The Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District

Board of Trustees Meeting

Thursday, April 4, 2013 – 5:00 p.m.

Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room

The meeting of the Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District Board of Trustees was called to order by President Steve Leonard at 5:04 PM at Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room.

Trustees present: Leonard,  Kramer, Peter, Davidson, Burger, Schneider and Kray

Trustees absent:

Visitors: Jim Locke, Diane Bauers, Margie Schneider, Gordon Anderson, Pat Anderson, Bob Klima, Bob Galiher, Matt Hektoen by phone

 Agenda reviewed by Leonard. Motion made to approve agenda by Davidson, second by Schneider .  All ayes, motion passed.

 Leonard advised there is a revised Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the LDRA after our work session.  Hektoen said we are back to the original MOA in terms as to what land is conveyed.  The only real estate in tracts 1-93 that will be held back by the LDRA is parcel JJ which is a small parcel by North Beach and the LDRA will retain the dredge containment site for further discussion regarding the ‘right of first refusal’ on that property.  The rest will be conveyed to the District.  The original MOA had a restriciton on ownership whereby lake proeprty and the dam site had to be held by a public entity into perpetuity.  Following our  discussion during the work session, only the dam site itself and Lost and North Beach will be subject to that restriction.  In addition, if the District wants, they can follow the same procedure that cities use to sell property which includes public hearings, etc.  Hektoen used April 25, 2013 as the close date to accommodate Mitvalsky’s schedule.  Motion to approve 3^rd Memorandum of Agreement by Kramer and second by Kray.  Hektoen said that once the issues surrounding Parcel JJ are settled the LDRA is subject to send that land to the District.  Davidson asked when the LDRA received the document and Hektoen said he gave it to Mitvalsky on Friday, March 29, 2013.  Locke said he received it on Tuesday, April 2.  Burger asked Locke if he had any questions on the document and Locke said nothing of significance and has no questions of the Trustees prior to the LDRA meeting.  Galiher indicated he was in compliance with what Locke said as he had no particular objection to anything in the document.  Individual roll call requested on the motion to accept the revised MOA.  All ayes, motion passed.  Hektoen left the call.

 Leonard gave background on the agreement with the DNR for funding purposes.  The agreement in front to the Trustees is the result of meetings between the Legislative Committee and the DNR to facilitate the movement of monies between the DNR and the District.  This agreement is somewhat  different from our original agreement with the DNR regarding the initial funding of $350,000.   It outlines the scope of the project and allows for the first $2.5 million must be spent by 2016 and the second $2.5 million must be spent by 2017.  Any project costs are eligible as of July 1, 2012 and Attachment A details what work is eligible.  Wastewater had been taken out but remains on this copy so Leonard will need to initial the word ‘wastewater’ and remove it.  The County Auditor and the County Attorney reviewed the document as we follow county procedures for payments.  The District will make payments first and then will be reimbursed by the DNR.  Within the document there is a requirement to do project updates and Stanley Engineering is aware of these requirements as they will provide the updates and Stanley will make sure work is completed before any payments are made.    Kramer made motion to accept the DNR agreement and Schneider second the motion.  Davidson asked how many contacts we will have at the DNR and  Leonard said George Antonio will be the primary lead for the DNR and he will make sure Dir. Gipp and McGhee will be copied.  Davidson asked what the payment process looked like and Kramer said she receives the invoices, the Finance Committee will review and when done, she scans everything and forwards to the DNR.  Burger said the Finance Committee will review all payments the Saturday before each regular monthly meeting.  Locke asked if our contracts will have progress billing milestones and Peter said there are some progress billings in the RFP document.  Peter said specific progress reports will be demanded in order for those payments to be made.  Individual roll call requested on the motion to approve the DNR agreement, all ayes, motion passed.

 Schneider discussed the storage agreement for the work platform with Darryl Hogan.  The original document had the District name incorrect and had Hogan wanted the start date to remain the same so the contract completes in November 2014.  Burger said we have no obligation that we will sell it to him and Schneider indicated that was true.  Burger made motion to approve the storage agreement with Hogan, Peter second, motion passed.

 Public comment – Galiher asked if the flood plain bill that is being considered.  Leonard said the House approved it, yesterday the Senate committee met and approved it unanimously and now it goes to the floor of the Senate.  Galiher also asked if public access has been dropped by the DNR?  Leoanrd said access is very important and they know it is important to us.  We have to make it part of our plan they have given us more time.  We are working with the County and those discussions will continue.

