good morning and welcome to the special meeting of the little Canada City Council or the little Canada City we're here to discuss Twin Lake we have everyone here except councilman Fisher could not be able to attend and as we start here there will be no public comment period this is a special meeting just to make a decision where we're gonna go so with that I will turn it over to our city administrator to give some background Thank You mayor piece and councilmembers as you mentioned compliment Fisher is is not able to attend but he did provide a letter I provided that around the dais and I'll actually read that into the the presentation after bill Dirk's provides some more background here but just as a context for this meeting we have had two public meetings from the city perspective related to the twin lake issue we've been partnering with the ramsey washington watershed and they conducted those meetings with the assistance of bar engineering and then just last night the board meeting at the Grand through Washington watershed was very well attended and had additional information that was provided in detail which several of you were for add as well so we have had a significant public process for over six months with this unprecedented high watermark issue and I think bill can go through some of the details and summary of that process before getting into some of our options available so with that I'll turn it over to Bill mr. mayor members of council most of this was reported last night at the presentation but that as you're aware the the level reached eight seventy six point one yesterday with the overflow at 877 so we are now officially higher than the low home on the lake at 154 Twin Lake Boulevard so at the meeting last night the Board of Commissioners for the watershed voted to support a pumpkin operation they went through the calculations and they have deemed that if we pump during dry weather and then shut the pumps off in anticipation of rain events we should be able to protect I mean there is there is some risk there but they there is we should be able to protect the colossal bass in the North Star Estates area and then there's less risk at Jarvis but still some risk it's not zero but there is there is a good chance that we can protect all of those properties the primary goal for pumping would be to get to below the the low house on twin Lake and we've worked with the contractor we're ready to get a pump set up a 12 inch pump out in the field to the south of the railroad tracks we would need a road to be built to that to get access to where the pump will go on for the fuel truck to be able to get in and out of there could get a little muddy without a road built and so Frank has Frank Fred alone has offered to construct that road for us gave us a price for that of sixty four hundred dollars and the the current estimate on the pumping is kind of a twenty five thousand dollars for the first month and for setup so that's that's gonna be the highest cost right out of the gates and then the monthly cost after that are basically just for their employees to maintain the pumps fuel costs those types of things if anything were to go wrong you know they would have to come out and do some work on it but the cost come way down after that initial setup cost they're talking about an 18-inch HDPE discharge pipe run for you know eight hundred feet or whatever that measurement is out to the Waldo pond so there's a lot of work to go into getting it set up they are work you know and getting a pump corralled here as soon as they can he didn't want to commit to too late this week he did it may be possible we have to get the road built first but we would ideally be set up and ready to go early next week with the idea being to get ahead of the water coming in from West badness and then also a little bit more so that we can start the process of getting the lake down but most important we get that Lake stabilized and get it down below the the low home we would shut that pump off when there's a rain event forecast 12 to 24 hours before that event and then turn it back on once things were safe again and the rain storm had moved through the system so if you could actually add just a little bit of additional information what you know about the MnDOT action alright I'm sorry yeah so we did we have applied for a permit with MnDOT MnDOT has agreed to kind of fast-track that the the permit was submitted last night and they should be approving that within a day or two we also were required to get a permit from the DNR and appropriations permit they have already approved that permit so we're good to go with the DNR and MnDOT they're gonna be out at the pond today putting some reinforcements I heard last night to reinforce in case that pond ever does is over top at a 77 they don't want that to erode away so they're going to be putting some reinforcements out there today but they are in support of the pumping operation so if I could bring it back to some of our options available as was excuse me it was discussed at the the watershed meeting last night there are are several options but we're primarily considering one of the more more feasible options with at least trying to take the edge off with the pumping but we do want to focus on the fact that we're trying to enhance the protection of the structures around the lake and particularly the low opening structures as you may recall from all the previous information the the lowest opening is the one that was sandbag first two weeks ago and that's at a elevation of 876 and as bill mentioned