WAYZATA — Members of the Minnesota House Capital Investment Committee visited Wayzata on Wednesday, November 13, arriving on time for a scheduled stop at Depot Park to learn more about the City’s $9 million state bonding request. The visit allowed legislators to hear directly from Wayzata leadership about future phases of Panoway and the need for public safety facility design work.
A Significant Bonding Request for the Lakefront and Public Safety
Wayzata is seeking $9 million in State support to continue its long-planned Panoway improvements and to complete design work for future police and fire upgrades. The City walked lawmakers through the broad vision: expanding public access to Lake Minnetonka, strengthening environmental protections along the shoreline, and preparing for facility needs tied to modern public safety operations.
Depot Park—anchored by the historic James J. Hill Depot—served as the setting for the visit, blending Wayzata’s past with its long-range waterfront planning.
Mayor Mullin’s Remarks
Mayor Andrew Mullin welcomed the committee and acknowledged members of the City Council, public safety leadership, Public Works, Community Development, and the Wayzata Conservancy who attended the visit.
He offered legislators a brief overview of Panoway’s history, noting that planning began in 2009 and that construction of the first phase started in 2020. Last summer’s work completed major improvements along the shoreline.
To provide context for the committee, Mullin explained that Lake Minnetonka means “big water,” and Wayzata means “North Shore.” As the eastern gateway to the lake—and the closest community to Highway 394 and Minneapolis—Wayzata functions as a primary point of access to one of Minnesota’s most visited lakes.
He highlighted that more than 95% of the lake’s shoreline is privately owned, making Wayzata’s public access especially meaningful. Panoway was designed to reclaim and expand this public realm by converting paved areas into green space, improving pedestrian connections, and creating a welcoming waterfront for both residents and visitors. He also noted Wayzata’s ability to host roughly 10,000 visitors a day in peak periods despite being a city of just 4,500 residents.
Mullin closed by emphasizing Wayzata’s commitment to historic preservation, including the James J. Hill Depot and an additional historic cottage recently added to the National Register.
City Manager Aurora Yager on Stewardship and Preservation
City Manager Aurora Yager highlighted the City’s ongoing work to restore and preserve the Section Foreman House, a historic railroad-era structure that sits along the eastern edge of the Panoway corridor. She described the refurbishment effort as part of a broader commitment to being good stewards of the land, ensuring that Wayzata’s lakefront, green spaces, and heritage assets are protected and thoughtfully maintained for future generations.
Yager’s remarks underscored that Panoway is not only an access and infrastructure project—it is an environmental, cultural, and historical stewardship project as well.
What Legislators Saw on the Ground
City staff outlined how Panoway’s next phases would extend pedestrian-oriented improvements along the shoreline, strengthen environmental buffers, and complete the remaining components of the original vision. Public safety leaders also discussed planning needs for modernized police and fire facilities.
Next Steps
Wayzata’s bonding request now advances into the 2026 legislative process. The Capital Investment Committee will evaluate projects from across Minnesota as it prepares the next statewide bonding bill. Wayzata will continue engaging legislators as deliberations begin early next year.
Wayzata.com will follow the City’s progress and report on key developments as the bonding conversation moves forward.
A group of Wayzata property owners has filed a lawsuit in Hennepin County District Court challenging the City of Wayzata’s recently adopted short-term rental ban. The case, filed October 17 under Court File No. 27-CV-25-18923, names the City as the sole defendant and seeks to block enforcement of Ordinance 852, which prohibits the use of homes for short-term rentals (STRs) within city limits beginning April 1, 2026.
The plaintiffs — Adlon C. Adams, 225 Manitoba Ave LLC, Olivia A. Adams, Wayzata Cottage LLC, and Robert C. Fisher, as trustee of the Robert C. Fisher Trust — collectively own several single-family homes in downtown Wayzata, including properties on Central Avenue, Manitoba Avenue, and Lake Street East. Each property has been used as a short-term rental through platforms such as Airbnb, and the owners allege they purchased and improved the homes specifically for that purpose.
Filed by attorneys Patrick B. Steinhoff and Bruce D. Malkerson of Malkerson Gunn Martin LLP, the complaint argues that the City’s STR prohibition amounts to both a procedural violation and an unconstitutional taking of property rights. The plaintiffs assert three primary claims:
Procedural Challenge: They contend that Ordinance 852 is a de facto zoning ordinance adopted without the legally required public hearing before the Wayzata Planning Commission, in violation of Minnesota’s Municipal Planning Act (Minn. Stat. § 462.357).
Nonconforming Use Protections: The plaintiffs claim that because their short-term rentals were lawful prior to the ordinance, they constitute “legal nonconforming uses” that cannot be retroactively prohibited under Minnesota law.
Regulatory Taking: They allege that banning STRs “goes too far” and unfairly diminishes the value of their properties, amounting to a regulatory taking under both the U.S. and Minnesota Constitutions.
The ordinance at the center of the dispute — approved in September and published October 6 — states that “no person is allowed to lease, license or agree to allow the use of a dwelling unit, or portion thereof, for a short-term rental,” defined as a stay of fewer than 30 consecutive days. The effective date was timed to coincide with the expiration of existing rental dwelling licenses on March 30, 2026.
As previously reported by Wayzata.com, the City Council voted 4–1 on September 9, 2025, to approve the first reading of the STR ban following months of debate over neighborhood impacts, parking, and enforcement. The second reading passed September 23.
The plaintiffs are asking the court to declare the ordinance void, enjoin the City from enforcing it, and — if necessary — compel the City to initiate condemnation proceedings to determine “just compensation” for the alleged taking.
The case represents one of the first legal challenges to a municipal short-term rental prohibition in the west-metro area and could set precedent for how Minnesota cities regulate Airbnb-style lodging.
Wayzata.com will continue to follow developments in the case as it proceeds through the Hennepin County District Court.
The Wayzata City Council has sent a formal letter to Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty expressing opposition to a new county policy that limits prosecution of cases arising from what are deemed non-public-safety traffic stops.
The letter, signed by Mayor Andrew Mullin and Council Members Dan Koch, Molly MacDonald, Alex Plechash,and Ken Sorensen, was transmitted October 14 by Interim City Manager Aurora Yager. It warns that the policy change could undermine local public safety and was developed “without any meaningful collaboration or conversation with local law enforcement agencies.”
In a public post shared Tuesday, Mayor Mullin echoed the Council’s concerns and voiced support for Wayzata Police Chief Jamie Baker and neighboring departments.
“The City of Wayzata has serious concerns about this policy,” Mullin wrote. “We believe this change will negatively impact our public safety practices and, most importantly, your safety here in Wayzata.”
