My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2010-11-30_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Grass Lake WMO
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2010
>
2010-11-30_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/27/2011 11:57:53 AM
Creation date
4/27/2011 11:49:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Grass Lake WMO
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
11/30/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1 Boar members recognized the serious need to block leakage and agreed with Chair Ferrington of <br />2 the need to place another plate on the lake -side and secure it laterally to the wing walls. <br />3 <br />4 Member Eckman moved, and Member Manzara seconded approval of Chair Ferrington's <br />5 October 4, 2010 letter response to Craig Wills, regarding DNR Permit Request 1971 -1269 <br />6 (Request for repair of outlet to Wabasso Lake) as the opinion of the Board of the GLWMO, with <br />7 Chair Ferrington serving as the authorized representative of the GLWMO. <br />8 <br />9 Chair Ferrington moved, and Member Von De Linde seconded a friendly amendment to <br />10 substitute "the GLWMO Board," and "the Board" for all references to "1," in the letter as <br />11 applicable; and authorizing Chair Ferrington to make those modifications and submit the letter as <br />12 a PDF file by Friday, October 29, 2010 on the Board's letterhead. <br />13 <br />14 Ayes: 5 <br />15 Nays: 0 <br />16 Motion carried. <br />17 <br />18 Request for Board review of Draft Groundwater Management Plan <br />19 Mr. Petersen reviewed the sixteen (16) initiatives of the revised Ramsey County Groundwater <br />20 Protection Plan 2009, and while not having those questions available for tonight's meeting, <br />21 offered to e-mail copies to individual board members for their input on those initiatives. Mr. <br />22 Petersen noted that board members may have contributed to the original plan as stakeholders. <br />23 The County is now seeking input on whether they want participate in the revision of the plan or <br />24 not, as a party in the Joint Powers Agreement. <br />25 <br />26 Discussion included the need to have the plan available on the website; background on the <br />27 County's process for review and comment, and the hold put on the plan by the County Manager <br />28 for further review to determine optional rather than mandatory participation. The Board <br />29 discussed anticipated future and major changes in water management and the need for an up -to- <br />30 date Groundwater Plan to acquire Clean Water Legacy Grant funding. Other topics briefly <br />31 mentioned included: water management jurisdiction of individual cities; need for definition of <br />32 funding for groundwater management; legislative changes pending regarding funding <br />33 mechanisms; inclusion of the possibility of a County Groundwater Plan as part of the GLWMO <br />34 Third Generation Plan RFP; and use by Ramsey County of this survey input to determine <br />35 whether to proceed with a Plan or not. <br />36 <br />37 Member Manzara opined that, as a GLWMO Board member, she was supportive of a Ramsey <br />38 County Groundwater Management Plan. <br />39 <br />40 Chair Ferrington opined that the agreement seemed conservative and underfunded. He stated that <br />41 supported the plan in concept and the initiatives outlined in the most current version. However, <br />42 he expressed hesitation with mechanisms for funding and stated in appeared that all necessary <br />43 coordination was not yet not fully developed. In some cases, the draft report simply highlighted <br />44 the funding mechanism as "to be determined. The Chair opined that it still needed to be <br />45 determined if a county -by- county approach or a regional approach would be a more feasible and <br />46 reasonable way to managem groundwater resources. <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.