Administrative Section ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION
Letter from Daniel Beckman, Gislason, Dosland, Hunter & Malecki dated December 7, 1992.
' Memo from Kate Aanenson dated December 7, 1992.
Letter from Jim Walston dated November 30, 1992.
' Letter to Mike Pflaum, Lundgren Brothers dated December 4, 1992.
Minnetonka Community Education and Services Advisory Council Board Minutes dated October
8, 1992.
Letter from Dave Pokorney, City of Chaska dated November 18, 1992.
Thank you note to Steve Winters.
Letter from Elliott Knetsch dated November 13, 1992.
Memo to Sgt. Julie Boden dated November 19, 1992.
Letter to Tom and Darlene Turcotte dated November 24, 1992.
' Letter to Larry Anderson dated November 25, 1992.
Letter from G. Dykstra dated September 10, 1992.
Memo from Todd Hoffman dated November 10, 1992.
Letter from Elliott Knetsch dated November 23, 1992.
' Memo from Scott Harr dated November 13, 1992.
Letter from Barbara Mittelstadt, AAA dated November 1992.
HRA Accounts Payable dated December 14, 1992.
Memo from Scott Harr dated December 9, 1992.
Letter to Mr. & Mrs. Pete Krebsbach dated December 10, 1992.
Final Report of Minnesota Lake Management Forum dated November 1992.
1
\ 2 -9 ILcwrit
/ 4 / ...(4 i 1 ) 1r
LAW OFFICES (r
GISLASON, DOSLAND, HUNTER & M �y ALECKI t o , µ ' J
1 A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION •• e1� \ `' Q '1 ,
SIDNEY P. GISLASON (1908 -1985) MINNEAPOLIS OFFICE f►k A1"
C. ALLEN DOSLAND OPUS CENTER DAVID W. STURGES*
DONALD F. HUNTER, P. A.'
SUITE 215E R. STEPHEN TILLITT
I
JAMES H. MALECKI 9900 BREN ROAD EAST
MARK S. ULLERY
DANIEL A. GISLASON P O BOX 5297 REED H. GLAWE'
ROBERT M. HALVORSON'
C. THOMAS WILSON MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55343 -2297 WADE R. WACHOLZ
BEVERLY BABCOCK KRANZ
TELEPHONE: 612 .933-9900
JOHN C. HOTTINGER JEFF C. BRAEGELMANN
I
DAVID D. ALSOP TELECOPIER: 612 • 933-0242
NOEL L. PHIFER
RUTH ANN WEBSTER LAURA L. MYSLIS
BARRY G. VERMEER ANDREW A. WILLAERT
GARY W. KOCH' z DANIEL A. BECKMAN
WILLIAM A. MOELLER' ANNE T. JOHNSON
TIMOTHY P. TOBIN' NEW ULM OFFICE MANKATO OFFICE
ELLIOT L. O
LISA J. HALL IESEN
STATE AND CENTER STREETS 106E.HICKORY
OLSEN KURT D. JOHNSON NEW ULM. MINNESOTA 6607! SUITE 200
ROGER H. GROSS MANKATO. MINNESOTA 66002 - 5163 CAROLE L. ISAKSON
DAWN R. SCHIEFELBEIN
1
REPLY TO • ADMITTED ONLY IN VIRGINIA
II P.O. Box 5297
Minnetonka, MN 55343 -2297
December 7, 1992
1
Mr. Don Ashworth
I City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
1 Re: Rockmore v. Cowger Homes, Inc.
Our File: 14521 -001
1 Dear Mr. Ashworth:
II Please be advised that pursuant to Minn. Stat. §466.05 Adam and
Alicia Rockmore give notice to the City of Chanhassen of a claim for
damages arising out of the City's negligent conduct.
I Within the last couple of months, the Rockmores have discovered
that the foundation on their home at 6320 Oxbow Bend, Chanhassen, is
wholly inadequate. The foundation does not comply with City code
I requirements, nor does it comply with standard building practices for
wood foundations. At the time of the original construction by Cowger
Homes, Inc., the foundation and footings were inspected by at least one
I City of Chanhassen inspector. On May 7, 1990, an inspector with the
initials S.N. inspected the footings and foundation and found no
deficiencies. Again, on May 22, 1990, an inspector named Mark Cooney
inspected the home and found no deficiencies.
1
RECEIVED
1 _ 3 1992
;_:11 v or urvAiNa-uSSEN
1 Attorneys also admitted in ' Iowa 4 Wisconsin 6 Illinois 4 North Dakota
GISLASON, DOSLAND, HUNTER & MALECKI
PAGE 2
Upon reasonable inspection, the home has been found to have
P P
numerous support deficiencies. Additionally, the home was constructed
with completely improper components. Further, the home was protected by
inappropriate polyurethane sheeting which should have been noticed upon
any reasonable inspection.
We believe the City of Chanhassen is responsible to hire
appropriately trained inspectors and that it has failed to do so.
Additionally, the City has failed to properly supervise its inspectors 11 and its inspectors have failed to carry out their duties in enforcing
city codes. The City's actions in hiring, supervising and inspecting new
homes did not take place at a planning or policy level. The City's
inspectors had actual knowledge of the specific deficiencies in the home
being built by Cowger Homes. By undertaking the inspection actions, the
City has assumed duty to enforce those codes. The building codes were
not enacted for the benefit of the public at large, but rather the
specific home owners of the homes being built pursuant to those codes.
The actions of the City's inspectors were not within any discretionary
function so as to provide the City with immunity. The City has waived
any potential immunity to the extent of any liability insurance procured. 1
The City's negligence and actions make it liable for the damages suffered
by Adam and Alicia Rockmore.
The amount of damages suffered by the Rockmores totals 1
$53,396.00 as itemized below:
Engineer Report - Fran Freyereisen $ 210.00
Engineer Report - Engineering Design Group 385.00
Woodmaster Report 250.00
Engineering Plans - Concept Designs 859.00
Engineering Plans - Engineering Design Group 630.00
Lost Landscape 750.00
Woodmaster Estimate 14,386.00
Larson /Henry Construction Estimate 20,026.79
Additional Insulation Work 3,600.00
Floor Repair - Kitchen 1,000.00
Deck Railing 300.00
Driveway Repair 2,000.00
Landscaping 3,000.00
Retaining Wall in Back Yard 5,000.00 1
Total: $53,396.00
1
1
1
1
' GISLASON, DOSLAND, HUNTER & MALECKI
PAGE 3
We look forward to your prompt attention to this matter. We
request that you refer this matter to your insurer for review, and that
they contact us immediately with their response. a woury ld be glad to
provide any further information which you feel is n= cessa.
Very tru'
-111111 o 'rs,
�
t
1 47,Lniel A. Beckman
DAB /bjs
cc: Adam and Alicia Rockmore
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
C1TYOF 1
.44
CHANHASSEN
1
• BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, COULTER DRIVE P.O. .O C > MINNESOTA 55317 1
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Kate Aanenson, Senior Planner
DATE: December 7, 1992 1
SUBJ: Group Homes in a Single Family District
1
On Friday, December 4, 1992, I learned that Rolling Acres signed a purchase agreement for a
home located at 3921 Leslee Curve. Rolling Acres will be operating a group home for four 1
young men who are developmentally disabled. State law mandates that state licensed group
homes serving 6 or fewer persons are a permitted use in any single family residential zone.
Therefore, the regulation is out of the jurisdiction of the city and no special permits from the city 1
are required. They plan on occupying the home in January.
Mr. Wayne Larson, Executive Director of Rolling Acres, has provided staff with information 1
about this type of group home. Specifically in this home, there will be four young men with
developmental disabilities living in the home along with staff help. One staff person will be
there at night and two staff persons will be there during the day during activity hours of the day
and evening. All four will go to a school or sheltered workshop program during the day.
A call was received from one of the neighbors on Leslee Curve as well as from Representative 1
Jim Ramstad's Office. Staff has explained that this type of group home is a permitted use in this
zone and is regulated by the state. Staff has asked Mr. Larson to meet with the neighbors to
explain more about their facilities.
1
1
is 1
tfil PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
Mount Olivet ---(-- 4±e
? il i .