Mullin said the city’s objections center on three main points: a lack of collaboration with local police; the unintended consequences of restricting enforcement tools; and the need to align reform goals with “the operational realities and specific needs of cities like Wayzata.”
The policy, effective October 15, directs county prosecutors to “prioritize charging offenses that arise from traffic stops that focus on public safety.” Under the new framework, cases that stem from stops for minor equipment or registration violations—such as expired tabs, a broken headlight, or an obstructed license plate—will generally not be prosecuted unless the stop involves a substantial and immediate risk to public safety.
In its letter, the Wayzata City Council said traffic stops serve multiple purposes beyond issuing citations and should not be curtailed without careful study.
“Traffic stops serve multiple public safety functions,” the letter states. “Any policy that restricts them should be developed through careful analysis and input from those with on-the-ground expertise.”
The Council emphasized that while it supports fair and equitable enforcement, meaningful change requires joint decision-making between prosecutors and the officers who enforce the law.
“Public safety is not an issue that can be effectively addressed in isolation,” the Council wrote. “Better outcomes are achieved when policy development includes those who will implement the policies and live with their consequences.”
Yager, in her accompanying message to Moriarty, invited dialogue:
“Should you or your staff have any questions of Wayzata, please do not hesitate to reach out and we would be happy to discuss this more.”
The County Attorney’s Office has said the new policy is intended to build public trust and focus limited resources on cases that most directly impact safety, such as speeding, impaired driving, and reckless behavior. Exceptions to the non-charging rule will be reviewed “on a case-by-case basis in circumstances that endanger public safety.”
Wayzata joins a growing number of suburban cities expressing unease about the countywide change, which affects all police departments that rely on Hennepin County for criminal prosecution.
Policy at a Glance: What Counts as a “Non-Public-Safety” Traffic Stop
(Effective October 15, 2025 — Hennepin County Attorney’s Office)
The County Attorney’s Office will presumptively not charge cases that result from stops based solely on the following minor violations unless a clear safety threat exists:
Expired or missing registration tabs
Failure to illuminate license plate
Frame or rim obscuring license plate
One broken headlight, brake light, or taillight
One missing sideview mirror
Rearview mirror obstruction or dangling item
Nonfunctional windshield wipers
Failure to signal when not creating a hazard
Cracked windshield that doesn’t obstruct view
Window tint darker than legal limit, unless unsafe
The Wayzata City Council narrowly approved a controversial variance request Tuesday evening, voting 3-2 to grant a shoreland setback variance at 547 Harrington Road, a peninsula property on Browns Bay owned by Dick and Elaine Swanson.
The action, adopted under Resolution 35-2025, reduces the required setback from Lake Minnetonka from 260.5 feet to 108 feet—a variance of 152.5 feet. While no redevelopment plans are on file, the variance establishes a larger buildable area should a future owner demolish the existing home and construct a new residence.
Mayor Andrew Mullin and Councilmembers Jeff Parkhill and Ken Sorensen supported the request, while Alex Plechash and Molly MacDonald opposed it. The applicant, represented by Kyle Hunt, argued the lot’s unusual shape, narrow width, topography, and position on a sharp bend of the shoreline created “practical difficulties” under city code.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 18 and later recommended approval of the request, subject to conditions. Those included a requirement that a shoreland impact plan be submitted with any future building permit, and that certain non-buildable wedge areas offered by the applicant be permanently recorded to protect neighboring sight lines.
Swansons Seek Variance to Preserve Future Use of Property
Property owners Dick and Elaine Swanson, who have lived at 547 Harrington Road for decades, are preparing to sell their nearly century-old family home. To aid in that transition, the couple hired builder Kyle Hunt of Kyle Hunt Partners to act as a consultant in seeking a variance that would preserve the lot’s usability for future owners.
Hunt told the Council the application was not tied to a specific redevelopment plan, but rather to establishing a reasonable building envelope so the property could be marketed and eventually rebuilt. Without a variance, he explained, the lot’s pie-shaped layout and position on a sharp bend of Browns Bay—combined with the unusual 299-foot setback of the neighboring Leavenworth home to the north—would push most of the buildable area toward Harrington Road, leaving the site effectively unbuildable.
Image source: Swanson narrative.
City code required a 260.5-foot shoreline setback at the site, yet the existing home sits just 91.9 feet from the water. The variance reduces that requirement by 152.5 feet, establishing a new setback line of 108 feet. That would still move any future home about 16 feet farther from the lake than the current structure.
To address concerns from neighbors, the Swansons also offered to record non-buildable “red triangle” areas on the lot to preserve lake views from adjacent homes.
Red triangles, courtesy of the Swansons.
As Hunt explained in his presentation to council: “The reason why we introduced the idea of the red triangles was to honor and take into consideration the neighboring properties when you look through the lens of sight lines from their structures to the lake and from the interior of their homes looking lakeside or lake setback side. In both cases, we’ve tried to look at that triangulation and offered that under free will.”
Public Hearing Brings Sharp Divide on Shoreline Impact
Neighbors Tracy and Dan Cosentino of 549 Harrington Road opposed the request. Their attorney, Jack Perry, urged the Council to deny the variance, warning it would invite litigation and stall any redevelopment of 547 Harrington Road.
“The reality is that 108 feet versus 175 feet is a major, major, major change — a major blockage of the lake for 549,” Perry said. “And 549 is going to [assert] rights. If you say yes, that will cause litigation. Litigation will hold this thing up for 12 months at a minimum, which no buyer is going to pay because of the setback until that’s resolved.”
Perry explained that his clients had worked with attorney Chris Pierson to develop an alternative method of measuring the setback, disregarding the unusually deep setback at 543 Harrington Road and instead using the next-nearest home to the north. That calculation produced a 175-foot shoreline setback and a 45-foot side yard setback, which the Cosentinos argued was “almost as close to the lake as possible” while still protecting their views.
In August 2025, Pierson also submitted a formal letter during the Planning Commission review, pressing for denial. “The Application does not satisfy the conditions for approval required … by Chapter 991,” Pierson wrote. “Granting the sought variance would severely adversely impact the shoreline and lake views of the Cosentinos. In addition, the Application is motivated solely by economic considerations … and granting the variance without construction and other required plans is likely to lead to problems the City should seek to avoid.” He urged commissioners to reject the request.
The Council also heard directly from Dan Cosentino, who said he was surprised to learn that the Swansons’ application sought a 108-foot setback “shaped kind of like a hexagon” without building plans, architectural drawings, or a shoreline impact assessment. Cosentino explained that he had retained Pierson and the architectural firm Mohagen Hansen to prepare 3D models showing how potential homes could affect his family’s views. Both concluded the variance would have an adverse impact.
In response, Cosentino said he directed Pierson to craft what he considered a fair compromise: a 175-foot shoreline setback with a 40-foot side yard, compared with the 188-foot setback of his own home. He described this as a “very generous variance proposal” aimed at avoiding conflict.
