Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP March 29, 1983 ~ 01 ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MARCH 29, 19S3 MINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on March 29, 1983, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, for the purpose of discussing the hazardous waste pit and landfill issues. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight, Lachinski, Orttel Councilmen absent: None Also present: Representatives from the Minnesota Pollution Control, Doug Day and Mike Hensel; Representatives from the Anoka County Environmental Services Division, Director George Steiner and Bob Hutchinson; County Commissioner Natalie Haas; City Engineer, James Schrantz; City Clerk/A. Administrator, P. K. Lindquist; and interested residents Mayor Windschitl gave a brief review of the sampling done of the monitoring wells at the landfill, of the contamination found in wells lla and Number 5 last year, of the establishment of the hazardous waste pit in the landfill in 1971 and its closing in approximately 1976, of the Council becoming aware of its existence in late 1979 or early 1980, and of the question of what is in the pit and what effect the landfill itself is having upon the contamination of the ground water. On March 22 the PCA Board gave unanimous approval to enter into a Cooperative Agreement with the EPA which entails a series of tests to determine the problem with the hazardous waste pit and to determine what type of abatement program needs to come out of the landfill. The Mayor reviewed the Cooperative Agreement: Phase I is to assess the contribution of the hazardous waste pit to ground water contamination within three months time for an estimated cost of $35,000. Phase II is for a 12-month study to determine the extent and impact of contamination emulating from the landfill, plus a search for and inquiry of hazardous waste generators for an approximately cost of $160,000. Then a feasibility study would be done incorporating the results of Phase I and II investigations to determine the most cost-effective remedy or remedial measures to be taken for the facility, to be available within one year of the execution of the Agreement or within one month if the results of Phase I show the pit to be a significant source of contamina- ti on. The approximate cost for the feasibility study is $25,000. Also, a feasibility study would be done to determine options available to the City of Andover for alternate water supplies in the event area residential wells are impacted by the Waste Disposal Engineering landfill, estimated cost of $20,000. Mayor Windschitl explained that of the total costs, 90 percent would be from the Federal Superfund monies, with the requirement being the remaining 10 percent be State or local monies. He noted the State Legislature is in the process of getting a State Superfund bill passed, that passage in some form appearing to be certain this session. Mayor Windschitl went on to explain the Agreement must be forwarded to District 5 EPA offices in Chicago and then to Washington, DC, noting the frustration of the Council has been the time it takes to get all of this accomplished. Also, Anoka County has appropriated $200,000 for the removal of the hazardous waste pit, expressing appreciation for the County's efforts to make funds available for this problem. Mr. Day explained they have had very limited experience with agreements with the Federal government, and it is difficult to arrive at a timetable for this, but it is a lengthy process. He estimated that the actual removal of the waste from the hazardous waste pit would be 12 to 15 months from now, feeling that was a conservative estimate. Mr. Day also reviewed the steps required to get to the point of physically removing - .- ._- -- Special City Council Meeting March 29, 1983 - Minutes Page 2 the waste, the drafting of the Cooperative Agreement with the City and County, the review of that document by the regional EPA office in Chicago, then forwarding it to Washington, DC, for their approval, and the return to the MPCA Board for execution. He too reviewed the phases of the Cooperative Agreement, noting the two phases of assessing the pit and the landfill itself would be done concurrently, and explaining the feasibility studies to determine the type of cleanup activity and alternative water sources for Andover. He felt the phase to examine the pit would take to December or January; and if it is found the pit is a significant source of contamination, they will go back to amend the Cooperative Agreement requesting the removal of those wastes, which would probably take place late spring, 1984. Mr. Day stated they are trying to keep the investigative studies and time periods to a minimum by breaking up those activities into two phases. Mr. Day then went into more detail on the time period for the Cooperative Agreement, intending to have a draft agreement for Regional 5 EPA staff review the first part of April, that review processing taking 30 to 60 days. Then it goes to Washington, DC, it being their experience that