- . iiii, °Lidice
.....„„,............_._.
i ...._____
1
.1.
. ..
•••__•___ _
December 4, 1992
°Imo Rs . , . _ . .
Pastor Paul M. Yam D.D.
President gam •
._
f Wendell S. Erickson H i ! `
, Via President - _ —
I Kenneth M. Anon My name is Wayne Larson. Rolling Acres signed the purchase
Secretary agreement for the home at 3921 Les l ee Curve on Thursday,
G arrea a December 3. We had a verbal agreement on November 25.
1 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Four young men with a developmental disability will be
Mary Anderson living in the home along with staff help. One staff at
I Harriet E Blodgett, Ph.D. night and two staff when four are there during activity
Jane Burton hours of the day and evening. All four will go to a
Richard A. Carlson, M.D. school or sheltered workshop program during the day. The
Lloyd E" gelsma nome is a foster home and is a permitted use in a single
i Dayton F . F i e b i g e r f a m i l y area under state law.
M. Annette Grosse
Melvin D. Hedct We plan to move into the home in January and look forward
Shirley Hoskins to i n v i t i n
' R. Bruce Kobe, D.D.S. g you to an information meeting prior to moving,
Pastor Kenneth H. Kamer and to an open house after we move in.
Charlie Lakin, Ph.D.
I David W. Lund I f you have any questions please call me at Rolling Acres
TedMann (474 -5974) or at my home in Chanhassen (949 - 0844).
John McClay, Ph.D.
Wayne W. Neubarth S i n c e r ly
I Arsham H. Ohanessian
Roy H. Olson
Douglas A. Peterson, M.D.
Robert A. Price Wayne L rson
Roland D. Rasmussen
Phillip A. Roberu Executive Director
Alpha Strand
Jean Teasley WL : a J •
I John W. Thiel
Greg T. Wailing, D.D.S.
Kathryn Westin
1 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR _
Wayne H. Larson
1
7200 ROLLING ACRES ROAD • EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 -9683 • (612) 474 -5974
•
•
Message from the Executive Director
by Wayne H. Larson
Everyone wants a special place, somewhere we can In 1993, MORA will make available to Carver,
call home. People with a developmental disability (DD) Hennepin, and adjacent counties a qualified team of
are no different. Most people with a DD are considered professionals. These professionals will provide assess -
to be moderately to mildly handicapped, and often live ment, intervention, and caregiver training for situations
and intermingle in their birth home environment or live where a person with a developmental disability has a
independently. crisis with behaviors that are out of control. Prevention
Five percent are severely to profoundly retarded and of out -of -home placement will be the primary goal. If
need some assistance in daily living. The amount of necessary, MORA will have a capacity to serve four
services a person needs to remain independent can vary persons on its campus as a temporary alternate to insti-
greatly, depending on the special needs of that individ- tutionalization. The savings in service costs will be used
ual. These special needs require professional services; to pay for the relocation of residents and to enhance
that often means group living situations. their lice on campus.
Choices for people with DD have been few. Minne- In order that space will be available for the campus
sota has 300 intermediate care facilities, including our crisis services, residents who have indicated an interest
Schutz Lake Campus, and 4,800 people in Minnesota in a small community home will be considered for the I
use them. In addition, there are more than 3,000 four homes in 1992 -93. In the longer term, we hope to
persons with a DD receiving 'waivered° or Semi -Inde- create three additional homes by 1996 to meet the
pendent Living services. Our Mount Olivet Rolling Acres expressed desires of more residents.
Northgate community home, apartment services, and in- Our long -term goat is to provide single bedrooms I
home service are included in these services. and smaller household sizes for those residents who are
Thanks to a special Legislative Pilot Project, MORA most appropriate for the four households on our cam -
is able to plan in 1992 -93 four community homes, crises pus. Remodeling of homes is not unusual after 24
services, and downsize and remodel our campus on years. /
Schutz Lake. This will relieve the crowding on campus, We continue our commitment to all the people we
provide a choice of living environments, and provide a serve, and we want to thank you for your support of
support service for people with a DD who live in a group Mount Olivet Rolling Acres. With your help we are able
situation, in a foster home, their birth home environment to assist people with disabilities so that they and their
or independently, but need help in a crisis. families can experience more of fife!
Third Annual Golf Scramble .. , ,
Held in September I
On September 14, 132 players First place, 54, in Men's Low Net
gathered at the Minneapolis Golf Club went to Ted Korzenowski, Richard
to enjoy the beautiful fall day and play Pearson, David Larson, and Doug
golf. Award winners in Men's Low Weber; second place, 55, to Gene and
Gross included Gary Merts, Shorty George Frey, John Walton and Mary ,.. I
Staton, Phil Moore and Terry Flynn, Swenson.
first place, 62. David Graham, Tim First place, 58, in Mixed Low net
and Mark Fuzzey, and Ron Swain was awarded to Robert, Mary, Dawn A
placed second, 66, and Robert Smith, and Reid Rischmiller; second place,
Vern Sieling, Basil Wissner and 55, to Joe and Donna Langer, Art t,,
Robert Kurek placed third, with 66. Albright and Dave Devore.
In Mixed Low Gross Paul Lian, I
Dale and Kathy Hanson and Mike Thank you to all the sponsors, 1
McCalvy placed first with 67, Gordon donors, players and to the steering ‘...t:,;- ;.
and Debbie Stofer and Pat and Cathy committee. A special thank you to all
Hopi placed second with 74. the hard - working volunteers: Pat ' „i -
In Women's Low Gross, first Blanch, Ramona Pearson, Nancee Thank-you to Waconla Knights of
place, 74, went to Cammie Olson, Doepke, Judy Crawford, Dee Hender- Columbus for their donation! Eva
II
Mary Vickerman, June Klindworth, and son, Sharon Hoffman, Betty Olson, Shroeder, above, accepted a chock
Pastor Jurgenson. Judy Cannady, Archie and Edith Japs. from Larry Wirtz, Waconta Knights of
Columbus 1
1 Annual Benefit Barbecue and Auction Held in September
by Betty Olson, Auxiliary President v.,.,b
The Annual Church Benefit Barbecue and Auction was " � `
• s . r , , }
held on September 27. Weatherwise, it was a picture - ' , •
I perfect fall day. 4:, i.
' -- ... #
The Shrine German Band again provided music, which s
adds so much to the festivities! With the addition of .;AI t - '
I several new games, plus some of the old favorites, guests it\ *.1,'''" , \ had a nice variety from which to choose. The Mount Olivet
Homes Auxiliary was happy to see so many MORA resi- > , ,
dents out and enjoying the day. °
We are greatly appreciative of the support received - ° , • - ,
r
from the community, MORA families, and MOLC members Senator Renneke (second from left) was honored at the
who attended or contributed to this benefit. barbecue with a commemorative plaque. Also pk:tured are
r Mrs. Renneke, left, Pastor Paul Youngdahl and Wayne
Larson.
i 4-7 , 1 4 1 44: ;
111 . z - : , Christmas Tea Dance Mark your Calendar!
, , a wt Will Be Dec. 13
x' 4 a Mark your calendar now
I " December 13 is the planned date so you won't miss the "Family
for the Second Annual Christmas Tea and Friends" event January
Dance, from 2:30 -4:30 p.m. in the 23, 1993, which will begin at
I y / , N u y Y g Acres
ymnium/recreation building at noon at Mount Olivet Rolling
h i ' :-Dance,
Mount Olivet Rolling Acres. .
ar
Th event was a great succes
I
•- - w residents and families alike on its
='°' -) t ri i a first run last year It is a great opportu- RemerkS Continued from
_=- x i -- 4 nity for families to share in the festiv
�. . ry s ties of the holidays. front page
' % f ' Music this year will be provided by
cared about their child.