Not all neighbors opposed the request. Several letters of support were submitted, urging the Council to allow the variance.
Ted Bigos, a longtime property owner in the community, wrote that the application aligned with Wayzata’s residential character. “I am writing in support of the variance request for 547 Harrington Road. Based on my review, the proposed variance is both reasonable and consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood,” Bigos said.
Tom and Lindsay Pohlad also submitted a letter backing the request. They argued that the strict shoreline setback stems from rules dating back more than a century and would effectively prevent any new home from being built on the site today. “The requested variance, as we understand it, does not impact views of neighboring properties, and should be considered for approval,” they wrote.
David Erickson, a neighbor on Harrington Road, described the proposal as fair and forward-looking. “The proposed variance by the owners of 547 Harrington Road, as requested, is more than generous to existing neighbors and appears to solve the problems created by what may now be an outdated practice given the circumstances at the site. As neighbors on Harrington Road, we favor City approval,” Erickson wrote.
Anne Johnson, another Harrington Road resident, called the request both reasonable and appropriate for the site. “As a resident of Harrington Road, I can confirm that the variance requested regarding 547 Harrington Road is very reasonable and does not impact any neighbors. I am familiar with the property and also believe that the existing setback no longer makes any sense due to the site’s topography,” Johnson wrote.
From just down the street, James E. Johnson and Lucy Rosenberry Jones expressed their backing for the application. “We live at 562 Harrington Road and fully support the Swanson’s request for a variance,” they wrote.
Hans and Carolyn Hagen, neighbors on Harrington Road, urged the Council not only to approve the variance but to make it permanent. “As neighborhood residents, we support the Wayzata Planning Commission resolution granting the variance to the shoreline setback requested by the owner of Tract B, the Swanson family,” they wrote. The Hagens emphasized that the Swansons’ proposed setback and view corridor matched existing conditions established by adjacent homes to the north and south, and argued that the family would face “an unusual hardship” if the variance were denied.
John Nolan, who lives nearby on Harrington Road, said he carefully reviewed the Swansons’ application before weighing in. “After reviewing their request, I feel the request is reasonable, appropriate and meets both the spirit and the technical requirements for variance relief for all the reasons expressed in their variance application. I am in support of the city approving this request,” Nolan wrote.
Carole Hunter added her voice in favor of the application. “Hello – we are fine with the variance request for the Swansons,” she wrote.
Joann W. Leavenworth, whose family home at 543 Harrington Road sits immediately north of the Swansons, pointed to the site’s natural challenges. “Because of the topography of this property, the existing 1920s house is located where it is. It would not meet the current ‘lakeshore set back’ code. Please take this into consideration … One look and the situation would be very apparent to you,” Leavenworth wrote.
Council Discussion
Councilmember Alex Plechash gave a detailed critique of the application, saying he recognized the property’s unique challenges but felt the requested relief went too far. “The fact that the residence to the north was built so far back creates a setback requirement that is skewed and untenable in my opinion. I think everyone agrees on that … As it is, an appropriately sized house would be unbuildable within the constraints delineated and begs for a variance,” he said.
Even so, Plechash argued the proposal was “granting a variance in a vacuum” without construction plans and could set a troubling precedent. He said the request would still adversely affect views from 549 Harrington Road and was not in harmony with the intent of the ordinance. “The letter of the law on a setback requirement for this property is draconian, but the requested variance goes too far, I think … The bottom line is that for all the reasons stated, I will be voting to deny the variance tonight.”
Councilmember Molly MacDonald echoed many of Plechash’s concerns, while adding that the city’s focus on preservation was being overlooked. “Our comp plan does value a diverse housing stock and neighborhood charm … maybe someone would appreciate a beautiful 100-year-old well-built home to not be just thrown away,” she said. MacDonald agreed a variance was needed but felt the Swansons’ request went too far. She also questioned claims that the proposal would preserve trees and concluded it would negatively affect shoreline views. “With all of that said, I will not be voting to support this variance request,” she said.
Councilmember Ken Sorensen said he saw strong arguments on both sides but ultimately leaned toward approval. He noted the property’s unusual topography and shoreline bend created genuine practical difficulties. Sorensen said that while a home built at 108 feet might be partially visible from 549 Harrington Road, “to me, [that’s] not adverse, not significant,” especially given that mature trees already obscure the shoreline from that vantage point.
He also pointed out that pushing construction farther back would force a new house into steep ravines and heavily wooded areas, creating other challenges. Reviewing the variance standards, Sorensen concluded the request was in harmony with the ordinance and comprehensive plan, and not driven solely by economics. He added that the Council should not base its decision on litigation threats. “I’m inclined to approve this variance,” he said.
Councilmember Jeff Parkhill acknowledged the difficulty of the decision, noting that both the Swansons and the Cosentinos had strong arguments. He said the property’s topography created an “insurmountable burden” under the code, making a variance necessary. Parkhill praised the Swansons’ approach of shaping the building envelope with “red triangles” to protect views, calling it considerate.
After visiting both homes, he concluded any obstruction to 549 Harrington’s lake view would be minor and not significantly adverse. “There may be minor and inconvenient and distant view obstructions of the lake, but not something that I believe to have a significant adverse effect,” he said. While he wished the neighbors had reached a compromise privately, Parkhill stated he was inclined to support the variance as a reasonable solution to a difficult situation.
Mayor Andrew Mullin said the Council’s role was not to redraw a different setback line but to decide on the application before them. He noted the challenge of weighing subjective criteria like views and neighborhood character alongside objective standards.
Mullin pointed to several factors that led him to support approval: the setback would remain more than 75 feet from the water, satisfying the base ordinance; the Planning Commission had found no adverse impact on shoreline or lake views; and a shoreline impact plan would be required to address erosion and tree loss.
He also stressed that the property’s difficulties were unique and not created by the Swansons, and that economic considerations could not be the sole reason to grant or deny relief. “I’m a very pro property rights individual,” he said. “I’m leaning in support of this variance for all the reasons I’ve stated.”
In the end, the Council split 3–2, with Mayor Andrew Mullin, Jeff Parkhill, and Ken Sorensen voting in favor of the variance, while Alex Plechash and Molly MacDonald opposed. The decision allows Dick and Elaine Swanson to move forward with a shoreline setback of 108 feet at 547 Harrington Road, though any future redevelopment will still require a shoreline impact plan and compliance with all other city codes. The debate underscored the tension between preserving neighbor views, respecting property rights, and applying ordinances to unusual sites along Wayzata’s shoreline—questions the city is likely to face again as more historic lake homes come up for reinvention.