that can take quite a bit of time. But they are hopeful with the activities of Anoka County, the community and State representatives, that that time can be kept to a minimum. Once it is approved there, it returns to the MPCA Board for execution, optimistically that happening at the July Board meeting. In this time frame, the studies on the site would begin late August or early September. Someone in the audience asked if the process could be speeded up with the County's appropriation. Mr. Day explained the requirement of 10 percent matching funds from the State or local level when Federal superfund dollars are used. But unless a Cooperative Agreement is signed, any local monies utilized are not recoverable and does not apply to the 10 percent matching funds. Mr. Hensel reported his experience has been it takes considerably longer to get EPA approval. The only Federal superfund money the State has received is for the St. Louis Park situation. They applied last August 11 for that agreement and the monies were not received until December 23. But he noted there is a new administration in the EPA offices in Washington, DC; and the EPA has finalized their guidelines which may speed up the process. Once the Cooperative Agreement is approved in Washington, there is a certain time period required to allow contractors to bid the project and then the three/four-month period where their consultants would collect the data to convince the EPA that something has to be done. Once that is done, they can then ask the EPA for the money to remove the barrels from the pit. Mayor Windschitl asked what well testing has been done and the results. Mr. Day stated the City and County did the original sampling of wells around the landfill in 1980 for organic compounds that were found in the landfill, and no contamination was detected at that time. The Agency has sampled residential wells on four different occasions around the landfill, mainly along Andover Boulevard, Crosstown Boulevard, and in the Red Oaks Addition. There was no contamination found in their first two samplings in 1981 and 1982. In the third sampling done in January, 1983, they detected contaminates in one well and below-detection limits of contaminates in another well, one on Andover Boulevard and the other on Crosstown Boulevard, both shallow wells of 20 to 25 feet. They have since resampled those two wells. The one well that had shown trace amounts of contamination was found to be clean in the resampling. And the well with below- detection limits of contaminates had the same indication that there may be something in the water, but it is such a low level their lab equipment could not quantify it. Mr. Day also explained that they are sampling at different depths around the area to be as representative as possible. A gentleman asked why wells north of Andover Boulevard weren't being tested. Mr. Day stated they are sampling in areas north, west, and south of the site, but not past Andover Boulevard and cited specific streets where samples were taken in the Red Oaks Addition. He also stated that both shallow and deep wells have been sampled along -. Special City Council Meeting March 29, 1983 - Minutes Page 3 Andover Boulevard. Mr. Hensel added they have found that the contamination is not at the residential wells at this time and that they are monitoring within the landfill itself and along Coon Creek. Someone asked about Coon Creek. Mr. Day reported it depends on the time of year. They have found organics in the water in some of their sampling, organics being solvents, industrial compounds, degreasers, etc. It was asked if the dump can reopen. Mr. Hutchinson explained the license is suspended at this time, and the owner has sent a letter to the Agency saying he does not intend to reopen the landfill. The only connection the County has with the landfill is through the licensing. The only activity that should be taking place at the landfill at this time is the bringing in of the lime sludge which is to be used as part of the capping of the landfill. Mayor Windschitl explained the use of the lime sludge as a cover to restrict the amount of water penetrating the refuse. It was his opinion that the problem with the landfill at this time is to get it terminated in a proper fashion, as there is present ly a 1 arge depress i on that has to be filled to get the water to run off, A woman from l38th in Red Oaks stated her 80-foot well was tested in 1980 and contaminates were found. It was then retested and that time no contaminates were found. She was concerned as to why the contaminates found at one time did not show up the next. Do they move around and di'sappear and reappear? And why wasn't her well tested this time? Mr. Hensel explained the lab control program is set up so that they know that 19 out of 20 samples will be correct, and statistically one out of 20 will be wrong. They can't get it more accurate than that, particularly when most of these wells are right at the detection level. Most of the time a single positive sample found among all negative samples from the same areas