yeah the current water elevation as of yesterday is eight seventy six point one one so we are technically over that low opening and the sandbags are technically protecting that that property that's the only the only reason we don't have water intrusion the other than that the next little opening is an 878 and that property is also protected so there is the feasibility that that the city could do nothing more that we could basically rely on the 877 pipe opening and in the MnDOT burn and you know ride it out hope that we see not a higher water event year a rainfall year than typical years and hope that evaporation and and you know ground recharge takes its its role but given the history given the recent you even the start to the spring where we're already in the the high percentage of rainfall events this year so that is not recommended from staff we're looking at a pretty significant chance that we would be challenging that that both the low water entry our low water opening plus the 877 overflow and so pumping when like is is the option that bill has gone through I do have a letter from a council member Fisher that I'd like to read into this just as background information and then we can talk a little bit about potential costs and and address any questions that you may have so letter drafted yesterday after the watershed meeting to unlike water level issues my apologizes my apologies for not being able to attend in person but I have a conflict I'm hosting a business meeting with international attendees thank you for the to the watershed for their unanimous support of pumping effort of a pumping effort to reduce the water levels on Twin Lake I also believe it is important for the City Council to act to preserve the homes surrounding twin lake from the rising water levels and assist in efforts to reduce the water levels as it relates to reducing water levels I support pumping water from twin lakes a few conditions one the city understands the downstream risks associated with this pumping - there's a risk management plan that a illustrate how the pumping will be managed be what monitoring will be established to protect downstream properties and see what actions are available to prevent downstream properties from damage as a result of this pumping effort and then three but not to exceed cost the city will incur to set up a pumping station and the estimated ongoing costs to manage the pumping studio a pumping activity are acceptable to my peers on the council I know from an array of conversations over the past few days that my conditional considerations are well understood and actively being planned Tom Fischer so just to address those those items the downstream risks I think we're addressed very well by the Ramsey Washington watershed I think the most prominent risk is the immediate area after the MnDOT area before it gets to the Owosso basin as you saw some of the specific pictures that were provided or some of these saw that the Northstar mobile home park is probably our most immediate risk downstream and we need to monitor that very closely the additional risk is is a very low percentage based on the the runs and the calculations that bar engineering has provided the risk management plan that Tom asked about how the pumping will be managed that'll be a work in progress I think but we certainly have both city staff and we have engineering staff through Bolton the minke and then Barr engineering I think continuing to do modeling that would be helping with that monitoring process and actions that are available to prevent downstream I think that was included as well in the recommendation from the watershed that we in any forecast rain event that we shut off the pumps 12 to 24 hours ahead of time any forecast rain event was it over over a certain amount or was it just over two inch rain event is that two inches what they had said okay so we will be that will be a part of the monitoring process and I think we need to if there's any action that we take here we should acknowledge that that is a key point in and providing risk management is is monitoring that on a daily basis even on weekends and the last item there that not to exceed costs that one is a very difficult situation because it's an unknown we don't know how the pumping will impact the actual lake levels if it if we didn't have the inflow from from the Vadnais side it would be much easier to calculate but we have a certain amount of pumping that we'll have to do to even make it make a difference and start to lower the lake levels we do know obviously the set-up cost being that 25,000 range plus the $6,000 road that must be built so we're already in excess of $30,000 we also are assuming that this is not something that will be resolved in two to three weeks in that one one month period we likely will need to be pumping for months to make a difference here and so we don't have the cost of those ongoing months but we know it's it's a both a rental cost of fuel cost and a monitoring cost I think we can pretty safely assume that it's going to be in excess of $5,000 per month it might be double that or more so big picture I think we're talking potentially then any decision made here today to pump is probably in the range of a fifty thousand dollar decision or more or more and that just to put that in frame of reference it's we're getting into two to three percent of our general fund loving so that that's not an insignificant decision for a city the size of a little condo that that could mean that we will have requested levee increases coming coming