). 2. Appropriations taken directly from surface water bodies are limited according to the requirements establishing and enforcing protected flows for streams and rivers or protective elevations for lakes and wetlands (Minn.Stat.,sec. 103G.285).These are intended to accommodate the range of needs and uses of water bodies. For surface-water appropriations, consumptive appropriations may not be made from watercourses during periods of specified low flows (i.e. protected flows)or from lakes and wetlands when water levels are below the protective elevation (Minn.Stat., sec. 103G.285, subd. 2 and 3). 6 DNR Staff, 1968.An Inventory of Minnesota Lakes. Division of Water,Soils and Minerals, Minnesota Conservation Department P53 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 3-5 3. Minnesota Statutes protect trout streams from water appropriations (Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.285, subd, 5) because they are particularly dependent on steady flow,stable cold water temperatures, and sufficient oxygen levels. These conditions depend on a steady supply of groundwater from springs or diffuse seepage.The goal is to limit stream depletion due to groundwater pumping. 4. Calcareous fens'are a rare type of peat-forming,groundwater-dependent wetland that are also protected in statute (Minn. Stat.,sec. 103G.223) because they host rare plants and are sensitive to impacts. Calcareous fens are very dependent on upwelling groundwater to maintain their unique chemical and physical characteristics.To meet the statutory requirement,the goal is to limit depletion of water moving to the fen as a result of groundwater pumping. 5. Public water wetlands may not be drained unless replaced (Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.221), and temporary drawdown is only allowed if certain conditions are met, including: improving navigation and recreational uses, improving fish or wildlife habitat, exposing sediments in order to remove nutrients or contaminants,to alleviating flooding of agricultural land or allowing mining of metals (Minn. Rules, part 6115.0270). There are no general thresholds for some of the other features described in Section 2 of this Plan: springs and seeps and wetlands that have saturated soil near the surface but do not have ponded water for much of the year, and native plant communities other than calcareous fens. Section 5 of the GWMA Plan provides a set of actions to meet Objective I. 'There are no known calcareous fens in the North & East Metro GWMA. P54 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 3-6 Objective II. Groundwater use in the GWMA is reasonable, efficient, and complies with water conservation requirements. Water conservation is a key component of ensuring sustainability, and an important goal within the GWMA. Efficient use increases the water available for current and future uses and can help reduce stress on the water resource. Explicit conditions may be placed on appropriation permits that require conservation practices appropriate to a specific use. Conservation Requirements for Municipal Systems Minnesota Statute, sec. 103G.291 requires public water suppliers serving more than 1,000 people to implement demand reduction measures by January 1, 2015.This includes all but one of the municipal systems in the GWMA. The measures must include a rate structure or outline a program that achieves demand reduction.They must also have a water supply plan that is approved by DNR. In the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, including the GWMA, all communities that have public water supplies must prepare water supply plans (Minn. Stat., sec.473.859). These plans must be consistent with the Metropolitan Council Master Water Supply Plan, providing an opportunity for cross-jurisdictional consistency and cooperation.The plans lay out future challenges and options for a community's water supply and the commitment of the community to its water use and conservation goals. Minnesota Statute,sec. 103G.291 also requires public water suppliers to adopt and enforce water-use restrictions when the governor declares a critical water deficiency.The restrictions must limit watering lawns, washing vehicles, irrigating golf courses and parks, and other nonessential uses. Other Water Uses Water conservation conditions may be placed on appropriation permits other than those for municipal water supply where reasonable use can be quantified,for example: • The amount of water reasonably needed for a particular agricultural situation (soil types, climate, and crop type) • Specific goals for water use for golf course operations in the GWMA • Water use goals for specific industries Non-permitted water users across the GWMA should also practice water conservation.The DNR supports conservation requirements for private and non-permitted use established through local jurisdictions such as watershed districts and municipal governments. Section 5 of the GWMA Plan provides a set of actions to meet Objective II. P55 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 3-7 Objective III. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not degrade water quality. Pumping groundwater does not directly degrade the quality of the water in the aquifer in most circumstances. However, some pumping can cause water levels in wells to fall below the top of an artesian aquifer(See Figure 3-1), resulting in conversion to a water-table condition. In some circumstances this can lead to changes in water chemistry and degradation of water quality. Compliance with safe yield for artesian aquifers prevents this situation from occurring as described under Objective 1. The effects of groundwater pumping on existing contamination must be considered when evaluating groundwater appropriation permits. Groundwater pumping can cause existing groundwater pollution to move or spread. Changes in groundwater levels and pressures can increase the movement of pollutants between aquifers or increase the spreading of pollutants within the same aquifer. In some cases, pollution containment wells are used to limit movement of contaminated groundwater into less or uncontaminated areas of the aquifers (Figure 2-10).The MPCA, in cooperation with the responsible parties, determines duration and volume of pumping to contain pollution plumes and limit the movement or spreading of groundwater contamination. Finally, water quality considerations in surface-water features must be incorporated into groundwater appropriation thresholds for surface-waters. Changes to the amount of groundwater flow into surface- water features can affect water quality items such as temperatures and oxygen levels in trout streams. Section 5 of the GWMA Plan provides a set of actions to meet Objective III. P56 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 3-8 Objective IV. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not create unresolved well interferences or water use conflicts. DNR must also address competing demands for appropriations of water within the sustainable limits. The purpose of this objective is to manage water appropriations in accordance with the allocation priorities in Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.261. The first priorities for water allocation are domestic water use and use of surface water for power generation. Five other priority levels are given for other uses: all other consumption of less than 10,000 gallons per day, agricultural irrigation and processing, other power production,other consumption greater than 10,000 gallons per day, and non-essential uses. A well interference problem occurs when groundwater appropriation causes the water level in public water supply well(s) or private, domestic well(s)to fall below the reach of those wells (Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.287 subd. 5 and Minn. Rules, part 6115.0730). According to Minn.Stat.,sec. 103G.287, subd. 5, this applies to public water supply and private domestic wells constructed according to the state well code (Minn. Rules, part 4725). An interference complaint can only be valid for a domestic well if that well was constructed before appropriation permits allegedly causing the interference were issued. An interference problem may be resolved by modifying the affected well, replacing the well with a deeper well, replacing the well with an alternate water supply (e.g. connection to a public system), or modifying permitted pumping rates or schedules. Potential for well interference is considered when evaluating new water appropriation permits or amendment applications.The DNR follows procedures described in Minn. Rules, part 6115.0730 to mitigate potential interference that may be caused by new or increased appropriations and to respond to interference complaints. A water use conflict occurs when water demands among existing and proposed users exceed the available waters. A water use conflict can only be resolved by limiting or restricting the rate,volume, and/or timing of water appropriations. The available waters must first be determined based on resource sustainability (Objectives I and ll) before allocating the available waters among users.The DNR follows procedures described in Minn. Rules, part 6115.0740 to resolve water use conflicts. Section 5 of the GWMA Plan provides a set of actions to meet Objective IV. P57 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 3-9 Objective V. All groundwater users in the GWMA have the necessary permits to use groundwater. Objectives I, II, III and IV (above) can only be tracked and achieved with an effective permitting system. Permits provide key data on groundwater use and the means to limit use if necessary to meet sustainability objectives.To be in compliance with current state requirements, individuals and organizations must, at a minimum, do the following if requesting 10,000 gallons of water per day or one million gallons of water per year: • Obtain a water appropriation permit • Pay annual fees • Report annual water use according to permit conditions Permit holders must also comply with special conditions placed on their permits that are designed to ensure sustainability and/or monitor resource conditions. Some permits may include special conditions such as groundwater-level monitoring from wells specifically constructed for that purpose. Objective V is meant to emphasize the importance of permitting and permit compliance to meet the sustainability goals of the North & East Metro GWMA. Section 5 of the GWMA Plan provides a set of actions to meet Objective V. P58 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-1 4. Status of the GWMA in Terms of the Objectives This section describes our current understanding of the status of the North & East Metro GWMA with respect to the five objectives described in Section 3. Based on the five objectives,the definition of sustainability with respect to groundwater is that use: • Does not harm aquifers and ecosystems • Does not negatively impact surface waters t is reasonable, efficient and meets water conservation requirements • Does not degrade water quality • Does not create unresolved well interferences or water sue conflicts All of the sustainability objectives must be achieved to attain overall sustainability of groundwater use in the GWMA. The status described is based on currently available information and an assessment of information and data gaps. The gaps need to be addressed to meet long term goals of groundwater sustainability in the GWMA. The status of each objective is briefly summarized below. Objective I. Aquifers, Ecosystems and Surface Waters Groundwater, surface waters and groundwater-dependent ecosystems are interrelated. Groundwater levels fluctuate in response to a number of influences including climate, land use, and groundwater pumping. Managing for groundwater-use sustainability requires quantitative knowledge of the influences on groundwater and its connection to surface water. Two types of information are needed to make water-appropriations permitting decisions that protect aquifers, surface water resources, and associated biological communities. First, acceptable levels of hydrological impacts must be determined for each type of feature. General considerations are discussed in Section 3.0, but site specific thresholds may be needed for particular surface-water features. Second, an estimate of how and the degree to which existing or proposed water appropriations may change the hydrological regime must be made. The projected or interpreted impacts may then be compared to the established thresholds. Climate Data and Trends The main driver of groundwater recharge variations is climate.The climate in the North & East Metro GWMA is characterized by variable weather.The 'normal' condition is for substantial ups and downs in precipitation, evaporation, and other climatic factors that affect hydrology.The hydrologic effects of climate must be understood before one can assess the hydrologic effects of groundwater use. Although longterm average annual precipitation has been higher in the Twin Cities since the mid- eighties compared to the previous decades, the Twin Cities experienced relatively lower precipitation in parts of the last decade. For example, the 1981-2010 'climate normal' precipitation at the Minneapolis- St. Paul International airport(red line on Figure 4-1) is higher than 30-year climate normal for previous P59 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-2 decades. Below normal precipitation in several recent years is reflected in the declining five-year moving average precipitation (dotted gray line in Figure 4-1).This is consistent with hydrological data indicating a recent drier period. In addition to changes in the amount of annual precipitation, the timing(wetter springs), nature (larger rain events over shorter periods), and distribution of precipitation also is changing in the midwest'. Precipitation and other climatic factors affect groundwater recharge and groundwater levels. Relatively small changes in precipitation over large areas can have a significant effect on groundwater recharge and groundwater levels. The current climate monitoring network may be inadequate for determining this important part of the water balance in the GWMA.The network should be evaluated and expanded to fill data gaps. 45 Annual VaeupiIJLion,MSV --- .l luaulr NUfalidt Vire pill non(19H14010) S-Ya Moving AVVJ Age Vire 1p lAtion 40 35 L � C ° 30 ` ` J a 25 j 20 15 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015 Figure 4-1 Example of historic precipitation patterns in the North & East Metro: precipitation at Minneapolis—St. Paul International Airport. 8 Pryor,S.C., D. Scavia, C. Downer, M.Gaden, L. Iverson, R. Nordstrom,J. Patz, and G. P. Robertson,2014:Ch. 18: Midwest. Climate Change Impacts in the United States:The Third National Climate Assessment,J. M. Melillo, Terese(T.C.) Richmond,and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S.Global Change Research Program,418-440, doi:10.7930/JOJ1012N. P60 Draft North& East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-3 Groundwater-Level Data and Trends Monitoring groundwater levels is an important element of groundwater management and ensuring compliance with the safe yield thresholds. Levels must be viewed in the context of natural climate fluctuations and groundwater pumping history. Since 1944 the DNR has managed a statewide network of dedicated water-level observation wells. Water-level readings from these observation wells are available on the DNR web page. There are 60 actively measured obwells within the GWMA boundary area (Figure 4-2). Nineteen of these wells have been constructed since 2009 and provide only short records. Some appropriation permit holders also maintain observation wells as required in permit conditions. Other organizations have also installed observation wells. For example the Valley Branch Watershed District measures water levels in 15 shallow observation wells three times per year. Historical data from inactive or sealed obwells and from obwells outside the GWMA provide additional useful information about changing groundwater levels over time. DNR staff reviewed data from obwells throughout the state for statistically significant trends in annual minimum water levels for the 20-year period from 1993 through 2012. Nineteen wells at 14 locations in the North & East Metro GWMA had sufficient data for analysis (three locations include 'nested' obwells of different depths). Four of these obwells had upward trends; three had no trend; and 12 had a downward trend (Figure 4-2). In general,the available obwell data indicate that recent groundwater levels have been near or below low points of the previous 30 years regardless of proximity to areas of intensive groundwater pumping (with the exception of rising groundwater levels in parts of Ramsey County as a result of reduced pumping).This leads to the conclusion that weather was a major factor in recent lower groundwater levels in the vicinity of the GWMA. Lower water levels in areas where groundwater use has substantially increased over the last 20 years appear to reflect a combination of climate and pumping effects. At observation wells completed in artesian aquifers, water levels are not approaching safe yield thresholds. P61 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4~4 ID 2027 Li SA S Columbusl Forest Lake 2026 scandia 82031 Anoka 2016 2009 82033 % Blaine 2007 2012 82029 82023 82022 82024 62038 n 62039 62037 62030 62002 62DO8 13 A St.Paul 27041 19005 82012 Active DNR Obwell :i Bedrock * Buried Artesian St. Paul RWS Supplied * Water Table Minneapolis Supplied * Other North&East Metro Annual Minimum Trend GWMA Working Boundary Up None 19015 Down j March 05,2014 0 5 10 Miles 1906T Figure 4-2 Active DNR obvve||s and trends in annual water level minima (1993—2D12) P82 Draft North& East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-5 Based on observation well levels, lake levels, and stream gauging data, the 1990s to early 2000s was a wet period in this region with relatively high water levels and flows. The period 2007 through 2013 included at least one period of hydrologic drought.This determination is based on a comparison with measured water levels and stream flows during and following the last extreme drought in the region (1988-899) at locations with low water use10. Relatively low water levels were most prevalent in groundwater and surface water measurements reflective of groundwater conditions such as stream baseflow. Figure 4-3 is one example of the gradual fluctuations in groundwater levels in a 'nest' of observation wells open to several different aquifers at different depths in northeastern Washington County. This obwell nest is four miles from the nearest municipal well and there is little other groundwater use in the vicinity. Water levels gradually declined in these observation wells from 2003 through 2010 and remained low through 2013. Water levels in the shallower obwell (82024) dropped below the minimum level of the previous extended drought that occurred in 1991, and water levels in the deeper obwells overlapped with levels previously measured in 1990-91 from 2009 through 2013. � 830 - - 825 i 820 -- - — ---- -- - — —— -- 815 N 810 --82024(Buried Artesian) 4 805 -- — -- — ----- S? 800 ---82023(Buried Artesian) °> 795 — ,-82022(Tunnel City-Wonewoc) w -- -- - - - -- - - -w'r --- ---- ai 790 785 - - -- � �— {j( --- --- — •- - "X% v . -r - --- 780 775 -- --- - -- -----1— --- W.80 Dec.84 Jan-90 3an-95 Dec-04 10 15 i Jan Jan-10 4-3 Observation well hydrographs, northeastern Washington County The three observation wells are completed in three different aquifers: a shallower buried Quaternary aquifer (82024), a deeper buried Quaternary aquifer in a bedrock valley(82023) and a bedrock aquifer (82022). Seasonal water level fluctuations have increased in the buried Quaternary and bedrock aquifers in areas of intensive groundwater pumping. Seasonal fluctuations at these locations increased due to 9 Some of the effects of this drought are described in: Minnesota DNR, 1989.Drought of 1988;and in Holmstrom and Ellefson, 1990. The Effects of the 1988 Drought on Water Resources in Wisconsin:USGS Open-File Report 90- 149. to Data sets used: DNR observation wells 13007/18, 13009/13, 82024,82031,and 82033; North Center Lake; Wisconsin USGS observation well PK-35/17W/08-0040(USGS Station 453013092314601);Apple River near Sommerset,Wisconsin (USGS Station 05341500);and St. Croix River at St.Croix Falls,Wisconsin (USGS Station 05340500) P63 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-6 groundwater pumping but appear to have become stable over the last 6 to 10 years at obwell locations. An example is shown in Figure 4-4. Groundwater levels are expected to be stable or to rise if average or wet hydrological conditions prevail in the next several years and pumping rates remain stable. If dry conditions continue, we should expect additional water level drops in aquifers of the GWMA. Other historical groundwater measurements were compared to more recent measurements in the GWMA, such as water levels measured at the time of municipal well construction. Recent water levels measured in municipal wells in the northeastern part of the GWMA while they were not pumping are mostly above or close to the historical measurements made at the time of construction (Table 4-1). For the recent measurements, water levels in the pumping wells may not have fully recovered from pumping and may be lower than in the aquifer nearby. These data do not necessarily show that long term pumping influence is negligible at these locations, but the data suggest that pumping has not pushed water levels substantially outside of their historical range.The water-level measurements listed in Table 4-1 vary from 96 to 172 feet above the top of the Prairie du Chien in those wells, indicating that water levels are clearly within the safe yield thresholds (Figure 3-1). 