My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-26-1990 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
1990-1996 Microfilm
>
1990
>
11-26-1990 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/21/2025 12:49:36 PM
Creation date
2/21/2025 12:48:23 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
287
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 13, 1990 <br />CHRISTMAS EVE DAY CONTINUED <br />understands Staff's reasoning. <br />It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Gcetten, <br />to direct staff to close City Hall on Monday, December 24th and <br />allow the option of using either vacation or 1991 floating <br />holiday to be used for that day and acknowledge that staff will <br />maintain at least a minimum staffing level for ‘onday, December <br />31, 1990, with Public Works department head determining whether <br />it is a scheduled work day. If not a scheduled work day, <br />department personnel would use either vacation or a floating <br />holiday in the same manner as Cxty Hall personnel. Motion, <br />Ayes-3, Peterson, Nay. Motion passed. <br />LMCD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/SHORELAND REGULATIONS <br />Acting Mayor Callahan asked to comment on this item, even <br />though it had not been removed from the Consent Agenda. He <br />stated that after the first of the year, it would wise for the <br />City of Orono to meet with the other lakeshore communities to <br />prepare for oncoming events. <br />Nettles commended Callahan for his efforts in this matter. <br />Goetten asked Callahan whether in t's opinion, the LMCD was <br />still willing to work with the cities t at did not approve the <br />plan. <br />Acting Mayor Callahan replied. "No. If you look at this <br />list of cities that did not approve the plan, you can see that <br />the majority of lakeshore communities are not for the plan. T:ie <br />LMCD has a situation that is not practical. The LMCD is now <br />focusir ” on shoreland management. They went to the DNR and took <br />their shoreland management regulations, which the DNR was <br />planning to use to make the cities adopt this plan. The LMCD <br />tightened up the regulations a bit. The LMCD indicated that <br />since they were the agency that would negotiate with the cities <br />that they would be able to be flexible about the plan. However, <br />the DNR representative attending the meeting did not agree. He <br />indicated that he wanted the plan the way it was. He assumed <br />that since the LMCD had adopted the plan, that everyone favored <br />it. So basically the LMCD has adopted the DNR plan as their own <br />as part of the Long Tarm Management Plan. However, the LMCD will <br />be unable to be flexible because the DNR has told them what to <br />do. The City needs to establish a plan that is agreeable to the <br />cities listed here that will enable us to deal with the DNR. I <br />do not think we should work with the LMCD under any <br />circumstances. The LMCD has no power. It may be difficult to <br />work with some of these cities because their views differ from <br />ours. It is my understanding that the DNR would now like to <br />establish a comprehensive zoning plan for the entire lake." <br />Goetten asked whether it will be necessary to amend some of <br />- 22 - <br />4
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.