10/19/2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

e DATE: September 12, 2005 TO: Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization FROM: Steve Woods, Assistant. Director Jim Haertel, Water Management Specialist SUBJECT: Follow up on questions raised at September 8, 2005 Meeting I provided some verbal feedback on the August 31, 2005 letter from Roger Jenson regarding Joint Power Agreement Issues. You have requested that we document our position in writing and address additional issues that were raised at the meeting. The first three questions mirror those of the August 31 letter and set forth our lack of concurrence with its conclusions. The remaining questions were raised at the meeting. I said that I would include these in our correspondence after conferring with Jim Haertel and our representatives in the Attorney General's Office. • 1. Can the Joint Power Agreement be continued for another year if Lino Lakes or SPRWS (or both) decide not to sign the extension? While we concur with WMO counsel that those members interested in doing so could continue with a JPA, we disagree that the JPA could be extended over cities objecting to being included. The net affect of the position contained in the August 31 letter would be to allow a majority faction of the JPA entity to perpetually bind a minority of communities to the JPA arrangement merely by extending expiration dates (as has been done once already with the concurrence of members). The reference to MS 103B.211 sited in the correspondence refers to decisions of a WMO Board — membership is an issue reserved for the governing bodies of the municipalities to act upon. 2. If the Board continues as a legal entity for an additional year based upon a majority vote, what is the status of the non - signing members? We disagree that a non - signing member is "likely bound by the agreement for 2006" for the reasons noted in item one above. Furthermore, our experience in the courts has shown us first hand that a city must opt out before it opts into another structure. State law says any area not covered by the JPA requires the county to petition for the formation of a watershed district or possibly to do the water planning and implementation themselves. •