Agenda - Council - 02/13/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

, Metro Local Water Management Task Force Report December 15, 1989 Coordination among local governments in water planning has improved substan- tially as a result of the water planning mandate in the Metropolitan Water Manage- ment Act. In nearly all of the 36 metro joint powers watershed management organizations (JPYVMOs), the affected cities and towns have been meeting and dis- cussing water managemen~ issues. In the seven years the law has been in effect, all except a few JPWIX4Os have developed watershed plans. In the 10 metro watershed districts (WDs), the planning mandate has improved the level of communications between the WDs and affected cities and towns. The law allows cities and towns to assume sole permitting authority for local regulation of activities affecting water resources, if they are willing to accept the responsibility of implementing WD policies, This provision has made it necessary for WDs and local units to meet and discuss how regulations will be handled, as well as other aspects of watershed plan implementation. lnterlocal coordination in t'ITMO p/an implementation is no,, the pritnary issue. The BWSR should be charged with specific responsibilities for facilitating coor- dination atnong W~Ox.' . : Tied to the issues of public participation and interlocal coordination is the ques- tion of WMO governance. JPWMO members are appointed by the member cities and towns. The cities and towns generally select members of their governing bodies or staff persons to serve as their JPWMO representatives. In a few instances, they have appointed citizens to represent them. WD members are appointed by affected counties from lists of nominees submitted by cities and towns. Existing law prohibits public officers of county, state, or federal government from serving, as WD managers. Currently there is no requirement for publication of nonces of vacancies on WMOs boards. ~ ::: . Pub'/iShed notice of vacanCies would open up the apPo!ntrn'ent process and I'.:i.i::i': facilitate'Public participati°,n, . Clear procedure for removing WMO members 'increase'their accountabilit) :. ~;!.:.:.' : t: '.:' :~:.~:~;::~:' ':::i ::: .':::', :7 -': ::(::::i::! i?.~: ::'" 2::.:::: :: ~i: :::~ '.::: Recommendations for Issue 1' #1 Amend the law to require WMOs to publish a newsletter each year and distribute it to residents, which lists their officers, phone numbers, and explains their programs. Request the £WSR to facilitate the formation of an association of metro WMOs and in- vestigate the feasibility of the metro V?MO association becoming affiliated with a similar national association. Require the appointing authority to publish notice of vacancies on WMO boards. #2 Maintain the current aflflointment process for WD managers and the requirement ffTor geographic representation, but amend the law to allow counties to appoint m outside the lists of nominees submitted by cities and towns, and allow coun- ties to remove WD managers for just cause. Amend the law to request WDs to have technical advisory committees with representatives of affected cities, counties, and SI4zCDs. ~age 7