Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 09/11/2006

Home

building block toward the next step. He estimated a ballpark budget of approximately $150,000. He stated that it seems logical that there would be a break in the price to do a natural resources inventory because one component of the work is already completed. Board Member Max stated that cost depends on what the City wants to utilize the natural resources inventory for. Chairperson McDilda concurred that it may be used for a baseline that is a stagnant snapshot in time that becomes part of the comprehensive plan, or is part of an ongoing process to be updated. Coordinator Anderson stated the City was looking at it for use as a tool for comprehensive planning. Environmental Specialist Bacon stated this falls in line with the educational mission of the EPR He noted that part of the utility of the document is to monitor and educate. He stated that the easiest route to source grant opportunities is to partner with other entities and sites such as the Anoka Conservation District. He noted the example of Cedar Creek Natural History area as being one of twenty-five (25) National Science Foundation sponsored sites in North America to receive funding. He stated that a Ramsey Natural Resource Inventory might be a great resource fifty (50) years down the line to involve citizens with an environmental mission in the process of applying for grants. Coordinator Anderson stated that this didn't come about because of the comprehensive plan, but the timing is important as the City continues to grow so they know what they have or had at one time. Chairperson McDilda concurred that this is an important part of the comprehensive plan. Board Member Max asked if this natural resources inventory was intended to be all of Ramsey or just public property. Coordinator Anderson stated that it would involve the entire City. Board Member Max stated that this would have to be a sample based document because of the size of the City. Board Member Max stated that he endorsed the thought of doing the entire City, but because it is a sample it may take away from usage as a comprehensive document. Chairperson McDilda concurred with Board Member Max. He asked if the City were to go down this path, what the agenda would be and what the expectations would be for the inventory . Board Member Bentz stated that to justify it to the taxpayer, he would question the results of the use of the existing wetland survey. He noted his concern to explain and prove a Environmental Policy Board / September 11, 2006 Page 10 of 13