Laserfiche WebLink
Environmental Board <br />January 31, 2024 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br /> <br />grant funding to RCWD’s discretion as to how it would be spent. She was also opposed <br />to residents paying increased taxes for the project. <br /> <br />Ms. Holmes clarified that outreach programs are a key mechanism for residents to <br />understand the importance of the treatment and have accurate information. She also asked <br />if the grant required a match for the project. <br /> <br />Mr. Kocian replied yes, 10% matching funds are required from RCWD and/or partners. <br /> <br />Mr. Schwartz asked what percentage of the total project cost will be allocated towards the <br />treatment project, contractors, and materials. <br /> <br />Mr. Kocian replied the vast majority of the cost would go towards the alum application. <br /> <br />Ms. Nelson asked how badly of a problem Eurasian Watermilfoil is and if it does show <br />up after the alum treatment. <br /> <br />Mr. Kocian said Eurasian Watermilfoil has not been as much a problem in recent years, <br />but pondweed, which is an invasive species, has been a problem in lakes. Mr. Kocian <br />clarified that the Lake Association collaborated with RCWD for the past 3-4 years to map <br />and treat pondweed and other invasive species. <br /> <br />Ms. Nelson clarified since RCWD and the Lake Association monitored Eurasian <br />Watermilfoil, then the main concern for residents would be the costs because there are <br />already steps being taken to try to control invasive exotic water plants. <br /> <br />Mr. Stowe replied that as a resident he would be paying the 3% through the contribution <br />of Lino Lakes, Anoka County and RCWD. He also expressed that the Lake Association <br />should be the only partner for the project. <br /> <br />Mr. Schwartz clarified that whether or not the Board makes a motion to approve the <br />project the project would still progress. He noted that the Environmental Board is not the <br />best forum for discussing the financial and tax implications of the project. <br /> <br />Ms. Cavegn agreed with Mr. Schwartz. She continued to say that the role of the <br />Environmental Board is to proceed with what is most environmentally responsible. She <br />also suggested bringing financial concerns up to City Council as the Environmental <br />Board does not have input on financial aspects. <br /> <br />Motion was made by Chair Sullivan and seconded by Ms. Nelson. Motion carried 7 – 0. <br /> <br />B. 2024 Annual Work Plan and Ongoing Tasks List <br /> <br />Mr. Nelson, Environmental Coordinator, presented the staff report. <br />