forward next year this is something that we were to to continue for right now though just to go through some of the funding options that we have available been working with Brenda over the last few days here and we do have some some options we I guess maybe first and foremost I'll mention that we have fund balance policy states that unreserved fund balance is provided for unforeseen expenditures related to emergencies such as this and the 2018 unreserved fund balance was actually 50% of our 2019 expenditure budget or 1.9 million is in our fund balance again that fund balance is to cover us because we only get our our tax levies on a in two times per year so it's to cover those those expenditures for five months until we get our our levy payments but that so that fund balance is not sitting there mmm doing nothing doing nothing but that that is our end of your fund balance for 2018 the unreserved fund balance other sources of funding for this we do have some salary savings based on our budgeted salary expenditures we held or due to the the finance director hiring process in the vacancy we had a couple months of salary savings there which equals about sixty five hundred dollars right now so that is one some we have already exceeded our annual budgeted amount for revenue in building permits and we've mentioned that in a previous meeting mostly due to our our Bix produce 16 million dollar renovation project so anything that we receive on building permits from now through the end of the year is in excess of our revenue and that projection is actually potentially over $100,000 depending on of course what permits come in and then we also as you may remember in 2018 we issued conduit bonds for recurring home on a housing project that's not anything that we financially have a cost or an obligation to but we benefit from a 0.5% sales ratio on that so in 2018 we received twenty eight thousand dollars from the issuance of conduit bonds and that was a two part issuance or at least as as proposed so we are anticipating that we will have at least a twenty eight thousand dollar bond proceeds for issuances of that kind of upon debt so as of right now budgeting wise we do have probably in the range of 100 250 thousand dollars revenue or revenue over expenditures anticipated but of course those are based on a lot of variables and things change so cut box very or big picture we do have resources available either through our unreserved fund balance or anticipated revenue over expenditures to address this issue so that money though is that's what every year type of occurs I mean for that that for which one well for just the money we have available that's not quote you know committed or art sitting there I mean if we start dipping into that at the end of the year that potentially could result in increases in levies that we try to keep down so correct so that is the background information that I have I guess at this time we also have Tina from the Ramsey Washington watershed in the room and we have Mark asthma from Bolton Bank if there's any questions that you have technical or otherwise either staff or either of those representatives can addressing those questions nice good I'll just start on excuse me what steps are we going to take or what steps have we taken to research outside resources for funding so I only to one resource we've had done as I mentioned before close partnerships with a lot of different agencies including our local representatives and Senators and so I've passed that request along to representative but we also have one possibility that was recommended I mean maybe just recap is it's probably unlikely but certainly something worth researching if there was any sort of FEMA disaster assistance but the process that is you you need to have a declaration an emergency declaration and that comes through the governor's office and it's based on you know overall impact to the county typically so that would be a something to check on and definitely been through that process but in some ways I would hope that that doesn't happen because that means that we would have widespread damage throughout the county more than just this issue and so uh alternative to that checking to the DNR specifically for some of those potential one-time funding sources is something that we can do or we can rely on our partners at boknam Inc to to assist us with but otherwise there's really not a lot of funding sources that I'm aware of you know outside of emergency funding through FEMA what about the county the county you see climbing again we can just but I'm not aware of any sort of fun doesn't set aside right city of Shoreview Baptist heights as far as other sources I mean they may be in it as an example the city of Shoreview and you've heard some of the comments last night has taken a different action on a similar issue on one of the other lakes in the watershed so there they're not at this point taking any further action even though there's there's desired action by residents so you know this is a fairly unique position for a city to be in to be taking this this level action and it's yes I think caused by the fact that we've you know we're at unprecedented high water levels but we also have an outlet pipe that is at a higher level than our lowest entry point which and then the fact that it's obviously a landlocked Basin so a number of unique issues that make this worth consideration for the City Council well tonight you know I just want to comment that what we're here for today is basically the emergency situation you know but there's obviously