896 -- -- -- - - - - --- ---- -- -- ----- --- --- ---- 894 - -- — -, —+ --- - - -- -- 892Ln -- ., l 1I w 890 -- _ — ,- - - - -- - - - - - - - -- Y t , ff LU 888 1 i 1 f v � k ;, II 3 886 - - - - -A- 884 ' , 882 - — ----- - —� — lan 70 Jan-75 Ian-go 3an-85 Jan-90 1an-95 Jan-00 Jan-05 Jan-10 Ian-15 Figure 4-4 Observation well hydrograph (2012),Jordan aquifer, southern Anoka County P64 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-7 Table 4-1 Historical and recent water levels in older municipal wells Date of Date of Difference in Well Historic Synoptic Water Level city Unique No. A uifer s 1 Measurement Measurement feet North St. Paul 208222 PCJ 1942 3/30/2011 11 North St._Paul 208223 PCJ 1942 3/30/2011 4 North St. Paul 205744 CJDN 11/23/1964 3/30/2011 13 North St. Paul 208224 CJDN 12/0/1957 3/30/2011 -9 White Bear Lake 14005 CJDN 8/14/1959 8/28/2012 21 White Bear Lake 2265672 CJDN 6/2/1965 3/30/2011 -2 White Bear Lake 205733 PCJ 3/31/1966 3/30/2011 7 White Bear Lake 226566 PCJ 1969 3/27/2012 20 White Bear Twp. 226570 CJDN 9/1956 8/9/2011 712 Vadnais Heights 224790 PCJ 11/1972 3/29/2011 -6 Lino Lakes 240171 PCJ 11/10/1971 3/24/2011 -1 208507/ Mahtomedi 2085063 PCJ/CJDN 1933 8/9/2011 -26 Oakdale 208454 1 CJDN__+ 6/24/1969 3 28 2011 5 Oakdale 208462 CJDN 10/1998 3/28/2011 0 Oakdale 208463 CJDN 4 20 1964 3 28 2011 4 'Aquifer codes: CJDN (Jordan), PCJ (Prairie du Chien and Jordan) z This is a standby or backup well that has not been pumped in recent years. 3 Historical measurement in an adjacent well that has been sealed. Available Groundwater Model Results Computer or numerical models of groundwater systems can provide valuable insights and predictions of changes that might result from changing climate and pumping. Several regional computer groundwater flow models that include the North & East Metro GWMA have been developed since the late 1980s. A new, regional model (Metro Model 3)was released June 201411. The model covers an 11 county area, and should not be used directly for more local decision making. However, the model provides a starting point for subregional or local analysis of aquifer conditions and effects of climate and cumulative groundwater appropriations.A local refinement of Metro Model 3 is planned by the Met Council and the U.S. Geological Survey(USGS)for the northeastern Metro area. The local refinement will provide valuable information about potential effects of pumping and weather variability in the GWMA. Ecosystems and Surface Waters Groundwater pumping rates may result in negative impacts to some surface waters, recreational and other uses of those resources, and their ecological communities. Several types of surface waters and wetlands that are potentially vulnerable to natural variations (drought)and to groundwater pumping influence were identified in Section 2.These include designated trout streams, non-designated trout 11 Metropolitan Council, 2014.Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Groundwater Flow Model Version 3.0: prepared prepared by Barr Engineering. P65 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-8 streams,wetland native plant communities associated with groundwater, and lakes and wetlands that are hydrologically connected to the regional aquifer system. Groundwater use in the vicinity of the six designated trout streams (Figure 2-6) is briefly summarized here.There are no permitted wells within 1 mile of Falls Creek, Willow Brook, or Valley Creek. All of the trout streams except Willow Brook have at least one permitted well within 3 miles.There are a total of nine wells within 1 mile of a trout stream and those wells pumped a total of 109.2 million gallons in 2012.A majority of that pumping was from wells in the vicinity of Brown's Creek.The potential impact that groundwater pumping has on the trout streams has not been fully evaluated. The City of Woodbury has conducted significant testing and analysis to evaluate the potential for impacts from its municipal wells in its eastern well field on Valley Creek.The results of those analyses were used to place limits on pumping these wells in the City's water appropriation permit.The DNR and Woodbury are working cooperatively to collect stream flow data near the headwaters of Valley Creek and evaluate potential negative impact of municipal pumping on the designated trout stream.This is one example of evaluations of pumping impacts applied to a specific water feature in the GWMA. There are a large number of lakes and wetlands that the Metropolitan Council classified as connected to the regional groundwater system and potentially vulnerable to impacts from pumping from buried Quaternary and bedrock wells (Figure 2-9).These include a number of features near areas of relatively intensive groundwater use. A number of the wetland native plant communities that are associated with groundwater(Figure 2-7) are in or adjacent to these features. As discussed in Section 2,the Metropolitan Council's classification system did not consider some factors that affect the sensitivity of lakes and wetlands to groundwater appropriations. Factors,such as the amount of surface inflow and outflow to a lake, can substantially affect the sensitivity of the feature to changing levels in underlying aquifers. For example,Washington County considered the relative importance of precipitation and surface water inputs in classifying water bodies in the northern part of the county 12. The classifications by the Metropolitan Council are generally based on regional information and should be refined for more local, lake specific characteristics to better evaluate vulnerability. A review of all hydrologic studies that provide useful information for evaluating groundwater-surface water interactions is beyond the scope of this Plan document. Several studies and additional data that focus on particular water features have been developed by watershed districts, counties, DNR, the U.S. Geological Survey, and others.These are resources for evaluations of these features. Permit holders have also developed important local information to help understand groundwater pumping impacts on surface waters and wetlands through aquifer testing and water monitoring.The U.S. Geological Survey(USGS), under contract with the Metropolitan Council, is conducting a project to 12 Emmons and Olivier Resources, Inc., 2003. Integrating Groundwater and Surface Water Management—Northern Washington County: prepared for Washington County. P66 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-9 improve understanding of groundwater-lake interactions in the northeastern Metro area.The results of the study will be useful for prioritizing evaluation of groundwater pumping impacts. Gap Analysis and Recommendations Aquifers The safe yield definitions in Minn. Rules, part 6115.0630 are the criteria used to evaluate the sustainability of aquifer levels in the North & East Metro GWMA.Safe yield defines sustainability of long term water storage in the aquifer system and the capacity of the aquifer system to supply water. There are sufficient data available to evaluate compliance with safe yield at recent pumping rates in the North & East Metro GWMA.There are no indications that recent pumping rates present a risk for exceeding safe yield in the North & East Metro GWMA.This is supported by the available observation well data and water-level measurements in other wells. Metro Model 3 results also indicate that total pumping rates are below estimated average recharge for the aquifers included in the GWMA. Continued collection of data from the obwell network, water use reports, and climate stations will allow for early detection of trends. Observations reflect impacts of current and historical climate and land-use changes in addition to pumping history. Continued growth in groundwater demand is expected for parts of the GWMA, particularly in growing suburbs in Anoka and Washington counties.Additional obwell locations and climate stations may be needed to improve assessment of climate conditions, aquifer level sustainability and other management objectives. The Metropolitan Council's new regional model (Metro Model 3) may serve as the foundation for improved assessments of future risk. Additionally, data collection and analysis typically required for new or amended permit evaluations, such as performing and analyzing aquifer pumping tests, will also provide more information where needed. Further work is needed to evaluate the risk of exceeding safe yield under potential future scenarios. Ecosystems and Surface Waters Appropriations from water basins (lakes and wetlands) listed in Bulletin 25 are limited by statute to a total annual volume of water amounting to% acre-foot per acre of water basin (6-inch depth over the surface area). While this limit is protective of some water basins, it is likely not sufficient to prevent negative impacts to all water basins and biological communities associated with water basins in the North & East Metro GWMA. Site specific thresholds may be appropriate for some sensitive features likely to be influenced by groundwater appropriations. As discussed above,the available information allows for comparing the relative vulnerability of different water basins. Improved methods for determining the hydrological impacts of groundwater pumping on basins are under development, and additional studies are underway to identify basins particularly sensitive to appropriations. Improved methods for determining the hydrological impacts of groundwater pumping on flow in water courses are also under development. Site specific maximum diversion thresholds are needed for 67 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-10 sensitive water courses such as trout streams.Therefore, additional evaluation is required to identify impacts of groundwater appropriations on trout streams and other water cou rses within the GWMA. In general, quantitative assessment of groundwater pumping impacts on surface waters is more demanding than assessing compliance with safe yield. Many surface waters and connected ecosystems are sensitive to relatively small hydrologic changes, and evaluating groundwater-surface water interactions is more complex than evaluating aquifer levels. Monitoring data are the foundation for impacts assessment.There is a relatively dense network of precipitation gauges, observation wells, lake gauges, and stream gauges in the North &East Metro GWMA. Nevertheless, monitoring gaps are likely to be identified as improved impacts assessment methods are implemented.The planned data system should also allow for more efficient assessment and use of monitoring data.There is also an opportunity for the DNR to partner with other entities such as watershed districts and other local units of government on data collection and management. A particular area of high uncertainty is lake evaporation.The DNR is working with other organizations to develop improved monitoring of lake evaporation on White Bear Lake and plans to extend what is learned to other lakes in the GWMA. Groundwater recharge is another area of uncertainty. Recharge cannot be directly measured, but recharge can be estimated using land use, climate, soils, and groundwater data.A comprehensive climate and water monitoring plan is under development for the North & East Metro GWMA. Pumping impacts to surface waters cannot be directly measured but must be interpreted from models developed using appropriate field data.To assess current or existing impacts, one must interpret or extrapolate conditions that would have occurred without groundwater pumping. Projections of future conditions are needed to assess the future effects of existing appropriations and the potential effects of proposed appropriations. Improved modeling analysis is needed to quantify the impacts.At the same time, ongoing monitoring will be needed to evaluate and update model projections. Metro Model 3 may serve as a valuable starting point for improved assessments of the risk to lakes from groundwater appropriations. It is a coarse, regional scale model and was not designed to be directly used for assessing pumping impacts on individual water bodies.The Metropolitan Council and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) are in the process of developing a refined, subregional model of the northeastern Metro to be completed in 2016.This project also includes developing information regarding groundwater-lake interactions, including a collection of related data and information describing characteristics that affect them. 68 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-11 Objective II. Water Conservation Water appropriation permits incorporate water conservation so the permitted volumes are reasonable and for a beneficial use. Explicit conditions may also be placed on water-appropriation permits that refer to conservation practices appropriate to a specific use.Additional water-use data reporting, supplemental to the monthly appropriation volumes, is currently only required for municipal water systems. Municipal systems include conservation goals in their water supply plans.Some permits for golf course irrigation and other uses also include conservation requirements as permit conditions. Municipal Systems Minnesota Statute,sec. 103G.291 requires public water suppliers to adopt and enforce water-use restrictions when the governor declares a critical water deficiency. The restrictions must limit watering lawns, washing vehicles, irrigating golf courses and parks, and other nonessential uses. This statute also requires public water suppliers serving more than 1,000 people to implement demand reduction measures by January 1, 2015. Demand reduction measures are intended to reduce water use and must include a conservation rate structure or a conservation program. Demand reduction measures established by January 1, 2015 by public water suppliers will be included in the next round of water supply plans. New, 10-year water supply plans will be due beginning in 2016. DNR staff has confirmed conservation rate structures are in place in 21 out of 30 municipalities in the GWMA(Table 4-2). In the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, all communities with public water supply systems are required to develop water supply plans and must submit a municipal water-use information sheet with the annual water-use report.These data are tied to conservation goals required in the water supply plans. The data required in the reports include the following: • Total water pumped divided into residential, industrial, commercial, agricultural,other and unaccounted use categories • Total per capita demand (annual total pumped for all uses/population served) • Residential per capita demand (annual residential use/population served).The current goal is 75 gallons per day" • Maximum day to average day ratio (maximum use in a 24-hour period divided by total annual volume divided by 365 days). The current goal is less than 2.614. • Unaccounted for water(total volume pumped minus volume sold or used by the utility as a percentage of total pumped).The current goal is less than 10 percent's The 5-year averages of the data reported by water suppliers along with reported apparent trends in these values are summarized in Table 4-3. Municipalities report the apparent trends over five year 13 The 7-County Metropolitan Area average for municipal systems in 2002.This measure was selected by a committee represented by DNR, Metropolitan Council,and the Minnesota Section of the American Water Works Association (AWWA). 14 The 7-County Metropolitan Area average for municipal systems in 2002. 15 AWWA Leak Detection and Water Accountability Committee, 1996.Committee Report—Water Accountability: Journal AWWA,88(7) 108-111. 69 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-12 periods as part of the water supply planning process.The trends information is not a statistical analysis. For the 2008-2012 period, all of the municipal public water suppliers in the North & East Metro GWMA submitted the water use reporting information sheets as required, but 14 percent left some items on the forms blank,and 7 percent missed some yearly submissions. Each public water supplier may track information differently based on differing billing systems, and each item is not categorized in the same way by all suppliers. For example, one supplier may categorize an apartment building to be a commercial user,whereas a different supplier may categorize an apartment building to be a residential user.Standardizing these categories would require that some suppliers change their billing or other information systems. In the North &East Metro GWMA,45 percent of municipal suppliers exceeded the residential use goal of 75 gallons per capita per day, 21 percent exceeded the maximum day-to-average-day ratio goal of 2.6, and 45 percent exceeded the maximum unaccounted-for water goal of 10 percent.Values for these three measures ranged from 40 to 110 gallons per capita per day, 2 to 11, and 0.4 to 29 percent, respectively. Additional water-use data reporting that is supplemental to the monthly appropriation volumes is currently only required for municipal water systems, and not for most other appropriation permit holders. Additional reporting for non-municipal systems would fill a data gap under this objective. 