The Wayzata City Council voted 4-1 (MacDonald opposing) on September 23 to approve the preliminary plat for Ferndale Bluffs at 565 Ferndale Road West, reversing its April denial. In contrast to April’s decision, council members proceeded directly to the vote without any discussion.
Applicant Draycott DST has been working for years to subdivide its 11.67-acre parcel into three single-family lots with a new access road. The Planning Commission recommended approval in February by a 6-0 vote. But in April, the City Council rejected the request on a 3-2 vote, citing concerns about grading, tree removal, and the disruptive effect of a new public roadway.
That denial did not end the matter. Shortly after, the applicant filed suit against the city (Dray Trustee LLC v. City of Wayzata), arguing that the project met city code. While the lawsuit was pending, the Council adopted Ordinance 853, amending Wayzata’s subdivision code to allow lower-impact roadways in small subdivisions. The ordinance created new flexibility for narrower right-of-way, steeper grades, and private roadway options, provided state fire code is met.
With that ordinance in place, the project returned to the Council under Resolution 36-2025. The resolution grants preliminary plat approval, contingent on the applicant amending its plans to conform to the new roadway standards.
What was notable Tuesday night was not the outcome but the silence. Council members offered no discussion before voting to approve. The lack of debate stood in contrast to the hours of deliberation in earlier meetings, and it underscored what many observers saw as a legal reality: the applicant’s lawsuit may well have prevailed in court had the Council not reconsidered.
What’s the Difference Between a Preliminary and Final Plat?
Preliminary Plat
Concept-level approval showing how land will be divided and accessed.
Conditions can be attached that must be met before moving forward.
Approval allows the project to advance, but construction cannot begin.
Final Plat
Detailed engineering, grading, and utility plans completed.
Must comply with all conditions from preliminary approval.
Includes a binding development agreement with the city.
Only after final plat approval and recording can lots be sold or built upon.
Bottom Line:
The September 23 vote advances Ferndale Bluffs, but it is not the last word. The project must return to the Council for final plat approval before any development can proceed. Watch for the final plat to be approved in the future.
Former City Manager Jeff Dahl and current Mayor Andrew Mullin spoke at the March Business Council Meeting. File photo.
The Wayzata West Metro Chamber’s newest initiative is back for its second session. The Wayzata Business Council, launched earlier this year in partnership with the City of Wayzata, will meet again on Thursday, continuing its mission to connect local employers directly with city leaders.
The semi-annual forum is open to all Wayzata-based business professionals and owners. There is no cost to participate, and Chamber membership is not required.
“We are pleased to partner with the City of Wayzata in bringing this program to our Wayzata-based business professionals or business owners,” the Chamber said in announcing the program .
At the upcoming session, Acting City Manager Mike Kelly will deliver general city updates, while Mayor Andrew Mullin will address key issues. Topics may include the City’s proposed food and beverage sales tax, development activity, public safety initiatives, and infrastructure improvements.
The first Business Council meeting in March focused on growth pressures and development challenges, drawing a strong turnout. This second gathering builds on that foundation and offers another chance for employers to hear directly from city leadership.
Thursday’s meeting will be hosted at Fina’s, the coffee shop inside Josefina on Lake Street, with light breakfast and beverages provided by the City of Wayzata.
Hosted by the City of Wayzata and the Wayzata Crime Prevention Coalition, Night to Unite—formerly known as National Night Out—brings neighbors together with local police, firefighters, and city officials to build stronger community connections and promote public safety. On Tuesday evening, dozens of block parties were held across Wayzata, with city leaders rotating between them to listen, answer questions, and share updates.
At one particularly engaged gathering, conversation turned to familiar concerns: enforcement of e-bike regulations, exhibition driving, overgrown city landscaping, and the long-standing frustration over the neglected Wayzata Post Office lawn. Many quieter conversations also unfolded around the city’s pending short-term rental ordinance discussions—some supportive, others opposed—underscoring the range of resident perspectives as the issue moves closer to a council decision.
“We’re here to answer your questions.”
Police Chief Jamie Baker introduced herself to residents as Wayzata’s newly appointed top law enforcement officer, sharing that he brings over two decades of policing experience, including three years as Deputy Chief in New York. “I was Deputy Chief for three years… I [have] 21 years of law enforcement with another agency. So that’s me in a nutshell,” he said, speaking plainly and without fanfare. Mayor Andrew Mullin, known for his dry wit and easy rapport with residents, followed with a smile: “What she said. I’m the mayor.”
Post Office Lawn Sparks Frustration
The first question echoed a long-running complaint: the Wayzata Post Office’s lawn is overgrown and neglected. “Why they don’t take care of or maintain their grass or their lawn?” one resident asked.
Mayor Mullin acknowledged the frustration, saying: “We are actively policing from an inspection standpoint and trying to enforce our local ordinances as little tiny Wayzata against the federal government, which is not an easy thing to do… we understand how it looks, how it’s kept, and it’s not acceptable, and we will not stop until they do their job”.
He encouraged residents to contact Rep. Kelly Morrison, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, and Sen. Tina Smith directly, noting, “…citizens are really going to be the driving force… ” .
Gardens Overgrown, but Ideas Take Root
A resident who jokingly referred to herself as “the number one street walker in Wayzata” expressed concern about declining upkeep in landscaped public spaces, especially along Panoway.
Mullin responded, “You’re not alone in that point of view… The shadow side of what you’re asking for costs a lot of money… I hear you loud and clear. You’re not saying do more, you’re saying do less with higher quality”.
Several residents proposed reviving the city’s Adopt-a-Garden program. Mullin was receptive, noting its history and challenges, “Part of what has challenged the volunteer program is the volunteers to administer the volunteer program… I’d welcome investing in it more” .
He also floated a sponsorship idea, “Otten Brothers and some of these other businesses would gladly spend the money to outsource the upkeep—as long as they get to put a little sign in there. Could you sponsor a garden for $5,000 a year and just write the check?.”
E-Bikes and Teen Safety
One of the most urgent topics raised was the rise of e-bikes on sidewalks and paths. A resident asked about motorized bikes racing past walkers along the lakefront. Mullin and Baker were direct, “They’re not supposed to be on the sidewalks or the bike path… They need to follow all the same rules and regulations as regular, normal, non-motorized bikes” .
Mullin described enforcement measures already in place, “We passed a local ordinance that if you’re under 18 and you’re not wearing a helmet, we can stop you without cause and we can seize your bike and we can send your mom and dad a $200 fine… which is new on the books as of May 1st.”
Efforts to regulate high-powered throttle e-bikes—many of which can reach speeds comparable to mopeds—as motorcycles failed at the Minnesota Legislature last session. Mayor Mullin explained that while Wayzata and other cities have taken local action, broader regulation at the state level has been difficult to advance.