,
D John Luckow an his band. In
- `>, addition to bein g g the father of Cottage We are going to achieve this goal
z"' because we care about people who
III res Suzanne Luckow and an
_ ' rr ,. -` . _- are developmentally disabled. We
optometrist, Dr. Luckow is a musician. need to care, we need their gifts to
On Sunday, November 8, Rolling Acres Festive and mellow music, alon become whole. We are enriched
I received and dedicated a banner made with delicious tea fare will be available
by artist and Mount Olivet member to enjoy. Families and friends of because of our experiences that
Marilyn Brown. The banner, depicting Rolling Acres, please mark your illuminate for us that which really
the story of Noah and the Ark, was calendars! matters in our worid...Homes with
I designed and made by Mrs. Brown Heart."
especially for Rolling Acres. It will
become an Important and visible part of
the Sunday church service. - -
r f
Building, continued f rom front page �, � \ . ;�� ��
r r,
nisce about the past, and join in supporting an exciting . , �
f uture at Mount Olivet Rolling Acres. Invitations will be '- f 4 - , -
1 „
mailed in early January, but mark y our calendar today. r te°'
If you would like to make a contribution to our 4 � '-� � r
"Homes with Heart" campaign, just send a check to p ' - k
Mount Olivet Roiling Acres. Your contribution will make �Y - . a - : . ' _, ,
a difference. -
Waconla Community Home
1
Thank You, Thank You... 1
Your Support Makes a Difference!
Needs List We're grateful to receive memorials Our thanks also go to the following 1
if you wish to make a donation to In memory of: for their donations and gifts:
Mount Olivet Rolling Acres, please
give us a call. Our major needs Frances Bergman from Janet Danielson
1
include: Elizabeth Barber Mr. & Mrs. Robert Danielson
Elizabeth and Christian Butt from Charles Danielson
Home Furnishings Wareen & Viola Edwards Mr. & Mrs. R. E. Danielson
Floor lamps James Freeberg from Mr. & Mrs. Nels Kemppainen
Dressers Milton & Mildred Reeve Mr. & Mrs. Lloyd Engelsma
Bedspreads/quilts (twin size) David & Phyllis Lund Mr. & Mrs. Dean Schmalz 1
File cabinets George & Sylvia Jones Mr. & Mrs. Elmer Rall
Outing Opportunities Mr. & Mrs. Philip Halverson Mr. & Mrs. Mary Joppe
Arboretum Elvera Heuer from Mr. & Mrs. Kevin Joppe
1
Minnesota Zoo Vem & Gloria Luckhardt Mr. & Mrs. Stanley Ralf
Science Museum O. Margot Kittelson from Ethel Holm
YMCA H. Medora Kittelson Warner Elg
Event tickets (Twins, North Stars, Thorolf E. Larsen from Bob Sparboe 1
Timberwolves, Vikings, Gophers) Mr. & Mrs. Daniel Enge Waconia Knights of Columbus
Recreation Will Rall from Mr. & Mrs. Lyle Allen
Variety of music tapes Mr. & Mrs. Stanley Rall Estate of Elma Nitardy 1
VCR prerecorded movies Mr. & Mrs. Kevin Joppe Estate of Hilma L. Spannaus
Photo albums Mr. & Mrs. Mary Joppe Estate of Jean E. Ekelund
Magazines Mr. & Mrs. Elmer Rall Edwin W. Norberg Char. Tr.
Mr. & Mrs. Oscar Rall Evelyn Duoos
1
Elizabeth Morgan Jean Danielson
Marie Wasie from
Mary Heimark
1
NON - PROFIT ORG. 1
Mount Olivet U.S. POSTAGE
OLLT
V ictoria, Minn.
Permit No. 2 1
CMS
Mount Olivet Rolling Acres
7200 Rolling Acres Road
1
Excelsior, Minnesota 55331
612- 474 -5974
Pastor Paul M. Youngdahl D.D.
President
Wayne H. Larson
Executive Director
1
1
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 1
ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED
1
1
.0 S
4/A.9 /j
CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A.
Attorneys at Law //_� �f
CC (pdi? iw
Th0111.1 1 (,nn (612) }�_' 5L\V
R \ l:nut"
Fax (612) 452 555
Th,nn.r \i s�,ut •
(lin (; FuLh.
Jame R. \ \',tl t n
11 November 30, 1992
Elliott R. knet.ch
M ichael .A Rrol -ack
Ren,ie 1) Steiner
Mr. Don Ashworth
� -Executive Director
Housing Redevelopment Authority
City of Chanhassen
Chanhassen, MN 55317
' Re: Chanhassen HRA /Gary V. Kirt Real Estate Transaction
Dear Mr. Ashworth:
On October 23, 1992 the Chanhassen HRA acquired the property
known as the "Hanus Building" from Gary Kirt. Simultaneously
with the sale to the HRA, the HRA then executed a repurchase
agreement with Gary Kirt wherein Kirt is obligated to acquire the
Hanus property from the HRA between April 1, 1994 and October
i 1, 1995.
To confirm, the respective interests of the Chanhassen HRA
and Gary Kirt in the Hanus Property are subject to an option
agreement recorded December 30, 1991 in favor of Gary Brown. In
other words, the ability of Gary Brown to exercise the recorded
option is in no way affected or altered by the transactions
between the Chanhassen HRA and Gary Kirt. Enclosed for you
reference please find the marked up title insurance commitment
issued by Chicago Title Insurance Company as well as a copy of
the Gary Brown's option.
If you have further questions regarding this matter please
do not hesitate to call me.
Very truly yours,
CAMPS KNUTSON, SCOTT
P• •
1
James R Walston
JRW:cfc RECEIVED
Enclosure DEC 01 1992
CITY Ur Uriheir1ASSEN
Suite 317 • Eagandale Office Center • 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Eagan, MN 55121
CITY OF
i
. CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
December 4, 1992 '
•
Mr. Mike Pflaum and Associates
Lundgren Brothers Construction Co.
935 East Wayzata Blvd.
Wayzata, MN 55391
Dear Mike: 1
Thank you for the generous donation in the amount of $4,000 to the City of Chanhassen's Park
and Recreation Department. As you know, this money was used to purchase the majority of a
play equipment expansion for North Lotus Lake Park. North Lotus Lake Park is a twenty acre
neighborhood park serving the northeastern sector of the city, an area which Lundgren Brothers
Construction has been greatly involved in. We have taken delivery of this new equipment, but
are postponing installation of such until the spring of 1993 (the project includes a good amount
of bituminous work). Upon installing the equipment, a notification informing the neighbors in
the area of the new equipment will be mailed. Lundgren Brothers involvement in making this
much needed playground improvement a reality will be recognized in this letter.
Again, thank you very much for your donation.
Best Holiday wishes, '
1
Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Coordinator -- TH:k
pc: Mayor and City Council
Park and Recreation Commission
111
1
t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1
1 RECEIVED
1 "eto,ika Canmunity Education and Services NOV 181992
Advisory Council
Oct. Board of Directoa CITY OF Chrr!vhr hN
1
The meeting was called to order by President. Bud Boberg. at 7:30 p.m. at the Minnetonka
I Administration Building. The following members were present:
Elaine Anderson Ann Osborne t.:'2-.-,.
Jim Berbee Marilyn Paimatier
' Bud Boberg Mark Senn c.f.',. '�
Colleen Faber Pat Senn ti; i{ Pack
Mary Hassett- Gabrys Tad Shaw C 4.is ,,..,..._.-.---n—
Douglas Jolstad Paul Teserak
1 Colleen Montag
The following members were absent:
I Bob Gagne Dili Malaga
Fred Hanus Larry Parkhurst
Bill Hickey Patti Prlesmeyer
Judy Hruby Jimmie Wright
I Sue Keller
Guests
Cheryl Scott
■ Action on Mines
Mr. Jolstad moved to approve the September 10th minutes, seconded by James Berbee, motion
II carried.
Forum P es dent Boberg reported on a phone conversation that he had with Larry Parkhurst. Mr.
I Parkhurst said that the School Board has approved the requests that the MCES Board made
regarding the remodeling of the gyms. (Refer to MCES March 12, 1992 minutes). The School
- Board has approved expanding the gyms at Scenic Heights. Groveland and Excelsior to allow
for spectators and to furnish wood floors.
I Committee Report.
Mark Senn from the Planning. Development & Evaluation Committee presented to the Board
I the final draft of Minnetonka Community Education & Services Goals and Objectives 1992 -93.
