Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20100503 - VI-09MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Dave Osberg, City Administrator DATE: April 29, 2010 SUBJECT: Resolution in Support of Watershed Boundary Change RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION It is recommended that the City Council take action approving the attached Resolution regarding the South Washington Watershed District Petition for Boundary Change. Background material is attached. David M. Osberg City Administrator SOUTH WASHINGTON WATERSHED DISTRICT PETITION FOR BOUNDARY CHANGE RESOLUTION Resolution by the City of Hastings concurring with the petition to add or transfer territory to the South Washington Watershed District. RECITALS: The City of Hastings is a statutory or home rule charter City with jurisdiction over area wholly or partially within the South Washington Watershed District. 2. That the Boundary Change Petition prepared by the South Washington Watershed District has been reviewed by the City Council of the City of Hastings, and subject to the terms and conditions of paragraph 4 (a -i) of said Petition, the City of Hastings concurs with said Petition. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hastings is in concurrence with the Boundary Change Petition of the South Washington Watershed District to be submitted to the Board of Water and Soil Resources. Adopted this 3 rd day of May, 2010 Paul J Hicks, Mayor Attest: Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative Assistant /City Clerk JACK W. CLINTON, P.A. ATTORNEY AT LAW ACK W. C!9M0N MARY K. KUEHL WEN PAKOU L. YANG -LEGAL ASSISTANTS 539 BIELBNBERG DRIVE S= 200 WOODBURY, MWNESOTA 55125 TELEPHONE: 651-389-9923 FAx: 651- 389 -9424 JWCLINPON r@USINTERNET.COM April 26, 2010 Matt Moore, Administrator South Washington Watershed District 2302 Tower Drive Woodbury, MN 55125 Re: Mediation Agreement and Boundary Change Petition Dear Matt: VIA E -MAII, I am enclosing new versions of the Petition for the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, and the agreement betweefl the various municipalities and watershed districts. Based - on the most recent events and discussions from the week of _April 19 the revisions can be summarized as follows: Petition The Watershed District is now the petitioner, substituting for Washington County. The operative terns of the Petition remain the same, and there is no change to the substantive agreemelits that were reached through the mediation process. AUeement The operative terms of the Agreement remain those that were agreed upon in mediation, with the following two exceptions: 1. The South Washington Watershed District, rather than the County, is the petitioner. 2. The County aAd South Washington will seek letters of concurrence from any municipality or tawtship that is required to concur i*i the submission of the Petition. The revisions are not being submitted in redline since the earlier versions had so many redlines that it became very difficult to read, and the document would not allow removal of all of the redlining. For purposes of references for the attorneys who will be reviewing this, the Petition would be an amendment under 103B.215, subd. 2, adding new territory to a district or by transferring territory that is within the jurisdiction of another watershed district. *BOARD CERTIFIED REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION Re Mediation Agreement and Boundary Change Petition April 26, 2014 Page Two Under Minn. Stat. 103B.225, there is authority granted to BWSR to place conditions upon a transfer of territory under 10333.215. We believe that the conditions can be added based on the work done to date by South Washington, including land acquisitions for the Central Draw Project. The obligations/responsibility for financing can be incorporated in the Petition and adopted by reference in the BWSR order. This is consistent with and follows the same process wh= the East Mississippi WMO was added to South Washington. The Petition in the East Mississippi proceeding was conditioners upon: (1) the East Mississippi territory being treaters as a subwatershed tasting district; (2) that the East Mississippi territory would pay 100% of the costs of any projects within the territory of East Mississippi; and (3) costs of projects that were outside of the territory of East Mississippi (and within the then existing watershed district) were to be paid for by the territory within the existing district, and none of those costs would be. charged to the East Mississippi territory. The Order approved by BWSR in 2003 stated in its conclusibus that the boundary change "should be approved per the Petition." If they are consistent, the 13WSR board should approve this petition. My letter, the two attachments and the resolutions of support that you prepared should be forwarded to the county for distribution. Please call me if you have any questions. Very truly yob, Attachments STATE OF MINNESOTA BOARD OF WATER AND SOIL RESOURCES 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 In the Matter of the Petition of the South Washington Watershed District BOUNDARY CHANGE PETITION for Boundary Change TO: Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, 520 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, MN 55155 Petitioner, Washington County, a body politic and c6rpoi'ate, pursuant to Washington County Board Resolution No. 2010- does 'hereby'petition the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) to change :the boundaries of.,.