Laserfiche WebLink
METROP CLITAN COUN CIL <br />Suite 300 Metro Squ<re Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 <br />612-291-6359 <br />DATE: April 5, 1988 <br />TO: Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission <br />Metropolitan Systems Committee <br />FROM: Jack 1-tauritz <br />SUBJECT: Revised Report on Lake Minnetonka Conservation District <br />Activities in 1987 and Recommendation for Action <br />INTRODUCTION <br />At the regular meeting on Jan. 25, 1988, the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space <br />Commission reviewed a staff report and forwarded recommendationo t., the Coun^il <br />about the 1987 activities of LMCD. The Metropolitan Systems Committee con- <br />sidered the report and recommendations on Feb. 2. Following extended discus- <br />sion, Chair F?ynn, reflecting the sense of the committee, returned the matter, <br />requesting a discussion ,i more alternatives. <br />BACKGROUND <br />The Metropolitan Council has become increasingly involved with issues around <br />Lake Minnetonka. Involvement began with one Council member sitting on a 1983 <br />Governor's Task Force on Lake Minnetonka Access. By 1986, it included a fill <br />Council report responding to a State Executive Council request for-Zg,onal <br />solutions to the recurring problems around the lake. <br />Among other findings, the Council's 1986 report said the existing management <br />structure for the lake was excesbively complex. Many PLencies had authority <br />over various aspects of management --some were overlap;.ing--and planning for <br />management on the lake appeared poorly coordinated. .,ome is:rues appeared to go <br />beyond managing public access and protecting water quality. Task force reports <br />and the Council's 1986 report implied that it would be helpful if there were a <br />single proactive managing agency to deal with the wide range cf issues ap- <br />pearing around the lake. At the time, a more active LMCD was advanced as the <br />best hope to fill the needed managerial role. The Council stated it would <br />review the actions of LMCD to see how it would meet a li.mt of recommended <br />specific actions and how it would become a more active lead agency for <br />planning, coordinating and reviewing projects which affected the lake. <br />In January of 1987, the Council found that LMCD had suggested initiatives which <br />would help, if implemented. LMCD had not carried out specifics recommended in <br />the 1986 report, especially those leading to understandings between the <br />agencies with managing responsibilities. Because the review followed the <br />report by only a few months, the Council found that LMCD needed time to <br />implement its ideas. It said that it would review LMCD actions again at the <br />end of 1987. <br />