3/31/11
During the 3/28 council meeting, staff was looking for approval to order "Welcome to Shorewood" signs for streets at the City borders. Many of these locations do not have signs today. It seems they were budgeted and that Council Member Zerby was the driver to get them into the budget.
See: http://windowsmedia.alphameetings.com/LMCCShorewood/032811shorewood.wmv at the 1 hour and 30 minute point for the council discussion.
Council Member Woodruff suggested not having the population count on the signs so as to keep them from being obsolete just because the populations changes. What ensued is an incredible discussion during which Council Member Zerby states that it's important to show Shorewood is larger that Excelsior and Tonka Bay as well as him stating that Shorewood's signs need to be larger than those of our neighbors.
More curious is the discussion by Siakel, Zerby and Lizee that the signs should have some sort of slogan on them and suggesting it be "A Southlake Community."
The notion of a multi-city branding effort with "Shouthlake" as the identity was floated at the 3-City cooperation meetings in January/February. During the second of these meetings, the attendees voted on what they wanted to pursue and the "Southlake" branding idea did not make the cut.
Now it appears some of Shorewood's Council wants to backdoor starting the process of branding by installing signs at Shorewood's borders. Of course, if Zerby gets his way, these will be bigger signs than either Excelsior or Tonka Bay have.
What do you think? Does "A Southlake Community" have any meaning or importance to you? Should Shorewood engage in a size battle with its neighbors? Is there any need to have Shorewood's population on the entrance signs?
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Sunday, March 27, 2011
What to do with $1.8 million?
3/27/11
The $1.8 million question: What does the City do with it?
See: http://weblink.ci.shorewood.mn.us/weblink8/0/doc/152341/Electronic.aspx for the 10-year financial plan discussion packet for the Council's 3/28 meeting. Page 3 speaks to the $1.8 million. The meeting is a council work session the 28th at 600pm and open to the public.
When the City sold its liquor stores, it ended up with a little over $900,000 in cash. Since then, and according to the recommendation of the council members who advocated the sale, $40,000 has been transferred from this fund each year to the General Fund. Not by coincidence, this is within a few dollars of the amount the City has been transferring from the General Fund to the Parks Capital Fund each year. So, in essence, the liquor store money has been put to use funding parks improvements.
In 2009, Council decided to move $1.0 million in excess reserves from the Sanitary Sewer Fund to an Infrastructure Fund. The idea was that this excess would be used to fund one-time projects instead of relying on tax increases. Last year, Council decided to combine the Liquor Fund with the Infrastructure Fund and thus, there is $1.8 million available to be put to good use.
Back to the opening question.
Should the City continue to use some of the fund for parks? This makes sense in that the major source of parks capital funds has dried up as the source was fees charged in conjunction with new development, something that has been largely absent recently and shows no sign of returning in any large way. Perhaps endowing the Parks Capital Fund to cover the next 10 years' of capital expenditures would be a good investment?
Should the City use some of the fund for its Long-Range Road Improvement plan? Currently, this Plan assumes tax increases as the funding source to keep it solvent.
Should the City acquire property at Cty19 and Smithtown Rd. in anticipation of developing this corner as a mixed use or other gateway to Shorewood? This is currently being discussed in Council and the Planning Commission. Having land available would simplify and make a development of this corner attractive to developers when the market for such development recovers.
Should the City use some of the fund to build trails? There's a Trail Committee looking into trail needs right now (see previous blogs on this topic).
The real question is: What do you, the residents of Shorewood, want to do with your money?
The Insider wants to hear from you.
Happy reading!
The Insider
The $1.8 million question: What does the City do with it?
See: http://weblink.ci.shorewood.mn.us/weblink8/0/doc/152341/Electronic.aspx for the 10-year financial plan discussion packet for the Council's 3/28 meeting. Page 3 speaks to the $1.8 million. The meeting is a council work session the 28th at 600pm and open to the public.