 Locke said salvaged both boats and we will need to re-register the work platform when we are ready to use it.  Locke also said the LDRA had to buy 250 gallons of LP for the office.  Galiher said there was a package on the outside of the office building and Locke said it is a podium that is used for the LDRA annual meetings.

 Diane Bauers asked what equipment was being stored at Hogans and Leonard indicated it is the work platform or old barge.

 Bob Klima said the agendas come out on the web site in very small print.  Kray said she would enlarge the print on the next posting.

 Motion made by Kray and second by Kramer to go into closed session for discussion and consideration of the terms, strategy and negotiations for the acquisition of interests in real estate for the purpose of restoring the lake and dam.  Individual roll call requested, all ayes, motion passed.

 After closed session, motion to adjourn by Schneider, Kramer second, motion passed.  Meeting adjourned at 6:21 PM.

The Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District

Board of Trustees Work Session

Thursday, March 21, 2013 – 5:45 p.m.

Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room

The work session of the Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District Board of Trustees was called to order by President Steve Leonard at 5:45 PM at Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room.

Trustees present: Leonard,  Kramer, Peter, Davidson, Burger, Schneider and Kray via Skype

Trustees absent:

LDRA present – Pat Dede, Jim Locke, Bob Galiher, Brooks Ante, Rich Hughes, Dennis Jasper

Visitors:  Don Dede, Garlen Glanz, Dave Nebel, Connie Nebel, Eve Peter, Jerry Ries, Norm Wellman,  Wanda Davidson, Larry Aschenbrenner, Bob Klima, Ed Schmidt, Doug Ricklefs, Margie Schneider,  Carla Becker, Anthony Bardgett, Chris Stender, Marcheta Cooey Lux.

 Leonard opened the work session advising the intent of the work session with LDRA is to come to resolution of the transfer of the dam with the help of the County Auditor and both attorneys from the respective organizations.  Carla Becker, County Auditor,  gave details of the issues regarding the inability to record the original Quit Claim Deed/Memorandum of Agreement (MOA).  One reason was the 38 documents attached to the original Quit Claim Deed were too old and not scannable which is a current requirement.  In addition, the same attachment was recordable in 1972 but they did not meet the requirements of being recordable in 2013.  The 38 pages were too long to retype in its entirety so the District’s Attorney, Matt Hektoen came to Becker  for assistance in getting it recorded.  Becker spoke with Hektoen and Mitvalksy (who was the preparer of the document)  as to their intent so she didn’t breach any of the ground rules.  Becker then worked on the documents and converted it to a 3 page document that she handed out to the attendees.   Some areas changed from the original document when Interstate Power sold the tracts to Shultz.  Included in the 3 page document is tracts 1-93 that is similar to the Quit Claim Deed.  It is a blanket quit claim deed which simply states that any interest the seller may have is being deeded to the buyer.  In a quit claim deed there is no warrant or abstract.  A quit claim deed is what was originally used when Interstate Power originally sold the land to the Schultzs.  When a quit claim deed was used when the property was sold to the Cooeys, the deed only stated tracts 1-93.  Becker believes there is no reason to have attachments as to what 1-93 were in our District’s deed.  Also there are some reservations in the original document that Becker added back in because there was no clarification that the original easements or reservations had been taken away.  The mechanic liens were left in as well as the requirement of the election to only sell the properties to a public entity. The original document from Interstate Power  include property that was is not included in the district. Becker modified the legal descriptions to correct the legal description and to follow the intent of Mr. Mitvalski and the LDRA.  Any property lying outside the district was excepted.  She also amended the legal description for the Turtle Creek area to incorporate the entire track rather than the portion that was being leased to Delaware County Conservation.

 Becker stated that the Quit Claim Deed currently excepts out all land lying outside the district, Parcel EE and its frontage, Parcel AA being the retention area, Parcel JJ (North Beach), lake frontage to Lots 1 & 2 in the Cedars and the Turtle Creek area.  Becker reitereated that she left in all the exceptions that were in the original Quit Claim Deed.  She only corrected the legals for those exceptions.

 In reference to the Turtle Creek area, the original Quit Claim Deed only described the parcels per the lease with Delaware County Conservation.  That means the legal only went to the center of the road and bridge.  Becker indicated that if there is going to be public access in that area, it would be easier if only 2 entities were involved instead of 3.  That is why she changed the legal, on the advice of the attorneys involved, to include the entire tract of land in this area.  Becker was asked for an exact legal description of what was still owned of this tract for use on the right to purchase.  While doing research she found an original document between the LDRA and another party that was ambigious.  This transaction which occurred early in the 1970s was trying to sell a tract which was frontage and its adjacent “frontage” but didn’t quite get the task accomplished. Becker referred to the irregular piece of property on her aerial view and indicated this was the tract she is speaking of.   This transaction was done via a quit claim deed and it did not require an abstract. Her suggestion for the Turtle Creek area is to have it surveyed since it is being looked at for public access and will eventually be deeded to the county.  However, she does not feel a survey is necessary prior to deeding to the District.