Mr. Senn reported that the next step will be setting up the framework for achieving these MCES
objectives in the coming year. Mr. Berbee moved to accept the proposed MCES Goals &
Objectives as outlined by Mark Senn, seconded by Colleen Montag. motion carried
1 Colleen Faber. from the Special Services Committee. and Jim Jones met with Florence Bogle
from ICA regarding the survey results and to discuss areas of cooperation. (For more
information refer to MCES minutes May 14, 1992). The meeting answered only some of the
I questions that had been developed by the full committee. Ms. Faber reported that ICA does not
promote holiday basket giving. ICA. according to Ms. Bogle, would prefer a dollar donation.
Ms. Bogie's reasons were:
1 1. Monetary value of baskets can be different
2. Food is perishable
3. Lead time is an issue.
I After considerable discussion, motion by Jim Berbee, seconded by Tad Shaw to give Colleen
Faber the authority to proceed as she sees fit and to continue to explore ways to deal with the
gift basket issue through the MCES "Youth in Service" program. motion carried by a hand vote.
1
1 .
r' i v.. a,c:�a`Y GL cw
r �� Chaska 1
7 r ,7, ..., „.._,_, .,.„
„i:..:,;),,L:2:.,)
1
•
, .
l
November 18, 1992
Mr. Phil Gravel
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates
2335 West T.H. 36
St. Paul, MN 55113
Dear Phil:
Recently I received the Change Order and plan sheet relative to
0
construction of'a portion of the Chaska -Chan Interceptor in
conjunction with Chanhassen Lift Station Project. As the agency
responsible for constructing the Chaska -Chan Interceptor, the
li
City of Chaska would agree to be responsible for the entire
amount of the Change Order which is estim2ted to be $41,300 plus
indirect costs. The City of Chaska looks forward to continued
cooperation in expediting this project.
I!
If you have any questions concerning the City of Chaska's
commitment, please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
Sincerely, „
),; - /:,-- _ --- -
Da - oitorney
. "y Administrator
Il i
DP :jai "%E , . l?, 9� � `'` rd
c: Charles Folch, City of Chanhassen/ , 7 x `' 4 ...
NOV '019;92
ENGINEERING Kra.
City o Chaska Mi nnesota One City Hall Plaza 55318 -1962 Phone 61: X48 -2851
! „--- ..,- ,--”, — 7 N..._..
,.:... _., r __. r: ('-- -----____ -
TS — %Th ---) • /
- ''''' --- ( ' -- r .._
.------
1
C"... .
'--
,, ,,-,,,,... ■ ,
, -
,..) --- '-'"••
:IS
I - - • - - 1 ) ' ,-: -..-.: s.
,----- ----■
( -)
c - ‘ i-■ '''- ' -----.
c.•• , (-..
- , v \ s c --) ( N, - ....,.
----- .,>-+„.
1;-] \ -
c
I
7
\_?.,,„ (.,,, /.Q_s ,, , ,,...l„,. -:-. c. , , •=4 .._.....) •-.7_, c-N, ...._
C''4P ..---. ' '•-•• -----,-) -
,--- ,—•-. (---- ,-----e .
r C
•',---, ----- (-- \
1
' •-■ e
•-.- t ,„) -...: - >I M
n • (1--- ____
, , ..._,-. , - -•-•, - a — .._
— c-\ ..:),....,--- -- j >. C k ,-• ,--,..
1
---- --A- -••
E-- ...___., 1/4 (-------- \ r■-_ ,
- '. ''' — c' ,---
r■ r"... -- — 2--(----
1
• -•-•• ->
-;-• ;
•-■-•' • ''''. - "---1 (--"-
...-
‘\ „. •••■ "rs,_
1 C ... C.4, 4 , - ,-■ C e"-. L.___ --'---) ''
I c\
rs... ,......" ( '
■•...)
1 •
1 .
.
j.... • . . • , : .- . , .
..
1
:3:3—
....„
i L..)
, CfQ
C:D ---
> ,
\ ....? ..)
cb . ---- (
rb -Et,
I et)
1 , c_ •,
(t4 r v)
, 0
I ,' 11
)
n V)
I L n
1 CO
• n1S.
-■:: Ci 1 ‘ 1/1' C cV„.
I L
--) L. •.
-4,
#0 l
RECEIVED
CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A.
',' i 1992
Attorneys at Law el:: � :- �r 1 f - nHASSEI
Thomas J. Campbell (612) 452 -5000
Roger N. Knutson Fax (612) 452 -5550
Thomas M. Scott
Gary G. Fuchs Ar- S-4 I
James R. Walston
Elliott B. Knetsch + November 13, 1992 ee- P -I(
Michael A. Brohack
Renae U. Steiner /46'.
Bradley Beisel
-, SCHOLLE AND BEISEL, LTD.
200 South Sixth Street II 430 Pillsbury Center
Minneapolis, MN 55402 -1488
CC) O
(
Re: Merz, et al. vs. Chanhassen et al.
1
Court File No. saKtmara C6 - - 925
Dear Mr. Beisel::
It
Enclosed herewith and served upon you by U.S. Mail, please
find a copy of the following documents:
II
1. JOINT ANSWER;
2. NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION; - 1
3. RESPONDENTS' JOINT MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
JOIN AN ADDITIONAL PARTY; and
• t
4. PROPOSED ORDER.
•
Ti Very truly yours,
1
t
1 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT _
i & FUCHS, P.A. 1
S
- By: i
' E1 iott B. J X4 I
i
EBK:mlw
` Enclosure II
"". cc(Don Ashworth (w /enc.)
4 Paul Krauss (w /enc.)
3 Ann Cathcart (w /enc.)
II
Trolls-Glen. Homeowners' Association (w /enc.)
1
i II
Suite 317 • Eagandale Office Center • 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Eagan, MN 55121
3
h
II STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF CARVER FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Court File NO.: C6 -92 -925
i
I II John Merz, Mary Ann Merz,
Terry Johnson and Pam Johnson,
II Petitioners,
' 1 vs. NOTICE OF MOTION
AND MOTION
The City of Chanhassen, a political
I subdivision, Don Chmiel, Mayor,
Ursela Dimler, Councilperson,
Mike Mason, Councilperson,
1 Richard Wing, Councilperson,
Tom Workman, Councilperson,
in their official capacities,
III Respondents.
I
TO: Petitioners John Merz, Mary Ann Merz, Terry Johnson and Pam
ill Johnson and their attorney, Bradley N. Beisel, Pillsbury
Center, 200 South Sixth Street, #430, Minneapolis, Minnesota
55402 -4188:
II PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on December 10, 1992 at 9:00 o'clock
II a.m., or soon thereafter as council can be heard, before a
District Court Judge, at the Carver County Courthouse, City of
II Chaska, State of Minnesota, Respondents, City of Chanhassen, Don
Chmiel, Ursela Dimler, Mike Mason, Richard Wing, and Tom Workman
1 will move the above -named Court for an Order pursuant to Rules
1 19.01 and 21 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure permitting
Respondents to join Trolls -Glen Home Owners' Association as an
II additional party respondent.
1
1
This Motion is based upon all the files, records, and 1
proceedings contained herein.
Dated: November 13, 1992 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT
& FUCHS, P.A.
By: att
u ' AC\
Elliott B. Wtsch, #168130
Renae D. Steiner, #222392
Attorneys for Respondent
Suite 317
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
Telephone: (612) 452 -5000
1
1
•
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-2- 1
1
II
1 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF CARVER FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
1 John Merz, Mary Ann Merz, Court File No.: C6 -92 -925
Terry Johnson and Pam Johnson,
II Petitioners,
vs. RESPONDENTS JOINT
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT
II The City of Chanhassen, a political OF MOTION TO JOIN AN
subdivision, Don Chmiel, Mayor ADDITIONAL PARTY
Ursela Dimler, Councilperson,
II Mike Mason, Councilperson,
Richard Wing, Councilperson,
Tom Workman, Councilperson,
11 in their official capacities,
Respondents.
il INTRODUCTION
II Respondents, City of Chanhassen, Don Chmiel, Ursela Dimler,
Mike Mason, Richard Wing, and Tom Workman bring this motion to
1 join Trolls -Glen Home Owners' Association as an additional party
respondent.
