This transcript is from a **White Bear Lake City Council** meeting. Based on the context provided, here is the formatted transcript with speaker names. **Note on Speakers:** * **Mayor:** Dan Melotik (presiding) * **Mr. Copy:** Paul Koppy (Public Works Director/City Engineer) * **Miss Crawford:** Lindy Crawford (City Manager) * **Council Members:** Walsh, Edberg, Hughes, Engstrand, and West. *** [0:28] (Silence/Background noise) [0:58] (Silence/Background noise) [1:28] (Silence/Background noise) [1:58] (Silence/Background noise) [2:28] (Silence/Background noise) [2:58] (Silence/Background noise) [3:28] (Silence/Background noise) [4:03] **Mayor:** Attendance rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible. All right, let's jump into the minutes. Item 2A, minutes of the City Council work session on February 18th. I’d entertain a motion to approve those minutes. [4:24] **Council Member Walsh:** So moved. **Mayor:** Second? All those in favor say Aye. (Council: Aye). Any opposed? Minutes—one abstention—the minutes are approved. Item 2B, minutes of the regular City Council meeting on February 25th, 2025. I'd entertain a motion to approve those minutes. **Council Member:** Second. **Mayor:** Motion and a second. All those in favor say Aye. (Council: Aye). Any opposed? Minutes are approved. Item three, adoption of the agenda. I'll note that we have an update to item 4C to the resolution and memorandum shifting the setup from Saturday morning to Friday after 7 p.m. If there are no other corrections or changes to the agenda, I'd entertain a motion to adopt the agenda. Have a motion, a second. All those in favor say Aye. (Council: Aye). Any opposed? We have an agenda. Item four, consent agenda. I’d entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda as updated. **Council Member:** So moved. **Mayor:** Motion and a second. All those in favor say Aye. (Council: Aye). Any opposed? Motion carries. Item five, visitors and presentations. Nothing scheduled. Item 6A, the 2025 Pavement Rehabilitation Project ordering improvements, approving plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisements for bid. Mr. Copy. [5:57] **Mr. Copy:** Thank you, Mayor, members of the Council. Tonight we have our next steps of our 2025 Pavement Rehabilitation Project. Tonight we'll have a public hearing and just go over a little bit of the background of the project first. So, the 2025 Pavement Rehabilitation Project is Division Avenue from Fifth Street up to the north city limits at the railroad tracks, and then 12th Street from Division Avenue to Long Avenue. Each year, staff goes through and looks at and comes up with basically a five-year plan of what we need to look at for pavement maintenance. Typically, for a full reconstruction, we're looking at about a 50-year life cycle. On the mill and overlay side of things, we're looking at about a 25-year life cycle. [6:43] **Mr. Copy:** So we try to stagger those so that we maximize the life of our roadways. This year, Division Avenue is about 0.64 miles, and that's just a mill and overlay. 12th Street, which is one of the roads that does not have curb and gutter and is not up to our current municipal standard, that's 0.17 miles. So we're doing about 0.8 miles of roadway this year. Back on February 11th, Council adopted or accepted the feasibility study. From an engineering standpoint, in order to assess any portion of a project, we need to find that the project is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible. That's required by State Statute 429. That was accepted by Council on February 11th, moving us to the next step where Council ordered a public hearing tonight. [7:30] **Mr. Copy:** Again, the extent of the project: reconstruction with adding curb and gutter to 12th Street, mill and overlay and some curb repairs on Division Avenue. We're going to extend a piece of sidewalk which will tie into the work that the high school did; that'll go from Division Court up to the south entrance of Wild Marsh to give that neighborhood access to the sidewalk system within the city. We're going to do some storm sewer repairs. Additions will be on 12th Street—currently no curb and gutter, just kind of a real rudimentary shallow ditch system along there. So we will be adding storm sewer. Some of it will flow back to the west to the storm sewer on Division Avenue and the rest of it, about a third of it, will go east to Long Avenue into a system along the railroad there. [8:17] **Mr. Copy:** We'll also look at some water and sanitary sewer repairs. We always like to get in and do some of the underground repairs and replace valves and hydrants as needed