June 30, 2018

CLOSED DOOR MEETING ON WATER TOWER. As a result of questions raised about the commissioned water tower study at our last council meeting it was agreed to have some objective eyes review the report and to have the Fire Chiefs from St. Boni and Mound provide guidance on water storage needs for fire suppression. Fire suppression has been the primary reason given in the past for the urgency of a new water tower in the SW sector of the city but recent fire flow tests in that area have shown adequate flow rates well within standard requirements.

As the city council liaison on both the Mound and St. Boni Fire Commissions I informed the City Administrator that I expected to attend any meeting that was called with the two Fire Chiefs on this matter, my goal being to observe and ensure transparency. I was told, in no uncertain terms, he didn’t want me to attend and then I learned he met with both Fire Chiefs yesterday without informing me of the meeting. Not surprised. Millions are on the table and transparency will take a back seat.

As a council member and Minnetrista taxpayer I want to make sure we make decisions on infrastructure projects like this using unbiased advice from entities that don’t stand to profit from resulting contracts. If we legitimately need a water tower to support the SW area then we should build it but when the city insists on closed door meetings and intentionally avoids transparency it can’t help but breed distrust.

June 14, 2018

IF AND WHEN MINNETRISTA NEEDS ANOTHER WATER TOWER. A year ago we were told we desperately needed a new water tower in the southwest corner for fire suppression in the Hunters Crest area. We were told the hydrants there were only putting out 500 gallons per minute (gpm) which wasn’t sufficient and water tanker trucks were still needed for fire calls there. Turns out that’s not true. I requested we have the hydrants tested for flow rates and the report we received actually shows flow rates there of 1000-1200 gpm. So it appears the urgency is no longer an emergency. Don’t expect the urgency to go away though…there are millions of dollars at stake here and we will still see a frantic push to buy land and build a tower anyway. You’ll hear that we urgently need it for future population growth but the historically exaggerated population numbers used (see pop growth chart), even if accepted as accurate, show that need isn’t until 2030 if (and that’s a big if) that growth materializes.

If those inflated population numbers don’t materialize after the city purchases revenue bonds (which are normally paid back with user fees) it will be all Minnetrista taxpayers left holding the bag. We need to make sure, before spending millions on a huge infrastructure project like this, that we are making decisions based on accurate, factual information and not on overblown predictions that may never materialize. We can’t let vendors pressure the city to line their pockets and cause Minnetrista to take on growth just to pay off debt.

No automatic alt text available.

June 8, 2018

IF YOU THINK YOUR PROPERTY TAX VALUATION IS TOO HIGH you’re likely right and can do something about it…next year. I called the number on our 2019 property tax statement in March to have the assessor come out and they reduced our valuation by $80K for 2019. My neighbors who did the same received a SIX FIGURE REDUCTION! Property valuations go up AND DOWN all the time due to a variety of factors in the marketplace. Unfortunately if you don’t get an evaluation of your specific property the formula used for the entire city will apply and you’ll likely see some big increases. You can call the assessor’s office or come to the open book meeting at city hall each spring to challenge your valuation. Don’t be afraid of the tax assessor. They are generally reasonable and fair, at least in Minnetrista.

More: https://www.americanexperiment.org/2018/06/minneapolis-property-owners-winning-war-tax-assessor/

May 23, 2018

Very disappointed in the decision Monday night to ban all short term rentals without an exclusion for owner occupied properties or a grandfathering provision for existing vacation rental properties. It is sad we’ve let some very vocal residents trample on the property rights of our entire community. We could have kept new vacation rental properties out of Minnetrista residential areas while protecting those in our community that have been operating responsibly in the past.

May 23, 2018

Regarding the private message some of you (perhaps all of you?) received from the person behind the “Our Minnetrista” organization, I WILL PUBLICLY ADDRESS EACH LIE IN HIS MESSAGE:

1. “I supported her candidacy”. Prior to the election my neighbors reported they had found flyers from this organization campaigning against me. I did meet with the Our Minnetrista representatives when I filed to run but as soon as they discovered I wasn’t going to be a rubber stamp for the Mayor or staff they launched an effort to derail my campaign.

2. He claims the road budget was “slashed during the preceding four years.” The point here is that it wasn’t “slashed” 128% and that was the increase being considered. Yes, the road budget needed an increase but 128%, in my opinion, was extreme.

3. He claims “Council Member Bruce refused to answer my questions.” He never asked me a question but rather spoke at a public hearing where he had three uninterrupted minutes to speak. He never addressed a question to me. I, however, did ask the Mayor for an opportunity to respond to his allegations of being misled and stated that all the statements I had made in an op/ed column in the Laker were accurate and I stood behind them.

4. He claims to have been misled to think the 4.35% increase in the city’s tax levy (which just means the city’s budget) translated to a 4.35% increase in his property tax bill. That is just ignorance, but understandable given the complicated nature of property tax calculations in Minnesota. Many Minnetrista residents saw increases of more than 5% in the city portion of their property tax bill for 2018. Those figures are publicly available and easy to prove.