1 LAW
r
II Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 19.01 states:
A person who is subject to service of process shall be
joined as a party in the action if:
I a. In the person's absence complete relief cannot be
accorded among those already parties, or
11 b. The person claims an interest relating to the subject
of the action and so situated that the disposition of
II the action in the person's absence may:
1. As a practical matter, impair or impede the
person's ability to protect that interest; or
II 2. Leave anyone already a party subject to a
substantial risk or incurring double, multiple, or
II otherwise inconsistent obligations by reason of
the person's claimed interest.
If the person has not been so joined, the Court shall order
II that the person be made a party.
1
1
Likewise, Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 21 provides
that:
Parties may be dropped or added by Order of the Court
on Motion of any party or upon the Court's own
initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms
as are just.
DISCUSSION
The Minnesota Supreme Court has specifically recognized that
interests of nonparties may be affected in an action, State Auto
and Casualty Underwriters v. Lee, 257 N.W.2d 573 (Minn. 1977). 1
The Court recognized the purpose of Rule 19 as stated in Rule 19
Rules of Civil Procedure, Advisory Committee Note "is to compel
joinder of parties whenever feasible so that a complete 1
disposition of the claim can be made in the pending case ". The
Court went on to note that "the Rule reflects pragmatic concern j
for the efficient use of judicial resources and also acknowledges
the fact that the interests of the nonparty, against whom a
judgment is not res judicata, may nonetheless as a practical 1
matter, be affected by the judgment." Id. at 575.
The requirement of joinder serves both the public's '
interests in the complete disposition of the action and the
parties' interests in avoiding inconsistent results, and also 1
serves to advance the general purpose of the Rules by fostering 1
litigation of as many claims as possible in each civil action.
Id. t
In this case, application of Rule 19.01(b) requires the
joinder of Trolls -Glen Home Owners Association as a respondent. 1
Trolls -Glen Home Owners' Association requested a Non - conforming
-2- 1
1
.
Use Permit from the City. The permit was granted by the City.
Now, aggrieved members of the Association are challenging the
'City's issuance of that Non - conforming Use Permit. Trolls -Glen
Home Owners' Association is clearly interested in the outcome of
this Petition because the subject matter of this litigation is
Trolls - Glen's Non - Conforming Use Permit. Additionally, if
Trolls -Glen is not made a party in this action, the City of
Chanhassen may be subjected to an additional suit by Trolls -Glen
Home Owners' Association if the outcome of this matter is adverse
I to their interests.
Joining Trolls -Glen Home Owners' Association in this action
would serve the public interest by completely disposing of the
actions and eliminating the substantial and real likelihood that
the City of Chanhassen would be subject to additional litigation
on the same matter.
CONCLUSION
For the above stated reasons, Respondents respectfully
request that this Court issue an Order allowing Respondents to
join Trolls -Glen Home Owners' Association as an additional party
1 in this action.
Dated: November 13, 1992 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SC'TT
& FUCHS P.A. 1
By: r;
1 Elliott B. etsch, #168130
Renae D. Steiner, #222392
Attorneys for Respondents
Suite #317
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
Telephone: (612) 452 -5000
1 -3-
1
STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT 1
COUNTY OF CARVER FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Court File No. C6 -92 -925 1
John Merz, Mary Ann Merz 1
1 Terry Johnson and Pam Johnson,
Petitioners,
vs.
1
JOINT ANSWER
The City of Chanhassen, a political 1
subdivision, Don Chmiel, Mayor,
Ursela Dimler, Councilperson,
{ Mike Mason, Councilperson,
Richard Wing, Councilperson,
Tom Workman, Councilperson,
in their official capacities, 1
Respondents.
9 £ 1
Respondents City of Chanhassen, Don Chmiel, Ursela Dimler,
Mike Mason, Richard Wing, and Tom Workman, for their Joint Answer
1
to the Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Mandamus herein
le
state and allege as follows:
1. Deny each and every statement, allegation, matter and 1
thing contained in Petitioners' Petition, except as hereafter
specifically admitted. 1
2. Admit the allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the
1
Petition.
3. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the 1
Petition, the Respondents are without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations,
and therefore deny the same.
1
1
I
' 4. As to the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of the
Petition, the Respondents are without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations,
and, therefore deny the same.
5. Admit the allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the
Petition.
6. Admit the allegation in paragraph 5 of Petitioners'
1 Petition that Exhibit "A" is an accurate depiction of the
Trolls -Glen beach lot. As to the remaining allegations in
paragraph 5 of the Petition, Respondents are without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations, and therefor deny the same.
7. Admit the allegations contained in paragraphs 6, 7, 9,
11, and 12 of the Petition.
1 8. Deny the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the
Petition.
9. Admit the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of the
Petition, except as to the portion of paragraph B that alleges
the original ordinance was passed in February, 1982. Respondents
1 allege that the original ordinance was passed in March, 1982.
10. Admit the allegation in paragraph 13 of the Petition
that the Trolls -Glen Homeowner's Association made application
pursuant to ordinance No. 163 for a non - conforming use permit.
As to the remaining allegations, Respondents are without
1
1
-2-
i
II
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 1
truth of the allegations and therefore deny the same.
11. Admit the allegations contained in paragraphs 14 18, 19, II
22, and 23 of the Petition.
12. Deny the allegations contained in paragraphs 15, 16, 20, 1
21, and 24 of the Petition.
II
13. Respondents are without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation 1
contained in paragraph 25 of the Petition, alleging that
Petitioners are owners of real property on either side of the 1
Trolls -Glen beach lot, and therefore deny the same. Respondents I
deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 25 of the
Petition. 1
14. Deny the allegations contained in paragraph 26 of the
Petition. 1
15. Admit the allegation contained in paragraph 27 of the
Petition. I
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES • 1
16. As an affirmative defense, Respondents allege that the
Petition fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 1
WHEREFORE, Respondents pray for judgment of this Court as
follows: 1
1. Dismissing Petitioners' Petition in its entirety on the
merits and with prejudice.
1
II
-3-
II
1
2. Awarding Respondents their costs and expenses, including
reasonable attorneys' fees.
3. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just
and equitable.
1
Dated: November 13, 1992. CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT
& FUCHS, P.A.
By: it !. ►.rlL
Elliott B. +Wtsch, #168130
Renae D. Steiner, #222392
Attorneys for Respondents
' Suite #317
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, MN 55121
Telephone: (612) 452 -5000
1
1
JI
1
1
1
1
1
1
-4-
1
1
STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT 1
COUNTY OF CARVER FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
John Merz, Mary Ann Merz, Court File No.: C6 -92 -925
Terry Johnson and Pam Johnson,
Petitioners, '
vs.
The City of Chanhassen, a political '
subdivision, Don Chmiel, Mayor, ORDER
Ursela Dimler, Councilperson,
Mike Mason, Councilperson,
Richard Wing, Councilperson,
Tom Workman, Councilperson,
in their official capacities, ,
Respondents.
The above - entitled matter came on for hearing before the
undersigned Judge of District Court on December 10, 1992 at 1
9:00 a.m. at the Carver County Courthouse, Chaska, Minnesota on
Respondents' Motion to Join Trolls -Glen Home Owners' Association as 1
an additional party respondent. Elliott B. Knetsch, Esq. appeared
on behalf of the Respondents. Bradley N. Beisel appeared on behalf
of the Petitioners. Other appearances were as noted: 1
•
Based upon the pleadings, all of the files, records and proceedings 1
herein, and the arguments of council at hearing, it is hereby
Ordered: '
ORDER 1
1. Respondents' Motion to Join Trolls -Glen Home Owners'
Association as an additional party is hereby granted. 1
BY THE COURT:
Dated: 1
Judge of District Court
CITYOF " '
= CHANHASSEN
.•. `1t4 tko
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
'— Y �" (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
' MEMORANDUM
• TO: Sgt. Julie Boden
FROM: Scott Harr, Public Safety Director
DATE: November 19, 1992
SUBJ: Street Light Outages
Some time ago I had requested that deputies pass on any street
light outages to us so that we can pass them on to our Street
Department. Some time has gone by since I made this request, so
for the benefit of those that have started working 2800 since then,
if outages are reported to Beth or Carol, they will pass them on to
Engineering. Thanks.
cc: Mayor Don Chmiel
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 is
t «: PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
i
CITY cF
}
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 r
November 24, 1992 r
r
Tom and Darlene Turcotte
6430 City West Parkway, #5314
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Re: City Trunk Utility Improvement Project No. 92 -5
Parcel No. 25- 0101520
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Turcotte: r
I have received and reviewed your letter dated November 17, 1992 addressed to the City
Council members of the City of Chanhassen concerning City Improvement Project No. 92 -5.
