2011-11-17_Minutes_PH - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

255 256 Joanna LaBresh, 705 Heinel Circle (Roseville) 257 *Note: Ms. LaBresh served as a member of the GLWMO Task Force on Govemance/Finance 258 259 Ms. LaBresh opined that it was a shame to observe who was in tonight's audience, when they represented 260 Lake Owasso residents, when for every person living on a lake, there were ten (10) other residents 261 without lake access, yet having great impacts on those lakes due to what was running off their lawns and 262 causing pollution on area lakes. While supporting the need for a Plan, Ms. LaBresh opined that the focus 263 needed to be on the real culprits who were not in tonight's audience. Ms. LaBresh noted the passion of 264 residents on the lake; and recognized future plans for education/outreach by the GLWMO; however, she 265 noted the need to spend efforts on those residents not living on the lake, when their leaves were washing 266 down storm gutters and everywhere else, and money needed to be spent letting those residents know the 267 results of their actions and the ultimate harm to area lakes. 268 269 Bill Frank, 3141 Sandy Hook Drive 270 Mr. Frank admitted to not having read the Plan, since its 200 pages were too daunting. Mr. Frank 271 suggested if the GLWMO was going to develop a Plan, it needed to be simple enough for people to read 272 and understand. Mr. Frank opined that, while leaves may be a source of phosphorus in lakes, there must 273 also be other sources coming into the lake; and suggested that bird droppings may also have a negative 274 impact, noting the substantial goose and duck population in the area. As a former resident on Lake 275 Minnetonka, Mr. Frank advised that he had observed a similar process as that of Lake Owasso, with the 276 lake becoming cloudy and murky during summer months; however, it was clear in the spring and fall. 277 While not understanding the science of the situation, Mr. Frank opined that it must have something to do 278 with the lake's temperature. Mr. Frank further opined that by simplifying what the GLWMO was trying 279 to do, they could add their bank of strategies and goals. 280 281 Mr. Petersen Response to Comments 282 Mr. Petersen reiterated the intent of the GLWMO Board to digest information from public comment, in 283 addition to written comment already received from the public and agencies; and that subsequently a 284 revised version of the Plan would ultimately find its way back to state agencies for their review and 285 approval, as previously stated by Ms. Correll during her explanation of the review process. Mr. Petersen 286 assured members of the audience that the GLWMO Board would take public comments into consideration 287 as they deliberated revisions to the next draft of the Plan. However, Mr. Petersen advised that, in 288 accordance with the legal review process, there was no additional public review period requiring formal 289 response from the GLWMO Board; and as had Ms. Correll previously, Mr. Petersen reiterated past 290 opportunities for public review of the Plan. 291 292 Unidentified member of audience (off- microphone) 293 Inaudible. 294 295 Audience member (Andy Walz off microphone) 296 Mr. Walz stated that he would appreciate the revised Plan being made available to the public on the 297 GLWMO website before it went to state agencies; while recognizing that the opportunity for public 298 comment was at tonight's Public Hearing. 299 300 Several audience members (off - microphone) 301 Anonymous speakers expressed concern that it was hard to make comment on a Plan when you hadn't 302 been able to read it for one reason or another. 303 304 305 6