70 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-13 Table 4-2 Municipal Water Use Rate Types Water Rate Typez Conservation Water Rate Types Conservation System' Rate? System Rate? Arden Hills Increasing Block Yes New Brighton Uniform No Bayport Increasing Block Not Newport Increasing Block Yes confirmed Blaine Increasing Block Yes Oak Park Increasing Block Not Heights confirmed Centerville Increasing Block Yes Oakdale Increasing Block Yes Circle Pines Increasing Block Yes Shoreview Excess Use Yes Columbus Uniform No Spring Lake Park Increasing Block Yes Cottage Increasing Block Yes St Paul Park Increasing Block Not Grove confirmed Forest Lake Seasonal Yes St Paul Regional Seasonal Yes Water Services Fridley Increasing Block Yes Stillwater Seasonal Yes Hugo Increasing Block Yes Vadnais Heights Increasing Block Yes Lake Elmo Increasing Block Yes White Bear Lake Increasing Block Not confirmed Lakeland Uniform No White Bear Increasing Block Not Township confirmed Lexington Increasing Block Yes Woodbury Increasing Block Yes Lino Lakes Increasing Block Yes 'Water rate information was not readily available for all Mahtomedi Increasing Block Yes public supply systems in the GWMA. Increasing block—different rates for different ranges Marine on St. Uniform No (blocks)of total use. Excess use—sharp increase in rate Croix for use above a threshold for excess use. Flat—a single Moundsview Increasing Block Yes water fee regardless of volume pumped.Seasonal—rate varies seasonally. Uniform—single volumetric rate. 71 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-14 Table 4-3 Municipal Water-Use Information Summary of data reported on the Municipal Water-Use Information Sheet averaged forthe 5-year period from 2008 through 2012, average for total annual water use, and apparent 5-year trends Public Water Water Pumped Total Per Residential Maxi mum Unaccounted Supplier (million Capita Per Capita Day/Average (percentage of gallons),Trend Demand Demand Day, Trend total),Trend (gallons per (gallons per day),Trend day),Trend Goal -- -- <= 75 <= 2.6 < = 10 Bayport 77.7, decreased 62.8, 41.4, 2.7, 0.4, decreased increased no trend no trend Blaine 2623.4, 129.5, 79.2, 2.2, 8.9, increased no trend no trend decreased no trend Centerville 98.2, increased 70, 59.8, 2.65, decreased 8, increased increased no trend Circle Pines 167.9, 90, 71.5, 2.3, 10.1, no trend increased increased no trend no trend Columbus 16.8, increased unknown unknown 11.3, increased 28.5, no trend Cottage Grove 1359.1, 102.5, 89.8, 2.6, 13.2, increased increased decreased decreased decreased Forest Lake 443.78, 119.1, 79.1, 2, 16.6, increased no trend no trend decreased no trend Fridley 1078.8, no 110.9, 82, unknown 19.2, increased trend decreased no trend Hugo 385.2, 100.1, 68.1, 3.2, 3.5, increased no trend increased no trend no trend Lake Elmo 123.2, 116.5, 94.9, 2.2, 7.8, decreased decreased no trend no trend no trend Lakeland' 79.8, increased 63.4, increased 47.1, 3.2, 9.8, increased no trend increased Lexington 65.2, 85.5, 66.6, Unknown 17.6, no trend no trend increased no trend Lino Lakes 544.8, 95.7, 77, 3.8, 1.5, increased no trend no trend no trend no trend Mahtomediz 281.6, 95, 79.1, 2.6, 2.1, no trend decreased no trend no trend no trend Marine on St. 3.1, 110.2, 110.2, 2.9, 11, Croix increased increased increased no trend no trend Minneapolis' 20514.8, 110.5, 41.8, no trend 1.7, decreased 14, no trend decreased decreased Mounds View 498.4, 109.2, no trend 73, no trend 2.4, no trend 12.5, increased decreased New Brighton 1331.4, no 166.2, no trend 79, no trend 1.5, no trend 29.4, increased trend Newport 99.8, decreased 72.3, increased 54.6, 1.7, no trend 5.9, no trend increased 72 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-15 Public Water Water Pumped Total Per Residential Maximum Unaccounted Supplier (million Capita Per Capita Day/Average (percentage of gallons),Trend Demand Demand Day,Trend total),Trend (gallons per (gallons per day),Trend day),Trend Goal* -- -- < = 75 <= 2.6 < = 10 North St. Paulo 447.3, 96.4, 64.3, 2.3, decreased 10.8, increased decreased decreased decreased Oakdale' 971.4, 97.5, increased 70, 2.4, 5.9, decreased increased no trend no trend Oak Park 231.8, 135.4, 64.6, 2.1, 13.2, Heights no trend increased no trend no trend no trend St Paul Park 202.2, 91.7, 64.2, 2.1, 15.2, increased no trend decreased increased no trend SPRWS (SW)6 16505.7, 109.3, 39.7, 1.7, 14.3, decreased decreased no trend no trend I no trend SPRWS (GW)6 987.6, no trend Not reported separately Shoreview 1106.3, 109.4, 69.4, 2.6, 13.8, no trend decreased increased no trend decreased Spring Lake 284.5, 118.1, 73, 2.3, 8.2, Park decreased decreased increased no trend no trend Stillwater 758.5, 116.6, 82.3, 2.3, 8.8, increased decreased no trend no trend no trend Vadnais 522.5, 110.5, 76.4, 2.4, 9.5, Heights no trend increased increased no trend no trend White Bear 943.2, 105.6, 65.6, 2.5, 6.3, Lake' decreased no trend increased I no trend I no trend White Bear 493.3, 109, 88.2, 8.3, unknown Township (2 increased increased increased I no trend permits)$ 45.6, no trend 116.6, Not reported separately no trend Woodbury 2731, increased 123.9, 99, 2.5, 2.1, increased increased no trend decreased The measures and goals are explained on page 4-12. 1 Supplies Lakeland, Lakeland Shores,and Lake St.Croix Beach.Source is the Mt.Simon aquifer. Z Supplies Mahtomedi and Willernie 3 Supplies Minneapolis and the Morningside neighborhood of Edina,and sells water wholesale to Columbia Heights,Crystal, Golden Valley, Hilltop, New Hope, and Bloomington. °Supplies North Saint Paul and a portion of Maplewood 5 Supplies Oakdale and Landfall 6 St. Paul Regional Water Services(SPRWS)supplies St. Paul, Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, Maplewood, Mendota, Mendota Heights,and West St. Paul and sells water wholesale to Arden Hills, Little Canada,and Roseville. '.Supplies White Bear Lake and Birchwood Village 8 Supplies White Bear Township and a portion of North Oaks 73 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-16 Other Appropriation Categories For appropriations other than municipal water supply, conservation measures are not specifically tracked by DNR.Typical permit language requires that the permittee shall,whenever practical and feasible, employ water conservation techniques and practices. Conservation requirements have been developed for some specific appropriation categories (e.g. golf courses) and a re applied to some permits or permit amendments. An estimated 5 percent of groundwater use in the GWMA is met by wells that do not require a DNR appropriation permit.There are also currently no conservation standards for the non-permitted groundwater users. Pollution containment pumping facilities are reviewed on a regular basis as part of overall site review under the applicable remediation program administered by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency or Minnesota Department of Agriculture. For example, lower pumping rates were tested for the 3M pollution containment wells in Woodbury, but the lower rates were found to allow polluted groundwater to escape the containment system. In general, pumping more than is necessary is avoided because of the added costs for pumping,treatment and disposal. Industrial users may seek assistance from trade associations and from the Minnesota Technical Assistance Program (MnTAP)of the University of Minnesota to help find industry-tailored ways to prevent pollution and reduce resource use. More efficient water use can save businesses money by,for example, reducing energy costs and wastewater fees.These measures usually must be tailored to an individual facility. Gap Analysis and Recommendations Community%heater supply plans provide the best opportunity for the DNR to engage with public water suppliers and the Metropolitan Council on conservation.The required demand reduction measures will be an important component of the plans. Goals for residential per capita demand, maximum-to average-day demand, and unaccounted for water will also be set in these plans.These goals may need to be updated for water supply plans. Annual reporting of water use by category(residential, industrial, commercial, agricultural)should be made consistent between municipalities to enhance the accuracy of water use tracking. It is important for DNR to develop water use category and business sector specific techniques, practices and measures for all appropriation permits. Permit conditions for each category or sector should be more consistent. Information collected on these conservation related permit conditions should be evaluated and reported to support management of groundwater appropriations. Groundwater users not required to hold DNR permits should be responsible for conservation and reasonable water use measures. DNR has the option to require general permits for wells that pump below the current regulatory limit (10,000 gallong per day or 1,000,000 gallons per year)within the GWMA(Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.287, subd. 4). If required,the fee to request authorization under a 74 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-17 general permit does not apply,and the DNR may waive measurement and volume reporting requirements. 75 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-18 Objective III. Water Quality In the North & East Metro GWMA, movement of man-made contaminant plumes is a concern.The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) has designated five Special Well and Boring Construction Areas in the GWMA where groundwater contamination is a risk. Additionally,there are concerns over perfluorochemicals (PFC) detected in groundwater in several areas of southern Washington County (Figure 2-10). Special controls on the construction or modification of wells are enforced in the MDH designated areas to protect water supplies from known contamination.The potential effects of groundwater pumping outside of the plume boundaries on these contaminant plumes is also a concern and has been and will continue to be considered in evaluating of groundwater appropriation permit applications.These analyses are typically local in nature and address concerns for individual wells or groups of wells when they are proposed, but subregional scale analyses may also be employed,where needed. Avoiding groundwater contamination or the further spread of contamination may reduce the availability of clean groundwater in the North & East Metro GWMA. Gap Analysis and Recommendations The current situation suggests that more integration between the DNR, MPCA and MDH would be beneficial in the GWMA. 1 76 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-19 Objective IV. Well Interferences and Water Use Conflicts Well Interferences There have been no confirmed well interferences16 in the GWMA. Potential for well interference is considered when evaluating new water appropriation permit or amendment applications. Water-Use Conflicts There are no known water use conflicts in the North & East Metro GWMA. As discussed for Objective I above, current uses appear to fall within safe yield thresholds for the area. Future requests for additional appropriations will be evaluated for potential to exceed safe yield due to cumulative impacts of permitted users. Protection of groundwater-dependent surface water features and biological communities may require limiting water appropriations in some areas. It is possible that water use conflicts could arise if cumulative impacts of more than one existing or proposed appropriations would risk negatively impacting these resources. Implementation of improved analysis methods and data for evaluating surface water impacts could reveal water use conflicts not previously identified. Gap Analysis and Recommendations Well interference is almost always a local issue. Local data will continue to be needed to evaluate the risk for well interference due to new or amended appropriations.These evaluations will continue to use pumping tests and/or local aquifer monitoring where needed on a site specific basis. 16 A well interference complaint is confirmed to be valid only after DNR receives a complete Water Well Information and Complaint Questionnaire and finds through an investigation that well interference caused a water outage. 77 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-20 Objective V. Permits Water uses that exceed 10,000 gallons per day and/or 1,000,000 gallons per year, except for domestic supplies that serve 25 persons or fewer, require a water-appropriation permit. Some water uses that exceed one million gallons (MG) in a year may be reported under general permits. Compliance There are no known groundwater uses in the GWMA that require a permit that are not covered under an existing permit. Nevertheless, a thorough audit of water wells has not been conducted for the GWMA. It is possible that there are unidentified groundwater uses that require permits.Since July 2013, new wells that will require a water appropriation permit must receive preliminary well construction approval from the DNR prior to construction.This helps the DNR monitor compliance and assists permit applicants in the planning and capital investment process. DNR staff obtains compliance reports from the Minnesota Permitting and Reporting System (MPARS) electronic permits database. When pumping volume exceeds the appropriation permit amount (overuse), the DNR investigates and takes appropriate action. In 2012, 16 groundwater appropriation permits reported use exceeding their permitted appropriations by more than 10 percent 17.That represents 6 percent of the permits in the GWMA. Reported average use annual use from 2008 through 2012 exceeded the permitted volume for only 3 of the over 250 active groundwater appropriation permits in the area. In general, compliance with permitted volumes is high in the North & East Metro GWMA.Special circumstances may lead to pumping exceeding permitted volume in a given year,such as waterline breaks, other system problems, or one-time uses. In other cases in which permitted volumes were exceeded for multiple years, a permit holder may have appropriated a reasonable volume for the use, but a permit amendment was needed and/or may have been pending. In addition to the limits on annual volume and maximum pumping rate, some permits may include special conditions such as groundwater-level monitoring.The DNR staff is working with permit holders who have monitoring conditions on compliance with both measurement and reporting requirements. Gap Analysis and Recommendations It is possible that high-capacity wells constructed before July 2013 could be appropriating groundwater without a required permit.To fill this data gap,the DNR staff will cross-check wells in the County Well Index with DNR water appropriation permits to identify potential unpermitted groundwater use.The DNR staff will then further investigate whether any high-capacity wells not associated with a DNR water appropriation permit are being used to pump more than 10,000 gallons per day or 1,000,000 gallons per year. Some permit holders that have the required appropriation permit may have replaced permitted 17 Because water use must be measured or estimated with an accuracy of plus or minus 10 percent,overuses of less than 10 percent are considered to be within the range of potential measurement error. 78 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 4-21 wells without notifying DNR.The cross-checking could also identify these wells, and the permits could be updated with the new well information. 79 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 5-1 5. Actions Prior sections of the North & East Metro GWMA Plan have described the area; introduced the sustainability goals, objectives and sustainability thresholds for the area; and presented DNR's current understanding of natural resources and appropriations with respect to the sustainability thresholds. Section 4 described some of the information and data gaps that need to be addressed to continue to manage groundwater sustainably.This section restates the sustainability goal for the GWMA, and introduces the specific actions by each objective that DNR plans to take to meet the sustainability goal. The 2014 GWMA Goal: In the North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area (GMWA), the use of groundwater is sustainable, and therefore, does not harm ecosystems, water quality, or the ability of present and future generations to meet their needs. Objective I. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not harm aquifers and ecosystems, and does not negatively impact surface waters. 1. DNR will improve monitoring of groundwater levels, basin water levels, stream flows, climate, groundwater associated biological communities and water use within the GWMA to inform DNR permit decisions. a. DNR will continue to build a comprehensive hydrological and climate monitoring system for the GWMA. DNR will coordinate with federal, state, and local agencies in these efforts. The following are some initial efforts that may be adjusted over time: i. Stream Flow Monitoring-By 2016-Review Washington Conservation District, Valley Branch Watershed District, Metropolitan Council, and Rice Creek Watershed district stream flow monitoring stations and data with those agencies and evaluate opportunities for collaboration or data collection and maintenance improvements. ii. Lake Level Monitoring—Add lake gauges as needed to the existing 139 gauges. iii. Groundwater Level Monitoring-By 2016, install 3 observation wells.These are in addition to the existing 60 DNR groundwater level observation wells. In addition, DNR will continue to work with permit holders on reporting groundwater level data and adding observation wells as needed. iv. Identify additional climate monitoring requirements and add weather stations as needed to provide precipitation,temperature, solar radiation, dew point, and wind speed for improved evapotranspiration estimates. i. In cooperation with the White Bear Lake Conservation District and others, DNR will participate in the establishment, maintenance and monitoring of a network of evaporation stations on White Bear Lake. 80 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 5-2 ii. DNR will evaluate the benefits of evaporation monitoring networks on lakes in the GWMA. iii. DNR will summarize the available climatological data related to groundwater management for the new GWMA reporting system b. DNR will continue to improve information on water use within the GWMA. i. Refine estimates of groundwater use that does not require a permit. Note: permits are not required for uses that are less than 10,000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year or other domestic supplies that serve 25 or fewer people. c. DNR will develop and use standard groundwater models and methods to predict volumes, rates and water level impacts from groundwater appropriations. i. DNR supports the ongoing work of the USGS and the Metropolitan Council to update, locally refine, and apply the Metro Model 3 to improve understanding of the effects of groundwater appropriations on the levels of White Bear Lake and other lakes in the GWMA. d. Develop additional information on groundwater associated biological communities to inform permit decisions. i. A GIS-based model will be developed to map potential Wet Prairie Complexes on the Anoka Sandplain. ii. Field surveys will be conducted to refine the model described above in "I.d.i", and to document additional locations of native plant communities and populations of state- listed rare plant and animal species in the GWMA. e. DNR will create a new GWMA reporting system, to make the results of data collection and analysis in the GWMA available to the public. 2. DNR will develop and apply sustainability thresholds for aquifers,ecosystems and surface waters in the GWMA18. a. DNR will use safe yield for aquifers to determine limits to appropriation permits in the GWMA.19 b. DNR will use a maximum of 15%of a stream's specified low flow as the maximum rate of withdrawal with no material increase in temperature (for trout streams) in determining a negative impact as required by Minnesota Statutes,sec. 103G.287,subd. 2. 18 Sustainability means that groundwater and surface water levels,water quality,and ecosystems are not harmed and that present and future generations will be able to meet their need for water. 19 Safe yield for artesian conditions means the amount of groundwater that can be withdrawn without degrading water quality or causing a continual decline in groundwater levels that results in a change from artesian to water table condition.Safe yield for water table conditions means the amount of water that can be withdrawn without degrading the quality of the water in the aquifer and without allowing the long term average withdrawal to exceed the available long term average recharge to the aquifer system based on representative climatic conditions. 