As the City Engineer for Chanhassen, I feel obligated to respond to your letter which raised
a number of concerns which were discussed and responded to at the neighborhood meeting
on October 14, 1992 and the previous public hearing on October 26, 1992. I would like to
first start off by stating that I am empathetic to your situation as an incoming resident with
a desire to build your new home on a 5 -acre parcel in a rural setting of a smaller
community. It is evident that you have incurred a significant expense to construct a well and
mound /septic system for your property. It is unfortunate that the timing for your building
activities and the construction of the proposed trunk utility improvement project are
probably 6 months apart from being compatible. It is hoped that the installation of these
types of capital improvement projects will help to avoid more properties within the urban
service area, such as yours, from installing septic and well systems just prior, to capital utility
improvements. -
- As I explained to you at the informational meeting, your property exists within the defined
service area for these trunk utility improvements. While you may not choose to make use
of these trunk utilities initially, these improvements arguably benefit your property as well
as all of the properties within the defined service area. Therefore, special assessment levies,
in accordance with state statutes, is appropriate.
On capital improvement projects such as this, the City Council and staff are charged with
the task of balancing the desires of property owners who wish to develop their property and
those who, at least initially, wish to remain in a non - developed condition. In fact, it is my
ars PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
1
1 Tom and Darlene Turcotte
November 24, 1992
Page 2
opinion that the Council has been very sensitive to the concerns of the small- acreage or
1 hobby -farm type properties affected by an adjacent improvement project. It should be
pointed out that a 5 -acre parcel such as yours could be assessed two trunk units per acre or
a total of 10 trunk units of sewer and water for assessment purposes. The Council's policy
for properties such as yours on similar projects in the past has been to assess only one trunk
unit per 10 -acre increment of property whereby the remaining trunk units would be collected
' at such time that subdivision of the property were to occur. Instead of an initial trunk
assessment of $19,340, your proposed initial assessment is $1,934. I also wish to be clear
that these proposed assessments are for the trunk utility improvements. At such time in the
' future that you would choose to connect to the City's sanitary sewer and water system, you
will incur additional costs for the lateral system which will be required to serve your
property from the trunk system.
1 In your letter you also raised a concern for your newly installed well in relation to the
proposed location for the trunk sewer line. The final design alignment for the trunk sanitary
1 sewer will take into consideration the location of your well.
In summary, the construction of this improvement project will arguably benefit your property
from the standpoint of having the trunk sanitary sewer and water systems installed for your
service area. The City's trunk assessment policy for small- acreage hobby -farm type
properties significantly reduces your initial assessment costs. The proposed assessment
' amount for your property is the same amount that was presented to you at the neighborhood
meeting and previous public hearing. While you may continue to disagree with this
methodology, it has been implemented on similar projects in the past and is believed to be
1 a "middle ground" that balances the needs and desires of all property owners involved.
Sincerely,
CITY OF CHANHASS
1 Charles D. Folch, P.E.
City Engineer
1 CDF:ktm
c: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician
' Don Ashworth, City Manager
City Council Administrative Packet (12/14/92)
Phil Gravel, BRA
1
1
CITYOF 1
1
. r
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
0
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
I
1
November 25, 1992
I
Mr. Larry Anderson 1
Katun Corporation
10951 Bush Lake Road _ 1
Minneapolis, MN 55438 -2391
Dear Larry: 1
I want to thank you and Glen for taking the time to visit with us last week. We hope you will
consider Chanhassen for your move and look forward to working with you on the project in the I
future. Please feel free to contact us if you need any additional information or have a specific
site in mind. I was also able to get in touch with our Fire Marshal to check on our fire rating.
The rating was just lowered to a 5 effective 12/1/92. The Fire Marshal has stated that they are
I
going to work towards lowering this to a 4 over the coming year or two.
S'
7■,)
erely, 1
(41-ve / 1-(116E4
Paul Krauss, AICP 1
Planning Director
PK:v
1,0/ 1
City Council
1
1
1
Is
1
t 0 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
I
ISO COMMERCIAL RISK SERVICES, INC.
6550 YORK AVENUE SOUTH SUITE 600 MINNEAPOUS, MN 55435 1612) 920.6726 FAX 1612, 920-0029
MERLE M. RAPPEL, CPCU
REGIONAL DIRECTOR
•
September 10, 1992
cc: pj a C. C
Honorable Don Chmiel, Mayor / Ck =�
' Municipal Building, Box 147 L:..•M -'s �•,�
Chanhassen, MN 55317 pai4(` s~ ,�
Dear Mayor Chmiel:
We wish to thank you, Mark Litfin, Gerald Boucher, and
others for the cooperation given to our representative
' during our recent survey. We have completed our evaluation
of the fire insurance classification for your city, and
advise that the protection class has improved to 5/9.
Class 5 will apply to buildings within 1000' of a fire
hydrant.
Formerly Class 6 applied; the new classification will
' result in a decrease in the fire insurance rates for many
insured commercial properties within the city. The new
rates will be effective on December 1, 1992'.
The purpose of our visit was to gather information needed
to determine a fire insurance classification which may be
used to develop fire insurance rates. This survey was not
conducted for property loss prevention or life safety
purposes and no life safety or property loss prevention
recommendations will be made.
The change from 6 to 5 does not affect rates for
sprinklered properties or residential occupancies insured
under Homeowners type policies and some other special
schedule rated property. The change will affect typical
mercantile properties to a degree depending upon the type
of building construction, the hazard of occupancy and other
rating factors. The overall effect is usually about -3%
for wood frame buildings, -10% for masonry buildings and
-3% for fire - resistive buildings. However, variations in
construction, occupancy and private protection can result
in increases or decreases from this average.
i
A SUBSIDIARY OF INSURANCE SERVICES OFFICE. INC.
• '1
1
2 1
The above estimates apply only for insurance companies
PP Y Y P
using ISO rates. However, numerous insurance companies use
other than ISO rates so that the effect of the change in
class may be different for their policy holders.
The city classification applies to properties with a needed
fire flow of 3500 gpm or less. The private and public
protection at properties with larger fire flows are
individually evaluated, and may vary from the city
classification.
We are attaching a copy of our Grading Sheet and the
results of the hydrant flow tests witnessed during our
survey. Extra copies of this letter and attachments are
also enclosed so that you may distribute them to other
interested parties, if you desire to do so.
If you have any questions concerning the new
classification, or the resulting change in fire insurance
rates, please let us know. 1
Youf tr 1y,
G. Dyrreftra
Field Representative
GD:lm
Enclosures 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
II CLASSIFICATION DETAILS
II Municipality Chanhassen State MN Population
Date Surveyed February 1992 Total Credit 56.33% , Class 5/9
1
SUMMARY OF CREDIT
II
Maximum
Assigned Credit
1 Receiving and Handling Fire Alarms 6.36 % 1D.DD%
• Fire Department 23.16 50.00
Water Supply 35.10 40.00
II * Divergency —8.29
56.33
1 The Public Protection Class is based on the total percentage
credit as follows:
II Class
1 90.00 or more
I 2 80.00 to 89.99
3 70.00 to 79.99
4 60.00 to 69.99
5 50.00 to 59.99
1
6 40.00 to 49.99
I 7
8 30.00 to 39.99
20.00 to 29.99
9 10.00 to 19.99
11 10 0 to 9.99
* Divergence is a reduction in credit to reflect a difference in
II the relative credits for Fire Department and Water Supply.
The above classification has been developed for fire insurance
II rating purposes only.
