Laserfiche WebLink
th{ awarding of funding was pushed back to sometime in September. He stated that it is now <br />September and he hasn't heard back from them. He stated that he didn't know if they had made <br /> decision yet, or if they just hadn't contacted the recipients yet. <br /> <br />('~hairpcrson McDilda stated that would be a future agenda item, should the ordinance be <br />approved. IIe stated that the next order of business would be how to fund this to get it to move <br />lk3rward. Council Member Strommen stated that initial funding has been allocated. She stated <br />tha~ $35,0{)0 was ah'eady allocated. <br /> <br />Stal'l~ member Chris Anderson stated that Peterson Environmental is working on the inventory <br />right now. lie stated that what was requested through the grant application was funds to cover <br />ground proofing of every single wetland that's out there. He explained that what the City <br />(;ouncil has ah'eady approved was funding for a full office review of all wetlands and ground <br />prooling oF the Preserve and Manage 1 wetlands. He stated that timing has been unfortunate. <br />lie stated thc contact at the DNR that he needed to speak with to get the infrared photographs <br />was on fire duty. He stated that the photographs should be showing up next week to be delivered <br />to I'etcrson l~;nvironlnental. He stated that he is working with Sarah Hoffman with the Natural <br />I teritage and Nongame Research program to get a license agreement needed to obtain a gis <br />shapcfilc that includes the natural heritage elements necessary for the wetlands study. <br /> <br />Case/44: Discussion of meeting dates. <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda stated that he felt that the agenda could possibly be taken care of in one <br />meeting per month. He opened it to discussion for the Board. He stated that the EPB has been <br />meeting twice a month. He stated that the agenda items are representative of what the EPB will <br />be talking about, noting that even additional activities in the future may be heavily tied into the <br />t;onsultants and things of that nature. He stated that he imagined the meetings to be more like <br />sitting down and collecting information to provide feedback. <br /> <br />Iloard Member Max concurred with Chairperson McDilda. He stated that both with the trees and <br />wetlands, when the EPB got into the "nitty gritty", if the EPB wouldn't have met twice a month, <br />they still would not be done with the tree ordinance. He stated that he felt the EPB was taking on <br />real live issues that required research and drafting policy. He stated that if the EPB is going to <br />do that lk)r another subject, he felt there was a need to be flexible and take on more than one <br />mcetiug a month. <br /> <br />Iloard Member I-lustvedt stated that he supported meeting once a month if it is going to save <br />mrmcy. I lc notecl his concern that it could potentially be hard to get the wheels back in motion if <br />there wcrc a need for more meetings <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda stated that they could be flexible. He stated that as a board, if it becomes <br />nc::cssary to meet more often than once a month, they could take on the responsibility of taking <br />m in utes themselves but that that decision could be made when the time comes. <br /> <br />I!nvironmcntal Specialist Bruce Bacon asked if that would be a majority rules decision. <br />Chairperson McDilda stated affirmatively that it would be a majority rules decision. <br /> <br />Environmental Policy Board / September 19, 2005 <br /> Page 6 of 9 <br /> <br /> <br />