81 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 5-3 L DNR will continue to coordinate studies and work with permitted groundwater users having potential negative impacts on Valley Creek, Browns Creek,Trout Book and other trout streams within the GWMA. c. DNR will develop thresholds to determine negative impacts to basins and wetlands as required by Minnesota Statutes, sec. 103G.287, subd. 220. i. DNR will work with USGS, Met Council, Watershed Districts and others to evaluate lakes and basins in the GWMA for specific susceptibility to changing groundwater levels. ii. DNR will work with USGS and others to model the total annual volume of water that is withdrawn from White Bear Lake due to permitted groundwater appropriations. If the total annual volume withdrawn is greater than one-half acre-foot per acre,then DNR will work with permittees to adjust their permits. DNR will use the procedures outlined in Minnesota Rules, part 6110.0740 to resolve any water use conflicts that are identified by this analysis. iii. DNR will set a protective elevation for White Bear Lake using the considerations listed in Minn. Stat. 103G.285,subd. 3. iv. DNR will work with BWSR, USFWS, Watershed Districts and others to determine limits on withdrawals from wetlands in the GWMA due to groundwater appropriations as guided by statute and rule. d. DNR will manage appropriations to meet the sustainability thresholds. 3. DNR groundwater appropriation permits will integrate sustainability limits,individual and cumulative permit analysis, and will include evaluation of existing permits within the GWMA. a. DNR will evaluate each new permit application individually, as well as in conjunction with other permits in the related aquifer systems to address challenges of cumulative impacts. b. DNR will complete a review of all existing permits in the GWMA within 5 years,and if necessary adjust permits to achieve sustainable groundwater use". c. Where needed, and in accordance with statutory requirements, DNR will limit current and future appropriation S.22 4. DNR will improve communication on the status of Objective I (aquifers, ecosystems,surface waters)in the GWMA. 20 DNR has not determined negative impact limits for wetlands and lakes. However,we recognize that this is a vital component of assessing sustainability of aquifers and surface water features such as lakes and wetlands. DNR is committed to working with stakeholders as these negative impact limits are established. 21 DNR has not determined the detailed steps and timeline for how we will evaluate and implement any necessary changes to existing permits. However,we recognize that this is a vital component of GWMA planning,and we are committed to working with permittees as we develop that process. 22 DNR has not determined the detailed steps and timeline for how we will evaluate and implement any necessary changes to existing permits. However, we recognize that this is a vital component of GWMA planning, and we are committed to working with permittees as we develop that process. 82 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 5-4 a. DNR will create a new GWMA reporting system to make the results of data collection and analysis in the GWMA available to the public b. The GWMA reporting system will include a listing of applications for new or amended water appropriation permits in the GWMA. c. DNR will hold at least two GWMA Advisory Team meetings per year.They will be open to the public. d. DNR will increase education and outreach to the public about sustainable use of groundwater in the GWMA. e. DNR will encourage counties to participate in the County Geologic Atlas program. i. Anoka County in cooperation with the MGS and DNR is in the process of completing a Geologic Atlas ii. Invite Ramsey County to participate in an update for that county iii. Washington County in cooperation with the MGS and the DNR is in the process of updating its Geologic Atlas 5. DNR will improve access to data collected and analyzed by other organizations in the GWMA. a. DNR will actively support and participate in the development of a more comprehensive and accessible data management system within the GWMA, including website improvements. b. DNR will pursue hydrologic data (stream flow, groundwater levels, lake levels, evaporation, etc.) being collected by organizations in the GWMA including but not limited to conservation districts, watershed districts, counties, Minnesota Departments of Health and Agriculture, BWSR and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 6. DNR will ensure that community water supply plans include actions that must be taken if cumulative aquifer withdrawals exceed thresholds or if negative impacts on surface waters are occurring due to groundwater withdrawals in the GWMA. 7. DNR will promote groundwater recharge in the GWMA,consistent with sound water quality management. a. DNR will work with other organizations and agencies including watershed districts, counties and local units of government to identify important groundwater recharge areas and opportunities to enhance recharge. b. DNR will support local government efforts to protect important groundwater recharge areas through zoning and land use planning. c. DNR will update the groundwater sensitivity maps for the GWMA within 5 years. 83 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 5-5 Objective II. Groundwater use in the GWMA is reasonable, efficient,and complies with water conservation requirements. 1. DNR will ensure that groundwater users are complying with water conservation requirements in their water supply plans and permits. a. DNR will include water conservation requirements in appropriate permits as framed by statute, rule, and public water supply plans. i. DNR will work with the Metropolitan Council to evaluate current conservation goals and update those as needed. b. DNR will evaluate compliance with water conservation requirements on permits that include them. DNR will contact permit holders relative to these reviews. c. When considering a permit transfer request or amendment request to increase appropriations in this GWMA, DNR will evaluate a permit holders' performance in meeting conservation requirements in their permit and the conservation goals contained in applicable water supply plans. d. DNR will partner with local units of government such as Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs)to assist in developing and complying with conservation requirements in water appropriation permits. e. DNR will update the information it uses to develop water conservation requirements specific to each water use category (i.e.water supply, non-crop irrigation, industrial processing, water level maintenance, special categories). Z. DNR will improve communication about and promote the values of water conservation in the GWMA. a. DNR will promote lessons learned about water conservation by municipalities, industries, and other water users in the GWMA. b. DNR will include descriptions and evaluations of water conservation practices being used in the GWMA in the new GWMA reporting system. c. DNR will provide assistance to local units of government and other organizations to encourage and implement water conservation measures for water uses that do not require a DNR water appropriation permit(e.g. private domestic wells). 84 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 5-6 d. DNR will update its website to include links to organizations with water conservation information (e.g., University of Minnesota Technical Assistance Program, Metropolitan Council Conservation Toolbox, and SWCDs). 3. DNR will work with other organizations to promote appropriate water storage,water re-use,and use of viable alternative water sources in the GWMA as a means to conserve of groundwater. 4. DNR will promote the use of water conservation strategies in community water supply planning in the GWMA. a. DNR will require that water supply plans include measureable conservation goals. 85 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 5-7 Objective III. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not degrade water quality. 1. DNR will include compliance with local, state, and federal water quality regulations as permit conditions. a. DNR will coordinate with local,state, and federal agencies to identify water quality regulations that apply to groundwater use and clarify how best to include them in appropriation permits. 2. DNR will ensure that permitted appropriations do not degrade water quality by moving known contaminants. a. DNR will evaluate new permit applications in the GWMA for their potential to move known contaminants. b. DNR will evaluate all existing permits in the GWMA for their role in moving known contaminants.23 3. DNR will ensure that community water supply plans take into account contaminant management. 4. DNR will improve communication about known contaminants and pollution management in the GWMA. a. DNR will use a new reporting system to describe and evaluate status of contamination and pollution plume management in the GWMA. 23 DNR has not determined the detailed steps and timeline for how we will evaluate and implement any necessary changes to existing permits. However,we recognize that this is a vital component of GWMA planning, and we are committed to working with permittees as we develop that process. 86 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 5-8 Objective IV. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not create unresolved well interferences or water use conflicts. 1. DNR will continue to review permit applications to identify and reduce the likelihood of well interferences and water use conflicts. 2. DNR will resolve well interferences and water use conflicts applying the framework outlined in statute and rule. 3. DNR will improve information on aquifer characteristics in the GWMA to improve its ability to identify and reduce the likelihood of interferences and conflicts prior to permit approval. 4. DNR will increase education and awareness about resolving well interferences and water use conflicts. 87 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 5-9 Objective V. All groundwater users in the GWMA have the necessary permits to use groundwater. 1. DNR will improve its capacity to detect unpermitted groundwater use. a. DNR will complete an annual analysis to identify potential unpermitted groundwater use in the GWMA and take appropriate action. b. DNR will provide updated information to well drillers and consultants on existing laws and the water appropriation permit application process as it is available. c. DNR will facilitate the public's ability to identify and report unpermitted use. 2. DNR will ensure that permitted volumes reflect actual use and that actual use does not exceed permitted volumes. a. DNR will evaluate water use reports and will contact permit holders whose reports indicate inaccuracies. b. DNR will monitor permitted versus reported use and bring permittees whose reported use is higher than permitted use into compliance. c. DNR will work with permit holders to adjust permitted volume to better match actual use and need, consistent with other plan objectives. 3. DNR will ensure that water users comply with conditions on appropriation permits. a. DNR will work with permit holders to bring them into compliance with their permit conditions. DNR will focus on permits that have been reviewed to address challenges of cumulative impacts and sustainability thresholds (Objective 1, action 3). 88 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 6-1 6. Implementation Schedule 89 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 7-1 7. Glossary of Terms Aquifer—any water-bearing bed or stratum of earth or rock capable of yielding groundwater in sufficient quantities that can be extracted (Minn. Rules, part 6115.0630, subp.2) Appropriating—withdrawal, removal, or transfer of water from its source regardless of how the water is used (Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.001,subd.4) Artesian aquifer or confined aquifer—a water body or aquifer overlain by a layer of material of less permeability than the aquifer.The water is under sufficient pressure so that when it is penetrated by a well, the water will rise above the top of the aquifer. A flowing artesian condition exists when the water flow is at or above the land surface(Minn. Rules, part 6115.0630, subp. 4). Basin— a depression capable of containing water which may be filled or partly filled with waters of the state. It may be a natural, altered, or artificial depression (Minn. Rules, part 6115.0630, subp.5) Buried Quaternary Aquifer —an aquifer composed of glacially associated sands and/or gravels, over which a confining layer of clay or till was deposited Conservation rate—a water fee (rate) structure that encourages conservation and may include increasing block fees, seasonal rates,time of use rates, individualized goal rates,or excess use rates (Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.291, subd.4(a)) Demand reduction measures— actions that reduce water demand,water losses, peak water demands, and nonessential water uses. Demand reduction measures must include a conservation rate structure, or a uniform rate structure with a conservation program that achieves demand reduction (Minn. Stat., sec. 103G.291, subd.4(a)). Groundwater—subsurface water in the saturated zone.The saturated zone may contain water under atmospheric pressure (water table condition), or greater than atmospheric pressure (artesian condition) (Minn. Rule, part 6115.0630, subp. 11) Native plant community—a group of plants that interact with each other and with their environment in ways not greatly altered by modern human activity or by introduced organisms Nested Obwells—Two or more adjacent water-level observation wells completed in different aquifers, or different depths within the same aquifer. Used to determine vertical differences in groundwater levels or heads. Normal(climate)—the average of a climate variable such as precipitation or temperature over a standard 30-year period (e.g. 1981-2010) Obwell—a water-level observation well in the DNR network Potential evaporation or free water surface evaporation—evaporation from a thin film of water having no appreciable heat storage (Farnsworth et al., 1982). 90 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan 7.2 Protected flow—the amount of water required in the watercourse to accommodate instream needs such as water-based recreation, navigation, aesthetics, fish and wildlife habitat, water quality, and needs by downstream higher priority users located in reasonable proximity to the site of appropriation (Minn. Rules, part 6115.0630, subp. 12) Protective elevation— the water level of the basin necessary to maintain fish and wildlife habitat, existing uses of the surface of the basin by the public and riparian landowners, and other values which must be preserved in the public interest(Minn. Rules, part 6115.0630, subp. 13) Recharge—the addition of water to the groundwater system Safe yield—water table condition:the amount of groundwater that can be withdrawn from an aquifer system without degrading the quality of water in the aquifer and without allowing the long term average withdrawal to exceed the available long term average recharge to the aquifer system based on representative climatic conditions (Minn. Rules, part 6115.0630, subp. 15) artesian condition:the amount of groundwater that can be withdrawn from an aquifer system without degrading the quality of water in the aquifer and without the progressive decline in water pressures and levels to a degree that will result in a change from artesian condition to water table condition (Minn. Rules, part 6115.0630, subp. 15) Transpiration—the process of transport of water from plant roots to above ground parts where it is released to the atmosphere as vapor Water table aquifer or unconfined aquifer—an aquifer where groundwater is under atmospheric pressure (Minn. Rules, part 6115.0630, subp. 17) Water-use conflict—A situation where the available supply of waters of the state in a given area is limited to the extent that there are competing demands among existing and proposed users which exceed the reasonably available waters (Minn. Rules, part 6115.0740. subp. 1). Well interference—A situation where an appropriation reduces water levels beyond the reach of public water supply and private domestic wells constructed according to Minn. Rules, part 4725 (Minn. Stat.,sec. 103G.287, subd. 5; Minn. Rules, part 6115.0730). 91 11U90City of 14669 Fitzgerald Avenue North,Hugo,MN 55038 (651)762-6300 !wwaxi.hueo.mn us January 6, 2015 TO: Mayors,City Council Members, Commissioners, Legislators RE: Water Summit Dear Elected Official, The Hugo City Council has been closely monitoring the recent settlement agreement concerning the water levels of White Bear Lake. We believe that agreement, coupled with recent efforts at the Met Council and DNR, will likely have significant impacts on communities in the Northeast Metro. Is it likely that the state legislature will soon be asked to implement measures that will result in the creation of a new regional water supply system that communities may be required to connect to. Our local legislators have encouraged us to meet with other elected officials in the area to determine if there is a shared position on these topics. Most of us know each other as members of the 1-35 W/E coalition, which was a unified group of elected officials that found success in securing federal funding for important interchange and highway improvements in our area. I am proposing a similar group be formed to discuss important water supply issues facing our communities. There is some urgency to this discussion, as the legislature is already in session. I am personally inviting you to join me in a NE metro "water summit"to be held at Hugo City Hall on January 29`h at 7pm. Attached is a copy of the settlement agreement for your review, and a list of those I am inviting to this meeting. If you think others should attend,please feel free to invite them. If you'd like to discuss these matters in advance,please call me at 651-955-1091,or contact City Clerk Michele Lindau with questions about the meeting arrangements at 651-762-6315. Sincere Tom eidt Mayor 93 1/29/2015 White Bear Lake Settlement Agreement December 15, 2014 Hugo Outline 1 Background rYw 2. Lawsuit 3. Settlement Agreement 4 Consequences 5. Alternatives 6. Discussion/Next Steps Hugo USGS Report (2011) r Connects groundwater pumping to water I in WBL i Theory is unproven s More advanced study to be released in 2016 ■ If the theory is true... . How much interaction is there? ■Do other factors(like climate)matter more? ■Which wells are most responsible? �ugo 1 94 1/29/2015 Lawsuit V Plaintiffs: Whoe Bear Lake Restoration Association r White Bear Lake Homeowners'Association . Intervener a Defendants, ■ Slate of MN(DNR) r White Bear Township . Intervener . City of While Bear Lake . Intervener Lf—H�sa Charges & Relief c MERA r DNR mismanaged the resource by allowing too much pumping r Order DNR to restore the lake r, Stop groundwater pumping c Augment the lake c Set protective elevations for lake and aquifer H40 Settlement Agreement N Has been reached it All parties have agreed to the terms ■Settlement puts the lawsuit on hold for 3- years ■Settlement is much better than the relief the plaintiffs were seeking it However,some things are bothersome 2 95 1/29/2015 Terms 1. DNR will support NE Metro Project e Met Council Feasibility Study s Supply river water to NE metro r Legislative approval required c 2 phases: Phase 1=$155-$230 million Phase 2=$623 million r WBL and WE Twp.agree to support legislative proposal c No word on how this is initiated 'Husa I Terms 2. Operating the new water system will be expensive r Costs will be"equitably allocated among the communities in the North and East GWMA." Benefits Phase 1 communities only New taxing district or similar arrangement involving fees?? Using GWMA boundary Policy implications of this idea are statewide 3 96 1/29/2015 '7- 7 - I l' Hugo Terms 3. DNR to set a"protective elevation"for White Bear Lake c By Nov 1,2016 L Statutory designation c We don't know what the elevation will be E Must consider impact of wells r Impacts new and existing groundwater appropriation permits c Lots of questions and concerns about how this will be accomplished ..HG'go Terms 4. Conservation *17%reduction in water use .Net of growth * Impacting all Phase 1 and Phase 2 cities r Some credit given for past efforts e Long list of conservation measures including stormwater re-use . 