1
1
1
CITYOF
CHANI1ASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
- MEMORANDUM
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator 1
DATE: November 10, 1992
SUBJ: 1992 Minnesota Recreation and Parks Annual State Conference
1
The Minnesota Recreation and Parks (MRPA) annual conference is being held next week,
November 18 -21 in Rochester. Jerry, Dawn and I will be in attendance Wednesday through
Friday. I will also be attending Saturday's session for park and recreation commissioners and
agency directors. All Park and Recreation Commissioners have been invited by the Conference
Committee to attend the conference free of charge. At this time, I do not know if any of
Chanhassen's commissioners will be attending. Due to our staggered departure times from
Rochester, Jerry and Dawn will be traveling in the city's celebrity wagon and I will be traveling
via my personal vehicle. As you are aware, the Lake Ann Park Picnic/Recreation Shelter is being
featured at the conference as a part of the Hall of Ideas exhibit (see page 10 of attached
brochure). This allows our city to show case a park construction project which, although not
unique in nature, is truly different than other park shelter buildings. I speak for our entire
department in expressing our anticipation in preparing for this year's conference, the opportunity
to meet with colleagues, and partake in continuing education sessions specifically targeted to our
individual areas of interest is always appreciated. 1
The attached brochure is my only copy. Please take the time to read through it and then return
it to me. Thank you. 1
pc: Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor
Dawn Lemme, Program Specialist 1
1
1
I's
tot PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
ee pae.
CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A.
I Attorneys at Law N
Thomas j Campbell . (612) 452-5000 Roder N Knutson Fax (612) 452 -5550
Thomas M Scott
Gary G.Fuchs November 23, 1992
James R. Walston
p I Elliott B. Kncrsch
Michael A. Broback
Renac D. Steiner
• Mr. Lowell Carlson CC
4141 Kings Road Excelsior, MN 55331 I,-...,...,
Re: Application for a Building Permit
Dear Mr. Carlson:
1 You were recently notified by the Chanhassen Building
Official that your application for a building permit was denied.
The reason for the denial is that your proposed 12,500 square
A I foot building does not comply with the requirements imposed by
the City Council on March 23, 1992.
At that time, the City Council approved a 6,000 square foot
i ' building and a 2,000 square foot screened outdoor storage area.
1 If you wish to proceed with your application for a building
permit, please submit a new application which conforms to the
above requirements established by the City Council by
December 23, 1992.
Al If you fail to submit a new application, I have been
t: directed to institute a civil action against you seeking an
!I injunction to abate the numerous violations of City ordinance
which currently exist on your property.
Please be advised that you do not have City approval, or a
'' building permit, to begin erection of the 12,500 square foot
metal shed which is now stored upon your property.
.1 Please contact me, or JoAnn Olsen at 937 -1900 if you have
any questions.
Very truly yours,
', CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCO T
& FUCH P.A.
= By : � � �� �.►(, L`r II
EBK:mlw Elliott B. iii sch
Enclosure
II cc: Don Ashworth RECEIVED
Paul Krauss
JoAnn Olsen NOV 2 4 1992
I Steve Kirchman
Bruce Olander Cf r t Lit �r,,,,�,,
�osEiv
II Suite 317 • Eagandale Office Center • 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Eagan, MN 55121
C ITYOF . ee r-c-4(-- I
, 4 /46/ 1
CHANHASSEN
y
t= . ,; 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 II
II
MEMORANDUM 1
TO: Jim McMahon, Fire Chief •
Bob Moore, 1st Assistant Chief II Richard Wing, 2nd Assistant Chief
Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal
c;
FROM: Scott Harr, Public Safety Directo 1
DATE: November 13, 1992
SUBJ: Fire Department Liability Issues 1
I am pleased that City Manager Don Ashworth was interested enough
II
to follow up on issues presented in the attached flyer, by asking
City Attorney Roger Knutson to follow up on some of the issues as
they apply in Minnesota. While much of this is what you've heard
I
me talk about, as well as what I presented recently at the United
Firefighters meeting that Chanhassen hosted, some of the issues are
different. I think this is worth reviewing. Feel free to let me
I
know if you have any questions.
cc: Don Ashworth, City Manager 1
1
II
II
1
11
n
II
t4 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
I
I
CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A.
Ai ro ne\ • .it 1..m
1: \I
tr•,
I III,+„ I t\,,.
\ L, I, 1, I \ I 1 ., )
I :,. ,; ; November 4, 1992
1
Mr. Don Ashworth
Chanhassen City Hall
690 Coulter Drive, Box 147
1 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
RE: Fire Department Liability Issues
1 Dear Don:
Enclosed is the Public Risk Insurance magazine you forwarded
to me. You asked me to briefly set out Minnesota Law on the
subject.
1. Are volunteer firefighters "City employees" for purposes
of tort liability?
Minn. Stat. § 466.01 defines a municipal employee broadly
to encompass volunteer firefighters.
2. If a volunteer firefighter is sued in conjunction with
1 the performance of his or her duties as a firefighter,
must the City indemnify the firefighter?
The answer is a qualified yes. Minn. Stat. § 466.07
provides:
Subject to the limitations in section 466.04, a
1 municipality or an instrumentality of a
municipality shall defend and indemnify any of its
officers and employees, whether elective or
appointive, for damages, including punitive
damages, claimed or levied against the officer or
employee, provided that the officer or employee:
1 (1) was acting in the performance of the duties of
the position; and
1 (2) was not guilty of malfeasance in office,
willful neglect of duty, or bad faith.
R ECG
✓ED
1992
�.>> : • r: i. iiiJ k l (:enter • 11S0 (:tarp r.rte t'cnt 'r (;ur\ e • E,i,,m \1 '6121
• I
Mr. Don Ashworth
Chanhassen City Hall
November 4, 1992
Page 2
1
Notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary in Section
127.03, Subd. 2, or 466.12, this section applies to all
school districts, however organized.
3. If a volunteer firefighter renders emergency medical care
or other assistance, is the firefighter subject to
liability for damages if something goes wrong?
The general answer is no. Minn. Stat. § 604.05, Subd. 2,
the good samaritan law, provides:
General Immunity From Liability. Any person who,
without compensation or the expectation of
compensation renders emergency care, advice, or
assistance at the scene of an emergency or during
transit to a location where professional medical
care can be rendered, is not liable for any civil
damages as a result of acts or omissions by that
person in rendering the emergency care, advice, or
assistance unless that person acts in a willful and
wanton or reckless manner in providing the care,
advice, or assistance. Any person rendering
emergency care, advice, or assistance during the
course of regular employment, and receiving
compensation or expecting to receive compensation
for rendering such care, advice, or assistance,
shall be excluded from the protection of this
section.
For the purposes of this section, the scene of an
emergency shall be those areas not within the
confines of a hospital or other institution which
has hospital facilities, or an office of a person
licensed to practice one or more of the healing
arts pursuant to Chapters 147, 149, 150A, or 153.
The scene of an emergency includes areas threatened
by or exposed to spillage, seepage, fire,
explosion, or other release of hazardous materials,
and includes ski areas and trails.
1
534
1
1
I/
Mr. Don Ashworth
Chanhassen City Hall
November 4, 1992
Page 3
4. Can the City be held liable for policy decisions made by
the fire department such as the number of trucks to send
to a fire?
The answer is no. Minn. Stat. § 466.03, Subd. 6, provides
that City's are immune from liability for "discretionary
1 acts." This applies to policy decisions which balance
"political, economic, and social considerations." Pletan
v. Gaines, 460 N.W.2d 74 (Minn. App. 1990). Policy
immunity has been held to apply to: 1) the decision on
the number of trucks and personnel to send, 2) the
decision to quit fighting the fire, and 3) the decision
not to extend public water lines. Invest Cast, Inc. v.
City of Blaine, 471 N.W.2d 368 (Minn. App. 1991).
5. Can the City be held liable for damages for negligent
' firefighter tactics?
Yes. Tactics do not involve policy decisions and the City
1 is not immune from liability. Invest Cast. Inc. v. City
of Blaine, 471 N.W.2d 368 (Minn. App. 1991).
6. If a firefighter is injured when fighting a fire, can the
1 firefighter recover from the property owner?
Generally, no. Under the so called "fireman's rule" an
1 owner has no duty to a firefighter to keep the premises
in a reasonably safe condition. The only exception is
that a landowner has a duty to warn firefighters of
hidden perils if the owner has an opportunity to do so.