so that we don't disrupt that new street after a few years. Then we'll also work with the private utilities to get any work that they need done. A lot of that's been done already, but we are coordinating with them to make sure that it is all complete so that they don't damage our new roadway. So the estimated project costs for this year: the total estimated improvement cost is $1,382,400. Of that, we typically assess about a third of our projects; that's been historic practice through the city's assessment policy. [9:02] **Mr. Copy:** So we'll be assessing about a little over $300,000, and then just over a million will be paid through city funds, primarily through bonding. As far as estimated assessments go for single-family, we're looking at, for reconstruction, anywhere between $2,800 and a little over $6,000. If we find they need to do any sewer or water service work, those numbers are there as well. We will do those inspections as we move forward with the project to make sure that, at least as we sit today, it appears that all of the homes up there are up to date, but we'll work with the residents as we get going with the project. [9:48] **Mr. Copy:** And then the mill and overlay portion of the project along Division, the assessments are between $1,000 and $2,400. So you can see why we want to try to do those staggered approaches to pavement maintenance—to help save a lot of costs. A resident's share of maintaining the road for 25 years at that price is pretty good. The assessment payments would be paid over a 15-year period. The interest rate that we charge residents is 2% over the bond rate. In 2024, that was 5.42%. This would be payable on the 2026 taxes. [10:34] **Mr. Copy:** As we go into the schedule, we had the neighborhood meeting last year. We ordered the feasibility study. The most recent action was receiving the study and ordering the hearing on February 11th. We're here tonight to hold the public hearing. If Council chooses to move forward, they would order plans and specs and authorize staff to go for bids. We would anticipate a late April contract award. With road restrictions going on pretty early, we would anticipate a pretty early start date. However, we will work around the school district schedule. There's work that we might be able to get out there and do with school in session, but the majority of the disruption will be after school is out. Construction will go, we're anticipating, May through October—we're hoping it will be much sooner than that due to the size and scope. Then the assessment hearing we would have sometime in September. [12:06] **Mr. Copy:** Tonight we will hold the public hearing. That is an opportunity for residents or property owners with interest in the project to speak either for or against if they so wish. Council will then deliberate and, if Council wants to move forward, staff would recommend adoption of the attached resolution. With that, I would recommend we hold the public hearing. **Mayor:** Thank you, Mr. Copy. At this time, I will open up the public hearing. I have two names on my list. I will just remind folks that this is a public hearing for the Pavement Rehabilitation Project and that issue only. I have the first name on my list as a resident at 2191 12th Street. If you could state your name and address for the record, that would be great. Thank you. [12:57] **Chad (Resident):** Chad, 2191 12th Street. Um, I’m gonna say I’m against this due to—I got a couple of kids and it’s not really in my budget. Also, I’m speaking for a couple of the residents that are also next to me that my parents own for rentals. They’re trying to have a small, easy living, and they’re going to have to raise their rent up on them, and they’ll possibly end up leaving because it might be too high. They’re just trying to have like an affordable living. So, I think it’s a little out of my budget as well, and it feels like I’m taking away from my two boys. So, I think that’s about it. Thank you. **Mayor:** Yeah, appreciate it. Thank you. All right, I've got a resident at 2154 12th Street. [14:05] **John Moran (Resident):** John Moran, 2154 12th Street. I’ve lived in that house for 27 years, raised my family there. The street improvements that I see that could be done there would be just a nice mill and overlay. The drainage seems to be going pretty nice down there; I don’t believe we need curb and gutter. If you come through and take curb and gutter, you’re going to come in about 10–12 feet into my yard along with the rest of the residents. There’s a house right now, if you were to cut that much back, you’d be like six inches from his front window. You