|
Chaska Community Center Victoria Memberships. 952-448-3176 |
|
Dine in Downtown Victoria * 952-443-2858 |
|
Victoria * 952-443-2022 |
|
St. Bonifacius * 952-446-1338 |
|
Take the worry out of winter.. Call 1-888-41-SEPTIC. |
|
1915 Arboretum Blvd * Victoria 952-443-2808 |
|
Call for a clinic near you. 952-442-8094 |
|
Headlines and bylines |
|
Front Page Feature Story |
|
From the Editor |
|
Addie’s Drawing |
|
Letters to the Editor |
|
Victoria Moments |
|
Hook Line & Sinker |
|
Calendar of Events |
|
Click here to Advertise |
|
the Gazette |
|
Return to Home Page |
|
Order paper Gazette |
|
Notes and Quotes |
|
The Scoop at City Hall |
|
Birthright. Pregnant and need help? 952-442-4026 |
|
Home Page |
|
The Victoria GAZETTE |
|
City Scoop Continued |
|
On the other hand, she estimated the Watershed District plan “restores or protects” 111 acres based on the Marsh Wasserman Corridor Plan prepared for the District and dated November 24th, 2009. Councilmember Jim Paulsen wondered when the Watershed District went from water business into land business. And he asked Holly, “What is their response when you tell them we get free green acres as part of our development while they’re proposing to buy them?” “That it’s part of their program,” replied Holly. Stated Councilmember Tim Amundsen, “They’ve bought millions of dollars worth of land in other areas. What process did they go through here?” In referring to negotiations between current property owners and the Watershed District, City Administrator Don Uram stated, “My understanding is that they’re not close on price. It may or may not happen.” Councilmember Tom O’Connor replied, “May or may not happen is not comforting to me. It’s still disconcerting.” Councilmember Kim Roden stated, “We have a number of impaired waters in Victoria. The thing that’s got me scratching my head is that I’d rather see them spend money helping us with our phosphorous pollution rather than land development. Why aren’t we working together so it could benefit us all? This seems like a new aggressive approach for them.” City Engineer Cara Geheren reported that the Watershed District has over $7 million in capital to spend on three projects in Victoria: the Six Mile Creek south of Lake Wasserman ($5.8 million), Lake Virginia ($160,000), and Schutz Lake ($1.4 million). According to Holly, “It won’t be three projects, but those are the three sub-watersheds that have many projects planned. The Six Mile Marsh includes the Wasserman and Parley Lake sub-watersheds. Lake Virginia is a sub-watershed.” She added, “Please let me know if this is all clear as mud, or maybe Lake Wasserman.” She said there are nine lakes in Victoria that are currently listed as impaired. “We’d like to partner with the Watershed District to get to a more cost effective technique to reduce phosphorous.” Councilmember Paulsen asked why some lakes, such as Stone Lake, that have no development around their shores still need phosphorous reduction. Phosphorous is normally seen as due to water runoff from lawns, for example. Councilmember Kim Roden cited her explanation for the Laketown property owners to be dealing with the Watershed District. “It looks to me like it’s a developer in search of cash,” she said. “Otherwise, why would we be sitting here doing this? Everything I’ve read says it’s going to be years before the housing market comes back. Looks like they found somebody with cash and it’s dressed up as a conservation project. They get a government agency to give them money. Absent a set of facts at the table, that’s what it looks like to me.” Holly said the Watershed District wants to update rules that would increase buffer widths next to a body of water, offer incentive programs for more stringent requirements for single family homeowners, and require permits for any vegetation removal near shorelines. Asked Councilmember Roden, “Doesn’t the DNR do this already? I’m puzzled why we’d duplicate this. And who’s going to pay for enforcing all of this?” In regard to the scheduled March 3rd joint meeting between the City of Victoria and the Watershed District, the city administrator reported that the District has suggested they hire a facilitator to lead the meeting and that they would pay for the facilitator. “They’ve got the money, obviously,” stated Councilmember Roden. “I’m not against feel good meetings but I don’t need a meeting to get educated like that. To me, a useful meeting would be like we had with the Met Council, where we raised the issues and questions in advance. As an elected official, I deserve an answer to my questions. Frankly, it’s otherwise a waste of my time.” Said Councilmember O’Connor, “To me the issue is an un-elected body buying land in our community.” “I agree,” said Kim. To Administrator Uram she stated, “Maybe the meeting would be productive to you, but it would not be productive to me. I am not going to another meeting and not be able to ask my questions. I don’t agree with your strategy.” “I am also not supportive of this meeting as stated,” said Mayor Mary Thun. “I have never been supportive of this meeting. Our questions should be given to Don [Uram] to get them answered. I very clearly stated to them [the District] that the council wants some answers and that our feeling is that we have this right and what is there to discuss? I told them it could end up in a lawsuit. They are interested in a communication plan. I also don’t believe we need a meeting for this.”
|
|
Sue’s Album A symphony of photos and fewer than a thousand words at www.VictoriaGazette.com |
|
March 2010 |