indicates some error on the lab's part, some contaminate coming from another sample from another area, from the air or from the solvents used. The detection levels at the Minnesota Department of Health is evaluated on a one to ten parts per billion, which he related to finding one second in 32 years' worth of time. Because neither the Council nor the representatives from MPCA were aware of the problem with this woman's well, she was asked to leave her name and address with the Clerk so it could be investigated further. A resident asked about the contamination found in the test wells at the landfill and where those wells are located. Mr. Day drew a sketch of the landfill and surrounding roads noting the location of the monitoring wells. He stated the monitoring seems to indicate that the ground water is moving in a north/northeasterly direction toward Coon Creek; and it appears that Coon Creek is the discharge point for that ground water. He also noted the location of the hazardous waste pit. Mr. Hutchinson explained it is 80x130x8y. feet deep with soil on the top. The pit itself does not have any refuse over it. He also stated the wells are monitored quarterly, and the question of the water moving in differe1t directions or the contaminates moving back and forth is not happening. A resident asked about the deep wells. Mr. Day stated they hope to find out more about that under the Cooperative Agreement. They do not know the movement of the deep aquifers. There is supposedly a till layer that separates the shallow from the sand aquifer, but it is not known whether or not that till layer is continuous. They have asked that pump tests be done to see if there is a connection between the shallow and deeper sand aqu ifers. There is also a bed rock aquifer in the area which varies from 120 to 300 feet from the surface. A gentleman· asked if all the hazardous wastes were placed in the pit or could some be dispersed throughout the landfill. Mr. Day stated from records and conversations with people, it is their belief that some hazardous wastes were disposed of in the landfill prior to the establishment of the pit. A lot of it was bulk waste in 500-gallon units. - Special City Council Meeting March 29, 1983 - Minutes Page 4 It was stated by a member of the audience that that is what might be going on during the very late hours, stating there was activity there at 2 a.m., 4:30 in the morning, all hours of the day last summer. He asked if there was a ruling to have some quiet time. Discussion noted every attempt has been made to control the hours of the landfill operation, and Mr. Hutchinson stated he was not aware of any activities outside of the posted hours. Councilman Knight stated normally there is rust and deterioration of buried barrels. He asked is it safe to assume that some of the barrels have deteriorated enough to have emptied out or leaked. Is it possible the waste is no longer in the barrels but actually in the soil? Mr. Hensel stated there is probably some in the soil, their experience being that when such barrels are removed, a quantity of soil must be removed as well because it is saturated with the waste. So if the pit is excavated, it would not simply be the barrels but a quantity of soil as well, how much being determined by soils tests. A gentleman asked what recourse the people of Andover have legally or criminally against the private enterprise that created the problem. Mr. Hensel stated next month the MPCA Board will issue a directive, which is the last legal means they have to tell the permitee what must be done. If the permitee does, not do it, the MPCA must sue to recover costs to clean up the site and the costs expended in the past dealing with this ussue. Someone from the area west of Crooked Lake Boulevard near the creek expressed frustration that neither his nor any of his neighbors' wells have been tested. Mayor Windschitl stated the City has the addresses of which wells have been tested and the results. Someone asked if it is known what kind of hazardous waste is buried in the pit. Mayor Windschitl stated the County has a list of the elements that went into the pit plus some of the known generators of the hazardous wastes. Mr. Hutchinson stated in 1973 the agent from their office was concerned about what waSa~~~ng placed in the pit. They began to put together a list of generators that had w u1ed by the trucking company of Waste Control. They interviewed those generators in late 1973, early 1974, as to who was hauling their waste, where they were told it was going, the types of wastes, and the quantities being hauled. Essentially about 1/3 of it is various types of solvents, 1/3 is various types of oils, and about 1/3 is sludges primarily from paint and plating operations. But they do not have the names of all the generators. Mayor Windschitl recognized Terry Reuther as the person who did much of the research of some of the original facts and furnished the City Council with a lot of data that was very helpful back in 1980 and '81. Mr. Reuther understood the Minnesota State law states when one sells one's