 Becker then asked permission from the Chairperson to give the floor to Delaware County Engineer, Anthony Bardgett.  Mr. Bardgett offered the services of County Land Surveyor Brad Burger to complete the requested survey in the Turtle Creek area.   They have already done some initial work on it but need approval from the LDRA and the Trustees to do any further work.  Leonard asked if the transfer happens between the LDRA and the District will it  have any bearing on the outcome.  Becker explained that for the original transfer between the 2 entities it wouldn’t be an issue because we are using a quit claim deed and that is giving the District interest in the land and no more.  She explained eventually the County would feel more comfortable knowing where the lines are.  Leonard indicated this was a great offer from the county and thanked Mr. Bardgett.  Davidson asked if the survey should be done before the transfer and Hektoen  said if the LDRA is going to quit claim deed the properties there is no reason to delay the transfer.  Leonard asked what is the timeline to do survey and Bardgett said the monuments used to do the survey are covered in snow so they have to wait for the snow to melt.  Jerry Ries said he would like to see the land surveyed before it was turned over to anybody.    Becker said if the LDRA takes the exception out of the Quit Claim Deed then the County would deal with the District on the Turtle Creek land.  The land would need to be surveyed before deeded to county, but it doesn’t need the survey prior to the transfer between the LDRA and the District.

 Becker feels there are only two (2) parcels which she feels the LDRA should except from the transfer; Parcel AA and Parcel JJ.  Parcel AA is the retention area and has a first right of refusal attached to it.  Parcel JJ is located at North Beach is the LDRA has been negotiating with Strauser to exchange the Parcel for access.  Because there are incumberances to these parcels, she would ike them to remain excepted from the transfer.  Becker than said there is only one other issue and that is why the LDRA is retaining property that is not in the district boundary and is that something the LDRA wants to retain as it could be a benefit to the District because of dredging or other items.  Hatala said there has been an underlying  concern by the LDRA  if the district can own property outside of its boundary and Hatala said doesn’t think it is an issue.  The 357E statute says the District can own property to carry out its mission.  Leonard asked if  it was Becker’s opinion that it makes sense to send as much as possible to the District.  Becker suggests to only have one entity to negotiate with property owners.  Hatala said if the District is held to the same standards as counties and cities and he doesn’t think it makes that big of a differnece because cities vacate alleys and such all the time and is not uncommon that they are usually transferred to an adjacent property owner.

 Rich Hughes asked about the current MOA and to make sure he understands the issues.  Leonard asked Becker to confirm in her opinion and knowing what she does about the issues, what is the most cost effective and efficient way to get the land transferred.  Becker said she is not an attorney, but in her opinion the  least amount of exceptions in a document the easier it becomes and it would give the district more flexibility.  Parcell EE is the one she keeps coming back to. The way it is currently surveyed is not how the property owners will most likely want it transferred which means if it is excepted from the transfer, then the property owners will need to deral with both the District and the LDRA.

 Leonard asked Hektoen in his opinion what was the simplest way to move forward.  Hektoen believes that the LDRA should convey as much real esate as possible at one time.  Mitvalsky says the LDRA feels the same way but they have had reservations but Becker has made good points in her discussion.  Burger asked what the LDRA concerns are and asked if  we take Turtle Creek and have it surveyed before giving to county, does that take care of it.  Burger understands that the board of the LDRA wrote the wording for the shareholder vote but believes the intent was most people did not want anyone sitting on a board to sell the dam.  Burger asked if we put in the MOA tha the District can’t sell dam without a public vote would that work and if the LDRA is concerned about Lost Beach and North Beach, add them as well.  Locke said lets go through all the properties;  Turtle Creek –  wouldn’t hold up the transfer;  Parcel JJ which is access to north beach and if it is only frontage, it isn’t a problem but if not should we wait until the problems are resolved;  Parcel EE – Locke said he would like to clarify more with Carla and said he thought maybe it is best for the LDRA to retain it and then pass it to the District. Becker indicated she doesn’t believe Parcel JJ could be sold as “frontage.”  As long as frontage could be described as frontage that parcel would not require a survey.  Locke said could do a quit claim deed and he doesn’t have same the same concern w other properties.  The issues with the Harbach property would be easier if only one party negotiated.