know, I understand about sewer and water—that’s what I do for a living. And then along with Division Avenue, the school came in and put that mega campus down there. We talked about it and it just basically got jammed in there. [14:51] **John Moran:** That’s where all the extra heavy-duty traffic is coming from. The buses used to come up and down 12th Street all the time. I have friends that work in the water and sewer departments in different cities; they say those water lines and sewer lines can be sleeved—they put a tube inside of them and reconstruct them to make them last longer than the life expectancy. I received a notice from the city; my bill alone for 80 feet of frontage is $6,800. That seems like a lot of money for 80 feet of road in front of my house. And with the schools, parents park on both sides of the street in the afternoon. We still have that traffic even though the city promised us we wouldn’t have the bus traffic. You’re putting a burden on all the neighbors. Mr. Chad said his parents own rental properties. We've got a couple elderly couples. I’m not against mill and overlay, but I don’t believe we need storm sewer, sidewalk, or curb and gutter. Thank you. [16:23] **Mayor:** Thank you. All right, those are all the names on my list, but anyone else who would like to speak to this issue is welcome to do so now, please. **Val Hansen (Resident):** Hello, Val Hansen. I live at 5118 Wild Marsh Drive and I’m supportive of the project. Wild Marsh, we have the two driveways and we are interested in having a concrete apron added to our driveway. I just wanted to check the timing with the engineer; when does he need to know our final yes or no? [17:09] **Mr. Copy:** Mayor, members of the Council. We will be following this meeting by sending out some information to residents. Typically, we send those letters out once we get the bid award so that we know the exact cost from the contractor. So we expect that sometime in mid-April. Residents will have their opportunity to enter into that driveway program. We’ll do an estimate and give a few weeks to make that decision. **Val Hansen:** Okay, thanks. I just didn’t want to miss the deadline. Thank you. **Mayor:** All right, anyone else? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and bring it back to the Council. Council questions for Mr. Copy or comments? Council Member Walsh. [17:55] **Council Member Walsh:** Well, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm just thinking about what we just heard. What are the options on payment? I mean, obviously, you can pay it all at once, but some of these numbers are pretty big. You can have it added to your property taxes over 15 years. Are there some other programs or relief extensions available to residents? [18:40] **Mr. Copy:** Mayor, members of the Council. The two options are to pay up front—and then you don't get levied any interest—or to let it go to your property taxes over a 15-year period at the rate of the bond plus 2%. There are senior deferral options. We'll provide information on those deferment options if they qualify for it. [19:25] **Council Member Walsh:** Just a comment on curbs and gutters. A lot of times folks from the neighborhood say they don't need it. We appreciate the current people saying that, but one of the philosophies is that you probably won't live there forever. We've been doing curb and gutter everywhere across the city. We pretty much have said it's what the city is doing citywide. It's for the city for the long run. Thank you. **Mayor:** Anyone else? Council Member Edberg. [20:12] **Council Member Edberg:** Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Copy, for the situations described at the mic—would you make the case for curb and gutter and the "whole nine yards" on 12th Street? Where is that recommendation coming from? **Mr. Copy:** Mayor, members of the Council. As Council Member Walsh stated, the goal and practice of the city is to urbanize. Curb helps with traffic and parking issues, better defines the roadway, is easier to plow, and manages storm water better. It increases value to properties. We look at adding value to the neighborhood. [21:46] **Mr. Copy:** I will mention we will be doing minor sewer and water repairs—replacing an old hydrant or a valve that's not working—not a wholesale replacement. The project generally entails just a few utility repairs versus wholesale replacement. **Council Member Edberg:** And what would be the reason we can’t have the curb and gutter without a full reconstruction? **Mr. Copy:** Mayor, members of the Council. 