When the City sold its liquor stores, it ended up with a little over $900,000 in cash. Since then, and according to the recommendation of the council members who advocated the sale, $40,000 has been transferred from this fund each year to the General Fund. Not by coincidence, this is within a few dollars of the amount the City has been transferring from the General Fund to the Parks Capital Fund each year. So, in essence, the liquor store money has been put to use funding parks improvements.
In 2009, Council decided to move $1.0 million in excess reserves from the Sanitary Sewer Fund to an Infrastructure Fund. The idea was that this excess would be used to fund one-time projects instead of relying on tax increases. Last year, Council decided to combine the Liquor Fund with the Infrastructure Fund and thus, there is $1.8 million available to be put to good use.
Back to the opening question.
Should the City continue to use some of the fund for parks? This makes sense in that the major source of parks capital funds has dried up as the source was fees charged in conjunction with new development, something that has been largely absent recently and shows no sign of returning in any large way. Perhaps endowing the Parks Capital Fund to cover the next 10 years' of capital expenditures would be a good investment?
Should the City use some of the fund for its Long-Range Road Improvement plan? Currently, this Plan assumes tax increases as the funding source to keep it solvent.
Should the City acquire property at Cty19 and Smithtown Rd. in anticipation of developing this corner as a mixed use or other gateway to Shorewood? This is currently being discussed in Council and the Planning Commission. Having land available would simplify and make a development of this corner attractive to developers when the market for such development recovers.
Should the City use some of the fund to build trails? There's a Trail Committee looking into trail needs right now (see previous blogs on this topic).
The real question is: What do you, the residents of Shorewood, want to do with your money?
The Insider wants to hear from you.
Happy reading!
The Insider
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Trail Committee - How did it happen?
3/24/11
The Insider has been asked how the Shorewood Trail Committee was formed. It's an interesting story in that it points to Shorewood's current Council's desire to operate outside the normal process of having committees appointed by the Council.
See: http://windowsmedia.alphameetings.com/LMCCShorewood/021411shorewood.wmv at 42:20 minutes for the announcement in the 2/14/11 Council Meeting by Administrator Heck that a Trail Committee had been formed and that it would start meeting the following week.
Heck stated that staff had met with Council Members Hotvet and Siakel and they had selected the committee members. There was no Council review of the appointees or, in fact, any communication to the full Council who might be appointed or why. The list of committee members wasn't even in that night's council packet.
Readers of this blog will note, after viewing the video of the council meeting, that no vote to approve the Trail Committee appointments was requested by Acting Mayor Zerby and no formal Council approval was secured. The two resident appointees were not interviewed by Council (at least not in a setting with all Council Members being able to participate).
It appears the new Council intends to use Council Meetings as places to announce decisions, not to discuss and debate before deciding. So much for "Transparency."
Happy Reading!
The Insider
The Insider has been asked how the Shorewood Trail Committee was formed. It's an interesting story in that it points to Shorewood's current Council's desire to operate outside the normal process of having committees appointed by the Council.
See: http://windowsmedia.alphameetings.com/LMCCShorewood/021411shorewood.wmv at 42:20 minutes for the announcement in the 2/14/11 Council Meeting by Administrator Heck that a Trail Committee had been formed and that it would start meeting the following week.
Heck stated that staff had met with Council Members Hotvet and Siakel and they had selected the committee members. There was no Council review of the appointees or, in fact, any communication to the full Council who might be appointed or why. The list of committee members wasn't even in that night's council packet.
Readers of this blog will note, after viewing the video of the council meeting, that no vote to approve the Trail Committee appointments was requested by Acting Mayor Zerby and no formal Council approval was secured. The two resident appointees were not interviewed by Council (at least not in a setting with all Council Members being able to participate).
It appears the new Council intends to use Council Meetings as places to announce decisions, not to discuss and debate before deciding. So much for "Transparency."
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Sunday, March 20, 2011
"Railroading" a trail?
3/20/11
In a previous post, the Insider wrote about the proposal for a trail connecting two trails and running along County Rd 19. There was a "Concept Plan" developed by a committee from Orono, Tonka Bay and Shorewood and considered by the councils of the three cities in 2009. Orono and Tonka Bay approved the plan (each on a 3-0 vote) with Shorewood not approving on a 2-3 vote (Lizee and Zerby in favor and Bailey, Turgeon and Woodruff against).
