2006-10-26_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

August 17, 2006 GLWMO Board Members: Since I am not an official associated with the GLWMO I feel a bit awkward speaking up at your meetings. Still, I appreciate the opportunity to say a few words at your recent meeting of Thursday July 27, 2006. I am writing to express some additional points I feel need to be made beyond the comments I offered at the meeting. Clearly stated Purpose & Objectives Much of the meeting on July 27"' was spent debating whether or not a stated purpose of a water quality study was necessary. Normally, when I have been involved in such discussions, a sometimes controversial, but very necessary and healthy debate ensues on WHAT should be the purpose and objectives; not IF there should be a stated purpose and objective. I am in agreement with Commissioner Moss with regard to the need for clearly stated purpose and objectives for a water quality study undertaken by the GLWMO. Whether an initiative is public or private, defining purpose and objectives are rudimentary. This is why it does not make sense to me that much of the meeting was spent debating whether it was necessary to clearly state a purpose and objective. This should especially be the case when tax payer dollars are ultimately involved. The board then went on to discuss extending the water quality study of Lake Owasso to possibly lease or purchase equipment for $36,000 and possibly hire Barr Engineering for another capital expenditure. How can the GLWMO be talking about additional studies and expenditures when it struggles with the necessity to have a clearly stated purpose of a water quality study? The GLWMO needs to have the WHAT discussion before proceeding further. If the GLWMO is making a concerted focus on Lake Owasso right now, it would do better by focusing on fundamental issues affecting water quality. I will offer several suggestions: Fundamentals: Instead of spending $36,000 on equipment for water quality sampling, why not work towards more basic fundamentals that ought to be completed anyway? Example 1) Why not make plans and recommendations to build a grate at the top of the boat launch with a trench below connected to a sediment chamber just to the west of the boat launch? It is troubling to realize that not one drain exits from the top of the hill on North Owasso Blvd. (NOB) until just west of the boat launch. (The five drains west of the boat launch do not capture much run-off from the hill as the boat launch intercepts that water flow and diverts it directly into the lake). A less expensive option would be to build a speed bump to divert run-off to the west the of the launch, however, people trailering boats may not like a speed bump as they come out of the ramp. Another option might be to use the 5' strip of land immediately to the north of the northern most parking spot at the launch for a grate and trench. This brings me to Example 2) Why not work toward building a catch basin for the 5 drains west of the boat launch? In this case you have the luxury of