5. Lastly, in the MG blog post that seems to have ignited this smear campaign I was not questioning whether or not it was the “right decision” to pull snow plows off the city roads during a snow storm. I was questioning the decision to make a public announcement on the city’s website that they were being pulled because of blizzard conditions. That announcement, in my opinion, was unnecessary in the first place and, secondly, didn’t state the real reason for pulling the plows which had more to do with staffing levels than anything else. If I make a mistake I will apologize for it but I don’t apologize for what others do.

No automatic alt text available.

Short Term Rentals May 21, 2018

I’m hoping reason and common sense will prevail this evening and the council will realize that everyone has property rights, not just the loud and vocal. The easy, politically expedient path to take on short term rentals is to just ban them without considering future litigation, the hardship caused to responsible owners that have earned a livelihood from their businesses and who will have their investments destroyed by a piece of irresponsible legislation. Let’s address this issue responsibly and comply with Minnesota state law that protects property owners from having the rules changed to deny previously allowed uses. It’s the right thing to do.

We can find a way to prevent future properties intended solely as vacation rentals from locating in Minnetrista’s residential areas without trampling on the property rights of responsible people.

May 18, 2018

A CAMPAIGN TO DISCREDIT THIS BLOG IS UNDERWAY by supporters of the Mayor, specifically the individual behind the “Our Minnetrista” campaign that supported the Mayor’s candidacy. Blog followers have reported to me they’ve received personal messages alleging misinformation on the blog and casting doubt on my integrity. The person sending these messages is too cowardly to identify a single fact they can prove is untrue but rather chooses to go behind my back and make allegations. These tactics are precisely why I started this blog, to have a public forum out in the open where people can judge for themselves what the truth is. I encourage any of my readers to contact me directly if they have questions about anything on the blog. This person is too cowardly to do that knowing his underhanded deceit will be called out. It is sad that a council member can’t express viewpoints that don’t coincide with the Mayor’s without being personally attacked.

Image may contain: one or more people and text

May 17, 2018

MINNETRISTA PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE BEING TARGETED and homeowners that have been able for decades to rent out their homes as vacation rentals will no longer be able to do so if a proposed ordinance passes next week. Despite the fact there are no specific complaints on record relative to any short-term rental usage of any kind on any properties within Minnetrista, the city council seems poised to ban short term rentals of less than 30 days. People that invested hundreds of thousands of dollars to purchase a house as a vacation rental business and have been responsible property owners for decades will have their businesses taken away by the city. So far there appears to be no inclination to grandfather these soon to be non-conforming properties as Minnesota state law requires (Minn. Stat. Section 462.357, subd. 1e).

What the city has done in the proposed ordinance is declared all short term rentals a public nuisance (which clearly they all are not as most have been operating responsibly for decades). In Minnesota, state law requires a standard of proof that a city must meet before declaring something a public nuisance, otherwise a local government could just arbitrarily declare anything they wanted to control, or get rid of, a nuisance (lawn mowers, dogs, etc.). That standard requires proof of a number of separate behavioral incidents committed within the previous 12 months. This standard has not been met by the city of Minnetrista and leaves the city wide open for litigation if it chooses not to grandfather these non-conforming properties and to make provisions for them in this ordinance.

The city council is unanimous in the desire to prevent future properties from being purchased in Minnetrista solely as vacation rentals in residentially zoned neighborhoods. There are constitutional issues involved, however, that need to be addressed in this ordinance to avoid taxpayer dollars from being needlessly spent on future litigation that could’ve been foreseen.

May 8, 2018

Property rights in Minnetrista are being threatened by a proposed ban on the long established, legitimate use of property to generate income for homeowners. Short term rentals (STRs) have been in the news a lot recently with the popularity of VRBO, Airbnb and other sites that make it easy for homeowners to manage renting their properties. Several homes have been purchased in Minnetrista solely for that purpose where the owner resides elsewhere. There are state laws that protect homeowners from local governments changing the rules and leaving them high and dry without grandfathering what was previously a legitimate use, but cities can circumvent those state laws by declaring something a public nuisance and that appears to be the route Minnetrista is taking. Obviously not all short term rentals are a public nuisance or the city would be overrun with complaints and so far they don’t have any documented complaints due to short term rental usage on any properties within the city. I guess the city thinks by simply announcing STRs are public nuisances it makes it so?

The only good thing that came from last night’s council meeting on the subject was an agreement to carve out some kind of exemption for people that actually live in their home. Staff seemed rather confused about what that should look like though. Should it exempt them entirely? Should the frequency be limited? Should certain activities be banned? The Mayor read off a list of things she suggested should be prohibited including dogs, wedding parties, parties of more than 6 people, parking on city streets, etc., etc… I don’t know how staff can possibly bring back a solid, enforceable ordinance when we don’t even understand the problem yet. Understanding just doesn’t appear to be a priority…