10 CC OCT 1998 MINUTES - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CITY OF GEM. LAKE MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING October, 1998 The October meeting of the City Council of the City of Gem Lake was called to order by Mayor Emeott. on Monday. 19October 1998, at 7:.10 p.m. in the first floor meeting room of Tausley Ford. Mayor Emeott, Council :Members Birkebak, Kunin, and Nielsen, Treasurer Nordstrom,. and Clerk Magnusonwere present Also present were Gem Lake residents Mike Przybylski, Roberta Pientka,.Julie Heffern, Scott Tessier and Joe Thury and White Bear Lake resident Charles D. Hart.. Following Mayor Enieott's request for additions, deletions, or corrections, the following were unanimously approved as presented: 1) 21 September 1998.City Council Minutes: with corrections on Motion by .Kunin, Second by Birkebak; 2) .19 October 1998 City Council Agenda as presented on motion by Birkebak, Second by Kunin: The report of the Planning Commission in the form of:a letter from Chairman .Hoeschler to Mayor Emeott was then presented and isattached hereto as Exhibit "A On motion by Birkebak and Second. by Kunin. Special Use Pennit No. 98-04, attached hereto as Exhibit "113", was unanimously approved for Herzog. On motion by Birkebak: and Second. by Kunin,. Resolution No. 98-08, attached hereto as Exhibit "C", requesting a time extension front the Metropolitan Council for completion of the City's Watershed Management ?Ian as a portion of the City's Comprehensive Municipal Plan was unanimously approved, Discussion :orSEH's topographical mapping proposal and cost increases attendant thereto was discussed, Mayor .E:meott expressed concernover the cost and use of data that was apparently sevenyears old that would he eight yearsold at the time of inception. The Clerk was instructed to discuss the matter with SEH and resolve. Discussion of city water to the Hoffman Corner businessdistrictfollowed and Magnuson was instructed to advise. l=loeschier and SEH that the project should be moved up in importance. SEH should revisit original plans and estimates, Planning Commission should prioritize for 1999.cotnpietion,.and Clerk should determine alternative funding vehicles available. The. matter of Linborg's operation of a kennel on Scheuneman. Road was: tabled to.Novernber. The third. quarter recycling report was reviewed with no action taken. Tlie matter of Alcohol Compliance Checks was then discussed. On motion by Birkebak and second by Kunin, participation in the project was unanimously approved. The Clerk was instructed to proceed with implementation and to consider the cost of same in 1999 Liquor Licenses. A copy .ofthe information regarding the project is to be established in file form and retained by the Clerk's office. Request for individuals to. serve on Ramsey County .C.oititnittees was presented with no. action. taken: Notice of Vadnais Heights public hearing to expand parking. at 1208 East County Road E was presented with noaction. taken. Mr, Thury was then recognized. He stated that he wanted to know why the City had ordered the killing of deer. Mayor Cmeottrequested that the Clerk read: theminutes of the 21. September 1998 City Council meeting relating to the. matter.. Following readingof the minutes, the Clerk presented a history of the deer population problem, citing thousands of dollars of damage to. private property reported. over the past several years, requests from residents to address the problem, and population counts of more than twice what the MN DNR suggests for an area the size of Gem Lake. Emeott stated that the City currently has no. ordinances restricting hunting with bow and an -ow, that Ramsey County has no similar ordinances and the Minnesota Department, of Natural Resources supports hunting asa best practices method of controlling: deer population in the absence of natural predators. A letter from Igo, attached hereto as .Exhibit. "D", was then presented stating Igo's belief that Thury hadengaged the media and presented a petition to the comnmunity under false pretenses and without full information on the nature of what was actually happening regarding land owner's rights to authorize deer hunting in the absence of an ordinance restricting saute, Mr, 1.iart. was recognized who stated he is an interested party opposed to the effort and was advised that there was no city ordered effort and that same was a Gem Lake, not White Bear Lake, matter. Tessier was recognized and asked if it was OK to Bunt on his land .and was advised that there is no ordinance restricting same, although trespass laws must be observed. Birkebak, Nielsen and Kunitt all spoke to the issue supporting. the City's position with Kunin comments thatshe has been a resident for 58 years and when she was a child in Gem Lake, no deer were present. Tessier and Przybylski felt. that Gem Lake residents should have Page 1 of 2