During Shorewood's 3/14 Council Meeting the approval of the Concept Plan was reconsidered. See the meeting at http://windowsmedia.alphameetings.com/LMCCShorewood/031411shorewood.wmv and skip to the 1 hour and 13 minute point.
Council Member Zerby and Council Member Hotvet (both were members of the 3-city trail committee in 2009) and Lizee indicated they wanted to approve the 2009 Concept Plan and support a request from Mayor LaBelle of Tonka Bay to do so.
Council Member Woodruff reiterated his objection to the Plan on grounds that the $15 million option it contains was still unacceptable. Further, he requested that the Plan be reviewed by the newly formed Shorewood Trail Committee, the Planning Commission and the Parks Commission, all of which have some jurisdiction over trail planning. This request fell on deaf ears, with Lizee, Hotvet and Zerby totally ignoring any reasonable process and normal involvement of Shorewood's volunteer commissions and committees.
Administrator Heck intervened stating that he'd like to bring the matter back to Council at the next meeting (3/28) since a resolution wasn't actually part of the packet for this meeting. Council agreed.
So, three of five council members were ready to vote in favor of a two year old Plan that had not been reviewed by cognizant commissions and committees, that had not been commented on (or even seen by?) by Council Member Siakel who was absent on the 14th and, most importantly, that wasn't documented by a resolution or even in the meeting packet (the actual Concept Plan was not in the materials distributed to Council). Is this the kind of due process the residents of Shorewood want and deserve?
Happy Reading!
The Insider
In a previous post, the Insider wrote about the proposal for a trail connecting two trails and running along County Rd 19. There was a "Concept Plan" developed by a committee from Orono, Tonka Bay and Shorewood and considered by the councils of the three cities in 2009. Orono and Tonka Bay approved the plan (each on a 3-0 vote) with Shorewood not approving on a 2-3 vote (Lizee and Zerby in favor and Bailey, Turgeon and Woodruff against).
During Shorewood's 3/14 Council Meeting the approval of the Concept Plan was reconsidered. See the meeting at http://windowsmedia.alphameetings.com/LMCCShorewood/031411shorewood.wmv and skip to the 1 hour and 13 minute point.
Council Member Zerby and Council Member Hotvet (both were members of the 3-city trail committee in 2009) and Lizee indicated they wanted to approve the 2009 Concept Plan and support a request from Mayor LaBelle of Tonka Bay to do so.
Council Member Woodruff reiterated his objection to the Plan on grounds that the $15 million option it contains was still unacceptable. Further, he requested that the Plan be reviewed by the newly formed Shorewood Trail Committee, the Planning Commission and the Parks Commission, all of which have some jurisdiction over trail planning. This request fell on deaf ears, with Lizee, Hotvet and Zerby totally ignoring any reasonable process and normal involvement of Shorewood's volunteer commissions and committees.
Administrator Heck intervened stating that he'd like to bring the matter back to Council at the next meeting (3/28) since a resolution wasn't actually part of the packet for this meeting. Council agreed.
So, three of five council members were ready to vote in favor of a two year old Plan that had not been reviewed by cognizant commissions and committees, that had not been commented on (or even seen by?) by Council Member Siakel who was absent on the 14th and, most importantly, that wasn't documented by a resolution or even in the meeting packet (the actual Concept Plan was not in the materials distributed to Council). Is this the kind of due process the residents of Shorewood want and deserve?
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Friday, March 18, 2011
Deer Management - Ban Feeding?
3/18/11
Shorewood's deer management efforts were discussed at the 3/14 council meeting. See: http://lmcc-tv.org/citystream_Shorewood.html and look for the 3/14 council meeting in the list.
The City Planner was given direction to plan another controlled hunt in 2011 as populations were up and support for the program overwhelms the opposition.