75 gallons per person per day is the goal tkv- 4 97 1/29/2015 Other terms r Private well owners near the lake F Conservation and metering of wells ii: Implementation of GWMA plan In 2015 . Plan is, done yet r Plaintiffs will join GWMA advisory team e: Plaintiffs are involved in review of appropriation permits r Time-lines r. No guarantee the lake levels will come b k Hugo x; 3-year stay E Delays lawsuit. r It is likely that USGS and Met Council studies will be complete within 3 years v If"project"is not funded by legislature,the lawsuit resumes L "Project"has operation costs which must be funded by new taxing district L Existing water systems will still be necessary 1� :Hugo Consequences ■ Appropriation permits for groundwater • Somehow tied to level of WBL • Notice given to plaintiffs of applications 'Plaintiffs may participate in proceedings • DNR agrees that all communities should switch to surface water . 'i'smore'sustainable " r Impacts growth&Economic Development a GWMA implementation IK Increased regulation and hurdles a Conservation a Expensive projects to build and operate ■ Loss of control �Hu�o 5 98 1/29/2015 rw Consequences c No guarantee that the lake level will come back Alternatives 1 Don't do anything r At least for a while . F Wait for the studies to get done } s Wait for the science to catch up to the policy r Identify the cause of the problem before solving it. J6 Hugo Alternatives 2. Big Picture Regional Discussion a Slow Down-There's no emergency • Water moves slowly underground i Regionalizing water supply or converting to surface water is a major shift in thinking. • Discuss the big picture and weigh pros/cons/costs . It is a legitimate discussion a Implement long term strategy • Think 10,20 or 30 years. ■ Use regional and community comp plan the implementation tools "0 6 99 1/29/2015 Alternatives 4. _ _s 3 Rethink city water management policies L Conservation . Meet 17%goal K. Water Re-use c Stormwater planning c Development rules c Changes to landscape ordinances,etc . C Hugo Alternatives 4. Pump from Centerville Lake r Water,infrastructure,and permits are already in place 40 MGD F Importance of incomplete"6 cities study' Connecting water supplies together Review this and other project ideas Before latching on to just one solution t 'Hugo Alternatives 5. Relocate the offending wells r ID problem wells that impact the lake ■ Plaintiffs expert report implicated 3 wells One City of WBL well Two SPRWS wells ■ Seal them up and drill new ones it Cost=a few million dollars Much less than$623 million tH 40 7 100 1/29/2015 Alternatives ` 6. Connect St.Paul Water to themselves r Left out of feasibility study and"protect" F They are the biggest user of groundwater in the NE Metro r Wells are down gradient from WBL r ► SPRWS uses groundwater for temperature control . Serves no critical needs Convenient source of river water available Shut'em off? If Direction / Strategy t r Settlement has happened . Phase 2 cities did not intervene L Relationship to agency direction r Met Council&DNR r Pressure to use surface water r Impact of municipal wells may be better understood in 3 years r Legislative approval of"project"is required r Is there a collective position from the group? .Hugo 8 101 STAKEHOLDER MEETING DNR NORTH & EAST METRO GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA PROJECT Meeting Time and Location: Tuesday February 3, 2015, 6:30 — 8:30 pm Shoreview Community Center, Shoreview Room 4580 Victoria Street North Shoreview, MN 651-490-4600 Meeting Agenda: 6:00 Doors open —informal conversation 6:30 Welcome and Introductions— Kris Van Amber 6:40 Commissioner's Overview Tom Landwehr, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 6:55 DNR Groundwater Management: Groundwater Challenges in Minnesota Jason Moeckel, DNR Division of Ecological and Water Resources 7:15 Draft North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan Paul Putzier, Project Manager, DNR Division of Ecological and Water Resources Project Advisory Team Perspective on the Process and Draft Plan Jane Harper, White Bear Lake Conservation District 7:45 Questions/Answers and additional perspectives 8:30 Adjourn formal program 9:00 Doors close Minnesota's use of groundwater has increased over the last two decades. The increasing use of groundwater may not be a sustainable path for continued economic growth. The DNR is establishing three groundwater management areas around the state. These groundwater management areas will help DNR improve its groundwater management decisions and will help groundwater users in the areas better understand and plan for their future development opportunities. 102 0 PROPOSED BOUNDARY for NORTH & EAST METRO GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA ,O I}- 'u Wyoming a o CHI SAGO I v z ; WASHINGTON Columbus °: Forest Lake B Scandi Ham Lake �' Q D An o ( Q q Coon ; Rapids Ccs atiFtiN°�rq Q o , Q , ' • a � Hugo Blaine `. O , , ANOKA ' 0 0. , , , i Fridley, it 0 Bear 17 illwate Lake ' D EF.NEPIN� Little Cana a• 'G Roseville ;z Maplewood ,_ 'C Minneapolis St.Paul' Aaka MSEY ; Woodbury AK Afton r � Bloomin ton on, Cottage Grove v� Eagan ` ASHING ssi D TA ryB/ 1 H 's North&East Metro GWMA Working Boundary County Boundary D Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer March 05,2014 103 Forth & East Metre Groundwater Management Area Pian innesota may be touted as the land of 10,000 sparkling lakes, but in some areas it's the unseen, underground waters that are drawing increasing attention. In the north and east metro region, for instance, a growing population, increasing demands on groundwater, and areas of aquifer contamination could pose problems for the area's water supplies, and its valuable lakes, streams and wetlands. This has led DNR to propose a groundwater management area for the north and east metro, and to draft a plan that will guide DNR efforts to make sure groundwater supplies remain adequate. The area The proposed North and East Metro Groundwater Manage- ❑ Improve DNR's support for better water conservation ment Area would include all of Ramsey and Washington by all users. counties, southern Anoka County, and a small portion of Hennepin County east of the Mis- Ll Improve DNRreducing groundwater 's role in red sissippi River. It features a rich contamination. variety of groundwater-related I Wyoming ❑ Improve DNR's ability natural resources, including trout to prevent well interfer- streams, lakes, and wetland com- Forest Columbus ' ences and resolve water plexes that are home to rare plants Ham Lake S.nd'a use conflicts. and animals. The Metropolitan Council projects that by 2030, Coon -- LJ Improve DNR's ability Rapids to ensure com liance water use within this area may ""°° y Blame p �' increase 20 percent over average ,F; � i with groundwater use reported from 2008 to 2012. p permit requirements. DNR responsibility Thero osed North and East � �, StillwaterSeekingfeedback p p Leke �r 1 Metro Groundwater Management _ ��. Ren e��na a �; Area plan lays out objectives Maplewood -N The DNR has worked with and actions aimed at achieving Minnaa,�s ` _ St Paul baktlal an advisory team of 21 the overall goal of ensuring thatj =r stakeholders over the past groundwater use remains sustain- Woodbury i year to create a reasonable ��_ able.That's a complex challenge A°00 five-Year framework for requiring the efforts of many Bbo.Von f ' �r groundwater management �°agaGove in the north and east metro entities. But under Minnesota law, 3i Eagan area.Now it's seeking feed- DNR has primary responsibility ,_ .��-� . back on its proposed plan. and authority for groundwater — - c� OT^ P p P management.Therefore the plan "aaD°ga Thdraft plan for the North focuses on what DNR can and - - — Norlh&East Men GWMAWorkmThe p g Boundary County Boundary and East Metro Ground- will do over the next five years. water Management Area is Action items available on the DNR website at: The draft plan commits DNR to the following actions: www.dnr.state.mn-us/gwmp/area-ne. ❑ Improve DNR's monitoring of water use and ground- Comments can be submitted through March 31,2015,to: water resources and make this information more NEMetroGWMA.dnr@state.mn.us. widely available. ❑ Improve DNR's management of groundwater permits, A short survey is available on the project website, or at: and its participation in municipal water supply plan- www.surveymonkey.com/s/ne-metro-gwma. ning. 104 uestions & n swe r s : North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan Q: What is a groundwater management area? generations to supply their own needs. Groundwater use A: A groundwater management area is a DNR-designated is not sustainable if individual or cumulative use harms region within which there is evidence that current or future ecosystems, degrades water quality, reduces water use of groundwater may not be sustainable. Authorized levels beyond the reach of public water supply and private by the legislature in 2010 (MS 103G.287 Subd. 4),the domestic wells, or limits the ability of future generations to designation allows a more comprehensive and focused meet their needs. approach to ensuring that groundwater supplies remain adequate to meet human needs while protecting lakes, r How will this plan affect current or future appro- p streams and wetlands. riation permits? A: The draft plan makes no changes to specific permits. Q: Why is a groundwater management area being It calls for a review of all existing permits within the area established in the north and east metro region? over the next five years. These reviews will evaluate the A: If trends continue, it's possible that groundwater use effects of all appropriations relative to allowable impact in the north and east metro area might negatively impact thresholds for aquifers, lakes,wetlands and streams. If the area's aquifers and surface waters. The area is one of existing appropriations result in those thresholds being three in the state being proposed as groundwater manage- exceeded,permits may be modified. Future permit ment areas to better focus DNR and stakeholder efforts on applications will be evaluated using the same sustainability ensuring that groundwater use is sustainable. criteria. Q: Who developed this groundwater management Q: What role will conservation play in this plan? plan? A: Under the proposed plan, DNR will support,promote, A: The plan was developed by DNR natural resource and evaluate water conservation strategies in water professionals with input from an advisory team that met supply plans and appropriation permits. DNR also will monthly over about one year. The 21-member advisory help promote and publicize successful water conservation team included representatives from other agencies, local techniques. government and businesses that use groundwater. Q: What is the relationship between this plan and the Q: What's in the plan? Does it set limits on cities' recent White Bear Lake settlement? water use? A: The proposed North and East Metro Groundwater A: The draft plan does not set limits on any individual Management Area plan is a comprehensive approach to a city's water use. It describes actions DNR will take to broad array of issues within a large geographic area that improve the agency's management of groundwater permits contains numerous natural resources in addition to White in an area that includes all of Ramsey and Washington Bear Lake. Once approved,the plan will be implemented counties, southern Anoka County, and a small portion of by DNR to ensure sustainable use of groundwater Hennepin County east of the Mississippi River. The plan is throughout the area. intended to help groundwater users such as cities under- stand how DNR will evaluate current and future permits to Q� Will this plan require a switch from groundwater to surface water for my city's water supply? ensure they are using groundwater sustainably. A: The plan does not address whether cities should get Q: What does "sustainable use" of groundwater their municipal water from surface waters or groundwater. mean? It does commit DNR to more effective participation in A: As defined in statute, sustainable use of groundwater municipal water supply planning. protects ecosystems and water quality, and it allows future For more information contact: Paul Putzier DNR Hydrogeologist Ir Paul.Putzier@state.mn.us MNDNR 651-259-5692 February 3,2015 105 Forth & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Project Advisory Team MNDNR Team Member Affiliation Mike Bailey Bailey Nurseries Brad Barott Barott Drilling Bryan Bear City of Hugo Larry Bohrer City of Columbus John Bumgarner US Geological Survey Jessica Collin-Pilarski Washington County Brian Davis Metropolitan Council Jo Emerson City of White Bear Lake Mike Grochala City of Lino Lakes Barbara Haake Rice Creek Watershed District Jane Harper White Bear Lake Conservation District Ryan Lemickson MN Department of Agriculture Jennifer Levitt City of Cottage Grove Mark Maloney City of Shoreview Jim Markoe White Bear Lake Homeowners Association Greg McNeely White Bear Lake Restoration Association Terry Noonan Ramsey County Paul Putzier MN DNR Project Leader Jay Riggs Washington County Conservation District Steve Robertson MN Department of Health Bill Short White Bear Township Brian West RockTenn Jim Westerman City of Woodbury 106 MN DNR CONTACT LIST NORTH & EAST METRO GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA (N&E Metro GWMA) Paul Putzier, DNR Project Manager 651-259-5692 paul.putzier@state.mn.us Steve Thompson—Groundwater Supervisor 651-259-5733 stephen.thompson@state.mn.us Jeanne Daniels-DNR District Manager 651-259-5784 ieanne.daniels@state.mn.us Terri Yearwood—DNR Regional Manager 651-259-5766 terri.yearwood@state.mn.us Keith Parker—DNR Regional Director 651-259-5635 keith.parker@state.mn.us North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Website: www.dnr.state.mn.us/gwmp/area-ne FOR THE DNR GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA PROJECTS Jason Moeckel, DNR overall Project Manager 651-259-5240 iason.moeckel@state.mn.us Steve Colvin—EWR Deputy Division Director 651-259-5709 steve.colvin@state.mn.us Luke Skinner—EWR Division Director 651-259-5106 luke.skinner@state.mn.us Barb Naramore—Assistant Commissioner 651-259-5033 barb.naramore@state.mn.us OTHER GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREAS Straight River Groundwater Management Area(SR GWMA) Tim Crocker, DNR Project Manager 320-616-2450X232 tim.crocker@state.mn.us Steve Thompson—Groundwater Supervisor 651-259-5733 stephen.thompson@state.mn.us Tom Groshens- DNR District Manager 218-699-7298 tom.groshens@state.mn.us Peter Buesseler—DNR Regional Manager 218-308-2626 peter.buesseler@state.mn.us Greg Nelson—DNR Regional Director 218-308-2629 greg.nelson@state.mn.us Bonanza Valley Groundwater Management Area(BV GWMA) Mark Hauck, DNR Project Manager 320-223-7846 mark.hauck@state.mn.us Steve Thompson—Groundwater Supervisor 651-259-5733 stephen.thompson@state.mn.us Dan Lais- DNR District Manager 320-223-7848 dan.lais@state.mn.us Rob Collett—DNR Regional Manager 507-359 -6050 robert.collett@state.mn.us Dennis Fredrickson—DNR Regional Director 507-359-6010 dennis.frederickson@state.mn.us WEBSITES DNR Homepage Website: www.dnr.state.mn.us DNR GWMA Projects: www.dnr.state.mn.us/gwmp/areas N&E Metro GWMA Draft Plan: www.dnr.state.mn.us/gwmp/area-ne Feedback Survey: www.surveymonkey.com/s/ne-metro-gwma Email for comments on Draft Plan: NEMetroGWMA.dnr@state.mn.us 107 Outline of the North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan SECTION 1 of The North & East Metro Groundwater Management Area (GWMA) Plan (Plan) introduces the purpose of the Plan in the context of the overall DNR mission and responsibilities with regard to water-resources management and water appropriations specifically. Key challenges for managing groundwater appropriations in the GWMA are identified.The Introduction also describes the process for developing the Plan, including the ongoing public outreach and review.The remainder of the Plan is divided into five additional sections plus a glossary of terms. SECTION 2 - DESCRIPTION OFTHE BOUNDARYAND THE GWMA summarizes background information on aquifers, groundwater connected natural resources, water use, and governance that were used to select the GWMA boundaries. The information also sets the stage for evaluating the groundwater management challenges in the area. SECTION 3 -THE GOAL AND OBJECTIVES states the Plan goal and describes five objectives that the DNR will pursue to achieve the overall goal of sustainable groundwater use in the GWMA.Together,the five objectives describe sustainable groundwater appropriation and use based on directives given in Minnesota Statutes.The five objectives are: I. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not harm aquifers and ecosystems and does not negatively impact surface waters. II. Groundwater use in the GWMA is reasonable, efficient, and complies with water conservation requirements. III. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not degrade water quality. IV. Groundwater use in the GWMA does not create unresolved well interferences or water use conflicts. V. All groundwater users in the GWMA have the necessary permits to use groundwater. SECTION 4 -STATUS OF THE GWMA in Terms of the Objectives provides additional information about conditions within the GWMA that relate specifically to the five objectives.This information includes a summary of current understanding of the status of each objective within the GWMA, discussion of gaps in knowledge or activities, and recommendations for how to fill those gaps. SECTION 5 -ACTIONS states the actions that the DNR will take over the next five years toward achieving the five objectives.These actions address the highest priority needs identified from the evaluations described in Section 4. SECTION 6 - IMPLEMENTATION provides a schedule for the DNR to perform the Plan actions as well as goals for achieving measureable outcomes.This section also describes the review and revision process for the Plan. SECTION 7 -GLOSSARY provides definitions of technical terms or terms with specific statutory meaning that are used in the Plan. 108 Project Advisory Team Schedule Proposed proposed NEM GWMA Project Proposed Standard Agendas Proposed Stakeholder Engagement Schedule Process Advisory Team Meeting Topics Advisory Team Convene the Project Advisory Team and focus the meeting on: Discuss topics Distribute Project Updates and the Meeting#1 Project purpose,process,products,participants Solicit advice "working boundary analysis"thru email, Oct 11,2013 Initial analysis of the GWMA"Working Boundary" Summarize key points web postings,hard copy. Prep for next meeting Connect with Stakeholders thru email, phone,in person,at meetings. *** DNR Hosts Large Stakeholder Meeting: DNR presentations Stakeholder questions and perspectives Commissioner's Overview Q&A session Informal conversations before and after Jan 8,2014 DNR Groundwater Authorities and Challenges Open microphone the meeting GWMA Project purpose,process,products, participation opportunities Advisory Team Convene the Project Advisory Team and focus the meeting on: Recap previous meeting Distribute Project Updates and the Meeting#2 - Review comments received on the initial analysis of the Discuss topics "initial analysis of sustainability issues" Jan 16,2014 GWMA"Working Boundary" Solicit advice thru email,web postings,hard copy. - Initial analysis of sustainability issues*within the GWMA Summarize key points Connect with Stakeholders thru email, *sustainability issues are framed by the performance Prep for next meeting phone,in person,at meetings. measures listed in the draft Groundwater Strategic Plan Advisory Team Convene the Project Advisory Team and focus the meeting on: Recap previous meeting Distribute Project Updates thru email, Meeting#3 - How will DNR heighten priority given to groundwater Discuss topics web postings,hard copy. Feb 14,2014 management in this GWMA? Solicit advice Connect with Stakeholders thru email, - How will DNR enhance information available for Summarize key points phone,in person,at meetings. groundwater management decisions in this GWMA? Prep for next meeting Advisory Team Convene the Project Advisory Team and focus the meeting on Recap previous meeting Distribute Project Updates thru email, Meeting#4 - How will DNR improve the management of its groundwater Discuss topics web postings,hard copy. Mar,2014 appropriation permits and improve the quality of its Solicit advice Connect with Stakeholders thru email, groundwater appropriation decisions in this GWMA? Summarize key points phone,in person,at meetings. Prep for next meeting Advisory Team Convene the Project Advisory Team and focus the meeting on: Recap previous meeting Distribute Project Updates thru email, Meeting#5 - Continue to discuss: How will DNR improve the Discuss topics web postings,hard copy. Apr,2014 management of its groundwater appropriation permits and Solicit advice Connect with Stakeholders thru email, improve the quality of its groundwater appropriation decisions Summarize key points phone,in person,at meetings. in this GWMA? Prep for next meeting Advisory Team Convene the Project Advisory Team and focus the meeting on: Recap previous meeting Distribute Project Updates thru email, Meeting#6 - How will DNR improve compliance with groundwater Discuss topics web postings,hard copy. May,2014 appropriation regulations in this GWMA? Solicit advice Connect with Stakeholders thru email, -How will DNR improve communication and education about Summarize key points phone,in person,at meetings. groundwater and the challenges facing management in this Prep for next meeting GWMA? Advisory Team Convene the Project Advisory Team and focus the meeting on: Recap previous meeting Distribute Project Updates thru email, Meeting#7 - How will DNR effectively address groundwater management Discuss topics web postings,hard copy. Jun,2014 challenges in areas of high use and/or limited groundwater Solicit advice Connect with Stakeholders thru email, supply in this GWMA? Summarize key points phone,in person,at meetings. - How will DNR promote water conservation practices in this Prep for next meeting GWMA? Advisory Team Convene the Project Advisory Team and focus the meeting on. Recap previous meeting Distribute Project Updates thru email, Meeting#8 Draft GWMA Plan for review Discuss topics web postings,hard copy. Jul,2014 How and when will DNR implement the actions proposed in Solicit advice Connect with Stakeholders thru email, the DNR GWMA Plan? Summarize key points phone,in person,at meetings. Prep for next meeting Get feedback from Stakeholders"on the feasibility and Actions proposed in the DNR Meetings **** acceptability of the actions proposed in the Draft DNR GWMA GWMA Plan. Web postings Plan. Reactions to those proposed Open houses August 2014 actions. Surveys ""use a variety of tools,such as meetings,web postings,open Direct conversations houses,surveys,direct conversations to get feedback Advisory Team Convene the Project Advisory Team and focus the meeting on: Discuss Topics Distribute Project Updates thru email, Meeting#9 - Review and discuss stakeholder feedback on the Draft DNR Propose Actions web postings,hard copy. Sep,2014 GWMA Plan. Summarize Key Points Connect with Stakeholders thru email, phone,in person,at meetings. Advisory Team Convene the Project Advisory Team and focus the meeting on: DNR GWMA Plan Distribute Project Updates thru email, Meeting#10 Present the final DNR GWMA Plan GWMA planning process web postings,hard copy. Oct,2014 Evaluate the GWMA planning process and the Advisory Team Advisory Team experience Connect with Stakeholders thru email, experience phone,in person,at meetings. 109 2014 Minnesota Statutes 103G.287 GROUNDWATER APPROPRIATIONS. Subdivision I.Applications for groundwater appropriations; preliminary well construction approval. (a)Groundwater use permit applications are not complete until the applicant has supplied. (1)a water well record as required by section 1031.205,subdivision 9,information on the subsurface geologic formations penetrated by the well and the formation or aquifer that will serve as the water source,and geologic information from test holes drilled to locate the site of the production well; (2)the maximum daily,seasonal,and annual pumpage rates and volumes being requested; (3)information on groundwater quality in terns of the measures of quality commonly specified for the proposed water use and details on water treatment necessary for the proposed use, (4)an inventory of existing wells within 1-1/2 miles of the proposed production well or within the area of influence,as determined by the conmmssioner.The inventory must include information on well locations,depths,geologic formations,depth of the pump or intake,pumping and nonpumpmg water levels,and details of well construction, (5)the results of an aquifer test completed according to specifications approved by the commissioner The test must be conducted at the maximum pumping rate requested in the application and for a length of time adequate to assess or predict impacts to other wells and surface water and groundwater resources.The permit applicant is responsible for all costs related to the aquifer test,including the construction of groundwater and surface water monitoring installations,and water level readings before,during,and after the aquifer test,and (6)the results of any assessments conducted by the commissioner under paragraph(c). (b)The commissioner may waive an application requirement in this subdivision if the information provided with the application is adequate to determine whether the proposed appropriation and use of water is sustainable and will protect ecosystems,water quality,and the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (c)The cormnrssioner shall provide an assessment of a proposed well needing a groundwater appropriation pemtit.The commissioner shall evaluate the information submitted as required under section 1031205,subdivision 1,paragraph(0,and determine whether the anticipated appropriation request is likely to meet the applicable requirements of this chapter.If the appropriation request is likely to meet applicable requirements,the commissioner shall provide the person submitting the information with a letter providing preliminary approval to construct the well. Subd. 2.Relationship to surface water resources. Groundwater appropriations that will have negative impacts to surface waters are subject to applicable provisions in section 103G.285, Subd. 3.Protection of groundwater supplies. The commissioner may establish water appropriation limits to protect groundwater resources. When establishing water appropriation limits to protect groundwater resources, the commissioner must consider the sustainability of the groundwater resource, including the current and projected water levels, water quality, whether the use protects ecosystems, and the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Subd. 4.Groundwater management areas. (a) The commissioner may designate groundwater management areas and limit total annual water appropriations and uses within a designated area to ensure sustainable use of groundwater that protects ecosystems, water quality, and the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Water appropriations and uses within a designated management area must be consistent with a groundwater management area plan approved by the commissioner that addresses water conservation requirements and water allocation priorities established in section 103G.261. At least 30 days prior to implementing or modifying a groundwater management area plan under this subdivision, the commissioner shall consult with the advisory team established in paragraph (c). 110 1 W ,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,1— .. ,,F—r.aN„t„t,a„u IV],,,UCJU-Mu,ca,wrrwrr aesr gnateu groundwater management areas,ute cotru"Issioner may require genera]permits as specified in section 103G 271.subdivision],paragraph(c),for water users using less than 10,000 gallons per day or 1,000,000 gallons per year and water suppliers serving less than 25 persons foi domestic purposes The comnussroner may waive the requirements under section 103G.281 for general pennrts issued under this paragraph,and the fee specified in section 103G 301,subdivision 2,paragraph(c),does not apply to general permits issued under this paragraph (c) When designating a groundwater management area, the commissioner shall assemble an advisory team to assist in developing a groundwater management area plan for the area. The advisory team members shall be selected from public and private entities that have an interest in the water resources affected by the groundwater management area. A majority of the advisory team members shall be public and private entities that currently hold water use permits for water appropriations from the affected water resources. The commissioner shall consult with the League of Minnesota Cities, the Association of Minnesota Counties, the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts, and the Minnesota Association of Townships in appointing the local government representatives to the advisory team. The advisory team may also include representatives from the University of Minnesota, the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, other institutions of higher learning in Minnesota, political subdivisions with jurisdiction over water issues, nonprofits with expertise in water, and federal agencies. Subd. 5.Sustainability standard. The commissioner may issue water use permits for appropriation from groundwater only if the commissioner determines that the groundwater use is sustainable to supply the needs of future generations and the proposed use will not harm ecosystems, degrade water, or reduce water levels beyond the reach of public water supply and private domestic wells constructed according to Minnesota Rules, chapter 4725. History: 2010 c 361 art 4 s 55:2013 c 114 art 4 s 71-73;2014 c 289 s 55 56 Teresa Bender From: Rick Kocinski <rkocinski@northmetrotv.com> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 12:04 PM To: Teresa Bender Subject: SKYPE connection Good morning Teresa. So far I have come up with two solutions to your situation. One involves a professional interface which sells for around $5,000. (I've attached a link) The second is quite simple,however, the counsel member off site will only be able to see and hear anything through their cell phone or PC. It would involve a PC either in the chamber hall or control room and I would just have to run an audio and video feed from the PC to your audio mixer and video switcher. Hope this helps. -------- Original Message -------- http:!lr�evvtek.comJproducts/talkshow This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http:/lwww.spiianteccloud.com 1 112 1/29/2015 13D.02-2014 Minnesota Statutes 2014 Minnesota Statutes Authenticate 13D.02 MEETINGS CONDUCTED BY INTERACTIVE TV; CONDMONS. Subdivision 1. Conditions. A meeting governed by section 13D.01,subdivisions 1. 2,4, and 5,and this section may be conducted by interactive television so long as: (1)all members of the body participating in the meeting,wherever their physical location, can hear and see one another and can hear and see all discussion and testimony presented at any location at which at least one member is present; (2)members of the public present at the regular meeting location of the body can hear and see all discussion and testimony and all votes of members of the body, (3)at least one member of the body is physically present at the regular meeting location;and (4)each location at which a member of the body is present is open and accessible to the public. Subd. 2. Members are present for quorum,participation. Each member of a body participating in a meeting by electronic means is considered present at the meeting for purposes of determining a quorum and participating in all proceedings. Subd. 3. Monitoring from remote site; costs. If interactive television is used to conduct a meeting, to the extent practical, a public body shall allow a person to monitor the meeting electronically from a remote location. The body may require the person making such a connection to pay for documented marginal costs that the public body incurs as a result of the additional connection. § Subd.4. Notice of regular and all member sites. If interactive television is used to conduct a regular, special, or emergency meeting,the public body shall provide notice of the regular meeting location and notice of any site where a member of the public body will be participating in the meeting by interactive television. The timing and method of providing notice must be as described in section 13D.04. Subd. 5. School boards; interactive technology with an audio and visual link. A school board conducting a meeting under this section may use interactive technology with an audio and visual link to conduct the meeting if the school board complies with all other requirements under this section. History: 1957 c 773 s 1: 1967 c 462 s 1: 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7: 1973 c 654 s 15; 1973 c 680 s 1.3; 1975 c 271 s 6: 1981 c 174 s 1: 1983 c 137 s 1: 1983 c 274 s 18: 1984 c462s27: 1987c313s1; 1990c550s2.3; 1991 c292art8s12: 1991 c319s22; 1994c618artl s39: 1997c154s2: 1Sn2011 cll art2sl Copyright Ccs 2014 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All rights reserved. https:/Am&w.reWsor.rnn.goVstatutes/?id=13D.02 1 1 3 1/1 1/29/2015 13D.01-2014 Minnesota Statutes 2014 Minnesota Statutes Authenticate 13D.01 MEETINGS MUST BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC; EXCEPTIONS. Subdivision 1. In executive branch,local government. All meetings,including executive sessions,must be open to the public (a) of a state (1) agency, (2)board, (3) commission,or (4) department, when required or permitted by law to transact public business in a meeting; (b) of the governing body of a (1) school district however organized, (2)unorganized territory, (3) county, (4) statutory or home rule charter city, (5)town, or (6) other public body; (c) of any (1) committee, (2) subcommittee, (3)board, (4) department, or (5) commission, of a public body, and (d) of the governing body or a committee of: (1) a statewide public pension plan defined in section 356A.01, subdivision 24;or (2) a local public pension plan governed by sections 424A.091 to 424A,096,or chapter 354A, or Laws 2013, chapter 111, article 5, sections 31 to 42. Subd. 2. Exceptions. This chapter does not apply (1)to meetings of the commissioner of corrections; (2)to a state agency,board, or commission when it is exercising quasi-judicial functions involving disciplinary proceedings;or (3) as otherwise expressly provided by statute. Subd. 3. Subject of and grounds for closed meeting. Before closing a meeting,a public body shall state on the record the specific grounds permitting the meeting to be closed and describe the subject to be discussed. Subd.4. Votes to be kept in journal. (a)The votes of the members of the state agency,board, commission, or department;or of the governing body, committee, subcommittee,board, department,or commission on an action taken in a meeting required by this section to be open to the public must be recorded in a journal kept for that purpose. https:/Am w.revisor.rm.grn/statutes/?id=13D.01 114 1n 1/ZWZU15 13D.01-2014 Minnesota Statutes (b) The vote of each member must be recorded on each appropriation of money,except for payments of judgments, claims, and amounts fixed by statute. Subd. 5. Public access to journal. The journal must be open to the public during all normal business hours where records of the public body are kept. Subd. 6. Public copy of members' materials. (a)In any meeting which under subdivisions 1,2,4,and 5, and section 13D.02 must be open to the public,at least one copy of any printed materials relating to the agenda items of the meeting prepared or distributed by or at the direction of the governing body or its employees and: (1)distributed at the meeting to all members of the governing body, (2) distributed before the meeting to all members; or (3)available in the meeting room to all members; shall be available in the meeting room for inspection by the public while the governing body considers their subject matter. (b) This subdivision does not apply to materials classified by law as other than public as defined in chapter 13, or to materials relating to the agenda items of a closed meeting held in accordance with the procedures in section 13D.03 or other law permitting the closing of meetings. History: 1957 c 773 s 1: 1967 c 462 s 1: 1973 c 123 art S s 7: 1973 c 654 s 15; 1973 c 680 s 1.3; 1975 c 271 s 6: 1981 c 174 s 1:1983 c 137 s 1: 1983 c 274 s 18; 1984 c462s27: 1987c313s1; 1990c550s2.3; 1991 c292art 8s12: 1991 c319s22; 1994c618art1 s39: 1997c154s2: ISn2001 cIOart4sl:2010c359artJ2s3: ISn2011 c8art 8s2,14; 2013c111 art 5s4.80 Copyright n 2014 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All rights reserved. Mps:/MnNw.rW sor.rnn.g o%Istatutes/?id=13D.01 1 1 5 212 City of Centerville Policy for Remote Meeting Attendance Purpose: to allow a Centerville Council Member, Commission or Board Member to be considered in attendance through interactive online media for the purpose of determining a quorum and participating in all proceedings. Background: Minnesota Statute 13D.02 allows for meetings to be conducted by interactive TV under certain conditions. An advisory opinion released in 2012 by the Information Policy Analysis Division (IPAD) has determined that a city council member can attend and participate in a meeting from a remote location using Skype, if the requirements of the State Statute have been met. Policy: A member of the Council, Commission, or Board will be considered present at a meeting from a remote location using Skype, or similar interactive media, if the following requirements have been met: 1. All members of the body participating in the meeting, wherever their physical location, can hear and see one another and hear and see all discussion and testimony presented at any location at which at least one member is present. 2. Members of the public present at the regular meeting location of the body can hear and see all discussion and testimony and all votes of members of the body. Public comment will only be allowed at the regular meeting location. 3. At least a quorum of the body is physically present at the regular meeting location. 4. The Presiding Officer must be present at the regular meeting location. 5. Each location at which a member of the body is present is open and accessible to the public. 6. Notice of the meeting shall be provided at each of the locations where a member is participating. The timing and method of providing notice depends on whether the meeting is regular, special, or emergency. For the purpose of remote attendance of regular meeting,the meeting will be considered a special meeting, which is any meeting at a time or place different from that stated in the Council's schedule of regular meetings.The posted notice of a special meeting will comply with the following requirements. a) Notice will be posted by the City Clerk at the regular meeting location. b) Notice will be posted at the remote location by the remote attendee. c) Notice will be posted at least three days prior to the meeting. In calculating the number of days for providing notice,the first day the notice is given should not be counted,but the last day should be counted. But ifthe last day is a Saturday, Sunday,or a legal holiday, that day is omitted from the calculation and the following day is considered the last day. d) The notice will specify the time zone for the meeting time at both locations. 