there's a there's a very big picture that that we have to look at I mean not I mean us taking water from Vadnais and dumping it into our city I that whole situation has to be reviewed but to focus back on the back on the emergency pumping you know at the meeting last night I I was taking notes you know there was I mean you start adding up the partners you know you have the residents the city MnDOT you've got DNR you start adding them up you got almost a dozen different parties involved and so it all gets kind of convoluted and everybody starts to go you know like this so what we're trying to do here today is which I think is gonna be greatest because we're gonna we're gonna be able to start to pump that water out of Twin Lake and get some sort of semblance of what's you know at least get us get the homes protected now I have a question for bill like yeah so the the pump first of all the roads gonna be on Frank's will be on Frank Fred Nolan's property correct and the pump will be on Frank's property correct and he's he's always he's fine with that you're supportive of it yes okay so does that don't have to cross the railroad tracks I know so the the way the look is overflowing underneath there's essentially another twin lake both side of the tracks and as you draw that down the whole lake draws down with it because it's that it's equalized with that pipe that runs under the tracks got it so as you draw that down on the south side the whole lake comes down okay with it and that's on Frank's property correct okay thanks I don't presume this is gonna be an issue but perhaps we should act to protect ourselves can we make sure that his allowance to put the pump in the road on his property is written a written agreement format and that it's insulated from any future business we might have with Frank or his companies in the future yeah I think we could pursue that with Frank okay thank you yeah does I have another question mr. marriage bill does there's a MnDOT restricting the amount of water you can put in that pond only during rain events if I understand correctly yeah so just if they want us to stop the pumps if there's that two inch rainfall expected otherwise they can handle the pump the water coming through any any amount I mean there's a 15 inch pipe underneath the freeway that don'ts over into that's a separate system this is a this is a big pipe this is a 70 inch pipe I think out of the out of water pond really - that's the one that goes through the MnDOT system and over to a Wasel oh they're so so we don't have any issues of overflowing that pond no there should be no issues except for a Rain Man okay I'll ask this question are we taking any steps to send notifications to some of the affected property owners like North Star States and with iris and Jarvis Lake homeowners association will be contacting both both parties okay thank you what about the industrial park does that have any worry of flooding if North Star Estates has the worry of flooding I think only in a really big event that would be an issue and that would be whether we're pumping or not so I don't think that they're threatened by this pumping as much as the North Star states are or at all can the pumping go on during the winter maybe just till freeze up so until the lake freezes we can keep pumping in you know if we so what happens then during freeze-up does that stop the whole system does that stop the water up that Grass Lake from flowing or are we gonna be forced with rising water during the winter when we're forced to stop pumping at Twin Lake I would have to defer to the water shudder bar on that not sure if that water will have to freeze up days that really depends on the climatic conditions sometimes we have seen freeze up where it has stopped flowing but then I think last year it did flow all year long so and it depends on the levels are at you know you're pulling from that wetland which will freeze up well is there anything in your studies forecasting bar engineering studies any of that that says to you that this is going to be a short-term event ie six months so it would be better for us to look at this in my opinion as this is maybe the new normal for the next couple years well I would hope that you'd be able to cut that off because otherwise as I said at the meeting last night we're going to pump in perpetuity we're never going to stop pumping for the for the rest of the future and as John stated last night there is a an economic cost to this and more more so is the concern of the homeowners we can't let them lose their property so my question to you is we're talking about funding what about your group can you participate in the funding of this so the way we would look at that is we will we provide services and technical support but we also so that cutting out from my sadness that would be led by us because it's part of a large system it's a multi-jurisdictional system we would look at that as our responsibility in this how long do you think it would be before so I guess what as I look at this we're in June by the time you guys have the next meeting and make it a decision and you know check for money and then we're going to do this year another question thank you so I don't know if it's quite motion time but I think I speak for myself I know I'm in favor of this at least to protect that Lowell home as a as as as our goal here to begin but there's still a lot of work to do down the line in terms of what we need to do and how we funded what Ramsey County does or what the watershed does again what the whole system can handle