04-14-1986 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

may be affected by discussions going on in the s' le regarding the authority to charge fees for any commercial i- :ivity in which a state resource, such as r, water body or its br ,3ms, is ised by entrepreneurs. �) That LMCD receive increased funds from other than its levy for its planning and regulatory activities v:hich go beyond the local interest. Those funds could appropriately be from a boating safety source as they will serve to increase boating safety through research and education. b. Hennepin County 1) The Sheriff's Water Patrol is currently funded in part from state boating safety funds and in part from the Hennepin County budget. The sources appear appropriate to MCTFLM which suggests that some increase is appropriate from the state boating safety source (this source and its expansion is discussed below) for increases in enforcement, which benefit all users, and for increased activ- ity in safety planning and education. Some increase in Hennepin County funds to the Sheriff's patrol are also appropriate in light of the fact that the great majority of Lakc Minnetonka users are from Hennepin County. �) Similar arguments for increased county support of the county DOT maintenance operations appear appropriate, based on the majority percent of usership from Hennepin County. C. Regional Recreation Open Space 1) Acquisition and development dollars for new regional recreation opei space features on the lake should come from a special appro- priation of state bond funds as an eiemen,. : t•z Regional Recreation Open Space Ca�'..i Improvement Program. Lake Minnetonka qualifies as a regional resource and the opportunity Lo do something significant occurs here. There have been other instances (e.g., Como Zoo) where the legislature has recognized that a special area or ;.CJ ecL merits special funding for resolu- tion of a critical situation. It should be treated in such a way as to enable a timely solution without handicapping the long- range Glans for orderly development of the rest of the regional system. i?) Operations and maintenance funds for a regional recreation open space agency are another important consideration. If a major new entity is funaed for quick development, a rapidly increased operating burden is placed on the operating agency. Given the general condition of operating budgets today, this could be a real impediment to aciion. MCTFLM recommends that this project receive a timely special supplement during "start-up" which will provide adequate dollars for the agency to begin operations and make provisions for continuing support in its regular operating budge, process. This sort of problem was specifically addressed in the Metropolitan Council'-, position statement on regional recreation 0 b M; no new direction appears necessary. (See Appendix D, the Council's position statement o reg:;nal C b M supplementary funding.) 16