-the `South Washington Watershed District (SWWD) and the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) pursuant to Minnesota Statute 103B.215 for the following reasons: + 1. ' Both the SWWD -and VBWD are existing watershed districts located entirely within the metropolitan area, and Minnesota Statute 103B215, subd. 1 allows the boundaries of a watershed district wholly within the metropolitan area may be changed.': SWWD is requesting the transfer of territory currently within the jurisdiction of the VBWD to the SWWD. The areas being transferred are contiguous to the existing SWWD. 2. The boundary change proposed and the areas to be transferred are described on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A. 1 The proposed SWWD consists of total of 110.38 square miles of which 0 4.82 square miles are located within the City of Afton 36.56 square miles are located within the City of Cottage Grove 30.14 square miles are located within Denmark Township 2.71 square miles are located within Grey Cloud Island Township 0.40 square miles are located within the City of Hastings 0.98 square miles are located within the City of Lake Elmo 3.89 square miles are located within the City of Newport 1.02 square miles are located within the City of Oakdale 3.61 square miles are located within City of St. Paul Park 26.25 square miles are located within the City of Woodbury The proposed VBWD consists of :a total of 71.33 square miles, of which 21.01 square miles are located within the City of Afton, 4.44 square miles are located within Baytown Township 4.33 square miles are located withial e City of Grant 22.93 square mfie`s_ are located withi City of Lake Elmo 0.87 square miles.' Gated within'the.City of Mahtomedi 5.55 square miles are located within the City of Oakdale 0.30 square miles ae6 located within the City of Oak Park Heights 0. 90 square miles are _located within the City of Pine Springs ithin the City of St. Mary's Point 0,08 square miles are located w 747. square rPiles are located within West Lakeland Township 2.75 square miles are locafe'd within the City of Woodbury 0. ] 0 s4dare'miles at_e.focatecl within the City of Maplewood 0.30 square_miles are'located within the City of North St. Paul 0,30 square miles are located within the City of White Bear Lake The following are supporting reasons for the boundary change between the SWWD and the VBWD described in Exhibit A. a. The boundary change will be conducive to the public health and public welfare and for the purposes of Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103. b. The boundary change will provide long term protection for surface and groundwater resources. C d e f. The boundary change will ensure efficiency and effectiveness of water resource management in this area. The boundary change is consistent with the purposes and requirements of Minnesota Statute 10313.205 to 103B.255. Certain properties under the jurisdiction of the SWWD are subject to protection under Minnesota Statute b3B.225. The boundary change, subject to conditions in the petition, is compliant with Minnesota Statute 10313.225. The petitioner has received' a written 'statement of concurrence in the petition from `the governing body of each statutory or home rule charter city and :town and each watershed management organization having' jurisdiction over thc-. `territory proposed to be added or transferred. The boundary change will accomplish the objectives that were agreed upon through' - the watershed boundary mediation process which involved BWSR, Washington County, SWWD, VBWD, City of Cottage Grove, Denmark - Township, and City of Woodbury in accordance with the Agreement (Exhibit B) adopted by Washington County, SWWD, VBWD, City of Cottage Grove, Denmark Township, and City of Woodbury. 