Laserfiche WebLink
We considered each and every issue raisea by Orono and we did it <br />in open public forum that Orono chose to avoid. <br />Page 2, paragraph 3, d. "So far as the environment is concerned, <br />the LMCD should immediately: <br />1. Establish the permissible density standards for optimum <br />environmental protection and for purposes of boating <br />safety;" <br />RESPONSE: We considered and rejected density standards at <br />the meetings that Orono chose not to participate in. The reasons <br />are too many to here. Basically, 15-20 years of research on <br />carrying capacity yielded little or nothing for planners <br />preparing a Management Plan for Lake Minnetonka. The field of <br />recreational research is now pursuing other management <br />strategies. Your emphasis on a density standard is outdated and <br />not supported by current recreational thinking. <br />Again, we wish that Orono had opted to be involved in the <br />planning process so these types of issues would not arise now. <br />Page 2, paragraph 3, d 2. "Seek increased enforcement of <br />existing regulations with emphasis on additional use of the water <br />patrol, and consider methods of increased cooperation with and <br />use of local police agencies (drunken boating, littering);" <br />RESPONSE: We specifically call for increased enforcement in <br />the Management Program. Orono's opposition to additional funds <br />for the LMCD ana their opposition to the tax district, means no <br />increased patrol hours on the lake if that view were in the <br />majority. Unless the LMCD uses its own money, there will be no <br />increase in patrol hours on the lake. It is shortsighted for <br />Orono to oppose the tax district on one hand and call for <br />increased patrol hours on the lake. There cannot be one without <br />the other. <br />We considered, at length, the use of local police agencies <br />on the lake. Orono proposed this in the Public Safety <br />Subcommittee. That proposal died for lack of a second. Not one <br />other police department on the lake supported Orono's proposal. <br />Two primary reasons were given for the lack of support: 1) <br />insufficient enforcement resources; and 2) increased liability. <br />Page 2, paragraph 3, d 3. "Require and encourage boat users <br />education in right of way rules, etc., and in safe operation of <br />their boats through licensing of boaters and certification <br />requirements - e.g. power squadron certification is available." <br />RESPONSE: This is specifically incluaeu xn the Management <br />Plan. What Orono is overlooking is that the DNR must support <br />efforts to require licensing of boat operators and they do not at