The Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District<\/p>\n
Board of Trustees Meeting<\/p>\n
December 20, 2012 \u2013 5:00 p.m.<\/p>\n
Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room<\/p>\n
\n
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.<\/p>\n
Trustees present: Leonard, \u00a0Kramer, Kray, Davidson, Schneider, and Burger and Peter via phone.<\/p>\n
Trustees absent:\u00a0 N\/A<\/p>\n
Visitors: \u00a0Chip Hughes, Chris Stender, Marcheta Cooey Lux and Bill Lux and Bob Hatala and Matt Hektoen by phone<\/p>\n
Agenda reviewed by Leonard.\u00a0 \u00a0Motion was made by Burger, second by Schneider, to approve meeting agenda. \u00a0Kramer moved to amend agenda to remove items 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14.\u00a0 Kray indicated she wants to leave on 14. \u00a0Leonard indicated he would like to keep agenda as Laurie proposed. \u00a0Burger second motion as amended, motion passed.<\/p>\n
Kray requested approval of minutes for 11\/15 and 11\/29.\u00a0 Kramer made motion to approve and Davidson second, motion passed.<\/p>\n
Kramer discussed payments due from the general fund are Alliant Energy for $64.40, Des Moines Register $10.74, L&L Consulting $2,000 and October billing for Simmons Perrine $9,475.\u00a0 Burger said going to go back 1 year since approval of bond fund and separate attorney bills and move funds involved in dam rebuild to bond fund. \u00a0Motion to approve payments as represented by Davidson and second by Schneider, motion passed. \u00a0Kramer reviewed the financial report and advised there is a beginning balance of $73,597.94 in the general fund.\u00a0 We received revenues of $3358.29 and some interest.\u00a0 Bills approved in November total $6,617.27 which gives an ending balance of $70,397.82 and does not include expenditures we approved tonight.<\/p>\n
Leonard introduced revised Public Access plan and that all Trustees had a copy sent to them in email.\u00a0 Kramer made motion to approve, Schneider second.\u00a0 Burger asked if DNR and County have seen the plan and asked if they gave comments.\u00a0 Leonard indicated final includes their comments and we will have continued conversations with DNR and County.\u00a0 Burger is recommending on further drafts we show that as of today\u2019s date we have purchased the Peck property that should help in accommodating portage.\u00a0 Kramer asked if we are to pay for new bridge.\u00a0 Leonard indicated that the team discussed costs and no details on cost sharing.\u00a0 This plan shows intention that we are in support of additional public access.\u00a0 Asked for individual roll call on motion, all ayes, motion passed.<\/p>\n
Leonard asked Hatala to walk through the \u00a0resolution approving the Peck property acquisition and costs and disbursements.\u00a0 $99,583.93 is to be paid to Community Savings Bank which includes the $5,000 escrow payment.\u00a0 Attached to the resolution is the closing statement and also the IDNR form for Time of Transfer Inspection Waiver.\u00a0 We do not have to raise the building as capping the system will be sufficient.\u00a0 Hatala said the District just needs to make one motion to approve the resolution.\u00a0 Also make note that the company name needs to show Peck Excavating Corporation.\u00a0 Motion to approve Resolution 12.20.12 by Davidson, Schneider second.\u00a0 Davidson indicated if we can live with the easements that are attached to the property and if we saw a final copy of opinion.\u00a0 Hatala gave a summary in respect to the easements.<\/p>\n
Entry 14 \u2013 Interstate Power and Light for electrical transmission line purposes.\u00a0 Due to the nature of the legal description, Hektoen cannot determine the exact location of the easement.<\/p>\n
Entry 15 \u2013 same as 14<\/p>\n
Entry 30 \u2013 public highway purposes and is most likely the county road.\u00a0 There isn\u2019t a plat or survey so Hektoen is unable \u00a0to show location exactly.<\/p>\n
Entry 35 \u2013 This is a road easement to Delaware county\u00a0 and it appears to be the same easement as entry 30 but can\u2019t be sure because of the legal description.<\/p>\n
Entry 188 \u2013 this grants Peck\u2019s property the right to utilize a water well on adjacent property and grants the property owner of the well access to the lake over property owned by Peck and reasonable dock space.\u00a0 This may be a little concerning since \u2018reasonable\u2019 is not defined. Also the owner of the Peck property is prohibited from improving the structure more than one level.<\/pre>\nEntry 213 \u2013 this agreement allows the owner of the Peck property access to a well on adjoing property but different adjoing from the previous entry 188.<\/p>\n
Basically we have 2 Interstate Power and Light easements for transmission lines.\u00a0 Entries 30 and 35 are highway and county road easements and then we have a well easement over the Peck property and include access for dock space along the shore.\u00a0 Hektoen joined the \u00a0meeting while discussing the easements.\u00a0 In Hektoen\u2019s opinion the only one of concern is the dock space along the shore line.\u00a0 There is some sort of path that has been used in the past and believes whatever the past practice is will be used.\u00a0 We may be able to renegotiate with the property owner.\u00a0 Leonard asked if any reason to believe that in these easements, if we use this property for portage, is there \u00a0anything restricting us from doing that.\u00a0 Hektoen indicated that as long as portage doesn\u2019t interfere with existing easements the District should be ok.\u00a0 Easement is held by owner of property and the District could offer additional easement to the public as long as it does not impair the access to the lake property easement held by the other property owner.\u00a0 Leonard asked if any restriction to access to the lake bed itself in terms of us working in river bed. Hektoen stated that the lake bed is described in deed from LDRA to Maxwell\u2019s (predecessor to Peck).\u00a0 A quiet title was given (after the lawsuit with LDRA, Rocky Nook and Peck) and the court did not make a ruling as to where the center of the river is.\u00a0 What is surmised is that it is at right angles of the exterior boundaries of the Peck \u00a0property.