The Planner said the Planning Commission is evaluating an ordinance that would ban feeding of deer. Other cities have ordinances and the DNR as well as other environmental authorities are in agreement that feeding of deer is harmful to the deer population besides promoting increasing herd sizes and associated property damage.
Apparently Mayor Lizee opposes a feeding ban. Her excuse for this position was that it would be difficult to enforce. The Planner stated that like other ordinances, enforcement would be due to complaints received and that the ordinance would differentiate between residents who feed deer on purpose by putting out huge piles of feed vs. those who have a bird feeder that deer visit.
Maybe those of you who have deer problems and know your neighbors are feeding deer should send a note of support for a feeding ban to Lizee. Her email address is: clizee@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Shorewood's deer management efforts were discussed at the 3/14 council meeting. See: http://lmcc-tv.org/citystream_Shorewood.html and look for the 3/14 council meeting in the list.
The City Planner was given direction to plan another controlled hunt in 2011 as populations were up and support for the program overwhelms the opposition.
The Planner said the Planning Commission is evaluating an ordinance that would ban feeding of deer. Other cities have ordinances and the DNR as well as other environmental authorities are in agreement that feeding of deer is harmful to the deer population besides promoting increasing herd sizes and associated property damage.
Apparently Mayor Lizee opposes a feeding ban. Her excuse for this position was that it would be difficult to enforce. The Planner stated that like other ordinances, enforcement would be due to complaints received and that the ordinance would differentiate between residents who feed deer on purpose by putting out huge piles of feed vs. those who have a bird feeder that deer visit.
Maybe those of you who have deer problems and know your neighbors are feeding deer should send a note of support for a feeding ban to Lizee. Her email address is: clizee@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Milfoil control - Correction
3/15/11
The previous post about chemical milfoil treatment should have stated that Shorewood spent $6,000 in 2010 on this program for Phelp's Bay instead of $4,000.
Happy Reading!
The Insider
The previous post about chemical milfoil treatment should have stated that Shorewood spent $6,000 in 2010 on this program for Phelp's Bay instead of $4,000.
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Paying for Chemical Milfoil Control?
3/15/11
Coming soon to a Shorewood council meeting: The Lake Minnetonka Association and homeowners asking Shorewood to pay for part of the cost to chemically treat milfoil in Phelp's and Gideon's Bays.
In 2010, Shorewood spent $4000 to partially fund the LMA's chemical treatment of milfoil in Phelp's Bay. The 2011 City budget has $4000 allocated for this sort of treatment.
While the LMA wanted to treat Gideon's Bay in 2010, the DNR declined to approve a bay-wide treatment permit.
It now seems certain that the DNR will grant a permit for Gideon's in 2011. So, the LMA is bound to be at a Shorewood council meeting in the near future asking for funding for both Phelp's and Gideon's. Treatment of Phelps is already in the DNR's plans as this is year four of a five year experiment on three bays of the lake.
The Insider wants to hear from readers. How much money should Shorewood spend on chemical milfoil treatment in 2011? Some choices are: the $4000 budgeted, a larger amount so as not to reduce funding for Phelp's, a smaller amount, or nothing.
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Coming soon to a Shorewood council meeting: The Lake Minnetonka Association and homeowners asking Shorewood to pay for part of the cost to chemically treat milfoil in Phelp's and Gideon's Bays.
In 2010, Shorewood spent $4000 to partially fund the LMA's chemical treatment of milfoil in Phelp's Bay. The 2011 City budget has $4000 allocated for this sort of treatment.
While the LMA wanted to treat Gideon's Bay in 2010, the DNR declined to approve a bay-wide treatment permit.
It now seems certain that the DNR will grant a permit for Gideon's in 2011. So, the LMA is bound to be at a Shorewood council meeting in the near future asking for funding for both Phelp's and Gideon's. Treatment of Phelps is already in the DNR's plans as this is year four of a five year experiment on three bays of the lake.
The Insider wants to hear from readers. How much money should Shorewood spend on chemical milfoil treatment in 2011? Some choices are: the $4000 budgeted, a larger amount so as not to reduce funding for Phelp's, a smaller amount, or nothing.
