Laserfiche WebLink
qASFffih-hE <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Department Approval <br />Date: 1/23/12 <br />Item No.: 12. d <br />City Manager Approval <br />Item Description: Adopt a Resolution Rejecting Proposed Grass Lake Water Management <br />Organization Joint Powers Language and to Petition Dissolution <br />1 BACKGROUND <br />2 The Grass Lake Water Management Organization Board last met with the City Council in <br />3 November 2011. Staff had additional discussion with the Council on November 19, 2011 <br />4 regarding the proposed joint powers agreement language changes that would reduce the city's <br />5 financial controls over the organization and other governance issues including merger with other <br />6 water management organizations. The Council indicated a desire to wait until Shoreview had an <br />7 opportunity to meet with the Grass Lake Board to take action on the proposed agreement <br />8 language changes. The City Council indicated concerns with the proposed changes and concerns <br />9 about managing these watershed resources in the same manner in the future. <br />lo The options the cities have related to the future of the GLWMO are: <br />11 <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 />1. To approve the proposed revised joint powers agreement language and subsequent annual <br />funding requests. The Board would then continue to work on a Watershed Management <br />Plan that meets regulatory agency review and approval. This would probably require <br />additional staff and professional services for the Board to meet performance goals set for <br />the organization by the Board of Water and Soil Resources. The long term cost for this <br />option is somewhat unknown until a plan is approved but in any case it will be <br />significantly more than current budgeting for the organization. City staff feels this is the <br />least desirable option given the small physical area of the Grass Lake watershed when <br />adjacent watersheds have staff resources in place to administratively manage Grass Lake <br />resources. <br />2. The city councils could choose to not approve the proposed revised joint powers <br />agreement language. This would put the GLWMO Board in a position of not having the <br />ability to get a plan approved by BWSR as they have stated they need revised JPA <br />language to approve a plan. Without an approved plan BWSR would eventually dissolve <br />the organization for failure to meet their performance requirements for watershed <br />organizations. The cities would have little input into the future management of the <br />watershed resources under this scenario. <br />3. The other option is for the councils to reject the language proposed by the Board and <br />petition the Board to dissolve the organization. The process for this is set forth in the <br />current approved joint powers agreement and gives the cities and the Board opportunities <br />to be a part of the process of redrawing adjacent watershed boundaries through petition to <br />BWSR. City staff feels this is the preferred option which provides some local input into <br />who manages the watershed resources in the future. We also feel that existing agencies <br />have the administrative resources to manage additional area and can do so without <br />Pagel of 3 <br />