Laserfiche WebLink
<br />land without compensation, such as easements and right-of-way. He recognized that the.ultimate <br />decision would come from the Council, but hoped that they would be willing to hear both sides. <br /> <br />Board Member Freeburg advised that he had obtained the information passed out to the Board <br />from BWSR (Board of Water and Soil Resources) and the Environmental Law Institute. He read <br />sections. of the information that clearly state it is legal and that as many as 5,000 local <br />government entities have regulations in regard to wetlands and the area surrounding them. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda stated that the Council brought up the fact that they were not against <br />wetland buffers, but that this would be a taking of land without due compensation. <br /> <br />Board Member Sibilski advised that there are several precedents that go in favor of protecting <br />those areas. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda thought that there were arguments on both sides of the issue, and <br />explained that the Board noticed that without local ordinances, in times of heavy development, <br />there was not enough detail in terms of proper preservation techniques. He explained that this is <br />a low time in development and people may have forgot what things are like when the <br />development picks back up. <br /> <br />Board Member Freeburg advised that a representative from BWSR may be willing to attend the <br />public hearing and present information on recharge. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda advised that they could contact any of the people that had worked with the <br />Board on the creation of the Wetl.;:md Buffer Ordinance to let them know what is occurring and <br />invite them to attend the public hearing. He advised that in terms of residents not being able to <br />sell their land due to that ordinance, the ordinance does have provisions for hardships and <br />outlines that process. <br /> <br />Environmental Coordinator Anderson advised that another potential outcome of the public <br />hearing could be to review the ordinance and consider how it could be tweaked somewhat. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda explained that based on the public input, the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission would make their recommendation to the Council but explained that the Council <br />does not have to follow the recommendation from the Commission. He advised that the option <br />was given to the Council for the EPB to explain and discuss the ordinance, but they denied that <br />discussion and input. <br /> <br />Board Member Freeburg advised that he had several newspaper articles regarding the issue and <br />supporting the ordinance and questioned how that could be included. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda advised that the information could be submitted once the notice for public <br />hearing is posted, and could then be included in the packet for the meeting. <br /> <br />Board Member Bentz thought that the feeling during the meeting was heavily pushing towards <br />repealing the ordinance, and questioned if the third option of amending the ordinance could be <br />looked at. <br /> <br />Environmental Policy Board / March 2, 2009 <br />Page 6 of9 <br />