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Monday, March 14, 2011
Former Council Member Bailey on Park Commission Chair reappointment
3/14/11
The following post comes from Jeff Bailey who chose not to run for re-election last fall to Shorewood's city council. Mr. Bailey also served multiple terms as Chair of Shorewood's Planning commission.
Happy Reading!
The Insider
-----
I'm deeply troubled by the Council's recent decision not to reappoint Jeremy Norman to the Parks Commission. Apparently the majority of the Council members only want Shorewood residents sitting on city commissions who see things the majority's way. In my tenure on city commissions and the Council, I found Mr. Norman to be one of the hardest working and most effective chairs the Parks Commission ever had. His reappointment should have been a no-brainer. I can only draw the conclusion that now, when it comes to city commissions, selection based on merit is out and selection based on whether you think the "right" way is in.
The following post comes from Jeff Bailey who chose not to run for re-election last fall to Shorewood's city council. Mr. Bailey also served multiple terms as Chair of Shorewood's Planning commission.
Happy Reading!
The Insider
-----
I'm deeply troubled by the Council's recent decision not to reappoint Jeremy Norman to the Parks Commission. Apparently the majority of the Council members only want Shorewood residents sitting on city commissions who see things the majority's way. In my tenure on city commissions and the Council, I found Mr. Norman to be one of the hardest working and most effective chairs the Parks Commission ever had. His reappointment should have been a no-brainer. I can only draw the conclusion that now, when it comes to city commissions, selection based on merit is out and selection based on whether you think the "right" way is in.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
3-City "Visioning" meetings - results
3/13/11
Shorewood has posted the results from the second (last?) 3-City "Visioning" meeting held on 2/24/11. See:
http://ci.shorewood.mn.us/pages/govt/projects.html#vision2
The Insider was told that each participant in the meeting got three votes to allocate amongst the potential projects listed in the various categories. Since Shorewood council and staff made up more than 50% of the people attending from the cities of Excelsior, Tonka Bay and Shorewood, the "City" commitment validity for Exc and TB is questionable.
Regardless, the list of projects handed to the administrators/manager appears to have some promise and is absent some of the more radical items associated with merging the cities. Only time will tell what level of commitment to actually doing anything exists within the three councils.
Recall that the last time Shorewood and the other neighbors went through this exercise (spearheaded by Woody Love and Chris Lizee) Shorewood spent more than $30,000 in consulting fees. So far, the cost to Shorewood seems to be less than 1/10th of this. However, in the words of Yogi Berra, "It ain't over t'll it's over."
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Shorewood has posted the results from the second (last?) 3-City "Visioning" meeting held on 2/24/11. See:
http://ci.shorewood.mn.us/pages/govt/projects.html#vision2
The Insider was told that each participant in the meeting got three votes to allocate amongst the potential projects listed in the various categories. Since Shorewood council and staff made up more than 50% of the people attending from the cities of Excelsior, Tonka Bay and Shorewood, the "City" commitment validity for Exc and TB is questionable.
Regardless, the list of projects handed to the administrators/manager appears to have some promise and is absent some of the more radical items associated with merging the cities. Only time will tell what level of commitment to actually doing anything exists within the three councils.
Recall that the last time Shorewood and the other neighbors went through this exercise (spearheaded by Woody Love and Chris Lizee) Shorewood spent more than $30,000 in consulting fees. So far, the cost to Shorewood seems to be less than 1/10th of this. However, in the words of Yogi Berra, "It ain't over t'll it's over."
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Friday, March 11, 2011
County Rd 19 $15 Million Trail - 2009 Council decision reversal?
3/11/11
On Monday night (3/14) Shorewood's City Council will reconsider its 2009 decision not to support a plan for a trail along Cty Rd 19. Tonka Bay asked Shorewood to reconsider. This trail plan was rejected twice by Council in 2009. Initially it was rejected at a special multi-city joint council meeting and later at a regular Shorewood meeting. The key reason for rejection was the plan's inclusion of a $15 million trail option, not the idea of having a trail.