and so what scares me is that this has been ongoing for a while I mean snail-like grass grass see all those lakes are are up and the water all flows this way so I'm going you know put your finger in the dike and does it pop up somewhere else so well for me I'm I'm in favor the pumping to take care of the homeowners they can't see letting that go but I think the homeowners have to understand that to begin with I don't think we can afford or a little a system hold or can we pump it down to where it was before or even close to that my eyes this is an emergency situation to pump it down to make sure that the homes are okay what that is what foot that is level I don't know and we would probably need some backup engineering to help us with that and opinions and structures and how they can be affected by water but I don't want the homeowners to be disappointed in thinking that it's going to go we're gonna pump it all the way down to where it was ten years ago to begin with that isn't in the picture right now for me this is more of an emergency to protect the houses and the structures and whatever we have to pump it to to get there well that's what we'll do Chris and we have to make sure that you know the watershed is in concurrence with us that we're we're all we have to listen to what they have to say because they have the technical expertise we might not like what they're telling us but they're doing what's best so just so you have that understanding of where I'm coming from for this thank you have a spare a excellent point comfortable girl as as far as just to put some context to those amounts of kind of what we are at least initially talking about and staff is that obviously ongoing conversations with both watershed and engineering for many months on this the so at that current water level of eight 96.1 you know just to provide that ultimate protection for private property 76 hey yes sorry says so you know that that one foot clearance is sort of one of those minimums that we would be looking at probably so 895 would would be a ball being 75 75 yes so 835 would be kind of a minimum amount that we'd be looking at we also have in most cases we're looking at public infrastructure protection you know that's that's what municipalities are looking at and as you know from some of the communications we do have a sanitary sewer line on the south side of Twin Lake here so those access points would not be all accessible at a 70 75 level it's not essential because those it is essentially a closed system you know we have good protection on those but they're not something that we we want to maintain access to those inverts and so we may want to consider going further than a 75 but at this time it's really not determined there's also other ways to gain access we can individually Dyke those particular inverts and possibly raised those you know as a wintertime project or something like that so just to put context again I think are maybe minimal efforts would be targeting that you know 875 level and as we understand how much pumping it takes to get to that level and and that's the season progresses I think we can make further decisions on if we want to go lower than that I think that's an important weight this is a this is a start don't be ongoing conversations with our city staff and everything but there'll be ongoing conversation with the the watershed and also other cities around us because they're all involved so this this isn't a one-time decision one and done this is a start and we'll see where what we need to do in the future exactly yes mr. mayor thank you is there any way to put a water monitoring mechanism in the Owosso Basin near North Star States much like exists on Jarvis at this point in time right I guess my thought there would be is if we hit we hit a certain level at some point that would trigger you know a response plan to maybe bring some sandbags down to the corners of North Star where we have the most risk of water intrusion and as as we get into this and I know since the the watershed is an agreement to support this there's going to be additional monitoring not only in Twin Lake but in the North Star estates or the also basin in Jarvis you know all the way down the chain to make sure that again things are okay downstream as well as just for the people at home could you kind of go over the effect this is going to have on Jarvis or the amount of water that you need to affect Jarvis so that the homeowners association and those living here aren't looking at they're gonna take on the flood below the flood events for Jarvis and we've had the city has had an emergency response plan in their hands for a number of years for those homes there's also two other homes that are at risk based on high water and wave action so how that plan works is as Derek's lake fills up at a certain level we get a phone call and it says be prepared be watching the next phone call is it's time to enact that emergency response plan which includes sandbagging those low homes and the plans are all in place for that and this so this additional water because what was explained last night is the water can go pretty quickly past Northstar scenes it's a six ish hour our travel time from Waldo Pond Pass or start so that's the request that that pumpkin shut off a rain event is coming but it takes a while and it's in that system for a while through Jarvis and downstream and so our modeling though shows that the increased water at you side different levels of pumping the most it had was 0.01 feet so that that's the that's the impact we would