house he must reveal any significant defects on the premises. Does this mean that they have to tell people that there may be contamination in the wells; and if so does that mean the house is unsalable: And if so, will there be any compensation for any kind of loss. Mr. Hensel stated at this point there is no defect, as they have not measured anyone's well as having contamination, certainly no one above drinking water standard level. Mr. Reuther asked if the MPCA is going to pick up the costs for the testing of the well. He stated there is a lawsuit in town of a person trying to get out of a contract for deed on the basis that they were not informed of potential pollution to the well. Mr. Hensel answered by saying his house is 1,000 feet from the Washington County hazardous waste landfill site. Two of his neighbors have been ordered by the Minnesota Department of Health not to drink their water. Four other neighbors have been told their water is okay but it keeps getting worse. He can't make the guarantee that they would pay for the testing of wells in cases Mr. Reuther described because their whole budget would be used for that testing. He can't even get his own well tested unless he pays for it. Mayor Windschitl added the Council has been trying to address the real estate side of this matter, explaining to those in the audience the restriction placed by the State Special City Council Meeting March Zg, 1983 - Minutes Page 5 Board of Health on well drilling in a portion of the City. He stated this whole issue clearly must be resolved and the residents of Andover shouldn't bear the burden for this when they didn't create the problem. A gentleman asked how many companies dump in the Andover landfill. Mr. Day stated no one knows for sure, but he has seen lists of 13 to 18 different generators that use the site. Discussion was on the question of how long the operator was allowed to operate without the bond and why it happened. Mr. Hutchinson stated there has not been a bond since August, 1981, due to an oversight by their department. Commissioner Haas added part of the problem is the bond and the licensing periods do not run concurrently, which is something she is working to have corrected. Another resident asked who is liable in this sutiaton. Who licenses it and don't they have some responsibility? Who polices the program, and don't they have some responsibility? What's the responsibility of the homeowners in the City? Mr. Hensel stated for liability they first look to the owner and operators of the landfi 11. Secondly, they will look to the generators of hazardous waste who use that landfill and perhaps the transporters that took it there. Their experience has been if it ends up in court, each party is held liable for a certain percentage. And one of the defenses would be that it was a permitted and licensed landfill, which the judge would look at. In all reality, every- one ends urr paying if it comes out of tax money. If there isn't a responsible party or that party becomes unrea~hable, files bankruptcy, etc., then the State and Federal Super- fund bill is designed to clean it up. Mayor Windschitl explained the purpose of the bond by the operator was for the operation of the landfill, noting the importance of completing the termination of the landfill as soon as possible and feeling the County will need to look at that. And the bond was designed to address the proper termination of the landfill. Someone asked for a clarification of the procedure with the Cooperative Agreement as to when the money would be received, when the research would be done, etc. Mr. Day again explained the requirement of doing a remedial investigation and a feasibility study after the Agreement is signed and the money is received. Mr. Hutchinson further explained in order to get the money to do any work, the Cooperative Agreement must be signed, hoping to get that signed by July. The present Agreement is to do an evaluation of the pit to prove to the EPA that it is a significant contributor to the problem, estimating that will be completed by the end of the year. The second part of the Agreement is to be looking at the ground water remedial needs, that to be done concurrently with the evalua- tion of the pit and which will take a year to complete. If the studies show the pit is a significant contributor to the problem, they would request monies to clean out the pit. When the ground water remedial needs is completed, they will again request an amendment and monies for the landfill problem. It was asked if the contamination will be worse a year from now. Mr. Day stated their experience indicates that the contamination is limited to the landfill and is dis- charging into Coon Creek. A gentleman asked what will be done with the barrels and soils once it is dug up. Mr. Hensel stated they have three alternatives: 1) See if it can be recycled; 2) Can they be burned either in the State or elsewhere; or 3) Haul it to an approved hazardous waste site, which would be to another State because Minnesota does not have an approved site. Another gentleman asked