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

Home

. Metro Loca' Water Managernenf Task Force Report December 15, 1989 . Natural and man-made water retention and conveyance facilities should be recognized, maintained, and managed in the same manner as our highways," streets, sanitary sewers, drinking water systems, and bridges, There is much catching up to be done to remedy past practices which have im- paired our surface and groundwater quality and exacerbated flooding problems. Most of this type of work takes many years before the impact can be felt. f Public expenditures to carry oU} the l°ng term goals of water planning shouId be' ;: viewed as investments towards the future and be exempted from~overall Ie~7 limits.;:: Recommendation for Issue 6: #21 WMO, count); cit), and town ad valorem levies for waterplanning, plan implemen- tation, and financing of capital projects (including debt service on bonds) should be exempt from an), overall lev), limitations. ISSUE 7 Whether the metropolitan water management act has met its original expectations. Findings for Issue 7: Expectations of what the Metropolitan Water Management Act was intended to accomplish vary among interestedparties. Some believe the Act was intended to do more than address the problems of flooding, erosion, and water pollution. They argue that plans should also address management and protection of the natural values associated with sensitive and critical slopes, soils, wetlands, and wildlife habitat. Others argue that the Act was solely intended to address the preservation and use of natural water storage and retenuon systems, and that benefits to recrea- tion and wildlife would simply come about as by-products of thatprimary goal. Con- nie Levi, a Task Force member and one of the original authors of the Metropolitan Water Planning Act, stated that the law was intended to be a broad-based water resource management tool to conserve natural resource values in addition to dealing with water quantity issues in a cost effective manner. Further, the implementation of it would be through local ordinances. Unfortunately, in many plans reviewed to date, the resource issues are not comprehensively addressed and the mode of im- plementation is left up to the local units of government without significant direction from the watershed organizations. Watershed plan content guidelines were developed by a 25-member committee shortly after the passage of"509". The guidelines provided some direction to WMOs, but failed to define a bottom line for plan content or minimum standards for im- plementation. Further, the guidelines are not binding. Consequently, the deter- mination of whether a plan complies with the law is very subjective. Page 13