12th Street is quite an old roadway. We drill cores down to see what's under there. It’s substandard. There's not enough gravel under it for today's standards. Even if we didn't add curb and gutter, we would still have to tear out all of that material and put new gravel in to a current standard. 12th Street really needs to be completely removed and replaced. [23:20] **Council Member Edberg:** Can you comment on the houses referenced? If we are taking right-of-way and bringing it within a narrow space of an existing home, what have your studies shown? **Mr. Copy:** Mayor, members of the Council. Per our current plans, we're not impacting outside of the right-of-way. We're 10 feet back in some areas to grade out; we replace that and resod it. If it is a driveway, we saw-cut and replace it. I'm not aware of any houses that we're getting that close to outside of the right-of-way. [24:55] **Council Member Edberg:** And my last question: senior deferral. Does that only apply to owners who are seniors, or is it available to renters who are seniors? **Mr. Copy:** Mayor, members of the Council. It’s available only to the property owners because the assessment is levied to the property, not the renter. There may be other county programs for renters, and we can help steer them in that direction. **Mayor:** Any other thoughts? I'd entertain a motion to approve the resolution. **Council Member Edberg:** I approve. **Mayor:** I have a motion. Do I have a second? (Silence). This fails for lack of a second. **Council Member Edberg:** Mr. Mayor, can we have some conversation? [25:40] **Mayor:** I'm happy to have the conversation. Would someone like to second it and then I would say is there any further discussion? **Council Member Walsh:** I'll second for purposes of discussion. **Mayor:** Is there any further discussion? **Council Member Edberg:** Well, I'm trying to understand where our three other council members are. Member Walsh has spoken; I'm trying to understand the issues preventing others from supporting. **Council Member Hughes:** Mr. Mayor, I think that I just did not do my own homework in terms of going to the street and actually seeing the impact it would have. I guess I should ask Mr. Copy—I understand right-of-way, but how much is going to be taken that someone is currently using as a yard? Are we going to widen the street? [27:17] **Mr. Copy:** Mayor, members of the Council. The actual bituminous mat will become a consistent width. We are generally going to straighten that out. What they see as usable width of the roadway today generally won't change. We're talking about a foot or two, not 10 feet. **Council Member Hughes:** Okay, that makes me feel a little better. **Mayor:** Mr. Copy, is there anything unique or peculiar about this project that differentiates it from what we've been doing every year for three decades? **Mr. Copy:** Mayor, members of the Council. It is very typical of just about any neighborhood that we go in. **Mayor:** All right, I've had a motion and a second. **Council Member Edberg:** I'm in my 16th year on this Council, and this is the first time I've experienced this kind of a conversation at the Council table for a street project. [29:34] **Council Member West:** So, more or less, it was kind of sticker shock for me. I take it really seriously when people say it's hard to afford things. Mr. Copy, if somebody decided to pay that $6,800 over 15 years, what would that be? **Mr. Copy:** $453 per year on your annual property taxes, before interest. **Council Member West:** Okay, I just wanted to get a measure of that. Thank you. **Mayor:** All those in favor say Aye. (Council: Aye). Any opposed? Motion carries. The resolution has passed. Item 7A, Public Dog Beach operations at Matoska Park. Mr. Copy. [31:53] **Mr. Copy:** All right, me again. I'll go fairly fast on the history. It goes back to the 2007 era. Council designated off-leash areas at Lakewood Hills, Varney, and Matoska. In 2017, the Parks Commission recommended closure, but Council kept it open. In 2021, public concerns were heard once again—more people were using the park. In 2022, the Parks Commission recommended keeping it open with provisions like fencing and signage. In 2024, we worked with law enforcement and found a clash with the code regarding the leash requirement. The ordinance was different from the 2017 language, so police weren't able to do enforcement. [34:10] **Mr. Copy:** The Parks Commission said we should remove the dog leash requirement to align with city code and didn't see an issue with it. They recommended extending the buoys another 50 feet and supported seasonal CSOs (Community Service Officers). Tonight, staff was asked to bring back two resolutions: one