anticipate on the water level in Jarvis because of the additional pumping point oh one feet on Jarvis Lake so that might mean you know a little bit quicker action through emergency response because of that additional water but it would not it does not add any additional who who declares no-wake zones to turn up a lake today it's it's high we don't want any small more increase I'm nervous to do that so that's not something we can do or I bleep County or DNR okay you could saucony does that designation other questions alright well I'll make a motion I don't have the specific wording that was used at the watershed last night that I think the motion states that we are going to initiate pumping along with cooperation from the watershed and monitoring to bring the lake level down underneath the low hole to a safe distance under a safe level underneath that which killed yet to be determined is lost when we decide what that is yes would you accept a friendly amendment to define a not to exceed cost in order to comply with mr. Fisher's third request I don't have a second no it's not it not at this point shut up well I think that that would staff is going to be responsible for that monitoring the funding I mean it makes a difference if we get outside funding if you see it's X amount of dollars you get outside funding that X amount of dollars the city's been changes so long I think that's understood so that we don't we don't spend more than we then we can we need a second to the questions I'll check it thank you all right any other discussion we have a motion a second all those in favor say aye aye opposed motion carries 4 0 tom was here to be 5-0 it's to pass that on so and we will leave that up to staff to continue I know things are in motion already but to continue that and again as things go along and we can notify people when this will start my concern would be can you update us anymore that we have to know about the the sewer system you know the and that's that is there anymore updating that you can more information that you can bring back how are we monitoring that with all of that water that's in there now those kinds of things so that we're sure that that's functioning the way it's supposed to we're checking upstream and downstream of the line daily or every other day as we can and we have Bolton Bank we just got them all the information and so they're doing a detailed study on the system and we're gonna try to get in there when we can to televise it and make sure that it's uh holding up that way okay and the second part of that is at the Met Council its lines do we have any do we talk to them about theirs yeah we've had communications with them I've waiting to hear back from them on my latest email to them but yeah we've been discussing this with them as well good does anybody have any information about the threat of trees over there as one of the own homeowners brought up last night what about the threat of the trees if the water line stays up will the trees become loose start to fall if that's the case how do we help homeowners a can we help homeowners with taking down the trees before they cause damage if they want them taken down up you know that whole thing is there any has anybody been talking about that and looking at what we can do in that respect because it that's gonna be some collateral damage to this I mean they already have to be I I think we've had you know some initial conversations that was actually one of the things that we had probably work session discussion but back in February when some I guess proactive work on some of the dead trees was taking place on at least one property you know that city's liability in this case would be substantial if we start doing that where where did we stop doing that they are on private property currently the easement itself is private property however there would be a greater argument to be concerned about trees along that easement area we probably do have permission or do have authority legal authority to maintain that easement and it's full full width and so that might be a consideration to maintain trees along that easement just for the potential of the impacting the sanitary sewer line but no from up from a municipal standpoint to go forward with private assistance in an issue like that if we were talking about an isolated project an example of that in a previous situation where I worked in another community along a river there was a actually with a live tree not fully under water but impacted by both development and and flooding a very large cottonwood tree I believe it was something in the in the 80 inch range or better but because there was commercial structures nearby and it had multiple impacts on multiple different properties the city did get involved in that process but the removal of that took a crane and it was in excess of $25,000 for one tree so you know the impact is is pretty significant when you start to decided to make those those or take those actions and the other one and I forget who I was talking to about this but you know most of our sewer lines are the city's sewer lines anyway are buried fairly deeply dictor six to eight feet deep you know so I get not being a an engineer if a tree fell you know on something that's six eight feet under the ground is it even gonna the impact on the from the tree falling on the ground would be there would be no impact from that tree if there's roots or difference by a manhole and it shapes that manhole that would be the issues you could run into all right done anything else if not meeting adjourned