“…being a little naive and only in the chair for seven months, we got buzz-sawed by the lobbyists,” Mullin said, referring to the strong travel, leisure, and recreational bike industry that pushed back against proposed restrictions. “They killed our bill probably within four days of it hitting the floor.”
Despite the setback, Mullin said the city is not backing down. He’s working with legislators, to reintroduce a revised version of the bill in the upcoming session—this time with broader regional support. “We’re trying to get all 14 mayors [around Lake Minnetonka] to sign on to that bill to try to get action. I can’t promise it, but I can play you what we’re doing.”
The aim of the legislation is to reclassify throttle-assisted e-bikes in a way that gives law enforcement more tools to address safety concerns—especially around youth riders and pedestrian-heavy areas like Panoway.
Exhibition Driving Crackdown
A resident praised the city’s progress on curbing exhibition driving, saying, “It’s not perfect but it’s much better than it was.” Mullin confirmed the policy change, “If you have a second offense… it’s a $1,300 fine and you have to appear before a judge. That was not on the books last year” .
Parking on Hills Raises Alarms
One of the most personal and emotional moments of the evening came from a resident concerned about cars parked on both sides of a steep hill on Walker Avenue. “People gun it up the hill and all these kids… we’ve seen a lot of really, really close calls, and it freaks us out… In the winter it’s even worse because it’s very narrow. It’s dangerous,” stated a resident.
Chief Baker acknowledged the challenge: “It’s really difficult for us to address that if they’re parked legally,” but encouraged residents to call 911 during the incidents—even if it’s a non-emergency—so officers can document it live .
Good News on Home Burglaries
An attendee asked for an update on residential burglaries. Chief Baker reported improvement, “Those have calmed down… basically a ring that was out of the country. And so they’ve been charged federally.”
Budget Growth Draws Scrutiny
One resident asked Mayor Mullin about a previous reference to a 50% increase, prompting a pointed discussion about the city’s operating budget. Mullin clarified that while individual taxes hadn’t risen by that amount, the city’s overall operating expenses had grown significantly.
“The operating expenses of the city have gone up 50% over the past four years,” he said. “Public safety is going to be [the top] driver. Second would be inflation… and third, administration.”
He then made it clear he was speaking personally—not on behalf of the full council or city staff. “From my chair, my political answer is: we don’t have a money problem—we have a money management problem. And I will again only speak for myself. We’ve got to get our budget under control and we’ve got to get the levy [increase] to 5% or less.”
Mullin, who has lived in Wayzata for over 30 years, said he finds it “unconscionable” that the city’s spending has grown at that rate over just four years. He’s advocating for a target levy increase of 3–5%, tied more closely to inflation, and encouraged residents to ask other elected officials where they stand. “It means taking things off the list before you keep adding things on the list,” he added.
The exchange underscored the balancing act between maintaining service levels, managing growth, and respecting the tax burden on longtime residents.
One Night, Many Voices
As the event wrapped up, city officials were off to the next stop. “We appreciate it. Thank you,” said Mullin. “Great party, as always.” Officers were encouraged to grab a bite before hitting the road. The open dialogue underscored one of Wayzata’s key civic values: not just listening to residents—but acting on their words.
The Wayzata City Council will hold a public workshop this Wednesday to explore additional regulations beyond licensing on short-term rentals—a subject that has stirred strong neighborhood pushback, raised legal questions about property rights, and reignited a broader conversation about the town’s identity, zoning authority, and lakeside legacy.
As officials weigh how—and whether—to restrict the 16 vacation rentals in residential areas, they must also navigate a web of Minnesota statutes, case law, and long-established land use protections that make eliminating legal nonconforming uses far more complex than many residents may realize.
The workshop is scheduled for Wednesday, August 6, at 5:00 p.m. at Wayzata City Hall. The purpose of the meeting is to review staff research and recommendations, consider community feedback gathered through recent outreach efforts, and explore regulatory options for short-term rentals (STRs). Council members are expected to discuss potential ordinance changes, enforcement strategies, and how best to balance resident concerns with property rights and legal constraints.
Resident Concerns: A Neighborhood Perspective
For many Wayzata residents, the rise in short-term rentals has brought with it more than just new visitors—it’s introduced uncertainty into the daily rhythm of neighborhood life. In public comments and survey responses collected during two outreach sessions this summer, neighbors voiced a common theme: that the presence of transient guests is altering the character of otherwise stable residential blocks.
Noise complaints were among the most frequent concerns. Several residents reported repeated disturbances from parties, music, and late-night activity not typical of owner-occupied homes. One neighbor wrote, “Our quiet cul-de-sac now feels like a weekend resort zone. It’s not just one rental—it’s a revolving door.” Another cited issues with guests arriving late at night, struggling to find their rental, and creating disruption with headlights, luggage wheels, and shouted directions from driveways.
Traffic and parking pressures also surfaced. Residents observed increased vehicle turnover and limited street parking—particularly in areas not built to accommodate high guest volume. One comment noted, “We bought in a residential area with the expectation that we wouldn’t have cars blocking driveways and people coming and going at all hours.”
But beyond the surface-level disruptions, many expressed a deeper concern: that the presence of short-term rentals—particularly when clustered—erodes the fabric of community. As one survey respondent put it, “When homes become investment properties catering to tourists, we lose neighbors. Our kids lose playmates. Our sense of security changes.” Others noted a “hollowing out” of blocks where formerly long-term residents have been replaced by what some called “ghost houses”—properties that sit empty between bookings and rarely interact with surrounding households.
Several residents described the trend as a quiet commercialization of residential zoning. “This is a business,” one respondent said bluntly. “They’re not hosting guests—they’re running hotels, just without a front desk.” Another added, “The city’s zoning code didn’t intend for hotels to pop up in neighborhoods. That’s what these are.”
The perception that the city has licensed this shift without enough foresight or enforcement was a recurring frustration. A few residents acknowledged that not all short-term rentals are disruptive and that many hosts are responsible. But the overarching sentiment was clear: the current system lacks guardrails, and the burden of enforcement—when problems arise—falls unfairly on neighbors.
Despite the range of opinions, nearly all agreed on one point: Wayzata must find a way to protect residential character while addressing the legal complexity of existing STR licenses and the property rights of owners.
Historical Use and Evolution of Lodging in Wayzata
As the City of Wayzata wrestles with how to regulate short-term rentals in residential neighborhoods, it’s worth remembering that hosting out-of-town guests has long been woven into the fabric of this lakeside community. In fact, Wayzata’s early development was shaped in part by its reputation as a summer destination—its economy and culture built around hospitality.
Arlington House in Wayzata. Image courtesy of Lake Minnetonka Historical Society.