to direct continued operations with improvements, and a second option to terminate operations. With that, I'd be happy to answer questions. **Mayor:** Thank you. It makes sense that the resolution deciding whether to close it or not is where we start the conversation. I'll kick things off with a thank you to the residents who sent emails. I'd entertain a motion to approve the second resolution, which closes the dog beach. [37:14] **Council Member Walsh:** I'd move that. I have one question for staff—the last clause about the City Manager bringing forward a proposal to amend municipal code. Is that necessary? **Miss Crawford (City Manager):** Mayor, Council Member Walsh. In 2007, the Council amended code to allow three off-leash areas. More research needs to be done regarding if code needs to be brought back for amendments to align with current practice. **Council Member Walsh:** Good, then we'll leave it in. I voiced that night that I'm leaning towards closing the beach. This thing has become a victim of its own success. It just doesn't fit in this small spot in this neighborhood. Water quality isn't the issue, but noise is a legitimate concern. This is a constant noise issue in one spot for years. [42:36] **Council Member Walsh:** We have this conflict where the sign says dogs must be on a leash, but code says they don't have to be in designated areas. The solution—taking them off-leash—makes the problem worse for the neighbors. A lot of people say if we close the beach, it'll be an enforcement problem. Maybe temporarily, but over time the word will get out that there is no dog beach. I don't think we've had our best moment of civility in this debate. I've asked how to balance a popular amenity with neighborhood rights, and I didn't get much help. We usually listen to the neighbors, like we did on the Coulter/Belair project. We aren't listening very well here. I'm moving the resolution to close it, and I pledge to find another location. [48:46] **Council Member Engstrand:** I'd like to add an amendment to close the 7th Street swim beach also, for the same reasons. It's too small and too loud. **Mayor:** Do I have a second? (Silence). The motion fails for lack of a second. Council Member Engstrand, help me understand that. Are you saying kids and dogs are the same? **Council Member Engstrand:** Well, you're worried about noise. Kids are there for 4 or 5 hours. Dogs are there for 20 minutes. Kids are yelling and screaming. If you're going to complain about the dogs, you got to complain about the people. [51:52] **Mayor:** I think the sound of children playing is not the same as excessive dog barking. I've heard from many residents who tried to approach dog beach users and were met with contempt and disrespect. I've witnessed that with my own two eyes. As someone who stood on the Park Commission in 2017, the idea that people who want to close it are "anti-dog" isn't the case. I love my border collie. This is an argument of finite space. We've tried fences, buoys, and doggy bags, and the complaints have only grown. It diverts public safety resources away from important things. That's why I urge the Council to close it. [1:00:48] **Council Member Edberg:** I am convinced this is not an issue of public safety or water quality. I am convinced we have an issue with our leash laws and enforcement. However, I have not been convinced by the evidence presented to date. It's all anecdotal from the neighbors. I am prepared to vote no on the motion in front of us. I'm not sure we've spent enough time looking at alternatives, like Ramsey County sites. **Mayor:** Council Member Edberg, were you struck by the fact that former Council Member Fraser, who supported this in 2007, now says what it has morphed into is not what he supported? [1:04:39] **Mayor:** And what about the dad who has to physically restrain unruly dogs to protect his small children? How do I justify that to him? **Council Member Edberg:** It exists all over the city. A wise parent exercises caution in public places. **Mayor:** There’s a concentration there. This gentleman was at the 7th Street swim dock, and a dog came over from the dog beach. You have to give deference to the people who live nearby. I get it's tough to say something unpopular to a crowd, but our charge is to provide services that don't override people's enjoyment of their homes. [1:10:51] **Council Member Engstrand:** There is no leash law in Matoska Park anyway, so even if you close the dog beach, the dogs still don't have to be on a leash. **Mayor:** That's the second part of the resolution—to undesignate it. **Council Member Edberg:** My issue is the process. We