Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />II <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />settlements to $100,000; and <br />. Clarifying and maintaining the applicability of municipal immunity in various <br />areas including, but not limited to: snow and ice immunity, park and <br />h*reational immunity, including the extension to entities providing a public <br />flervice that have not traditionally been included within the immunity (e.g. state <br />trails over municipal utility easements), vicarious official immunity, and <br />problems related to the Y2k computer issue. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />SD-4. Environmental Protection (rs) <br />[significant revisions needed] <br /> <br />IS:J-:::>:- State and federal environmental programs are improperly designed to meet <br />their stated goals, and impose an undue burden on local governments because of a lack of <br />federal or state'financial assistance. The refusal to finance these programs by the <br />governments that pass them has eliminated an essential restraining feature in program <br />design and implementation. <br /> <br />-~ <br /> <br />Specific problems include: <br /> <br />. New programs or standards are continually adopted without regard to the existence, <br />attainability, or cost of existing programs and standards. <br />. Inability of regulatory bodies to use good science and accurate data when establishing <br />permit criteria. For example, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Citizens <br />Board's recent decisions resulted in a phosphorus standard for the city of Greenfield <br />that was inconsistent with current data and likely not to have been recommended by <br />agency staff. <br />. Fragmented program adoption and implementation does not ensure prioritization of <br />environmental matters or the establishment of comprehensive environmental <br />protection strategies. <br />. "One size fits all" implementation of programs force remedial efforts by local <br />governments for nonexistent environmental problems. <br />. Permit fees and other cost transfer elements of federal and state programs do not'- <br />provide an incentive for environmental agency efficiency, policy prioritization, or risk <br />assessment. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />In addition to the above problems, cities face emerging issues in the areas of drainage, <br />bio-solids, wellhead protection, and feedlots. <br /> <br />Response: <br /> <br />. A comprehensive effort to consolidate, reorganize, and manage state and federal <br />environmental agencies and programs should be undertaken, and a partial or <br />full moratorium on new programs or requirements should be considered. <br />. Permit fees should be limited to 50 percent of the agency's direct operating costs <br />in order to promote efficient agency operation and sufficient legislative <br />oversight. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />3 <br />