if it is known that the contamination is coming from the pit. Mr. Hensel stated that that is the purpose of the first three-month study to be sure that is really where the contaminates are coming from. It is known that other hazardous wastes were placed in the landfill, but they think it is a small amount compared to the amount in the pit. But that has to be documented for the EPA. Special City Council Meeting March 29, 1983 - Minutes Page 6 A resident asked what happens if it is found that some wells outside of the landfill are contaminated during the time of the studies. What recourse do the homeowners have? Mr. Day stated if that happens, emergency actions would be taken whereby they would have bottled water provided to the residents in question as a short-term solution. Part of the Agreement also includes a feasibility study for alternate water supplies for Andover residents should this occur. Mayor Windschitl explained the water question is one that the Council has talked about a number of times, and they are trying to get some type of contingency water plan so it could move very quickly if some contamination did show up. And he has been working with the PCA to get the $20,000 for the study freed up front as soon as possible so that plan can be done. Water was not put in at the time of the sewer project because of the deep wells in the area, feeling the additional expenses was not necessary at that time. A partial water plan was developed at that time but was never implemented. The most important consideration in a municipal water system is the location of the well given the immense draw-down created by such a major deep we 11. Mr. hensel elaborated on the emergency plans in the event a residential well is found to be contaminated. Discussion was on the proposed landfill site in the Bunker Hills area. Commissioner Haas explained the County has three sites that have been approved by the Metropolitan Council, one in Bunker Hills, the one in Oak Grove, and the one in Ramsey. None of them have been picked yet, and the County has not yet been told they have to have· another landfill site in Anoka County. Mayor Windschitl stated the City had hired a consultant to fight the Bunker Hills site at the siting hearings, but were unsuccessful. When this site is resurrected, it will require a full environmental impact statement, and the City fully intends to fight it as much as possible. A woman asked if a copy of Mr. Roth's bond was sent to the County. Commissioner Haas explained a copy is not reuqired; but Mr. Roth's bond was in effect at the time of the issuance of the license, the bond was allowed to lapse, the bonding company notified the County of that lapse, and for whatever reason the ball was dropped and nothing was followed through with it. Mr. Hutchinson and Mr. Steiner admitted that was the responsibility of the Environmental Services staff; it was their error. Mr. Steiner again explained the reason for the bond is for termination of the site, final cover, seeding, etc., and not for the issues being talked about tonight. Discussion was on when the first contaminates were found in the monitoring wells in the 1 andfil1. Mr. Day stated organic contaminates were detected the first time they were sampled for in 1981. Mr. Reuther stated PCA records indicate the monitoring wells show pollution as early as 1977. Mr. Hensel stated in 1977 all they were being monitored for was ph, chloride, nitrates, sulphates, things that come out of a typical landfill. They were not monitoring for any hazardous waste in 1977, that first being monitored in 1981. It was questioned why something hasn't been done sooner with this problem. Mr. Hense 1 stated the major reason is knowing about it, being able to measure it, and mostly lack of money. Someone asked how far down the list Andover is. Mr. Hensel stated Andover is on the national priority list, which is EPA's list of sites. Of the 418 sites, he thought this was number 134. He stated that means if the 10 percent matching funds can be met, there would be Federal dollars to work on this project. A gentleman asked what happens: if they do not get the Federal money. Mr. Hensel stated the next option would be the State Superfund, assuming that passed. If that is not possible, they would have to look to litigation to get money from the responsible parties through the courts. Mayor Windschitl noted the estimates to deal with the hazardous waste pit along are approx.imately $2 mi llion. -- - Special City Council Meeting March 29, 1983 - Minutes Page 7 Someone asked where the matching ten percent will come from. Commissioner Haas stated if the State does not have the matching 10 percent, the County has currently put forth that 10 percent. The holdup is the Cooperative Agreement must be in effect before the County's dollars can be used for the ten percent of the Federal dollars. She felt their job on the County level is to pressure the people on the Federal level to pass this through as quickly as possible. They feel that enough studies have been done in this instance that it is time to get