 Burger asked if we could move property into the District boundaries like was done with the Hughes property.  Becker said yes, but to remember once it goes in, it cannot come out of the boundaries then.  Rich Hughes said the issue also is what can happen 10 years from now.

 Hatala said he believes we can allow the transfer of the propetry with the MOA but amend it to say the dam site would require a sale to a public entity.  Mitvalsky said he believes he understands but does it allow for an election.  Burger said he would lean towards having more details so a future board wouldn’t sell it.  Mitvlasky said members would convey their wishes with an election approval for sale.  Burger said the LDRA knew the frontage sales would not be done by the time the dam transfer took place so he doesn’t think the intent was to tie the trustees  hands so they could never sell frontage to adjacent property owners.  Burger said he also wouldn’t want to see Lost Beach or North Beach sold either.  He would not be opposed to adding in the MOA a clause to except out the dam, North and Lost Beach but allow to sell frontage and other areas.  Locke said Turtle Creek could be an issue but the District would convey it to the County.  Leonard said he would echo what Burger said and that we change the MOA with that understanding.  There will be situations where we may need to work through and need the ability to transfer properties.

 Davidson asked if the LDRA has an objection to that.  Mitvalsky said there is a laundry list of properties and containment site may be another one to hold out.  He believes there is an issue wth a transfer outside of the district, and whether or not the district has authority to own outside of its territory.  Mitvalsky continued that the 357E Iowa codes is a very unique chapter of code and said it hasn’t been used much.

 Dede asked how FEMA plays into this.  Leonard said it was made pretty clear in the monitoring report that the dredge site should be owned by the district.  He understands that can’t be done right away but everything else can be.  Mitvalsky asked if the dredge containment site is within the geographic boundaries of the district.  Becker said the property was split into 2 parcels because one is within the district and the 2^nd is not within the boundary.  Dave Fry said Iowa Homeland Security has been very clear that the district should own the containment site.

 Hatala said the next step would be to write an amendment to the MOA that brings in some of these ideas and see if we can get that going and it would be limiting the revision to the dam site and the 2 beaches.

 Burger left at 6:57 pm.

 Becker said she will be there to help  get the document the way both parties want it and help to get it recorded.  Locke said it was never the intent to hold back property and the only reason there were exceptions is because of concern from the LDRA lawyer and he hopes the public understands that.  Rich Hughes said he would like to move forward and whichever makes it quicker.  Brooks Ante and Dennis Jasper said agree that we want to transfer the properties.  Becker said the legal description references tracts 1-93 because it was a blanket quit claim deed just like the original transfer from Interstate Power years ago.  It is intended to be all encompassing and cover any remaining interest in the property the LDRA originally received.

Davidson asked who would draft the MOA and Hektoen indicated he would do it.

 Leonard asked if further comments from the Trustees and there were none.  Leonard thanked all who participated.  Peter made motion to adjourn, Schneider second.  All ayes, motion passed and meeting adjouned at 7:08 pm.

The Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District

Board of Trustees Meeting

Thursday, March 21, 2013 – 5:00 p.m.

Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room

The meeting of the Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District Board of Trustees was called to order by President Steve Leonard at 5:01 PM at Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room.

Trustees present: Leonard,  Kramer, Peter, Davidson, Burger, Schneider and Kray via Skype

Trustees absent:

Visitors: Pat Dede, Don Dede, Garlen Glanz, Dave Nebel, Connie Nebel, Eve Peter, Jerry Ries, Norm Wellman,  Jim Locke, Wanda Davidson, Larry Aschenbrenner, Bob Klima,  Brooks Ante, Ed Schmidt, Bob Galiher, Dennis Jasper, Doug Ricklefs, Margie Schneider,  Carla Becker, Anthony Bardgett, Rich Hughes, Chris Stender, Marcheta Cooey Lux.

 Agenda reviewed by Leonard. Motion made to approve by Kramer, second by Davidson .  All ayes, motion passed.

 Kray requested approval of minutes for 2/21/13, 2/26/13, 2/28/13, 3/3/13, and 3/7/13.  Peter made motion to approve all 5 as presented, Schneider second.  All ayes, motion passed.

 Kramer reviewed bills for payment – L&L Consulting for $2,000;  $13,155.40 for Attorney fees; News Publication for $25.97.   Motion by Burger to approve payments as presented, second by Davidson.  All ayes, motion passed.