Lizee and Zerby who supported the plan argued that approval would cost Shorewood nothing and that money to build the trail would come from Three Rivers Park District and Hennepin County. Council Member Woodruff pointed out that Shorewood residents pay property taxes which include levies from both of these organizations. So, Shorewood taxpayers would be paying some of the cost and approving the plan would send a message that $15 million for a trail was OK.
Do you think $15 million for a few miles of recreational trail is a good plan and a good use of your tax dollars?
See pages starting at 83 on Monday's agenda at: http://weblink.ci.shorewood.mn.us/weblink8/0/doc/152067/Page1.aspx
A consultant and a group of residents from Orono, Tonka Bay and Shorewood held a series of meetings to plan a train connecting the regional trail that crosses Cty 19 just north of County Rd 15 in Navarre to the LRT trail that crosses Cty19 at the Shorewood/Tonka Bay border. The Shorewood residents in the group were appointed by Chris Lizee without discussion with or knowledge of the City Council. One of these residents was Scott Zerby who, at the time he was appointed was not a member of Council.
In October of 2009 the group delivered to a joint meeting of the councils of Orono, Tonka Bay and Shorewood a set of alternative concepts for the trail with costs ranging from a few hundred thousand dollars to $15 million. Only three council members from each city were in attendance likely due to the meeting being held in the middle of the day in a workweek. Orono and Tonka Bay each approved a resolution supporting the concept plan on 3-0 votes. Shorewood did not approve on a 2-1 vote (Lizee and Zerby in favor and Woodruff dissenting). Woodruff stated he could not vote for approval when two of five council members were not in attendance and had not had a chance to participate in the discussion. In a subsequent Shorewood Council Meeting the plan was reviewed and was not approved on a 2-3 vote (Lizee and Zerby in favor; Bailey, Turgeon and Woodruff dissenting).
Happy Reading!
The Insider
On Monday night (3/14) Shorewood's City Council will reconsider its 2009 decision not to support a plan for a trail along Cty Rd 19. Tonka Bay asked Shorewood to reconsider. This trail plan was rejected twice by Council in 2009. Initially it was rejected at a special multi-city joint council meeting and later at a regular Shorewood meeting. The key reason for rejection was the plan's inclusion of a $15 million trail option, not the idea of having a trail.
Lizee and Zerby who supported the plan argued that approval would cost Shorewood nothing and that money to build the trail would come from Three Rivers Park District and Hennepin County. Council Member Woodruff pointed out that Shorewood residents pay property taxes which include levies from both of these organizations. So, Shorewood taxpayers would be paying some of the cost and approving the plan would send a message that $15 million for a trail was OK.
Do you think $15 million for a few miles of recreational trail is a good plan and a good use of your tax dollars?
See pages starting at 83 on Monday's agenda at: http://weblink.ci.shorewood.mn.us/weblink8/0/doc/152067/Page1.aspx
A consultant and a group of residents from Orono, Tonka Bay and Shorewood held a series of meetings to plan a train connecting the regional trail that crosses Cty 19 just north of County Rd 15 in Navarre to the LRT trail that crosses Cty19 at the Shorewood/Tonka Bay border. The Shorewood residents in the group were appointed by Chris Lizee without discussion with or knowledge of the City Council. One of these residents was Scott Zerby who, at the time he was appointed was not a member of Council.
In October of 2009 the group delivered to a joint meeting of the councils of Orono, Tonka Bay and Shorewood a set of alternative concepts for the trail with costs ranging from a few hundred thousand dollars to $15 million. Only three council members from each city were in attendance likely due to the meeting being held in the middle of the day in a workweek. Orono and Tonka Bay each approved a resolution supporting the concept plan on 3-0 votes. Shorewood did not approve on a 2-1 vote (Lizee and Zerby in favor and Woodruff dissenting). Woodruff stated he could not vote for approval when two of five council members were not in attendance and had not had a chance to participate in the discussion. In a subsequent Shorewood Council Meeting the plan was reviewed and was not approved on a 2-3 vote (Lizee and Zerby in favor; Bailey, Turgeon and Woodruff dissenting).
