Laserfiche WebLink
554 Mr. Petersen had also provided a memorandum dated September 19, 2011 addressed to members of the <br />555 GLWMO Board and entitled, "Highlights /Paraphrase Summary of the April 2009 BARR Lake Owasso <br />556 Use Attainability Analysis (UAA) Report. <br />557 <br />558 Ms. Correll noted that to -date they had received 434 individual comments, with 199 submitted by state <br />559 agencies, member cities and/or Ramsey County; and the remaining 135 had been received from the Lake <br />560 Owasso Association and /or residents of the watershed, resulting in 69 pages of comments. Ms. Correll <br />561 advised that, even though their firm had written a number of plans to -date, this represented the most <br />562 comments ever received by FOR to a Water Management Plan. <br />563 <br />564 Ms. Correll opined that it was great that there was such interest in the Plan, and that many of the <br />565 comments were very well- thought -out and provided constructive criticism; but for tonight's discussion, <br />566 asked that the GLWMO Board focus on the summary of EOR's discussion with representatives of the <br />567 BWSR and Metropolitan Council as summarized in EOR's September 12, 2011 memorandum to the <br />568 GLWMO Board. <br />569 <br />570 Ms. Correll noted that both BWSR and the Metropolitan Council seemed to be seeking significant <br />571 assurance about the GLWMO's future governance and financing structure to ensure that Plan goals could <br />572 be accomplished. Ms. Correll noted that this may be based, in part, on the GLWMO's past lack of <br />573 activities and accomplishments; and their desire to have clearly defined implementation activities and <br />574 outcomes. Ms. Correll noted that the GLWMO didn't currently have a lot of programs; and <br />575 recommended that the Board add a technical assistance program addressing how the GLWMO will hire <br />576 technical staff to implement projects in the future. Ms. Correll noted that this requirement had been a <br />577 surprise to EOR, and included a lot more detail than what BWSR normally requires of WMO's. <br />578 <br />579 Mr. Petersen questioned the statutory authority for those requirements; concurring that, based on his <br />580 experience in the field, he had never known BWSR to require a detailing of how a WMO purchases <br />581 technical services. <br />582 <br />583 Ms. Correll introduced Mr. Pat Conrad, with EOR, attending tonight's meeting with her, noting that his <br />584 credentials included serving as the primary author of the Capitol Region Water Management Plan, among <br />585 other Watershed organization Plans. <br />586 <br />587 Mr. Conrad opined that BWSR was seeking assurances that the GLWMO had a process in place to "get <br />588 things done ", with some sort of part- or full -time professional service /staffing budgeted for and available <br />589 for implementation. <br />590 <br />591 At the request of Member Von De Linde as to the comments received from other agencies, Ms. Correll <br />592 admitted that she was most surprised by the requirements of the MPCA and the DNR related to a <br />593 monitoring plan and documentation. Ms. Correll advised that, according to a phone conversation with <br />594 BWSR's , Melissa Lewis earlier today, there was new management at both agencies and new rules that <br />595 were starting to be enforced. <br />596 <br />597 Chair Eckman opined that there seemed to be a change in scope since initial conversations and direction <br />598 was addressed with Ms. Lewis at BWSR and their response to the Plan. <br />599 <br />600 Ms. Correll concurred, noting that such a change had not been published on their website or those <br />601 additional requirements known; nor had there been anything mentioned in the Stakeholder input process <br />602 to -date, causing further surprise on the part of FOR to the new Plan requirements of BWSR, Metro <br />603 Council, DNR and MPCA. <br />604 <br />12 <br />