 Kramer covered the financial report and as of February 28, 2012 the ending balance of the General fund was $51,690.94.  The balance for the Debt Service fund at the end of January  was $147,997.12 and as of February 28, 2013 the balance is $162,748.62.  The Dam/Spillway Project fund had a balance of $5,905,063.35 as of the end of January. We received interest in February and ended with a balance of $5,907,313.74.

 Schneider spoke to contract with Darryl Hogan advising it is for storage of the work platform.  Hogan is agreeable to signing, however, the District name needs to be changed on the document.   There is no action tonight until the document is changed.

 Committee updates

Finance committee has no report.

 FEMA –Project worksheets have been completed.  We are just waiting for FEMA determination for eligible projects.

 Legislative Committee – Leonard advised that most folks have probably seen the updates on TV and in the Gazette.  Representative Hein and Senator Zumbach have been actively engaged on the top of dam issue.  We are currently going through a 5 step process for approval of a bill which will change the definition of the term ‘top of dam’ for certain circumstances in the state.  The 5 steps are a vote for approval of the bill in a House subcommittee, House of Representatives vote on the bill, a vote for approval fo the bill in a Senate committee, a vote on the bill in the Senate and finally signature by the Governor.  There should be action on the bill next week in the Senate.

 Dam Construction –  Leonard spoke for the Dam Construction group and advised that the Phase I bid documents are starting to be developed.  Stanley did the bid project and the documents have been reviewed by the County Engineer, Anthony Bardgett.  Leonard thanked Bardgett for working on the documents.  There are additional financial/insurance items that the Trustees need to work on for the remainder of the contract details.  Bob Hatala is currently reviewing for his input.  There was an update sent via email but there is still a lot of work to be done.  The Army Corps of Engineers are working closely with us to finalize the permit for Phase I and the County will need to approve as well.  Bardgett has reviewed our documents so once the Corp permit is received we shouldn’t have a long review process by the County.  The drawings for Phase II are still being worked on by Stanley Engineering and will be complete in the next month or so.  Once that is done, we can be ready to go on to Phase II.

 Property management Committee had nothing to report.

 Public Comment – Ed Schmidt asked about the law we are trying to get passed.  Would that mean that no one would have to sign new easement agreements?  Leonard said it is still to early to tell if we will need any additional easments once the law is signed.  We just received the original documents from Alliant Energy who purchased the original dam owner, Interstate Power.

 Larry Peter  suggested that folks contact their County offices for boat registration.  If someone does not intend to use their boat for the next year or two, you should check with your county office to see how that should be handled.  There is some question as to whether you will pay a penalty and the registration amount or just the penalty.  Each county may handle it differently.

 Bob Galiher asked if the bill being worked on is passed, does the DNR have to follow it?  Leonard said the DNR would have to re-write rules with new law.  This law pertains to only certain heights of dams and is specific to certain types of dams.  The language for the new law was given to DNR for commentary prior to moving it forward.

 Larry Aschenbrenner advised that Tom McGlaughlin and himself were guest bartenders at the Pizza Place again this year on St. Patrick’s Day and donated their tips to the Community Fund to Rebuild Lake Delhi.  They raised $630 for the fund and Leonard thanked them for the donation.  The new owners of the Pizza Place said they would be willing to consider another promotion for the dam.

 Jim Locke said the high water this month washed up a lift on his land in front of his house and asked  how soon the lake bed cleanup would start.  Leonanrd said Brian Hughes will be leading the effort.

 Bob Galiher asked status of the fish ladder and Leonard advised that Kray would post the variance letter on the District web site.

 Marcheta Cooey Lux said wanted to say a few words regarding the discussion in the work session to follow.  She believes we all want the lake to come back and that we need to work through our issues just as it has been done throughout the years at the lake.  By sitting at the same table to work on the issues as they did years ago when the dam was owned by the Schultzes,  should allow us to come to agreement.   She said she has watched how the Trustees conduct themselves and the residents of the lake have voted for these 7 Trustees to do what they feel is best for our community.  We cannot move forward until the dam is owned by a public entity.  Please respect the Trustee request so we can move forward.

 Bob Klima said legal issues arose at some locations on the lake and it would be good to allow the county to own the Turtle Creek area.

 Bob Galiher says he is in total agreement in the need for the transfer of the dam.  The LDRA signed the MOA (Memorandum of Agreement) and now we are dealing with issues coming along with the deeding of some of the property.  This is not an adversarial position, we just need to understand a process to accomplish the transfer.

