My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes from 1991
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
LRRWMO
>
Minutes
>
Minutes from 1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/21/2025 1:31:00 PM
Creation date
4/14/2010 9:00:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Document Title
Lower Rum River Water Management Organization
Document Date
12/19/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
102
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).
View images
View plain text
LRRWMO Meeting Minutes <br />April 17, 1991 <br />Page 8 <br />Skallman stated Waste Management will be going through two <br />wetlands. Schrantz indicated we will have to require they <br />follow the erosion control requirements of the watershed. <br />Skallman recommended the LRRWMO should review this Waste <br />Management project. He stated part of the LRRWMO's respon- <br />sibility is to be aware of it. He noted the Water Management <br />Plan indicates this WMO will take an active role in the <br />protection of Class A wetlands. Sunfish Lake is classified <br />Class A. <br />Ms. Rudolph stated she has become aware the LRRWMO seems to <br />have been overlooked when it comes to some of these project <br />reviews. She recommended letters be sent out to the various <br />agencies notifying them the LRRWMO is a legal entity. <br />Schrantz directed the Recording Secretary to prepare and mail <br />these notification letters to the various agencies. <br />Ms. Rudolph indicated the DNR and the MPCA should have <br />provided project review information on the Waste Management <br />application. <br />Weaver directed that a copy of the motion be provided to <br />Waste Management to make them aware this board, not the City <br />of Ramsey, is requiring the permitting process. <br />Jankowski explained his position on.the LRRWMO review process <br />takes in a broader scope. Weaver stated the bigger the <br />project the greater the LRRWMO role. The statutes require <br />our input while the other agencies operate at a more <br />technical capacity. Schrantz concurred, adding it is <br />important this board know what is going on. After we review <br />a project, we can then recognize the agencies' technical <br />procedures. Ms. Rudolph noted the importance of WMO review <br />and comment at the beginning of a project so that WMO <br />comments can be incorporated into the project permit, <br />thereby, providing a double insurance policy. <br />Jankowski went on to state the problem is, as he sees it, <br />once the LRRWMO accepts responsibility for doing something, <br />you have to do it right. We must do it right or do nothing <br />at all. He feared the limited LRRWMO resources will be <br />quickly used up. Jankowski stated if our plan says we have <br />the responsibility over these projects we will have to <br />require the permit. However, he indicated he would like to <br />see discussion continue in the future on how we approach the <br />larger projects and what the extent of our technical review <br />will be. <br />Schrantz stated we will defer the technical expertise to the <br />DNR and the PCA. It is not our desire to take over their <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.