John Stevens Harrington staked the Ferndale peninsula in 1854 and soon enlarged his family log cabin to a 16-room boarding place he called “Lake Side Home,” quickly rebranded the Harrington Inn—the first purpose-built summer hotel on Lake Minnetonka. About the early 1870s he erected a bigger frame hostelry, the Harrington House, at the peninsula’s south tip. That hotel later burned, but its barn survived long enough for its timbers to be reused in a bridge on the neighboring James Ford Bell estate. Harrington also cut the first north-shore wagon route—originally Harrington Road, today’s Ferndale Road—cementing both the geography and the name of one of Wayzata’s most storied neighborhoods.
The Arlington House was one of Wayzata’s earliest and most prominent hotels, operating in the late 19th century during the height of Lake Minnetonka’s steamboat tourism era. Located near the present day Wayzata Sailing School, it served as a gateway for summer visitors arriving from Minneapolis and beyond. With its wraparound porches and elevated views, the Arlington was emblematic of Wayzata’s early identity as a resort town. Its presence—and that of other boarding houses and inns along Lake Street—underscored a time when guest accommodations were not only accepted but essential to the town’s economy and charm. Though the Arlington no longer stands, its legacy endures as part of Wayzata’s heritage of welcoming outsiders to the lakeshore.
Downtown Wayzata’s lodging era continued with Henry Maurer’s Minnetonka House, opened on Lake Street near Broadway in 1870, expanded to fifty rooms by 1876, and razed in 1900 after the resort boom faded. On the same block A. O. Matson’s summer boarding-house changed hands in 1871, grew under H. L. Gleason’s ownership, and lived on as the thirty-guest Gleason House behind the 600 block of Lake Street until its 1966 demolition. Farther down Lake Street, the Blue Bird Inn and a neighboring rooming house catered to boarders until both were gutted in the great fire of April 30, 1926, ending Wayzata’s early boarding-house chapter.
This informal network of guest accommodations was not just tolerated; it was part of what made Wayzata thrive. With regular lake excursions, train connections to Minneapolis, and a cool summer breeze drawing urban dwellers west, the line between private residence and public hospitality was often blurred. Many longtime families supplemented their income by hosting boarders, and entire blocks functioned as de facto vacation enclaves during the summer months.
The Tradition Lives On
Wayzata’s city code explicitly allows bed and breakfast inns as a conditional use in several residential zoning districts, including R-1A, R-2, and R-3 under Chapter 925. Enacted before a viable hotel project existed in Wayzata, the ordinance reflected a deliberate policy choice to enable lodging in a broad swath of residential neighborhoods—at a time when no large-scale hotel investor, operator, or site had emerged. It aimed to welcome visitors through small-scale, owner-occupied accommodations woven into the existing fabric of the community. By contrast, hotels are treated as commercial uses and are only permitted in designated business districts.
The bed and breakfast ordinance requires the manager to live on site, while the hotel ordinance imposes no such residency requirement. Both are governed by performance standards related to safety, parking, and occupancy. The B&B framework was an early effort to balance tourism with residential character—offering a precedent for how managed, small-scale lodging can coexist with neighborhood life.
Wayzata’s only downtown hotel, the Hotel Landing, sits directly adjacent to a residential neighborhood—offering a real-world illustration of how hospitality and home life already coexist in close proximity. Coach buses, food delivery trucks, limousines, and a steady stream of guests are regular features along the residential streets within the neighborhood to the east of the hotel.
On summer nights, music from events drifts across backyards, and occasionally the unmistakable aroma of fried food from the hotel’s restaurant carries into nearby homes. This juxtaposition hasn’t been deemed a nuisance under city code—raising fair questions about whether similar activity from a licensed short-term rental warrants greater scrutiny simply because it’s hosted in a single-family home.
Today’s short-term rentals represent a digital-era evolution of Wayzata’s long history of guest accommodations. Though managed differently—and often with more commercial intent—the impulse is familiar: Wayzata has always opened its doors to visitors. The present challenge lies in crafting ordinances that preserve neighborhood integrity without erasing this deeply rooted tradition of hospitality.
A Phased Elimination: City’s Stated Intent to Sunset STRs
While policy discussions may explore middle-ground regulation, city documents make clear that the long-term goal is to eliminate most short-term rentals (STRs) in Wayzata’s residential neighborhoods.
According to the August 6, 2025 City Council Agenda Report, staff recommend that all STRs in single- and two-family zoning districts be phased out. Under the proposal, currently licensed STRs would be allowed to operate only through January 1, 2027, after which all rentals must be for at least one month in duration—with limited exceptions for primary homesteads.
This “sunset” strategy echoes earlier staff comments made during public outreach sessions. As documented in a June 26, 2025 meeting memo, staff explicitly stated that “the goal of the proposed changes was to sunset existing STR licenses over time.”
If adopted, this approach would end legal short-term rentals in most of Wayzata’s residential areas within two years, regardless of whether they have previously operated with city-issued licenses. While framed as a transition, this policy would represent a significant shift—and could raise legal questions around vested rights and non-conforming use protections.
Local Residency Requirement: A Legal and Practical Question
One element under consideration is whether short-term rental owners should be required to live in Wayzata—a condition that appeared in staff memos and public discussion as a possible restriction moving forward.
On its face, the idea reflects a desire for local accountability: by limiting STR licenses to Wayzata residents (or homesteads), the city hopes to reduce absentee ownership and maintain neighborhood cohesion. However, such a requirement raises both legal and practical concerns.
From a legal standpoint, courts have been skeptical of residency-based restrictions on property rights, particularly when they discriminate against non-resident property owners. Imposing a “Wayzata resident only” clause could invite constitutional scrutiny under equal protection and commerce clause doctrines, especially if the restriction limits access to property use based on an owner’s mailing address rather than conduct.
Practically speaking, enforcing a residency requirement would be complex. Owners may claim homestead status while spending significant time elsewhere, or transfer property into trusts or LLCs that obscure residency. The city would likely need to create and enforce a detailed definition of “residency,” and such a condition would do little to address behavior-based concerns like noise or parking.
In short, while the proposal may reflect a legitimate goal—ensuring STRs remain tied to community values—a blanket residency rule may prove both implausible in application and potentially vulnerable in court. Targeting conduct, not identity, tends to yield more enforceable and equitable results.
City Code and Legal Constraints: Nonconforming Uses Cannot Simply Be Banned
Under Minnesota law and Wayzata’s own city code, a legally established nonconforming use—such as a short-term rental permitted in the past—cannot be summarily banned or revoked by the city unless it meets a high legal threshold. This is a key consideration as the City Council explores new regulations for short-term rentals.
According to Minn. Stat. § 462.357, Subd. 1e, “A zoning ordinance may not prohibit the continuation of a nonconforming use unless the use is discontinued for a period of more than one year or is declared a nuisance and abated as such.” This likely means that unless a short-term rental is abandoned or the city legally declares it a public nuisance, its operation is protected.