Burger made motion to adjourn, Kramer second.  Motion passed with all ayes for adjournment at 5:40 pm.

The Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District

Board of Trustees Meeting

Thursday, March 7, 2013 – 6:30 p.m.

Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room

The meeting of the Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District Board of Trustees was called to order by President Steve Leonard at 6:33 PM at Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room.

Trustees present: Kramer, Peter, Davidson, Burger, Schneider, Leonard by phone and Kray via Skype

Visitors: Jim Locke, Pat Dede, Don Dede, Tom Cook, Marilyn Cook, Dave Larson, Gordon Anderson,  Pat Anderson, Bill Lux, Marcheta Cooey-Lux, Larry Aschenbrenner

Agenda reviewed by Leonard. Motion made to approve agenda by Burger, second by Davidson,  all ayes, motion passed.

Kramer advised meeting purpose is for public hearing of FY 2013/2014 budget.  Burger made motion to receive and file the publication of the budget, Schneider second.  All ayes, motion passed.

Burger made motion to open the public hearing, Peter second.  All ayes, motion passed.

Burger said budget made by financial committee and board members, Burger, Kramer and Davidson.  This budget is for next year and the committee budgeted high so the budget doesn’t have to be amended if we get to build the dam for the next fiscal year.  This budget starts July 1, 2013 and ends June 30, 2014.  Kramer said the taxes to be levied should be around $10,000 more than the estimate on the budget.   Kramer said the supplemental detail is on page 3 of the handout and advised the detail is a guestimate.  Kramer asked if comments from the public and there were none.  Burger made motion to close the public hearing, Kramer second.  All ayes, motion passed.

Burger made motion to adopt a resolution to approve the Fiscal Year budget for 2013/2014, Kramer second.  Individual roll call requested, all ayes, motion passed.

Motion to adjourn by Burger, Davidson second, motion passed.  Meeting adjourned at 6:42 pm.

 The Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District

Board of Trustees Meeting

Sunday, March 3, 2013 – 2:00 p.m.

Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room

The meeting of the Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District Board of Trustees was called to order by President Steve Leonard at 2:02 PM at Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room.

Trustees present: Leonard,  Kramer, Peter, Davidson, Burger, Schneider by phone and Kray via Skype

Visitors: Eve Peter, Don & Pat Dede, Chip Hughes, Shirley Christensen, Dorothy Thomas, David Vorwald, Larry Aschbrenner, Bob Klima

Agenda reviewed by Leonard. Motion made to approve agenda by Davidson, second by Kramer,  all ayes, motion passed.

A letter written by the Delaware County Engineer to Senator Matt McCoy was introduced by Leonard.  As a review, the  Legistlative team met with County Supervisors, County personnel and the DNR to create a revision to the District’s first adopted public access plan.  It was an opportunity for the District to work with the County in this project and this letter is a request for funding which would come from the state Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund (RIIF) monies.  The County has to get something prepared as the request needs to be to Senator McCoy no later than Tuesday, March 5^th.   This letter will go before the County Supervisors in their regular board meeting on Monday, March 4, 2013.  In the work session with the County Supervisors on Thursday the issue was addressed that the transfer of the Turtle Creek property was very important to them to facilitate the public access plan.  The resolution in front of all the District Trustees is in support of the county and the transfer of said  property.

Kramer made motion to accept Resolution 3.3.13 regarding public access and funding for Delaware County, Schneider second.  Davidson voiced his concern that the resolution has restrictions on Delaware County and he is not sure he is in favor of language that puts conditions the County.  Davidson indicated that he had a conversation with Supervisor Helmrichs and she said if we couldn’t get an agreement on the public access that she would be willing to draft a letter saying the County would give us back the land.  Davidson requested the clause about adequate funding according to the district be removed from the resolution.  Peter indicated he agrees with Davidson.  Burger asked if a timeframe could be added because if the project is not completed in 3-4 years it probably won’t happen. Leonard indicated that the worksession agreement with the county supervisors last week that  it was the first time in a public setting that he heard that the Supervisors would be willing to give the property back if the public access plan is not completed.  And that this statement came from only only Supervisor.  The intention of this resolution is to assure the Supervisors that the land will come over and that it is just good stewardship to get a document between the two parties to transfer the land.

