2015-02-11 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

_ •a,r R W 4Pf.�♦ f �4��y rof DNR Q&A Dec. 1 2014 Media contacts: Chris Niskanen, DNR communications director, 651-259-5023, Chris.niskanen(alstate.mn.us. DNR settles lawsuit over White Bear Lake water levels The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources recently settled a lawsuit through mediation with plaintiffs over White Bear Lake water levels. Here are some questions and answers regarding the settlement and the agency's ongoing efforts to advance long term groundwater sustainability in the northeast Twin Cities metropolitan area. The Q&A provides background material about the settlement. Q:What is the background on this lawsuit? A: In the past several years,White Bear Lake's water levels have been at the lower end of their historic range. Experts disagree about the fundamental causes of the low levels.The DNR was sued in Ramsey County District Court in 2012, with the plaintiffs claiming that, by allowing 13 local communities to use groundwater for their public water supply,the DNR has permitted too much groundwater use in the area,thus lowering White Bear Lake.The plaintiffs asked the judge to set a lake water elevation, reduce local communities'groundwater use, and require the agency to augment the lake with an additional water supply. Q: What are the key aspects of the settlement? A: The settlement,which is subject to court approval, halts the litigation up to three years. During this time, the DNR and the two local communities involved in the mediation have agreed to support efforts to develop a surface water supply to serve area communities.The DNR has also agreed to set a protective elevation for White Bear Lake by Nov. 1,2016. Finally, all parties to the settlement have agreed to pursue conservation measures. Q: What is envisioned for the alternative water supply? A: The DNR has agreed to support a two phased option identified in the Met Council's June 2014 Draft Water Feasibility Report to move 13 communities from groundwater and to surface water from the Mississippi River for their public water supply.The first phase of the project(Phase 1)would move six communities-Mahtomedi, North Saint Paul,Shoreview, Vadnais Heights,White Bear Lake,and White Bear Township—to a surface water supply system. The Phase I project would cost an estimated$155 million to$230 million.The DNR agreed to support a legislative proposal advanced by a public entity to fully fund the feasibility and design of Phase I by August 2016. Under the settlement agreement,the target for full construction funding is August 2017. The DNR also agreed to support Phase II and to work with seven additional communities in the northeast metro to move these communities to surface water. There are no timelines set out in the settlement agreement for this Phase II work. Q:What does the settlement mean to lake levels? A:White Bear Lake's levels are driven by complex and interconnected factors.The DNR cannot guarantee when and how lake levels will respond to implementation of the various settlement terms. However,we are confident that the settlement is fundamentally based on sound water resource management principles. Q: Does the settlement commit the Met Council or the Legislature to fund or implement the water supply project? A: No.The settlement is an agreement among the parties to the litigation and is not binding on any other party. As the lead for water supply planning in the Twin Cities,the Met Council has examined alternatives to addressing northeast metro water needs.The DNR and the other parties carefully considered the Met Council's draft June 2014 report in developing the settlement agreement, but the Council is not party to the settlement and is not committed to advancing any legislative proposal. Additionally,the DNR and the other parties to the settlement certainly cannot obligate the Legislature. Rather,the settlement agreement is an opportunity to halt the litigation for three years,allowing time for appropriate legislative consideration and debate. P18