going, and she'd like to shortern up the time from the 15 months estimated by MPCA officials by six months. Discussion returned to the hazardous waste pit. Mr. Hutchinson explained at the south end of the pit there is a 34-inch pipe that was inserted into the pit area before it was sealed off. Last Friday there was 4~ inches of liquid at the bottom of the pit. Commssioner Haas stated some of the wells in the landfill will continue to be monitored until the Agreement is signed. A sample is also going to be taken of what is in the pit to measure whether or not it changes and to find out what is in there. That sampling is occurring this week. Mayor Windschitl noted in looking at the results of the monitoring wells from the Red Oaks' side of the landfill and that of the well near the pit, there is a significant difference which make the effects of what is taking place apparent. Councilman Elling stated there is no guarantee that once the pit is removed that the pOllution problem will be gone because it is known there is other hazardous waste within the landfill itself. Someone asked how old the landfill is. Mayor Windschitl stated as far as can be determined, it was started in 1964 or '65. Discussion was on the monitoring wells in the landfill. Mr. Day stated there are about half a dozen wells along the north side of the landfill, showing the contaminated plume on the map as an over-shaped area north/northeast toward the creek. He explained the further away from the area, the lesser amount of contaminates are showing up in the test wells. That is also the area of the oldest refuse which could also have been industrial wastes and could conceivably be causing the contamination. They are pro- posing to put in one shallow testing well in the landfill south of the pit. A gentleman in the audience stated he felt there would still be a problem after the hazardous waste pit was removed and felt the City should be concentrating on a City water project and start the application for Federal funds to do that. Mayor Windschitl agreed. Mr. Hensel again noted that study is included in the first Cooperative Agree- ment, but it will take a year or so to get the technical work completed before some recommendation can be made. Further discussion noted the attempt would be to see if the EPA would fund a municipal water system as part of the remedial action of the landfill. A woman asked if there are test wells along Coon Creek farther to the west and south other than in the vacinity of the landfill. Mr. Day stated there are none, but residential wells have been sampled. Mr. Hutchinson again explained Coon Creek is the discharge area for the shallow gound water all along the creek. Commissioner Haas stated the State Health Department did test Coon Creek and did not recommend the creek be posted, not feeling there was a problem with pollutants. A woman stated when the sanitary sewer was proposed, the Health Department recommended the sewer so the on-site septic systems would not pollute their water. So they paid for their sewer. Now if the water becomes contaminated, do they pay to put in water or does someone else? Mayor Windschitl stated there are good arguments on the City's part that the City not pay for a water system because of a problem they did not contribute to. The first thrust is to see if that would be included in the EPA superfund. The City's next course of action would be determined by EPA's answer to that. The City Council's position has always been that the Andover residents should not have to pay for it. ~ Special City Council Meeting March 2~, 1983 - Minutes Page 8 A gentleman asked what the cost would be for an individual to have his well tested. Discussion was it would be approximately $150 to test for all the organics. Recess at 9:17; reconvene at 9:38 p.m. Mayor Windschitl introduced State Representative from District 50A, Ernie Larson. Commissioner Haas stated one of the suggestions has been to hold periodic meetings such as this to share the status of the situation, get the information back to the community with the idea that the community, County, and PCA know what is going on, know when to be contacting representatives, etc. Mr. Hensel added as part of the Cooperative Agreement, they are required to develop a community relations plan. In addition to holding meetings with the County ahd City officials, they will be holding public meetings at the key decision points. Those meetings will be publicized. Mayor Windschitl also made an appeal for more members on the Hazardous Waste Committee which is addressing some of these issues as well. Councilman Knight asked if there is any chance the Federal superfund money would not be forthcoming. Commissioner Haas stated there is always that chance, but they are not seeing that kind of negativism right now. The people on the State level also feel some superfund bill will be passed, the liability question being the major issue. Mr. Hensel felt the recent shakeup at the EPA puts the responsibility on them to perform, and the impression they are getting is that this is an oportune time to