Laserfiche WebLink
Mexao - Wetland Cooservaiioc Act <br />Jiauaiy 3. 1994 <br />Pafs 2 <br />tcview replKcnxot ptins as re^pcited. and maim tec <br />City. <br />to the <br />• The Watershed District appears to have adequate funding to cootmue as LC^. <br />However, the many technical aspects of the WCA regulatiota would m sufTs <br />optnioo require the City » incur sifmficantly increased enfineenaf coosultiaf <br />costs wluch would have to be passed on a> applKants if Orooo a LGU. <br />. Regardless whether the City or MOV’D is LGU, the City stUl has rights’ <br />over changes lo those wetlands the City has always protected, via vanante/CUP <br />requirements. <br />• As LGU the Citv potentially increases its liability from both skies of the <br />being ^en to task by <br />City de^nninations. as well as being taken to task by CWSR if they <br />regulaaoos are not being correctly enforced. <br />• If MCWD is LGU. It can t* argued that the City up a degree of control <br />over wetlands. <br />. OfOOO i5 somewhat unique as compared to tte oeighborin* f <br />ItidepeiEletice, Medina, and Plymouth since Orooo ts entirely wi^ <br />bout^-ies. while those cities are in two. three or more Watershed Districts. <br />. Staff is aware that Minnetrisu and Medina have assumed LGU staM. a^ dut <br />pS Z destenat-d MCWD as LOU. We are ^v«d that Eden Frame <br />expects to designate their local Watershed Dismet as LGU. <br />. Continuing with MCWT) as LGU does not preclude the City's ability to take over <br />as LGU in the future. <br />CouocU is encouraged to <br />Jeanne and I <br />to presentations by BWSR staff and r Minnetrista and Medina are <br />currently is much more well equipped than Oron ‘ • ■ (Booestroo in both <br />assummg LGU responsibUiues. and we ^ated that ’most cities" <br />cascs> will be doing the bulk of the review work. Ms. Sones a^o i^v^cu <br />2^’ district tcwlJe have no. taken specific action regarding LGU destgnauon.