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
South Shore Center - Who's not supporting?
3/9/11
The South Shore Center is owned by Deephaven, Greenwood, Excelsior, Tonka Bay and Shorewood. In mid-2009, Shorewood volunteered to operate the Center for three years and did not ask the other owners for any financial participation. Since then, it's cost Shorewood taxpayers more than $40,000 for capital and operating expenses.
The Center Manager has made a strong case that an electronic sign is needed on Hwy 19 so Center users can find the building. Some rental customers have pointed out that lack of such a sign is a big problem and limiting how attractive it is to rent the Center. A sign is expected to cost more than $20,000.
Deephaven and Greenwood have voluntarily contributed toward the sign purchase as have a number of individual donors but, there is a huge gap between funds available and what's needed. At the last Shorewood Council Meeting, it appeared that Shorewood would be willing to provide significant funds for a sign, but perhaps not enough to close the gap.
Excelsior and Tonka Bay residents are the largest users of the Center after Shorewood residents. Neither of these cities has made any contribution toward the sign or any thing else at the Center. However, some council members and residents from both of these cities were outraged when it appeared that the Center might close in 2009.
Where's the outrage and commitment when it comes to helping support the Center now?
Happy Reading!
The Insider
The South Shore Center is owned by Deephaven, Greenwood, Excelsior, Tonka Bay and Shorewood. In mid-2009, Shorewood volunteered to operate the Center for three years and did not ask the other owners for any financial participation. Since then, it's cost Shorewood taxpayers more than $40,000 for capital and operating expenses.
The Center Manager has made a strong case that an electronic sign is needed on Hwy 19 so Center users can find the building. Some rental customers have pointed out that lack of such a sign is a big problem and limiting how attractive it is to rent the Center. A sign is expected to cost more than $20,000.
Deephaven and Greenwood have voluntarily contributed toward the sign purchase as have a number of individual donors but, there is a huge gap between funds available and what's needed. At the last Shorewood Council Meeting, it appeared that Shorewood would be willing to provide significant funds for a sign, but perhaps not enough to close the gap.
Excelsior and Tonka Bay residents are the largest users of the Center after Shorewood residents. Neither of these cities has made any contribution toward the sign or any thing else at the Center. However, some council members and residents from both of these cities were outraged when it appeared that the Center might close in 2009.
Where's the outrage and commitment when it comes to helping support the Center now?
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
No commercial messages here - please
3/8/11
The Insider has deleted a comment that contained an advertisement for Dish Network.
Please, no commercial messages or ads in this blog or its comments.
Happy Reading!
The Insider
The Insider has deleted a comment that contained an advertisement for Dish Network.
Please, no commercial messages or ads in this blog or its comments.
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Park Commission - Chair "fired"
3/5/11
Monday night (2/28) on a 4 to 1 vote, Shorewood's Council appointed three Park Commissioners to fill one vacant seat and two seats which were at the end of their three-year terms. Two residents new to the Commission were appointed along with Steve Quinlan whose Commission term was expiring.
Jeremy Norman who has been the Chair of the Commission was not reappointed despite the fact that he applied and interviewed for the reappointment. There was no discussion in the Council Meeting about why Mr. Norman should not be reappointed nor, why the two new candidates were more qualified than Mr. Norman.
Dick Woodruff, the lone dissenting vote, told the Insider that he voted no because he disagreed with not reappointing Mr. Norman. Since the motion had all three Commission appointments together, Mr. Woodruff said he had no choice but to vote no even though he may have thought some of the other appointments were good ones.
The Insider knows that Mr. Norman had Mr. Woodruff's sign for Mayor in his yard during the last election. So, is "firing" Mr. Norman Mayor Lizee's way of payback for Mr. Norman's support of Lizee's opponent?
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Monday night (2/28) on a 4 to 1 vote, Shorewood's Council appointed three Park Commissioners to fill one vacant seat and two seats which were at the end of their three-year terms. Two residents new to the Commission were appointed along with Steve Quinlan whose Commission term was expiring.