present the request. Mr. Day cautioned that one of the problems with the shakeup at the EPA may be a time delay because of the new people settling in. Councilman Elling stated one thing in our favor is that the amount of money is not great compared to some other prob lems. He also stated the PCA is starting the first cooperative agreement on the hazardous waste problem in southern Andover south of Bunker Lake Boulevard. Mr. Hense 1 stated they will be requesting that agreement at the April Board meeting. Representative Larson reported on their request for a hearing on a bill addressing the waste tire· problem, promising if that hearing is not granted that there will be several interim hearings on it between now and the next session. Representative Larson also stated in his opinion there will be a superfund bill passed by the Legislature this session, but noted a lobbying effort by MACI to vote against the superfund bill for four reasons. In his opinion the reasons were poor, and he urged those present to contact members of the Legislature expressing support of the bill. Commissioner Haas stated if the waste tire bill does not become a reality at the State level, she thought it would be dealt with in some fashion at the County level, feeling there were some options available particularly to clean up the large pile located in southern Andover. She also stated that whether or not the strict liability issue is included in the State superfund bill, that strict liability is in the Federal bill already and must be adhered to when Federal funds are used. It was asked how deep the wells are at the schools and have they been tested. Discussion was that that should be investigated, though later in the meeting Representative Larson suggested contacting Al Salmela at the District offices, 755-8220, for that information. A gentleman expressed shock over the failure to do any type of health survey in the community. Mr. Hensel stated that has not been done at any of the hazardous waste sites in the State because that comes under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Health Department and secondly because they are very costly to do. He suggested writing to the Legislators and Congressmen to get the money to do it. Someone askedifthe wells in the vacinity of the Heidelberger property are still being monitored. Mr. Hensel did not know but would check on it. Another question was about Anoka County's ordinance on tires and if Mr. Heidelberger is exempt from that law, the statement being made that tires continue to be brought into that property. Di scuss ion Special City Council Meeting March 29, 1983 - Minutes Page g with the County officials and Commissioner Haas was that Mr. Heidelberger has been tagged and court action has been taken, that if a resident sees these trucks bringing in tires they should get the license plate number and notify the Sheriff immediately, that the ordinance is basically tires cannot be land stored unless they are first brought down to a maximum partical size of six square inches on any surface, that there are no licensed waste tire disposal facilities in Anoka County at this,time, reviewing the chipping tire operations available in other areas. Another gentleman asked if there is a permit for operation in the vacinity, referring to the smoke being generated. Discussion reviewed the events on the sale of the property on which the tires are placed and that the smoke that is viewed is probably from the K & K Foundry which is a smelter for aluminum and ·copper. Mr. Hensel stated they would check into the status of the air quality standard from that foundry. Discussion returned to the concern of some residents about what would happen in the event of contaminated wells, fearing they would have to pay for another private well and then for the municipal system when it comes in. Discussion by County and MPCA officials was that bottled water would be supplied as a temporary solution until it is known what the ultimate solution would be, asking for Federal monies for that ultimate solution. Several realtors in the audience spoke of the fear buyers have of coming into Andover because of the potential water contamination problem, that they have found that houses are not selling in that area, again noting the lawsuit mentioned earlier in the evening., Other residents present expressed fear of reduced property value because of the potential problem. Several also talked about having the taxes reduced on their property until this entire situation is resolved. Mayor Windschitl stated the City will have to address the property valuation question, noting the Hazardous Waste Committee will be discussing this item in greater detail at their next meeting. Commissioner Haas stated she is not adverse to taking that up with the County Assessor, particularly in this situation with the time frame of decision making with the Federal Government on what the cleanup should be. In the case where moratoriums have been put on the land- owners because of the preliminary landfill sites, they have abated taxes. A gentleman in the audience