Kray indicated both sides of the argument were warranted – to transfer the property to the Supervisors but also to have some type of agreeement between us and the supervisors when we transfer the land since the District is ultimately responsible for the public access plan back to the Legislature.  She indicated that she spoke with Hatala and he said just a simple letter from the Supervisors indicating they would give the land back if the public access plan was not completed was not binding when you transfer property so she believes we need something in writing.  She proposed new language that Hatala had given her.  The language to replace the last whereas clause would read “WHEREAS, the District intends to transfer its right, title and interest in the “Turtle Creek” property in Delaware County, Iowa, for the purpose of providing public access if adequate funding as set forth in the attached request is available and the County and the District have an approved plan for the development and use of the “Turtle Creek” area.  The to be resolved language should read “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the District intends to transfer “Turtle Creek” to Delaware County, Iowa,  if adequate funding as set forth in the attached request is available, and the County and the District have an approved plan for the development and use of the “Turtle Creek” area.  Before any transfer is made, the terms will be reduced to writing and approved by the County and the District. 

Burger asked if the money the County is requesting from the State doesn’t come through is this a dead issue or would we still attempt to work with the county to jointly come up with funding?  Leonard indicated the monies needed to repair the dam have increased so he didn’t believe the District would have a large amount of additional funds to utilize for a large public access plan such as is now proposed – that it would have to be smaller that what is on the table now.  Peter said he thought public access was an expectation from the Legislature from us and why would we take it out.  Peter wants to see the details of the new increased monies needed for the dam repair.  Leonard said he requested the details from Holman and would share with the Trustees when he receives it.

Kray said to Burger’s point she believed that without the state requested funds, the public access plan would look significantly different than what is currently proposed.  Burger said who approves the public access plan should also be part of the document between the County and the District.  Davidson said the Supervisors indicated money is tight in Delaware County and he is adamant that we work with the county as partners.

Burger proposed to take out “adequate funding language” in the Whereas and Be it resolved language and Kray indicated that would be fine. Burger made a motion to amend the original resolution as stated and proposed the new language in the final Whereas clause as “WHEREAS, the District intends to transfer its right, title and interest in the “Turtle Creek” property in Delaware County, Iowa, for the purpose of providing public access and the County and the District have an approved public access plan for the development and use of the “Turtle Creek” area.  And to also change the language in the To Be Resolved clause as “BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the District intends to transfer “Turtle Creek” to Delaware County, Iowa, and the County and the District have an approved public access plan for the development and use of the “Turtle Creek” area.  Before any transfer is made, the terms will be reduced to writing and approved by the County and the District.    Peter second Burger’s motion.  Individual roll call was requested, Burger – yes, Peter – yes, Davidson – yes, Kray – yes, Kramer – yes, Schneider – no and Leonard yes, motion passed.

Burger then made motion to approve Resolution 3.3.13 as amended, Davidson second.  Individual roll call requested, Burger – yes, Peter – yes, Davidson – yes, Kray – yes, Kramer – yes, Schneider – no and Leonard – yes.  Motion passed.

Burger made motion to adjourn, Peter second, motion passed.  Meeting adjourned at 3:11 pm.

The Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District

Board of Trustees Work Session

Thursday, February 28, 2013 – 2:00 p.m.

Delaware County Courthouse

301 E. Main Street, Room 203

Manchester, IA

The Delaware County Board of Supervisors met in work session this date at 2:00 pm with all members present.  Also present were Ed Schmidt, Garlyn Glanz, Dave Larson, Eve Peter, Mike Steuck, Jim Locke, Ken Ziegenfuss, Bob Galiher, Marcheta Cooey Lux, Bill Lux, Don Dede, Pat Dede, Norman Wellman, Lamont Davidson, Larry Peter, Bill Decker, Laurie Kramer, Steve Leonard, Anthony Bardgett, and Carla Becker.  Larry Murphy, Gary Grant and Mary Kray joined the meeting via conference call.  Jeff Madlom, Chairperson, called the meeting to order.  This was a joint work session with the Delaware County Board of Supervisors and the Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District.

 Chairperson Madlom addressed those present to set the parameters for the meeting.  The only item on the agenda for today’s meeting is the enhancement of public access at Lake Delhi.  No public comment period will be allowed for this meeting.

Steve Leonard, President of the Board of Trustees, was given the floor.  He began by reassuring the Board of Supervisors that the Trustees are still committed to providing additional public access to Lake Delhi.  He stated that in 2011, Stanley Consultants estimated the cost of reconstruction at roughly $11.9 million.  Since then, there have been design development changes, DNR requirements, archeological studies, regulatory and design constraints, and proposed land acquisitions.  With all the requirements being placed on reconstruction, the estimated cost has risen over $2.9 million to $14.8 million.  Unfortunately, that does not leave any additional funding for the public access or lake bed restoration (dredging).