116 7. Remote meeting attendee will be responsible for all cost related to technology and devices needed to meet the above requirements. 8. If at any time a quorum of the governing body at the regular meeting location has detennined the method of attendance by interactive online media has proven to be disruptive or troublesome to meeting proceedings, the remote attendee will no longer be considered in attendance and will not be permitted to participate in discussion and voting. Reasons to dismiss the remote attendee could be poor quality video or audio, excessive lag time, etc. 9. Any changes in Minnesota State Statute may void or amend this policy. Adopted by the City of Centerville on January 28, 2015. Thomas Wilharber, Mayor ATTEST: Teresa Bender, City Clerk 117 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council,City of Centerville FROM: Sami Corlew Kurt B Glaser Smith&Glaser,L.L.C. DATE: January 22, 2015 RE: Meetings Conducting using Interactive Television/Skype A Councilmember may participate in a regular city council meeting through Skype or other video conferencing means while physically present at a remote location outside Minnesota without violating Minnesota's open meeting law. All four of the following requirements must be met: 1. At least one councilmember is physically present at the regular meeting location. 2. All councilmembers must be able to hear and see each other and all discussion and testimony presented at any location at which at least one councilmember is present. 3. All members of the public at the regular meeting location must be able to hear and see all discussion,testimony, and votes of all councilmembers. 4. Each location at which a councilmember is present must be open and accessible to the public. If interactive television is used to conduct a regular,special,or emergency meeting,the public body shall provide notice of the regular meeting location,notice of any site where a member of the public body will be participating by interactive television and notice of the fact that some members may participate by telephone or other electronic means.Furthermore,the council member must be present in a location which is open and accessible to the public. Each member of the governing body participating in a meeting by telephone or other electronic means is considered present at the meeting for purposes of determining a quorum and participating in all proceedings. 118 STREET WIDTH. The shortest distance between lines of lots delineating the street. SUBDIVIDER. Any person who undertakes the subdivision of land as defined herein. The SUBDIVIDER may be the owner or the authorized agent of the owner of the land to be subdivided. SUBDIVISION. The division of a single lot, tract or parcel of land, or a part thereof, into two or more lots,tracts or parcels of land. THOROUGHFARE. A public right-of-way with a high degree of traffic continuity and serving as an arterial traffic way between the various districts of the city. TOPOGRAPHY. The detailed description of the features of a relatively small area, also the relief features or surface configuration of an area WATERCOURSE. Shall include channel, creek, ditch, drain, river and stream. WATERSHED. Rice Creek Watershed District. ZONING. The reservation of a certain specified areas within the municipality for buildings and structures for certain purposes with other limitations such as heights, lot coverage and other stipulated requirements. DESIGN STANDARDS § 153.15 GENERAL. Subdivision design shall comply with the following general design standards: (A)Natural features. Existing natural features which would add value to the subdivision and the city, such as trees, steep slopes, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable assets, shall be preserved, insofar as possible, through harmonious design of the subdivision. (13)Land dedication. In all new subdivisions, ten percent of the gross area subdivided shall be dedicated for public recreation space, with this ten percent being in addition to property dedicated for streets, alleys, easements or other public ways. No areas may be dedicated for public use until the areas have been approved as being suitable and needed for the public health, safety, convenience and/or general welfare. When the subdivision is too small for practical dedication of public land or if no land in the subdivision is suitable for that use, the subdivider shall be required to pay a fee as per schedule in effect per lot 1 created or ten percent of the subdivision land value, whichever is greater,prior to subdivision; the value (market)of the land shall be determined by negotiation between city and developer. Lots created in any manner that is larger than five acres or 300 feet in width shall not be subject to dedication of land for public use. A fee according to the current schedule will be charged on every building permit issued pertaining to new housing units for parks and playgrounds. 272 1 Page 119 Plumbing Permits.....................................................See Exhibit"C" Electrical Permit Fees..............................................See Exhibit "D" Demolition Permit&Escrow: Residential (not required for accessory bldgs. <120 sq. ft.).$200.00(§150.01) Escrow...................................... ..................................$2,000.00 or Letter of Credit Commercial/Industrial ..................Valuation Based w/Minimum Of.................................................................................... $300.00 Escrow.................................................................... . ...20° Permit Surcharge .................................................... /o of Demo. Cost • Per State of MN Chanter 152 Sign Permit Fee: Wall-mounted sign.............................................. .....$75.00 Free-standing sign (In addition to building permit)...............$75.00 i Chanter 153 Park Dedication Fees Land Dedication............................................ (§153.15) At option of City-10%of Fair market Value of all property located in the proposed development or$3,000/unit(whichever is greater) Commercial/Industrial ................................................$2,175.00/acre Lc t Split/Lot Combination...................................................$200.00 plus legal fees +park fees rk fees only apply if the lot is split eliminary Plat Fee—Application............................ $500.00+ deposit of$100.00/Lot or Unit ity Review will cease if costs exceed fees and deposit is not replenished) Chapter 155-same as Chapter 156 xogedure fees Chanter 156 Bridges/Structures in easement Encroachment Agreement.....................................................$100.00(§1 54.132) Annual Insurance Monitoring& Inspection...........................$25.00 FencePermit................................................................................$60.00 In Easement—Requires Council Action and Encroach. Agr.$100.00+Recording Fees PUD Application(§156.251)....................................$500.00+deposit of$100.00/Lot or Unit (City Review will cease if costs exceed deposit and deposit is not replenished) Variance Application (§156.310)...............................................$250.00+deposit of$500.00 (City Review will cease if costs exceed deposit and deposit is not replenished) Conditional or Interim Use Permit Application(§156.320)......$250.00+ deposit of$500.00 (City Review will cease if costs exceed deposit and deposit is not replenished) Page 4 of 17 120 Teresa Bender From: Kurt Glaser <ku rtg laser@ glaserlaw.net> Sent: Thursday,January 29, 2015 1:35 PM To: Teresa Bender Subject: Re: FW: Lot Split for Alex (Water Tower&7087 - 20th Ave) The City does not have to pay itself park dedication fees. Kurt B. Glaser Attorney At Law Smith & Glaser, LLC 333 Washington Avenue 405 Union Plaza Building Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1370 612-333-6513 612-333-3821 fax KurtGlaser(a Glaserlaw.Net On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Teresa Bender<TBender&centervillemn.com>wrote: Dear Kurt: This was City owned property and we split it to sell it and retain a portion of it. Should the City really pay park dedication fees? Is this something we should take to Council? I have not researched the fact that someone may have already paid fees on it when they purchased if before us. Do I need to spend the time to do this? Your views? 'rir�,Ga 1 121 Teresa Bender City of Centerville City Clerk (651)429-3232x13 vrptt tbender@centervillemn,com 1880 Main Street Centerville, MN 55038 http.,/Icentervillemn.com From: Dallas Larson Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:53 PM To: Teresa Bender Subject: Re: Lot Split for Alex (Water Tower& 7087 - 20th Ave) Teresa, I treated this as any other property owner. Park fees would normally be required.. Council can choose to waive them if the wish,but I would not presume to make that call for them. Dallas Larson City of Centerville 1880 Main St. Centerville, MN 55038 651-429-3232 Sent from my Verizon Wireless Device Teresa Bender<TBender(acr�,CENTERVILLEMN.com>wrote: I appreciate how you came up with the dollar amount, however, this was platted by the City are you still saying because the City platted it we should pay park dedication fees? Did you charge Alex it in the cost of the 2 122 property? Ellie is saying that proceeds of the sale went toward the refinancing bond and there is no money left over. Teresa From: Dallas Larson Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:40 PM To: Teresa Bender Subject: Re: Lot Split for Alex(Water Tower&7087 - 20th Ave) Teresa, The fee schedule has a park dedication fee for commercial and industrial property. I don't recall the amount, but take that times the acreage and it should be the amount that was listed in the approving action. Not sure what Ellie is saying about nothing left. Dallas Larson City of Centerville 1880 Main St. Centerville, MN 55038 651-429-3232 Sent from my Verizon Wireless Device Teresa Bender<TBender(a,CENTERVILLEMN.com> wrote: Dear Dallas: How did you calculate that park dedication fees should be paid on something that the City split off and Ellie's says there is no money after all expenditures? 3 123 Please fill me in on your thought process. Thanks, 7 66�0h-le, Teresa Bender City of Centerville City Clerk (651)429-3232 x13'..�ori tbender@centervillemn.com 1880 Main Street Centerville,MN 55038 http://centervillemn,com This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://v.rAw.sManteccloud.com 4 124 7087-20`b Avenue South 23-31-22-14-00(A •■rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr CITY OF CENTERVILLE,ANOKA COUNTY,MINN. Findings and Decision The Planning & Zoning Commission met on November 3,2014, to hold a public hearin� to consider a request of City of Centerville to plat certain property located at 7087-20 Avenue South. FINDINGS: 1) The property is currently unplatted property described by metes and bounds and is zoned B-1 Commercial. 2) The Commission finds that there would be benefit to both the City and the applicant property owners by platting the property. 3) The applicant provided evidence to show that the two new lots created by the plat will meet the minimum lot size and dimensions of the zoning ordinance. 4) The applicant provided evidence that the buildings that are on the property will have at least the minimum setbacks from the newly created property lines. 5) State Law allows Anoka County the opportunity to require right of way dedication by virtue of the fact that the property abuts Anoka County Road CSAR 54. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning & Zoning Commission by its action on November 3, 2014, recommends that the council grant preliminary and final plat approval,subject to the following: 1) Owner will include any right of way requirements of Anoka County Highway Department. } Park land dedication fee shall be paid prior to recording the plat, in the amount of$4100($2175/acre). CITY COUNCIL DECISION: Findings and recommendation are adopted by the Council this 12`h day of November, 2014. Tom Wilharber,Mayor Attest: Teresa Bender,City Clerk 70 125 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 12,2014 Estimated Principal Amount of$1,390,000& Advisory Service Agreement Approval as presented. Discussion ensued and Attorney Glaser stated that the sale of the General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2014A along with the Advisory Service Agreement were two (2) separate items and needed to be two separate motions. All in favor. Motion Passed. Motion by Council Member Fehenbacher seconded by Council Member Paar to approve the Advisory Service Agreement as presented All in favor. Motion passed 3, Schedule Public Hearing for December 10, 2014 —2015 Mill &Overlay Project. Engineer Statz stated that he, previous Administrator Larson and Mr. Burmeister had met in regards to a proposed 2015 Mill & Overlay Project on the recommendation of Public Works Director Palzer. Engineer Statz stated that the first step is to receive a feasibility study and then call for a public hearing on the improvement. Engineer Statz presented the feasibility study stating that the proposed project showed work to be completed in 2015 as green and 2016 in red. Engineer Statz also stated that the proposed roads that are to be included in the 2015 project are Dupre Road, Brian Drive south of Clear Water Creek, Eagle Trail, Portage Way and the roads locate in Royal Meadows which are North Robin Lane, South Robin Lane, West Robin Lane and Cardinal Drive. The feasibility study has an approximate cost of$350,000. This road project will be similar to the 2014 project. A discussion ensued how the 2014 road project was completed. For the 2015 project, they would like to mill deeper, which could slightly more costly, but by milling an inch at the curb up to the center line, they hope this will solve some of the problems they ran into with the 2014 mill and overlay project. Council Member Fehrenbacher ask Mr. Statz about the height of the asphalt comparative to the manhole covers and would this solve that problem, Mr. Statz stated it could solve some of those problems. Mr. Statz stated that the Robin Lane area would need more than just mill and overlay. They would need a full payment replacement. Engineer Statz stated that two (2) hearings will need to be scheduled one (1) for the project and one (1)for the assessments. a. Res. #14-037—Receiving Report&Calling for Public Hearing on Improvement Motion by Council Member Fehenbacher, seconded by Council Member Paar to approve the Res. #14-037 — Receivina Report & Calling for Public Hearing on Improvement. All in favor. Motion passed. 4. Planning & Zoning Recommendation, Findings & Decision — Plat 7087 — 20th Avenue South. Page 5 of 7 126 City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 12,2014 Mayor Wilharber stated that Planning and Zoning Commission met on November 3 and held a public hearing to consider the request of the City of Centerville to plat 7087 - 20th Avenue South (old public works site), which houses the City's water tower. Mayor Wilharber stated that the purpose of splitting the property is to allow the City to retain enough land to have access and maintenance ability for the tower. Mayor Wilharber also stated that additional discussions needed to be had with the County regarding road right- of-way and access. Motion by Council Member Paar, seconded by Council Member Fehrenbacher to approve the Planning & Zoning Recommendation of findings and decision on Platting 7087—20th Avenue South as presented. Discussion ensued with Council Member King questioning timing and Attorney Glaser stated that discussion at this time would be optimum. All in favor. Motion passed. 5. Planning&Zoning Recommendation, Finding & Decision--Plat 6995 —20th Ave South Motion by Council Member Paar, seconded by Council Member Fehenbacher to approve Planning & Zoning recommendations on the Plat located at 6995-20th Ave S. All in favor. Motion passed. 6. Onboarding—Brimeyer/Fursman Services Mayor Wilharber explained the onboarding survey and its intended purpose to Council by stating that it allows the new Administrator (Mike Ericson) to obtain input from Council as to expectations, styles of communication, immediate priorities, expected approaches to issues and special concerns. Mayor Wilharber also stated that it provides Mr. Ericson with performance expectations, readiness for change and identify risk factors. Mayor Wilharber stated that Mr. Fursman would work with Council to determine the specific survey form to utilize to assist Mr. Ericson in succeeding with Council's desires and future avenues. Council questioned Mr. Ericson regarding this proposal and Mr. Ericson stated that it would provide him with a wealth of information to obtain optimum efficiency and a clear picture of Council and their desires. Motion by Council Member Fehenbacher, seconded by Council Member Paar to approve onboarding services with with Brimever/Fursman not to exceed $500 All in favor. Motion passed. 7. Trail Easement Correction. Attorney Glaser stated that this item is in regards to the 6995 — 20th Avenue South Plat and that upon completion of the engineering work it was discovered that the description Page 6 of 7 127 CITY " FOF LlINCA, KES January 26, 2015 Mike Ericson, Administrator 1880 Main St. Centerville, MN 55038-9701 Jim Keinath, Administrator 200 Civic Heights Circle Circle Pines, MN 55014-1788 Re: Notice of Lino Lakes' Implementation of Fire Services on January 1, 2016 Dear Mr. Ericson & Mr. Keinath: The purpose of this letter is to provide notification that the City of Lino Lakes will be implementing its own fire service on January 1, 2016. After considerable discussion by the Steering Committee at its January 22 meeting, the administrators were directed to obtain a legal opinion as to whether the Joint Powers Agreement needs to be amended by the Committee and then approved by the city councils of the member cities to support Lino Lakes' plan of action. The Steering Committee is meeting again on February 26 to further discuss the matter. Sincerely, Jeff Karlson City Administrator 128 ® fry VI t~/1 Vr W O •. _ N - d 1 ,�--y�- , � W •�� a+y - :•a �" �'r:�� A"i: i9:lf.�a;:-ft��e��` 1T9^F, ' 0 jEAGUEoF zv_ a d `^ 3 "' -- -- w: �.. _ �- - ,. d `_ . � : ; MINNESOTA �. 7 � � ~ d CITIES Uj • Co toCITIES*COUNTIES*SCHOOLS*TOWNSHIPS 71J• _ � OINT 0LL Cn • LEGISLATIVE• (D C — U7 ' > U � _ C7 0 0) • NFERENSIE 'I.-_ W• C; • - p • _ Uj M Z r • .- U CO ZJ ►OSA MARCH 4-5, 2015 • '— Oco W � V h- • 0 i dR ZcoJ • Q p 2 Uj H • = U ERZ LLJ Cf) Q v $ V Join hundreds of city, county,school,and township officials in LU (DSt. Paul to bring attention to the legislative priorities of our Minnesota local governments.This joint legislative event is an opportunity for you to • • network with other local elected and appointed officials;"and a chance to express our common legislative agenda to state decision-makers. Ln U We work better when we work together. • o C� a REGISTER ONLINE AT WWW.LMC.ORG/JLCIS LO a` G 2 a E or m 0 ® PRELIMINARY AGENDA j,EAGUEor MINNESOTA , IPS;.TO HELP YOU EFFECTIVELY CITIES WEDNESDAY,MARCH 4 4-7 p.m. Registration Open DVOCATE WHILE IN ST. PAUL FOR 5-7 p.m. Legislative Reception at Crowne Plaza(optional) THE CONFERENCE: Mingle with legislators and network with your colleagues in local government at this cash bar reception on the eve of the joint conference. Limited access to public areas and crowded legislative offices THURSDAY,MARCH 5 duringthe State Capitol renovations will make it difficult to meet with legislators in the .