Wayzata’s own City Code (Chapter 915) mirrors this limitation. The code specifies that a non-conforming use may continue “at the size and in the manner of operation existing” at the time it was lawfully established. Importantly, the code states that when a property “poses a danger and/or threat to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community,” the city may begin a process to declare it a nuisance—but this must be supported by documented study and evidence, not mere opinion or neighborhood preference.
Additionally, the city code clarifies that a license or permit does not eliminate vested rights to continue a nonconforming use. In other words, revoking or failing to renew an STR license does not automatically nullify the underlying legal status of the use. The City Code appears to affirm that these rights “run with the land” and are not dependent on annual administrative approval.
This legal framework likely creates a high bar for the city to remove existing STRs unless they are discontinued voluntarily or proven to be detrimental to the public’s health or safety—similar to how a city might deal with an asphalt plant that was legally constructed decades ago but is now considered incompatible with its surrounding neighborhood. The presence of neighbor complaints alone, while politically relevant, is unlikely to meet the legal threshold needed to revoke a nonconforming use.
To declare all or individual short-term rentals a nuisance, the city likely must present documented evidence—such as police reports, administrative citations, or verified code violations—showing the property or properties pose a threat to health, safety, or welfare. So far, no such evidence has been presented–at least within the City Council Workshop Packet. In fact, the city has issued licenses for these properties, which might make it legally difficult to argue they are nuisances after the fact. Without a clear record of problems, a nuisance claim is unlikely to hold up.
Ultimately, any effort to sunset existing STRs must carefully navigate these legal protections to avoid property rights challenges and potential litigation.
Legal Precedent Analogy: The Asphalt Plant
The City of St. Paul’s asphalt plant. Image courtesy City of St. Paul.
To understand the likely legal complexity surrounding short-term rentals (STRs), it helps to consider a common analogy in land use law: an asphalt plant.
Imagine an asphalt plant built decades ago on the edge of town. At the time, it was a legal use under local zoning. Over the years, the neighborhood grew around it. Today, nearby residents may dislike the noise, the smell, or the truck traffic—but the plant remains protected because it was lawfully established. Unless the city can prove the use has become a public nuisance—a threat to health, safety, or general welfare—it likely cannot simply shut it down.
The same principle applies to almost all legal-nonconformities statewide.
This analogy isn’t meant to equate the impact of a vacation rental with that of an industrial plant, but rather to illustrate the legal threshold. Like the asphalt plant, STRs that were lawful when established are likely to be legally entrenched. While the City may regulate future licenses, eliminating existing uses without due process or a formal nuisance finding would likely face legal challenge. With the City of Wayzata already involved in two ongoing property development lawsuits, proceeding cautiously to avoid additional legal challenges may be a prudent course of action.
Any policy shift must therefore distinguish between forward-looking regulation and the protected status of what came before.
STR License Issued From Residential Rental Code
Wayzata’s current approach to short-term rentals falls under Chapter 815 of the City Code, which governs rental dwelling licenses. The ordinance defines its scope broadly, stating that it applies to “all rental dwellings and rental units located within the City.” This inclusive language makes no exception based on the duration of the rental, meaning the same licensing framework applies whether a unit is rented for one night or one year.
Short-term rentals are further defined within the ordinance as any lease under 30 consecutive days, yet this distinction doesn’t appear to carve out a separate category of land use. Instead, it appears that short-term rentals are treated as a form of residential tenancy—likely regulated not by exclusion from zoning districts, but through operational standards such as licensing, inspections, and occupancy rules. Because the ordinance suggests this is a residential use subject to licensure, not a distinct commercial activity, any attempt to phase them out or prohibit them could raise legal questions related to vested rights and nonconforming use protections under Minnesota law.
Policy Middle Ground: Where Might Consensus Land?
As the Wayzata City Council prepares to deliberate on next steps, several compromise measures may be discussed. These options aim to address resident concerns while preserving certain property rights for existing short-term rental (STR) owners.
Possible regulatory options include:
Require a local manager or contact to oversee the property and respond to issues—similar to hotel and B&B standards under Wayzata code. Many STRs already use local staff & cleaners who may be able to fill this role, or nearby owners could serve as on-site representatives.
Caps on the number of STRs allowed per block or neighborhood, to prevent over-concentration;
Limits on party size, enforceable parking rules, and noise thresholds tailored to residential areas;
Enhanced licensing standards, including clearer operational expectations and expanded enforcement mechanisms.
Many in the community have acknowledged that “some regulation is appropriate” to strike a balance between protecting the integrity of Wayzata’s neighborhoods and respecting the rights of licensed STR operators. These measures may form the foundation of any near-term policy consensus, particularly as the city navigates the legal and logistical challenges of managing existing STRs.
Stakeholder Divide: Property Rights vs. Neighborhood Integrity
At the heart of the short-term rental (STR) debate in Wayzata lies a fundamental tension between two deeply held priorities: individual property rights and neighborhood preservation.
On one side, STR operators see the practice as a lawful use of their property—often supported by a valid city-issued license. For some, it provides essential supplemental income; for others, it’s the only way to afford homeownership in a high-cost community like Wayzata, allowing them to pay the mortgage while attending college or spending time elsewhere. They argue that responsible hosting should not be penalized simply because it differs from traditional models of occupancy.
On the other side, many long-term residents express concern that STRs introduce transient activity into otherwise stable, family-oriented neighborhoods. They cite worries about livability, safety, and community identity, fearing that unchecked short-term rentals could erode the very character that draws people to live in Wayzata in the first place.
These competing narratives—both grounded in personal investment and civic pride—have made the issue one of the most polarizing policy challenges the city has faced in recent years.
Next Steps
Wayzata residents can expect City staff and the Council to continue refining draft ordinance language following the upcoming workshop. If formal code amendments are pursued, they would follow the City’s standard public process—likely including Planning Commission review, legal vetting, and additional public hearings.
Any effort to restrict or phase out existing short-term rentals is likely to face legal hurdles tied to vested rights and nonconforming use protections under Minnesota law—including challenges to a possible residency requirement.
Wayzata.com will cover the workshop in full and report on Council deliberations, proposed regulations, and next steps for community input.
Editor’s Note: Chapter 815 and the analysis of rental license regulations have been added to this article to clarify how Wayzata currently governs both short- and long-term residential rentals.
WAYZATA – After 40 years of service with the City of Wayzata, Kurt Klapprich has retired from his role in public works but will continue as a volunteer firefighter. Listen to a full-length audio interview with Kurt here:
Klapprich began working for the city on March 18, 1985. A lifelong Wayzata resident and third-generation public servant, he brought to the role not just skill, but heart.