The Trustees have communicated with the DNR and State Legislators regarding the public access requirements and the lack of funding to implement them.  According to Mr. Leonard, the Trustees have been told verbally that the DNR intends to waive its day one1 requirement of additional public access due to this lack of funding.  However, the Trustees are still committed to providing additional public access.

He continued by thanking County Services Director Norm Wellman, the County Services Department, Conservation Director Garlyn Glanz, the County Conservation Board and County Engineer Anthony Bardgett for all the work they have done on the proposed plan at Turtle Creek Park.  Without them, there would be no plan.  When asked what time frame the DNR is looking at for completion of the public access, Mr. Leonard replied that he did not think they were attaching a deadline for completion.  However, this has only been verbally presented to them.  The Trustees currently have nothing in writing from the DNR waiving this requirement.

The Board members reminded those present that at a previous work session regarding county funding for this project, the Board was very clear that the land must be transferred from LDRA to the trustees and that additional public access must be created before any county monies could be used.  Since the addition of public access is very high on the Board’s list, they feel it needs to be a high priority if the Trustees wish to use county money.

Mr. Leonard stated that the Trustees agree with this.  That is why they are continuing to search for additional funding sources to make it happen.

Anthony Bardgett, Delaware County Engineer, stated that it would cost roughly $600,000 to move the roadway and install a new bridge.  However, if they wait until the water is back to begin construction, you can add at least $200,000 to this estimate.  He stated it would be ideal to complete the road and bridge construction prior to the dam being put back.  One positive thing is that the Corps of Engineers does not feel the area qualifies as a wetland and will be waiving the requirement for wetland mitigation.  He feels we could have a permit for the project soon.

Larry Murphy, Trustee Lobbyist, stated that they have met with Senator McCoy and Representative Huseman.  They would be willing to review a funding request but feel that the request should come from the county rather than the district.  The funding is through the RIIF Funds (gambling monies).  There is more latitude in the spending of these funds rather than with road use money.  Since this is considered a grant, there would be a 50/50 match.  However, the engineer’s services, land donation and on-going maintenance costs for the area would qualify for the 50% match.  Any request for dollars this year should be submitted no later than Tuesday of next week to Senator McCoy.

When asked about what form the request should be in, Mr. Leonard stated that a one or two page document would suffice.  Perhaps one page could explain the project, cost estimates and request of funds while the second page could show a picture of the project.

Chairperson Madlom asked how the county could apply for funding when they do not own all the property needed for the project.

Mr. Leonard stated that the District has a written agreement with the LDRA for the transfer of the land to the District.  He feels the Trustees would be willing to approve a resolution stating that their intent is to transfer the property in the Turtle Creek Park area over to the county for this project once the county’s plan is approved for funding.

The Board is concerned with being able to explain why they are replacing a bridge that is not posted when there are so many others in the county that are posted.  Even though this bridge has been listed and removed from the five year plan before, there are bridges in much worse shape than this one.  Mr. Leonard responded that it would have to be a business decision by the Board.  There are additional monies which may be available for this project that would not be available for a normal bridge replacement somewhere else in the county.

Even if they receive funding for this project, Mr. Bardgett pointed out that there would still be a cash shortfall that would need to be picked up by the county or the district.  Even though it would not have to be outlined in the request, this is an issue that needs addressing at some point.  Mr. Leonard felt it could possibly be a percentage cost share between the two entities.  That way as additional funds became available each entity’s responsibility would be reduced on a percentage basis.  They would just have to sit down and negotiate the percentages.

Supervisor Helmrichs felt it would be foolish to not request funding if it is available.  However, any request that is submitted by the county needs to be credible and realistic both short term and long term.  She stated that the county could also look at other funding streams to help fund any shortfalls.

Both Chairperson Madlom and Supervisor Ries were concerned with the fact that the transfer between the LDRA and the District has not taken place yet.

It was suggested that the County and the District form a committee to put together a draft request that could be considered by the Board at Monday’s meeting.  Mr. Leonard suggested one Board of Supervisor member, one or two Trustees and Mr. Bardgett could work up a draft for the two entities to consider.  Supervisor Helmrichs volunteered on behalf of the Board.

Larry Murphy and Gary Grant stated that the important things to put in the request were as follows:

1. Description of the Proposed Project
2. Importance of the Project to the District and to the County
3. The Estimated Cost of the Project
4. What they are requesting of the State (Funding % etc.)

The group agreed to meet at 8:00 am on Friday to work on the draft.

Chairperson Madlom adjourned the meeting at 3:15 pm.