2010-04-22_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

1 Old Business 2 Discussion: 2009 Annual Report Update 2010 Work Plan 3 Mr. Petersen noted, in his review of the Rule requirements, the work plan needed to be created as 4 part of the reporting process; and advised that to -date he had been unable to find an annual work 5 plan for the GLWMO. Mr. Petersen advised that by the next special meeting, he hoped to have 6 an outline and draft for approval by the GLWMO prior to submission to the BWSR, in addition 7 to more information available related to water testing and the budget. 8 9 Chair Ferrington expressed willingness to provide leadership and work with Mr. Petersen in 10 compiling that information and formatting it for review by the GLWMO members. 11 12 Discussion included rule requirements; past reports and how the Metropolitan Council may have 13 been involved; need to see actions and financial documentation taken by the board as part of the 14 annual report; assessment of the previous year's work plan (i.e., Owasso Feasibility Study and 15 Analysis); and identification of budget areas that satisfy the BWSR requirements. 16 17 Further discussion included the status of the current rewrite of the MN Rules, currently in 18 preliminary draft form undergoing internal discussions, and not affecting the GLWMO timeline 19 and planning at this time. 20 21 Ms. Lewis suggested that the GLWMO proceed under existing regulations given the expiration 22 of their plan and impacts on their eligibility for funds, and consider that as an incentive to move 23 forward to write a work plan and then be able to accommodate a revised plan from that point 24 forward. Ms. Lewis again offered her assistance and guidance to the GLWMO throughout the 25 process. Ms. Lewis worked through the formal review period once the work plan is submitted, 26 with the proposed draft ready for approval by the GLWMO at their January of 2011 meeting. 27 28 Mr. Petersen noted the need to begin immediately, given the deadline of August of 2011; and 29 suggested that this be a priority work item for 2010. 30 31 Chair Ferrington opined that a lot of time and effort was put into the original plan ten (10) years 32 ago and scoped for the future; suggesting that due to its comprehensive nature, the entire 33 document may not require significant reworking other than to comply with the new MN Rule 34 requirements and other areas needing updating or improvement. 35 36 Old Business 37 Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Vegetation Issue Update 38 Member Eckman provided a brief update on this item; and noted the advantage of Mr. Welling 39 addressing this issue for Lake Owasso, and expressed the need for action based on recent 40 assessments of the lake. Member Eckman noted that a summary of the Lake Owasso Use 41 Attainability Report was available on line at the GLWMO website. 42 43 Discussion included what was needed in a management plan prior to seeking an aquatic weed 44 management grant from the DNR; focus of the Study initiative to determine whether substantial 45 internal versus external loading of sediment was occurring, based on Barr Engineering's analysis 46 and their provision of fourteen (14) alternatives for controlling phosphorus in the water based on 4