4. Washington County has worked with representatives of City of Cottage Grove, Denmark Township, City of Woodbury. SWWD, and V13WD to develop recommendations for key issues related to the proposed boundary change between 93 the SWWD and the VBWD; such as financing policies, implementation of water management plans, and board representation. The local governments have approved an Agreement (Exhibit B) to specifically address these key issues to be in full force upon approval of this petition. Recommendations have been developed by these representatives and approved the county. The following are the conditions for changing the boundaries of the SWWD to be compliant with Minnesota Statute 103B.225: a. The SWWD will amend its watershed management plan pursuant to Minnesota Statute 103B.205 MB.25.5 to include the Lower St. Croix subwatershed area within one year. The SWWD will initially adopt the Lower St. Croix Water. Management Organization (LSCWMO) 2009 Water Management Plan as the plan for this subwatershed pursuant to Minnesota Statute 10313.205 - 10313.255. b. The SWWD will apply resource based water quality standards defined by the St. Croix ,River and the Mississippi River and based on discrete geographical locations defined by hydrologic boundaries. c. The SWWD will implement the Central Draw Overflow Project as follows: The SWWD will complete acquisition of lands necessary to control the outlet for the Central Draw Overflow Project to the Mississippi River by June 30, 2014. 4 As part of the Central Draw Overflow Project, the SWWD will construct improvements to the Cottage Grove Central Ravine by December 31, 2014 to accommodate interim watershed overflows. The SWWD will complete construction of the Central Draw Overflow Project by January 1, 2020 unless otherwise agreed to by the City of Cottage Grove, City of Woodbury and SWWD. d. For the purpose of collecting revenues and paying the costs of projects in the former LSCWMO. :territory, the SWWD- "Will establish a water management district pursuant to Minnesota Statute 103D.729. The former LSCWUM.territory will pay 100 percent of the costs of any projects that are riecdcd Within the former LSCWMO territory and none of the costs will be charged to_any of the territory SWWD as it existed prior to - the May 27,.2009 BWSR'Order. e: The cost of projects for the territory within the existing SWWD will be paid for by -the territory within the existing SWWD and none of the costs will be charged to the former LSCWMO territory being added to the SWWD, f. Funding should be determined on a project -by- project basis, based on project benefits, costs (including administrative costs of the financing options), and equity. The SWWD will finance projects on a subwatershed basis through revenue collected using a stormwater utility fee according to Minnesota Rules Chapter 444. 5 g. Administrative services and related general services that are provided throughout the new areas of the watershed districts will be funded using a district wide ad valorem tax, collected by Washington County as a part of property tax collection. For the SWWD, the former LSCWMO territory will pay its costs of the annual administrative budget and proportional costs of annual SWWD operational programs based on the ad valorem tax rate. h. Currently the SWWD <coisists of five managers. The SWWD is requesting the SWWD board of managers remain at five. . i. The appointtneit - of managers in the SWWD will be consistent with Minnesota Statute 103D.311, subd. 3(c) which states that managers must be 'appointed to fairly _represent the various hydrologic areas within the watershed district. The - county will ensure that two managers on the SWWD board 'live in the .City of Woodbury. The remaining three managers will be appointed to fairly represent the remaining hydrological areas Within the SWWD. In accordance with Minnesota Statute 103D.311,'subd. 3(a) the county will appoint managers from a list of persons nominated by the townships and municipalities located within the watershed district. The list must contain at least three nominees for each managers position to be filled. The list must be submitted to the county at least 60 days before the managers term of office expires. If a list of 10 nominees is not received 60 days prior to the managers term of office expiring or if a city or town fails to submit a list of nominees, the county may appoint any managers that they so choose. THEREFORE, the SWWD requests that the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, after giving notice as required by law, and for the public welfare and public interest and to further Minnesota Statute 103, the SWWD requests that the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources issue its order granting the following relief; ' 1. That the boundaries of the SWWIY'bc changed as set forth on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A pursuant to Minnesota Statute 103B.215. 2. That the area in each watershed district'wiil be guided and managed consistent with the current management play of the watershed management organizations in accordance with. Minnesota Statute I03 3. That the''conditions stated in item (a. — i.) of this petition be incorporated in the Board's order.