TOWER— City officials here reacted mostly with a shrug to a letter from Greenwood Township rejecting participation in a joint powers board that would oversee the operations of the Tower Area Ambulance Service. The council showed little enthusiasm for a request by Greenwood officials that the city solicit a private ambulance provider.
The ambulance issues were among a long list of items on the agenda for the Tower City Council’s regular monthly meeting, held Monday.
The city’s ambulance service has been facing financial challenges ever since converting to a costly paid on-call service in 2018, and the city has been subsidizing the service in recent years to help it meet its high monthly payroll, and the council approved another $5,000 transfer already made from the Hoodoo Point Campground at Monday’s meeting. So far this year, the city has transferred $20,000 to support the ambulance service, according to clerk-treasurer Michael Schultz.
The Tower Ambulance Commission, made up of representatives of various townships within the ambulance service territory had established a committee last year to develop ideas for assisting the ambulance service. That “ad hoc” committee has proposed the creation of a joint powers board to oversee operations of the ambulance service as well as a possible taxing district that would provide a stable, long-term funding source in addition to the fees the ambulance charges for medical runs.
But Greenwood, which did not participate on the committee and discontinued payments to the ambulance service last year, rejected the joint powers proposal in an undated letter to the city, signed by board chair John Bassing.
The township complained that it could not understand the numbers included in the ad hoc committee’s report. In addition, Bassing stated his conclusion that “Greenwood would be paying over 60 percent of the cost of the ambulance service while having only a 15 percent voting share.” Rather than work to stabilize the city’s ambulance service, the Greenwood board is asking the city to solicit proposals for a private provider that could offer full-time basic life support service and part-time advanced life support service to the area.
Tower Mayor Dave Setterberg noted that the ambulance commission was working on solutions and said it wouldn’t be fair for the city to take a unilateral approach while the ambulance commission was working on its own plan.
And Setterberg noted the history of dissatisfaction in Greenwood in recent years over ambulance issues. “When you look at the recent history over the last couple of years, some of the supervisors in Greenwood and community members have been very critical and rejected a lot of the findings of, first of all, the EMSRB, which is the state regulatory board. They didn’t agree with that. The Tower business plan was the next thing that was basically rejected,” he said. Setterberg noted that Greenwood opposed participation with the ad hoc committee, and essentially rejected the findings and conclusion of the McGrath study that Greenwood commissioned. “I could go on with even more than that that but I’m not going to but with all aforementioned findings being rejected by Greenwood, I’m kind of wondering why they would believe us now if we went and did an RFP.”
Council member Kevin Norby, who had attended a recent Greenwood meeting in hopes of fielding questions about the joint powers proposal, said he didn’t feel the supervisors were interested in hearing from him. “That was the impression I got from being there. The other impression I got was I really felt like they are wanting to see the ambulance fail and hopefully something else takes its place,” said Norby. “I appreciate Greenwood’s feedback, but I would appreciate it more if they’re giving us feedback on what they will do versus just saying ‘no.’ It feels like the goalposts keep getting pushed back. I invite them to come and sit down and talk to us about some of this stuff.”
Norby said he questioned Greenwood’s apparent suggestion that the township should have more votes on a joint powers board than other townships. “I would like to hear that explained,” he said.
After expressing their frustrations with the township, the council moved on without taking any action on Greenwood’s request.
County garage on the table
In other business, the council had its first extended discussion about the possibility of acquiring the county public works garage, which is being vacated later this summer.
A letter from the county suggests a purchase price of $260,000, but Setterberg noted that one of the appraisals came in significantly lower than that. “They had a low of about $180,000,” he said. Setterberg said the city found records of the original sale of the 30-acre site from the city to the county, back in 1988, for $8,000. “I think there’s some room for negotiation,” he said.
The bulk of the property value today is in the buildings, which include a nearly 5,000 square foot heated garage with a small office space, along with two or three other unheated storage buildings and a large parking lot for outdoor storage of equipment.
City officials have been talking behind the scenes with the county about the site since 2020, once the county board opted to relocate the facility to along Hwy. 135, south of Tower. But with the site now set to be vacated at the end of summer, the issue is finally coming to a decision point. It was clear that not everyone on the council was on board with a possible acquisition.
Setterberg noted a number of possible advantages of the site, which would allow public works staff to work on equipment, rather than job repairs out due to lack of shop space.
He said it would also free up city parcels on South Second and Lake Avenue, where the city maintains storage buildings, for possible sale or other uses.
“I’m hesitant,” said council member Kevin Norby, when asked about a possible purchase. “It sounds like a ‘nice to have,’ but I have a hard time justifying it in my own mind,” he said. “I’m not opposed to trying to learn more about it, but I think we have to put together a real good justification that it’s in the benefit of everybody.”
Council member Joe Morin agreed. “We definitely have to peel it back,” he said. “Maybe we need an ad hoc committee on this?”
“That’s what I’d like to see happen,” said Schultz.
“I would be happy to serve on that,” said Morin. After a bit more discussion, the council approved an ad hoc committee comprised of Morin, council member Bob Anderson, Schultz, and TEDA director Marshall Helmberger to serve on the committee and work quickly to come back with possible recommendations.
Support for chickens
In additional business, the council approved a resolution acknowledging the validity of a petition from city residents seeking a change in the city’s ordinance that would allow the keeping of chickens in town. Morin, who had taken up the issue as part of an ad hoc committee established last year, said that under the initiative portion of the city’s charter, the petition means the city has 60 days to enact an ordinance allowing the keeping of chickens or send the question to voters in a special election.
The city’s current ordinance prohibits the keeping of chickens, however, the rule hasn’t been rigorously enforced in recent months and at least some chickens do currently reside in town.
Schultz said it isn’t clear that the city is limited to 60 days to act given that the petitioners did not include sample ordinance language as the charter calls for. Schultz said it would be difficult for the city to draft and approve a new ordinance within a 60-day time frame, so a bit more time would be helpful.
In other action, the council:
• Voiced support for a temporary moratorium on new RV parks within the harbor zoning district. Setterberg noted that most cities try to limit the percentage of short-term rentals, and that Tower could consider a similar limitation. He said a moratorium would be a good idea until the city has a better plan in place on housing.
An item to declare a moratorium on RV parks in the harbor zone district will be on next month’s agenda. Such a moratorium would not impact any existing or previously approved RV parks.
• Discussed but came to no resolution on a request by city hall personnel to close city hall to the public during certain periods to allow city staff to get their work done. Schultz said the steady stream of phone calls and window traffic can provide so many interruptions as to make it nearly impossible to complete the normal workload without working more than eight hours per day. Morin said he supports the idea but suggested that city hall set up a voicemail system so the public can leave messages during periods when the office is closed.
• Held a brief discussion of the impact of the new law legalizing cannabis. Schultz said that he has received no inquiries to date about any permitting for a possible outlet shop, although he said it could well happen and that the city will likely need to draft an ordinance. He said the League of Minnesota Cities is currently reviewing the law and is expected to have guidance out soon.
• Gave its blessing to the renovation project being undertaken by TEDA at the Vermilion Country School. TEDA has approved the issuance of a bond to cover the estimated $400,000 cost of the renovations, but the bond does not obligate the city in any way. The bond will repaid by the ongoing lease payments from the charter school, which financed the previous renovations undertaken when the school opened in 2013. “It’s going to be a great project, with a huge amount of beneficial elements,” said Morin, who also serves as president of TEDA.
More items from this week’s council meeting will appear in next week’s edition of the Timberjay.