Jeremy Norman who has been the Chair of the Commission was not reappointed despite the fact that he applied and interviewed for the reappointment. There was no discussion in the Council Meeting about why Mr. Norman should not be reappointed nor, why the two new candidates were more qualified than Mr. Norman.
Dick Woodruff, the lone dissenting vote, told the Insider that he voted no because he disagreed with not reappointing Mr. Norman. Since the motion had all three Commission appointments together, Mr. Woodruff said he had no choice but to vote no even though he may have thought some of the other appointments were good ones.
The Insider knows that Mr. Norman had Mr. Woodruff's sign for Mayor in his yard during the last election. So, is "firing" Mr. Norman Mayor Lizee's way of payback for Mr. Norman's support of Lizee's opponent?
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Spring Cleanup - Curbside?
3/2/11
During the January 24th Council Meeting, the Mayor and her new council members asked City staff to investigate doing curbside pickup as part of the annual spring cleanup program. Mayor Lizee wanted a report quickly so the service could be offered this spring. The Insider recalls this curbside program was one of the election promises of Mayor Lizee and the new council members.
Some background:
Shorewood had done curbside pickup during the annual spring cleanup for many years and discontinued this about four years ago. Reasons for discontinuing were that participation was falling off, many residents complained that they had to pay the $18 fee per household even though they did not use the service and the City started offering a drop-off service at Public Works on a spring Saturday instead. The drop-off has some fees depending on the items dropped, but only those who used the service paid any fees.
During the February 28th Council Meeting, staff reported that a curbside pickup could be done on a Saturday morning for a cost to every residence in Shorewood of between $25 and $30. However, the only items that would be accepted curbside were the same ones that could be placed in the normal weekly garbage pickup. In essence, the spring Saturday curbside would be nothing more than a second garbage pickup that week, but would have a big cost to every residence. If other items were to be placed curbside on Saturday, some could be eligible for pickup, but the hauler would note what was picked up, by address, and the City would have to pay a separate fee for every such item.
Mayor Lizee decided that the drop-off at Public Works would happen for this spring, but wants to consider curbside for 2012 budget.
So, the Insider want to know from the Shorewood residents: would you want every household to pay something like $30 plus, having each household that places out a special item for pickup pay a per item fee to have curbside pickup or, is bringing your cleanup materials to Public Works and only paying for what you actually drop-off the better deal?
Happy Reading!
The Insider
During the January 24th Council Meeting, the Mayor and her new council members asked City staff to investigate doing curbside pickup as part of the annual spring cleanup program. Mayor Lizee wanted a report quickly so the service could be offered this spring. The Insider recalls this curbside program was one of the election promises of Mayor Lizee and the new council members.
Some background:
Shorewood had done curbside pickup during the annual spring cleanup for many years and discontinued this about four years ago. Reasons for discontinuing were that participation was falling off, many residents complained that they had to pay the $18 fee per household even though they did not use the service and the City started offering a drop-off service at Public Works on a spring Saturday instead. The drop-off has some fees depending on the items dropped, but only those who used the service paid any fees.
During the February 28th Council Meeting, staff reported that a curbside pickup could be done on a Saturday morning for a cost to every residence in Shorewood of between $25 and $30. However, the only items that would be accepted curbside were the same ones that could be placed in the normal weekly garbage pickup. In essence, the spring Saturday curbside would be nothing more than a second garbage pickup that week, but would have a big cost to every residence. If other items were to be placed curbside on Saturday, some could be eligible for pickup, but the hauler would note what was picked up, by address, and the City would have to pay a separate fee for every such item.
Mayor Lizee decided that the drop-off at Public Works would happen for this spring, but wants to consider curbside for 2012 budget.
So, the Insider want to know from the Shorewood residents: would you want every household to pay something like $30 plus, having each household that places out a special item for pickup pay a per item fee to have curbside pickup or, is bringing your cleanup materials to Public Works and only paying for what you actually drop-off the better deal?
Happy Reading!
The Insider
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)