• • building, 7 a.m. Registration Open • • _ - • •' • • 7 a.m. Networking Breakfast Meet and network with city,county,school,and township _t Wednesday before, during. or after _ officials over breakfast. evening legislative '• • at the CrownePlaza 8 a.m. Welcome and Remarks from Governor Dayton, House Speaker Kurt Daudt,and Senate Majority Leader Invite your - • •join youfor _ House Tom Bakk (invited) members in the State Office Building 8:15 a.m. Local Government Priorities and Opportunities Organize a regionala • • your for Collaboration area u'd like to Hear from association staff about mayor issues affecting • group • local officials • local government and how cities,counties,schools,and plan a group - contact LMC staff to arrange townships are collaborating in several key areas to make an impact. conference •• W 9:15 a.m. Individual Association Breakout Sessions 0 , - sure to call or email your legislators now 10:45 a.m. Issue Breakout Sessions or Meetings with Legislators to schedule appointments! Engage with policymakers and others around critical local / government topics like transportation funding,groundwater management,and workforce development and related housing issues.Explore challenges,ideas,and strategies, LOOMatho C4flwomm ow pemn as well as how we can work together to achieve results in Ono fft kWWW bleWeet tt*Wh.and bonpWteWn tMt tlft Me0o Gwen Una these areas.Or,use this time to meet with your legislators L 19 nth&WkA*d to advocate on legislative priorities. 12 p.m. Luncheon with Minnesota Media Experts: Cancoilleftn ft0r.AS CO ppK.be 1R WrIllft a Awled-or ftC•d Issues to Watch in 2015 1 ID f 00Wf I,$ %&A#WPW Enjoy lunch with your local government colleagues as you tvlgb•IblNodo #utliil�rarru.e get the scoop from several well-known media personalities ►tdt ,no MNMIS with extensive experience covering Minnesota politics.This impressive group will share observations about how the new partisan split is influencing the issues and the pace P864110 Aft QO*ft Is rAftbl•In#*Lee**PVft%bt'PW t$In tft Crowne Piew and tone of debate at the capitol—and what's likely to get hotell rw"IS avageNe for a 9e•of$18 per dW.Cl•brame of Ow 0afte romp is&9 done this year. TT 1:30 p.m. Issue Breakout Sessions or Meetings with Legislators i0p0rThe Me1t0 1 Une RM a"10 tlNftUM VF•CBpiili�/7Rk* Engage with policymakers and others around important �SL old� local government topics like broadband deployment and tax deN1Clif!> initiatives,as well as other hot legislative issues.Explore challenges,ideas and strategies,as well as how we can work together to achieve results in these areas.Or,use this time in the afternoon to meet with your legislators to �+' '� advocate on legislative priorities. 4 p.m. Social Hour at the Capitol Ridge (optional) • u • ADOPTED. 7/23/2014 CITY OF CENTERVILLE-GOAL STATEMENTS GOAL STEP Council Staff Consultant Other Time Frame Commercial/Industrial Develo ment. Endeavor to make contact annually with major commercial and industrial businesses in Centerville to determine plans for A expansion and relocation XX XX Aug-Sept.2014 Maintain and update a listing of available commercial and industrial properties. Where appropriate,facilitate listing available sites on MNPro and MetroMSP development B websites. XX Sept.2014 Participate with Anoka County cities in business and C industrial development meetings. XX Respond promptly to inquiries of commercial or industrial U prospects. XX Consider use o any available resource such as securing outside grants and tax increment financing(TIF)and tax abatement to induce new commercial and industrial E development. XX Z Sale of surplus city property. Select a realtor to market the properties that are deemed A available for sale. XX Com Tete B Work with realtor to consider purchase offers XX Ongoing C Evaluate performance of realtor to determine contract renewal XX Aug2st 1,2015 ADOPTED. W23IM14 CITY OF CENTERVILLE - GOAL STATEMENTS GOAL stFp Council Staff Consultant Other Time Frame 3 o ration with neighboring communities. Continue monthly meetings with neighboring cities to build A relationships conducive to collaboration. XX Continue semi-annual meetings of council representatives to coordinate collaboration efforts and provide liaison with full B city council of each city. XX October 1,2014 Continue working with neighboring cities to study the C feasibility of a joint water and/or sewer utility_ XX XX Consider any proposal Tor collaboration which could improve _ D efficiency or save costs. XX XX .A C� work with Circle Pines as Centennial Pire Utstnct transitions E from three cities to two. XX XX January,2016 4 Hire new city administrator Select recruitment firm to assist with selection of new A administrator. XX July 23,2014 B Interview and select new administrator XX XX September 15,2014 C New administrator contract finalized XX XX October 1,2014 D New administrator begins employment 10/15/2014-11/l/2014 2015 CITY FOCUS GOALS RESPONSIBLE PARTY IES TARGET PRIORITY DESCRIPTION OF GOALS COUNCIL STAFF CONSULTANT OTHER DATE FOR COMPLETION 1 Economic Development-Business Retention&Growth a. Maintain active relationships with all businesses in Centerville allowing for open input of economic conditions,available City resources,future plans(i.e.,expansion/relocation). b. Collaberate with Quad Area Chamber of Commerce, neighboring communities and businesses,Anoka County,etc. assisting in increased knowledge of projects affecting Centerville,its businesses and future businesses. c. Maintain active involvement in educational resources aiding in use of financial tools(i.e.TIF,grants,etc.). d Maintain database of available stock of commercial/industrial properties(MNPro,MetroMSP&other venues),assist potential suitors with inquiries,market when opportunities arrise. e. Activate marketing Centerville's attributes(lakes,small town feel,transportation/easy access,internet/broadband availability, etc.) * EDA/EDC,formation of business association,secure outside assistance when needed,organize business events/showcases, etc. f. Review and update downtown redevelopment plan. 2 Infrastructure a. CSAH21-Work w/County and residents to provide coheisve services reconstruction(financial and progress updates). b. Pavement management-continued funding and review. c Ensure existing systems(water,sewer,storm sewer,etc.) are in good working order and can be sustained through fees. d. Continue grant submissions for assistance with additional municipal connection e. Ensure Storm Water Management policies and procedures. 3 Public Safety a. Fire District b. CLPD Police Commission 4 Comprehensive Plan a. Follow existing growth plan during all phases of marketing Centerville 5 Water Conservation a. Storm Water Irrigation-monitor b. Water rate/conservation-monitor c. Education,encouragement,incentives d. Collaboration on water supply-Northeast Water Summit 6 Parks&Recreation a. Identify and complete missing trail links b Identify funding sources * Include grants,donations,private investment 2015 CITY FOCUS GOALS TARGET PRIORITY DESCRIPTION OF PRIORITY COUNCIL STAFF CONSULTANT OTHER DATE FOR COMPLETION 1 Maintain Quality Staff a. Continue training and education b. Establish internship program c. Recruit qualified citizens to serve and lead Commissions/Committees d. Obtain adequate resources-including technology e. Establish equipment continuity(cell phones,computers,training,etc.) 2 Commission/Committee Collaboration a. Maintain communications and interaction between Council Members, Staff and Commission/Committee Members b. Training c. Recruit qualified citizens to serve and lead Commissions/Committees 3 Continue to Build Diverse and Stable Tax Base a. Pavement Management Plan b. Water Conservation c. Collaberation with neighboring communities to continue sharing services. 4 Community Outreach a Re-establish newsletter,re-vamp website,facebook?,establish cable t.v show,Lions,establish Yellow Ribbon network,recreational& civic organizations. b. Build relationship with civic organizations,(i.e.Lions,etc.) c. Build&maintain relationships with businesses(local&neighboring). 5 Maintain Legislative Relationships a. League of MN Cities/Metro Cities b. With County Commissioner,Congressional&Legislative leaders. 6 Build&Maintain Regional Partnerships a. I-35W/E Coalition,Northeast Metro Water Summit,St.Paul Regional Water,Met.Council,School District,RCWD,State&Fed.Agencies. b. Annual review of public safety service(FD&PD) ,NDAY,DECEMBER 2,2013 • STAR TRIBUNE •BUSINESS•D3 Pulling together: None of us is as good as all of us OUTSWIMMING the importance of teamwork THE SHARKS at every level.While many g HARVEY MACKAY Westerners might think that r consensus is characteristic of Teamwork Japanese culture,institution- might seem like alized conflict is an integral 1 a complicated part of Japanese management. 1 subject, but to 'At Honda,any employee, I some creatures, however junior,can call for a it comes naturally as a way to 'waigaya'session.The rules survive and expend the least are that people lay their amount of energy. cards on the table and speak According to a BBC News directly about problems. story,scientists taped heart "Nothing is out of bounds, monitors to great white peli- from supervisory deficien- cans.These birds had been cies on the factory floor to trained to fly behind a light perceived lack of support for aircraft andaboat,and ateam. adesign team. was able to observe them dur- 11 Waigaya'legitimizes ten- ing their flight.Pelicans,it is sion so that learning can take known, fly in "squadron" place." formation,or in a'V"shape, That example empha- and they flap their wings in sizes the importance of every time with their leader.Sci- member of the team and how entists,now able to observe a real team should function. and gather data from the Each member should be able heart monitors,found that to contribute strengths and the buds'heartbeats were ideas;otherwise,the concept ' lower when they flew in for- of team is meaningless. mation than when they flew Once upon a time,there I solo.Their heart rates slowed was an enterprising business- d because they were able to man who had a fantastic idea t benefit from each other's air He figured out a way to build r streams.They were also able the perfect automobile.He to glide more. hired a team of young engi- i Working together,the birds neers and told them to buy ' were able to accomplish their one of every car model in the migratory goals by expending world and dismantle them s less energy and being able to He instructed them to pick fly farther thanwhenthey are out the best part from every alone.It seems that there is a car and to place it in a spe- r lesson here,and ifs not for the cial room Soon the room was birds. filled with parts judged by a Lester C.Thurow,econo- the group to be the best engi- mist and dean of the Sloan neered in the world—the E School of Management,said: best carburetor,the best set n "There is nothing antithetical of brakes,the best steering ` in American history,culture wheel,the best transmission, or traditions to teamwork. and so on.It was an impres- tl Teams were important in sive collection—more than America's history—wagon 5,000 parts in all.Thenhe had C° trains conquered the West, all the parts assembled into 3. men working together on one automobile—the pick of ' the assembly line in Ameri- the world,so to speak can industry conquered the There was only one prob- e world,a successful national len It didn't work)The auto- strategy and a lot ofteamwork mobile refused to function. u put an American on the moon The parts would not work i1 first(and thus far,last). together. "But American mythology It's the same with people. extols only the individual— A team of people or things the Lone Ranger or Rambo. with a common objective and d In America,balls of fame exist harmony can be superior to a for almost every conceiv- group ofindividual"all-stars" able activity,but nowhere do any day. Americans raise monuments Mackay's Moral:TEAM: in praise of teamwork" Together Everyone Accom- Why is that?I can think of plishes More, sl no single feat that was accom- plished without a little help. Harvey Mackay is a Minneapolis busk �l A story in the Harvard nessman.Contact him at 612.378.6282 e Business Review illustrates ore-mail harvey@mackay.com, i1 LS 11/6/13 Print Subject: Why Failures Fail From: Dr. Alan Zimmerman (alan@drzimmerman.com) To: maericson@yahoo.com; Date: Tuesday, November 5, 2013 5:35 AM Dr. Zimmerman's Tuesday Tip: Why Failures Fail Subcribe to Dr. Zimmerman's Tuesday Tip Having Trouble Viewing this Email? Click Here 4,0 P71 , Dr. Alan Zimmerman's TUESDAY TIP Delivering attitude, motivation,and leadership programs that pay off ,41 [-.uthor I Keynote Speaker I Seminar Leader Making Work Relationships Work -- This Thursday, November 7, 2013 Have you wondered how you could build stronger err': r,r' Y Y 9 relationships and get greater teamwork out of people? I certainly have. So I've spent years looking for the answers. Well, I've got some GOOD NEWS for you. This Thursday, on November 7, 2013, at 2:00 ET, I'll be delivering a 60-minute webinar on "the 3 best ways to build stronger relationships and get greater teamwork out of others." You'll learn a series of simple, easy techniques that you can use dob to get immediate results with your coworkers, team members, customers, and even your family members. Better yet, the registration fee has been rolled back to a mere $49 per person ... instead of the regular $89 ... and a great deal cheaper than that if you have several people that want to sign up. And then to make sure YOU REALLY GET this valuable information, I'm going to give you ... at NO COST ... a multi-page handout ... before the webinar begins. After the webinar, I'm going to send you ... at NO COST ... an audio MP3 recording of this LIVE webinar, and I'm going to send you volume 3 of my eBook on "The Emotional Intelligence Edge," and I'm going to give you 30- days of e-mail support. All these reinforcement about:blank 1/4 11/6/13 Print tools are typically sold at $125, but you get them FREE when you register for the webinar this Don't plan Thursday. boring - - We have reserved 100 spaces for this webinar. Hire Dr. Z to speak Sign up now and claim your space! at your next event! Get The Info Dr. Zimmerman's TUESDAY TIP: Winners are winners because they've formed the habit of doing things that failures don't like to do. Dr. Alan Zimmerman's Personal Commentary: Years ago the National Association of Life Underwriters published a pamphlet by Albert Gray entitled "The Common Denominator of Success." The author said that he had been brought up on the popular belief that the secret of success is hard work, but that he had seen so many men and women work hard without succeeding and so many people succeed without working hard that he had become convinced that hard work was not the real secret. After much research, he became convinced that the common denominator of success ... the secret of every person who has ever been successful ... lies in the fact that that person formed the habit of doing things that failures don't like to do. Of course, that didn't mean that the successes liked to do those things either; they just did them anyway. In particular, I've noticed two things failures don't like to do. 1. Failures don't like to set goals. They don't want to take the time or put in the effort to think about what they really, Really, REALLY want. They'd rather drift through life, drift through their careers, and drift through relationships ... hoping things will work out. Oh, they make their lack of goal setting sound really pretty, saying something like "I prefer to keep my options open." But that's baloney! A lack of goal setting ensures your failure more often than not. By contrast, Alfred Werth set a goal to become a highly successful real estate agent. He left his native home in Germany in the 1930's to escape Hitler's regime and migrated to San Francisco where he had a distant relative. about:blank 214 11/6/13 Print 41fred did not speak English, but he still wanted to pursue a career in real estate. His relative did the natural thing and advised Alfred to get a job washing dishes or something menial until he learned to speak the language. However, Alfred wanted to start selling real estate right away and he convinced his relative to introduce him to a local broker. The broker told Alfred the same thing ... to go out and get a job where you can learn the English language and then come back. But Alfred was persistent, coming back to the real estate office over and over again and finally the broker gave him a desk in the corner, telling him he would only be paid if he sold something. Alfred went to his desk and just sat there. He didn't understand a thing that anyone was saying. At the end of the day, however, when everyone left the office, Alfred stayed on. He went to the wastebasket and dumped the contents on the floor. He picked out every telephone call slip and selected those that had a name that looked German. The next morning he called each of those people. If the person did not understand him, he hung up. However, if the person responded in German, Alfred would offer the very best of personal service and personal attention. Within three months Alfred was the top producer in that office. He went on to great success in the real estate field in California and he became the shining example of how powerful goal setting is. You know ... that old saying is true ... where's there's a will (or a goal) there's a way. I only wish the failures in life would realize that sooner than later. (Sidebar: If you'd like to become an "expert" goal setter and goal achiever, you should invite me to speak at your next meeting on "The Payoff Principle: How To Motivate Yourself To Win Every Time In Any Situation.") And... 2. Failures don't believe in themselves. Of course failures don't like to admit things like that. Most of them would rather blame their failure on their birth order, poor parenting, their race, religion, gender, or inadequate education. They'd rather make excuses than work on bolstering their self-esteem. By contrast I think of four people who had every right to say, "Life really dealt me a bad hand. I can't make it." Yet each of them believed in themselves enough that they didn't sit back and whine. They took action. The first person was tongue-tied at birth, but he became the greatest orator that Greece had ever known ... Demosthenes. The second person was blind, but he remembered what he had seen when he had his sight and went on to write beautiful poetry ... John Milton. The third person was deaf so he couldn't even hear the music he composed ... Ludwig van Beethoven. And the fourth person who grew up with braces on her legs and years of illnesses became the world's fastest runner ... Wilma Rudolph. about:blank 3/4 11/6/13 Print You already have the potential for greatness inside of you. After speaking to hundreds of thousands of people, I know that's true. I know that it's not what you HAVE that counts; it's what you DO with it that makes the difference. ACTION: Set three goals for yourself. Write them down. Read them every day ... morning and night. Do that for 30 days and you will have some significant successes. Social Share I Forward to a Friend I Read and Respond Online Share the Tuesday Tip and forward it to your friends and colleagues! Reprint The Tuesday Tip I encourage you to reprint my "Tuesday Tips" in your own e-mail, online newsletters, or conventionally-printed publications. It's free and legal ... as long as proper credit is given. All you have to do is include the following notation along with the reprint of my material: "Reprinted with permission from Dr. Alan Zimmerman's Internet newsletter, the 'Tuesday Tip.' For your own personal, free subscription to the 'Tuesday Tip' ... along with several other complimentary gifts, go to www.DrZimmerman.com" @2013 Dr. Alan R. Zimmerman As a best-selling author and Hall of Fame professional speaker, Dr. Alan Zimmerman is focused on "transforming the people side of business." His keynotes and seminars are noted for high content, high energy, and high involvement that transform people's lives and the companies where they work. To learn more about his programs and products, or to receive a free subscription to his weekly Internet newsletter, click here. ©Copyright 2013 Zimmerman Communi-Care Network 1-800-621-7881 f.Iz.n@DrZimmern-tan.com his message was sent to maericson@yahoo.com from: Dr.Alan Zimmerman 128677 San Lucas Ln #2011 Bonita Springs,FL 34135 Manage Your Subscription I Forward This Message about:blank 4/4