\u00a0 There was no survey of the property and 2 drawings were presented during the case but the court did not make a ruling.\u00a0 This is a risk that is inherent with purchasing this property.\u00a0 Davidson asked about surveys and if any were found?\u00a0 Hecktoen said there were plenty of surveys of the land but no definitive survey of the lake itself and \u00a0that is why it is called a quiet title so we would get whatever right LDRA has when we finalize the land transfer agreement with them.\u00a0 Rocky Nook would still have quiet title. \u00a0How far downstream are we buying is what we don\u2019t know.\u00a0 We don\u2019t know the exterior boundaries of the lake bed.\u00a0 Davidson asked about dock space and it doesn\u2019t say what has to be provided.\u00a0 Hektoen said that is correct but it will probably be determined by past practice.\u00a0 One dock and boat lift were there before per Davidson. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Leonard asked Hektoen about the IDNR Time of Transfer waiver statement and if we need to take action tonight.\u00a0 Hektoen said will receive the warranty deed and ground water hazard statement from Peck at closing.\u00a0 Attached to the ground water hazard statement will be this document and will need to indicate that in lieu of raising the building, the district could take the toilet seat off and cap the system with cement.\u00a0 This document does not reflect that and will have to be changed and Hektoen is working with Dennis Lyons at the County to get that done.\u00a0 Hektoen recommend not to sign this document tonight as the resolution will allow Leonard to sign this document, once the agreement from the county to allow capping of the toilet is complete.\u00a0 Hatala says Resolution 12.20.12 allows the President to finalize the\u00a0 documents to complete the purchase of the property.\u00a0 The signing of the IDNR document would be within the authority of this motion.\u00a0 Individual roll call requested.\u00a0 All ayes, motion passed.\u00a0 Leonard said Kramer will go to courthouse tomorrow so can get funding process to move forward so the documents needs to get to the auditor tomorrow.\u00a0\u00a0 Hektoen said closing will be done remotely and Hektoen will work with Peck attorney as to how to get the checks to the bank.\u00a0 Someone needs to go to recorder with transfer tax and documents.\u00a0 Hektoen left call.<\/p>\n
Public comment \u2013 Stender asked reason for the purchase of the Peck property.\u00a0 Leonard explained that the property lines as it relates to what is owned or controlled by the LDRA currently, (and then will be transferred to the District) was a gray area.\u00a0 We also needed the property for construction.\u00a0 Hughes said there was a lot more determined in the lawsuit. \u00a0\u00a0Hatala said in contact with Mitvalsky, attorney for LDRA.\u00a0 Hatala said the results of the lawsuit are not as clear as some might argue.\u00a0 Stender thought Rocky Nook owned some of the area.\u00a0 Stender asked if the District owns from the Peck property to the Pottebaum property.\u00a0 That will be the intention and the purchase of this property takes away the gray area.\u00a0 Stender asked how much Peck asked for the property and Leonard indicated it was his understanding that it was originally for sale for approximately $170,000.\u00a0 Hughes doesn\u2019t understand why we are saying a survey will answer the question because we know exactly where property ends and the levy went under the water\u2019s edge.\u00a0 Hatala says doesn\u2019t have court decisions in front of him and if we have a specific question that is being raised we can take it and get the answer back to the board.\u00a0 Hatala needs to have the documents to readily answer any question. \u00a0Hughes said was the purchase of the Peck property going to go all the way to the ownership of what the LDRA\u00a0 had.\u00a0 Rocky Nook was granted ownership of the concrete part of the south side of dam at that time and still owns that.\u00a0 Schneider said we are talking about the riverbed not about what is on the previous cement side of the dam.\u00a0 Stender asked if we are going to try to purchase Rocky Nook.\u00a0\u00a0 Leonard said exploring all alternatives.\u00a0 Rocky Nook owns their piece of\u00a0 property and our understanding is that the Peck property owns the river bed per Gibbs Engineering.\u00a0 The Peck property goes to the center.\u00a0 Stender asked if can move forward with or without Nook property.\u00a0 Leonard said working through that issue.\u00a0\u00a0 Schneider said should help with public access as well.<\/p>\n
Stender asked about time line and stated he was disappointed that time line wasn\u2019t on the agenda.\u00a0 The goal is to have a meeting next week to detail it.\u00a0 Kray said her intention of having time line on agenda is to discuss critical factors.<\/p>\n
Stender asked if progress on easements for flood plain.\u00a0 Leonard said a lot of communication being done by District\u2019s engineering firm.\u00a0 Hatala hasn\u2019t been able to speak with Holman to get status. \u00a0On the fishladder issue, the University of Iowa has given a summary of what is deemed possible at no charge to the District.\u00a0 With their experience, they have detailed what they believe can be done and if it is feasible.\u00a0 Stanley is finalizing a draft and Stanley is doing a final case report as to why they have always said is not workable.\u00a0 Should have a final draft within a week or two.<\/p>\n
Stender asked if the Public access plan will be put on web site and Kray said will add it.<\/p>\n
Stender stated that he will be at boat shows and it would be nice if had easel with bullet points on what is going on with Lake Delhi.\u00a0 A lot of people ask what is the status.<\/p>\n
Cooey-Lux says people are losing faith on the lake that we are going to get the lake back so we need items like that to show accomplishments and where we are headed<\/p>\n
Schneider made motion to adjourn, Davidson second.\u00a0 Motion passed.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District Board of Trustees Meeting December 20, 2012 \u2013 5:00 p.m. Maquoketa Valley Middle School Conference Room The meeting of the Combined Lake Delhi Recreational Facility and Water Quality District Board … Continue reading