haven't looked hard enough at the alternative location. I accept it might be in the wrong place, but in the meantime, I have documentation from 100 citizen visits that carries weight. **Mayor:** With all due respect to the Parks Commission, I simply disagree. They voted 6-0 to close it in 2017. People who live there every day have the most credibility. [1:18:53] **Council Member West:** I just wanted to be clear: 291 White Bear Lake residents signed the petition to keep it open. I fundamentally have an issue with closing a public amenity without having another resource available. **Mayor:** 736 residents opposed it. This is not about being "pro-dog" or "anti-dog." It's whether we have a discrete problem we can fix. [1:22:44] **Council Member Hughes:** Council Member Edberg, what kind of evidence would convince you? I have sent dozens of pictures of dogs off-leash and issues at the swim dock. I would sit down there for 3 hours every Friday and take photos. It’s not just two parents; it's a real issue. The dog beach is shared with the swim dock, the yacht dock, and the boat launch. Owners haven't done their job of keeping dogs in that space. There is an incentive problem—if we keep this one open, there is no incentive to find another one. I prefer we close this location and find a different one. [1:40:27] **Council Member West:** I wanted to ask about the conflict of interest regarding Council Member Hughes living near the beach. **City Attorney:** Mayor, Council. I was asked about this. It's not a disqualifying interest. It’s a policy call, not a financial interest. She is not required to recuse herself. **Council Member Walsh:** It’s an absurd question. Let’s vote. **Mayor:** All those in favor of the resolution terminating the dog beach say Aye. (Walsh, Hughes, Mayor: Aye). Any opposed? (Edberg, West, Engstrand: No). By a vote of 3 to 2, the motion fails—wait, it’s 3 to 2, so it passes? *(Correction: The transcript indicates it fails, likely due to a 4/5ths requirement or a miscount in the live audio, but the dialogue says "3 to 2 the motion fails.")* [1:43:37] **Mayor:** We have another resolution approving continued operations and ordering improvements. **Council Member Edberg:** I’m not seeing a need for us to take action. I’d like to launch an investigation into an alternative site. **Mayor:** I personally think repealing the leash requirement is ridiculous. **Council Member Walsh:** I'd move that we direct staff and the Parks Commission to do a feasibility study of options to move the dog beach, with a report back by October 1st. **Council Member Edberg:** Second. **Mayor:** All those in favor? (Council: Aye). Motion carries. Staff is so directed. [2:02:01] **Council Member West:** Do we need to change the municipal code for the dog leashes so it matches? **City Attorney:** Yes, to write tickets, it must be codified. **Mayor:** Let’s get that in the next meeting. Item 8A, Construction plans for Downtown parking lots. Mr. Copy. [2:08:56] **Mr. Copy:** At our workshop, Council directed staff to bring back a proposed parking lot project for 2025. There are four lots. Lot 1 at Third and Banning (built 1964) needs full reconstruction. Lot 2 behind Ace Hardware (built 1974) has an option to revise the layout but would require removing four mature oak trees. Lot 3 at Fifth and Cook and Lot 4 behind the Armory would also see improvements. Estimated cost is $1.7 million, funded through fund balance. We would start after Market Fest. We also have lighting, colored concrete, and signage to consider. [2:24:20] **Mayor:** I support taking the trees down to get 15 to 18 additional spots. We'll replace them elsewhere. I see this as a necessary predicate to the 2026 downtown street project. **Council Member Edberg:** I support the downward-facing lighting. I'm swayed by the argument of the city paying for this now without assessing the businesses, but we need a "sinking fund" so the next Council doesn't have this problem. I’m open to pay-to-park kiosks in the future. **Council Member Walsh:** I’ve warmed up to the idea of pay-to-park. Other cities like Hopkins and Stillwater do it. I move to approve the resolution. **Council Member:** Second. **Mayor:** All those in favor? (Council: Aye). Motion carries. Item 10, communication from the City Manager. [2:47:51] **Miss Crawford:** We have online engagement open for the zoning code update. Please go to our website and check your property. Also, the Real ID deadline is May 7, 2025. Our License Bureau is open for that. **Mayor:** I’d entertain a motion to adjourn. **Council Member:** Second. **Mayor:** All those in favor? (Council: Aye). We’re adjourned.