stated the problem with selling a house will be worse once the decisions have been made because it will be more widely publicized. It was asked who the residents should contact about the State superfund bill. Representative Larson explained Dee Long carried the bill on the House side, suggesting her office be called; and Gene Merriam carried the bill for the Senate. Discussion returned to the testing of residential wells, one gentleman on Nightengale being concerned that wells be tested in that area. Mr. Day stated other samples will be taken, as 30 wells will be tested on a quarterly basis to test for volatile organics as part of the Cooperative Agreement for the year-long study.of the landfill. Discussion noted that there are also lists from the County of their sampling, it being suggested those lists be gathered and a map prepared showing all the wells that have been tested by the various agencies. A woman asked who would be liable if their house is sold now but contaminates are found in that well two years from now, again relating to the lawsuit on this matter in Andover. Mr. Hensel replied that is a legal question, but the Federal superfund looks to the generators of hazardous waste for liability. Mayor Windschitl felt that question should be posed to the City Attorney, with discussion from those in the audience that some statement to that affect could be placed in the purchase agreement to protect the seller. It was again noted that no known contaminates have been found in the deep residential wells. Special City Council Meeting March 29, 1983 - Minutes Page 10 There was some discussion on the proposed landfills in the County, that the County has not yet been told that it will have to have one, with an explanation from County officials as to how a selection committee would be made up if one site would need to be se lected . The committee would be made up of all the County Commissioners plus one representative from each City where a landfill site is on the inventory. However, those County Commissioners who have a landfill site in their district would not be allowed to serve and would appoint a resident in their place. And the committee must have a majority of at least one of people who do not reside in the community that has a site on the inventory list. Commissioner Haas stated she would be looking to the cities for a recommendation of whom she would appoint·· to take her place. Commissioner Haas also reviewed the County's requirement to have landfill sites on their inventory according to the 1980 Solid Waste Act and noted the draft of a bill to compen- sate cities in which a new landfill is sited. She did not see landfills as being good business for either County or City government. Councilman Elling stated he has asked a real estate agency to monitor sales of homes within the area from the time it was first known about the problem at the landfill, and that information should be available in the future. The Compensation and Mitigation bill would compensate cities, the suggestion being on a quarterly basis, for hosting landfills within their city, that money to be used as the cities desire for civic projects, reimbursement to landowners within the area, etc. Discussion with members of the audience was also on alternatives to solid and hazardous waste disposal. A gentleman stated with the closing of the landfill, the area east of Red Oaks is becoming a private dump for people, asking if that can be stopped in some manner. Mr. Schrantz stated he has just received permission from the property owners to the east of 139th Avenue to barricade the road, which will be done as soon as the frost comes out of the ground. That is about all the City can do. Another person asked that those affected be notified by mail of any future meetings on th i smatter. Discussion noted some system will need to be worked out to keep residents informed and some type of notification system. Discussion was also on the drilling of wells in the area around the landfill. Mr. Day stated that in the Health Department designated area, they must be notified of any well drilled in that area. There are no restrictions on drilling new wells except for the construction specifications. Mr. Hensel knew of no rule that a city well could not be drilled within six miles of a hazardous waste site. The rule states a complete hydro- geological invesigation must be done before siting a municipal well within a certain ·distance from a hazardous waste site. Mayor Windschitl asked that they find out the specific rule on this item. Mr. Hutchinson stated those rules applied when such a well would be sited within one mile of the waste site. Another recommendation by Barr Engineering who did the study for the County in 1980 is that any large capacity well within two miles of a landfill have a hydrogeological study done. Mayor Windschitl again noted that;informational meetings such as this will be held in the future and that the residents will be notified in some manner. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~LCY~ Mar lla A. Peach Recor . .g Secretary -