“I grew up here in Wayzata, so it was something I cared about—my community,” he said. “And it seemed like a good job.”
Staying Power and Service
Asked if he ever imagined staying with the city for four decades, Klapprich smiled.
“I really did not,” he said. “I thought I was just going to work there for a while and then move on to something else. But it just fulfilled everything that I like. I like my town, and I love working and helping people.”
Kurt Klapprich at a fire on Gleahaven Road in 2011.
Over the years, he’s watched Wayzata change dramatically.
“When I started working there, the public works garage was down where the parking ramp is on Mill Street,” he said. “It had a cement bay for the mechanic, but the rest of it was a dirt floor. And where McCormick’s is now—it was a gravel parking lot. Down on the other end of Lake Street, further west, there was a lumberyard and bulk oil tanks.”
He’s seen the old 1960s-style Bay Center give way to five-story buildings. “Pretty abrupt change,” he said.
The Rink, the Beach, the Trash Cans
Though major projects like Lake Street and the lake walk were contracted out, Klapprich and his crew had a hand in nearly everything.
“We all had parts and pieces where we were coordinating and had a hand in making it happen,” he said. “Just all the stuff that’s gone on, mostly in the downtown.”
He also did the daily work most residents rarely think about—but always rely on.
“As a parks department, we service about 80 trash cans around town. We don’t have any big parks like some of the surrounding cities, but we’ve got tennis courts that we try to keep clean, the bocce ball courts, and we inspect playgrounds, the boardwalks, and the docks so people can use them safely.”
And in the summertime? “We rake the beach seven days a week for weeds. Clean public bathrooms. It’s not all just mowing grass and plowing snow.”
The Skating Rink Standard
Kurt Klapprich at the Klapprich Warming House.
Among all the tasks, Klapprich may be best known for setting the standard at Wayzata’s beloved outdoor skating rink.
“We always had the skating rink, and we didn’t do anything with it on weekends,” he recalled. “So it took us until about Wednesday to get good ice back down there.”
It was then-Mayor Barry Petit who advocated for seven-day-a-week maintenance—something Kurt supported wholeheartedly.
“It was just so worth it to do that,” he said. “It’s like anything else—you maintain it, and it doesn’t get too far out of whack. It’s so well-renowned. You go out there and see sweatshirts from Mound, Eden Prairie, Maple Grove… People know it’s kept up to a good standard, and they come in and love to skate there.”
A Fire Department Tradition
Klapprich will continue to serve the Wayzata Fire Department after already logging 43 years.
“It’s probably just a little bit more of helping people,” he said. “It’s a learned behavior. I don’t know how long my grandfather was on, but my dad was on for 49 years. My older brother has been on for 47. And I’ve been on for 43.”
The Wayzata Fire Department responded to a fire in Minnetrista.
“It’s very rewarding to go and help people—sometimes at their worst moment. If nothing else, offer a hug.”
The Hardest Day
When asked about the most difficult moment in his career, he didn’t hesitate.
“When my brother passed away,” he said quietly. “I worked with him for—yup—20-some years. It was one of those things—when I left the funeral and went back to work… I knew that all his coworkers were hurting too. That was probably the most challenging.”
“Lots of people would ask you questions, say they were sorry for your loss and whatnot. But to go and work with those same folks you’d been working with—minus a loved one—was not much fun.”
His brother Cookie passed away from undetected heart disease in his sleep. “Fortunately, he didn’t suffer,” Kurt said. “I don’t think he knew anything was going on. He was a proactive guy. If something was wrong, I think he would’ve gone to the doctor.”
Advice for the Next Generation
What would he tell someone just starting in public service or city maintenance?
“It’s pretty much all about relationships,” he said. “If you’re going to be out there, it’s better to go the extra mile—do more rather than less. It’s far more rewarding to build allies than enemies. Even if it’s maybe not completely your job—if you can help out in some way, people really do appreciate it.”
“People—whether we know it or not—are always watching what’s going on out there.”
What’s Next
Klapprich plans to take some well-earned time off even as he continues to serve on the Fire Department.
“I’m gonna take a little bit of time to not have to be anywhere for a while,” he said. “Then I’ll probably volunteer at Chamber events. And who knows—I might go back and be the rink guy down at the skating rink this winter.”
He and his wife, Steph, plan to spend more time at their family cabin and hope to travel to Arizona this fall to visit her dad. “Maybe we’ll go on a trip over the winter sometime,” he added.
Just this week, Kurt was named Grand Marshal of the James J. Hill Days Parade.
“The Chamber ladies asked me to stop by the Depot—they said it would just be short,” he said. “And they kind of surprised me. They read a poem to me, and in the poem was asking me to be the Grand Marshal.”
“I’m honored. So many people do so many good things for our community. They could’ve picked any number of people. I’m honored they chose me.”
Listen to the Full Interview
To hear Kurt’s full story—in his own words—Wayzata.com invites you to listen to the exclusive audio interview included with this post. It’s a heartfelt conversation about legacy, change, service, and love for a town he helped care for with humility and quiet pride.
Listen in—and the next time you walk past Klapprich Park, or lace up your skates at the rink—think of the man who spent 40 years making Wayzata feel like home.
At an upcoming meeting on July 15, the Wayzata City Council is expected to consider a resolution authorizing the submission of a grant application to the Minnesota Historical Society. The grant would help fund the restoration of the historic Section Foreman House, a lakeside landmark slated for reuse as a public learning center under Phase 3 of the Panoway initiative.
City staff is recommending approval of the resolution, which would allow Wayzata to request $308,829 from the Minnesota Historical and Cultural Heritage Grants program. The project’s total estimated cost is $868,576, with the remaining funds—$559,747—committed by the Wayzata Conservancy or secured through additional grant opportunities.
File photo.
The Section Foreman House, a small rail-era structure near the lakefront, has long been viewed as a key part of Wayzata’s plan to expand access to Lake Minnetonka and create new indoor-outdoor educational space. If restored, it would serve as the future home of the proposed Lakeshore Learning Center—offering programming tied to history, ecology, and lake stewardship.
According to city documents, the grant builds upon a previous Legacy Grant that funded the creation of architectural plans and construction documents. This next phase would bring the vision to life.
“This project supports our strategic priority of sustaining community character,” said Parks and Environment Planner Nick Kieser in a staff report. “It’s an opportunity to preserve an important piece of our heritage while expanding public access to the lake.”
The Minnesota Historical Society’s Legacy Grant program is funded through the Clean Water, Land, and Legacy Amendment, which supports the preservation of significant historic and cultural resources across the state.
If the council adopts the resolution, the city will submit the application ahead of the upcoming grant deadline. Award announcements are expected later this year.
You must be logged in to post a comment.