Armstrong v. Mailand, 284 N.W.2d 343 (Minn. 1979).
1 ly yours,
C. PBELL, TSON, SCOTT
• FUCHS P.A.
•
•oger N. Knutson
RNK:srn
Enclosure
1
534
1
1
Identifying Local Government Liability Risks September 1993 l'nl S, No 1
uBuc
1NSU.NCE _
SY� T
. i
'EMS MANACI -CR .t.: .,.
A r
Fire Department Liability Issues ,,,p C
Y 9 al" 0,3945i
Identif in and reducing risks associated v /' with fire districts 40
1
i A Ithough public and
volun- I. Risk Identification emment liability for negligence in 1
tary fire companies exist fighting fires applies equally to vol-
in practically every locality •;• Volunteer Fire Companies unteer fire companies controlled
in the United States, without an ordi- - and /or financed by local govern -
nance or regulation localities are not Volunteers may be recognized ment.
legally required to maintain fire de- as public officials but generally are
I
partments. There is no guarantee pro- not considered public employees.
vided in the U.S. Constitution to a Volunteer firefighting and ambu- • :. Assisting Neighboring
citizen for fire protection. Fire de- lance services can, however, be de- Jurisdictions
partment creation and administration fined as "state" government agen-
is controlled entirely by the law of the cies for purposes of determining A locality's fire department can-
jurisdiction where it exists. These liability under 42 U.S.C. Section not operate outside its jurisdiction
laws vary greatly throughout the 1983, the federal civil rights statute.
United States. When on duty or responding to a please see page 2
call for service, volunteer
This article summarizes major firefighters have the same powers Contents
liability areas associated with fire and privileges as regular, full -time
departments, and personnel liability firefighters including statutory im- Fire Department to which fire departments many be munity from traffic violations. Le- • Li issues
particularly susceptible. gal principles governing local gov- 1
• On -Cali Hours
Compensabie Under
Editor's Note: In this month's issue we review potential liability FLSA 5
• ' risks associated w the Fire Department. For more information refer
I
to the Fire Department, Public Employees, Public Officials and Public ■ Law Line 7
Transportation in your Public Risk lnsurance Systems Manager manual.
1
1
Public Ri.s.• insurance Systems Manager September 1992
.-., Fire Department Liability sion from the occupants. Because fire hood of disability. Minimal vision
' Continued from page 2 officials are supposed to put out tires standards for firetighters have also
and find out what caused then. they been upheld. The validity of psycho -
may take into their possession any logical testing as a job applicant
1 fire equipment or negligent construe- evidence of arson that is in plain view screening aid has been sustained when
tion of fire houses. This principal once they enter a building to fight a licensed psychologists conduct the
1 extends to local eovemment's ar- fire. Firefighters may also ask police testing.
rangements with volunteer compa- to help investigate suspicious origins
nies for the use of governmental build- of a fire without first obtaining a s• Retirement Payments
ings, grounds, and equipment. warrant.
in some jurisdictions, statutory
❖ Operation of Emergency • Hiring and Probation provisions governing pensions, dis-
Vehicles ability and accidental death benefits
1 Appointment provisions for for firefighters constitute an exclu-
In general, if a fire truck driver firefighters are a local matter and sive wrongful death remedy against
I does not drive carefully and is negli- vary widely. Civil service provisions the locality which would preclude,
cent. he may be civilly liable for control appointments in some juris- for example, civil lawsuits. Some
mone\ damages Fire department dictions , while in others, the fire com - states provide special death benefits
I diners are exempt from certain traf mission,themayor,the city manager. for the widow and dependents of
fic laws when responding to an emer or the goveming body makes the ap- firefighters. The right to such benefits
gency. This exemption is contingent. pointments. may be based on whether the
however. on the use of warning d firefighter was killed on duty.
I , - vices such ;As .irens and flashing lights. In some cases, volunteer
and the operation of vehicles with firefighters may be covered by ❖ Mandatory Retirement
I regard to the .atet■ of others on the a workers ' compensation act
road Drs cr. ni.n he liable under and civil service laws. The Age Discrimination Act is
cenatn trattik Ism hs tailing to use applicable to local government as an
I the siren or flashing lights. or by physical and Psychological employer. For firefighters, however,
failing to e xen i.e .ire or to look out Standards it has been held that mandatory retire -
tor other s chIL le• ment ages as low as 55 are bona fide
1 Fire department applicants may occupational practices because Con
II. Personnel Risks be required to meet reasonable and gress has provided for federal
non - discriminatory physical and psy firefighters to be retired at that same
1 Reasotuh4e rule. and regulations chological standards. A fire depart age'
_ firefighters' conduct are ment may set minimum and maxi -
neCea;t■ to pre.erve the public in- mum weight standards, vision scan- 4. Workers' Compensation
I serest Rules against actions that un dardsandheightreyuirements.
dernune departmental order are ap requirements are not valid if they are In some cases, volunteer
propnate Firefighters are subject to designed to discriminate against cer- firefighters may be covered byawork-
1 man) of the .;tore pnnciples restrict- rain groups of applicants such as en' compensation act and civil ser-
tn_� First amendment rights of free women, without a legitimate govern- vice laws. A fire department that re-
speech and association that apply to mental justification for the require- mains under the command of its own
1 other public employees. ment. Applicants for permanent ap- supervisors while assisting aneigh-
pointments as firefighters may be boring jurisdiction remains in the
A firefighter many entera bum denied because of physical condi- employment of its own local hi, which
in;;g building without a search warrant lions that may adversely affect per-
and without first obtaining permis- formance and /or increase the likeli- Please see page ge 4
1
2 Public Risk Insurance Systems Manager September 1992
Fire Department Liability vice has been recognized as a govern- in the absence of a statute imposing
Continued from page 1 mental function. In some jurisdic- liability or waiving immunity from I
tions, fire department paramedics liability. Localities are generally not
have been given tort immunity by liable for injuries resulting from neg-
without express statutory or charter , statute for acts done or omitted in ligent mismanagement of fire equip -
authority. A locality may seek fire good faith while rendering emergency ment whether or not it was used to
services from an outside source but a life saving services, and for injuries extinguish fires. Negligence in the 1
contract to furnish those services be- resulting from an automobile colli- selection and training of fire person -
yond its own limits cannot be legally sion while on an emergency run. nel who are known to be incompetent
enforced by a court. Statutes may is generally not grounds for local 1
give a locality the power to respond to 4. Failure to Provide Adequate liability. In absence of a statute, there
alarms from neighboring jurisdic- Fire Protection is no right of action against local
tions. Generally, operational and dam- government by a firefighter for inju- 1
ages expenses are paid for by the State tort claims statutes usually ries sustained while rendering ser-
jurisdiction that asked for assistance. grant immunity to public entities for vices as a firefighter. Also, a local
When a regularly scheduled drill of failure to provide adequate fire pro- government and its fire department 1
volunteer companies from several tection when fire protection is deter - are usually not liable to a firefighter
localities is given, the host locality mined to be agovemmental function. for injuries sustained during training
generally will not be liable for inju- In the absence of a statute, local gov- sessions.
1
ries of one of the visiting companies' emment is not liable for failure to
members. maintain a fire department nor is it Governmental inununity protects
liable if the firefighting personnel or localities from negligence liability
•:- General Liability Problems equipment are inadequate. Further- when firefighters are acting within
more, a local government is not con - the scope of their duties. A locality
Maintaining and operating a fire stitutionally required to provide ad- may be held liable, however, should 1
department is normally considered a equate fire protection even when it a fire truck collide with an auto
governmental function. Some Courts has undertaken such service. Local while on a paid call outside the
hold that localities are not liable for govemment is not liable for losses locality's limits. Independent con- I
failing to protect life and property resulting from failure to provide ad- tractors that voluntarily assume
since they are not held to the same equate water supply or water pressure firefighter responsibilities in a local -
performance standards as private to extinguish fires, not providing ity can be held liable for the negli- I
businesses. Municipalities are not li- proper fire apparatus, or for not keep- gence of their vehicle drivers. Volun-
able for negligence in the use of fire ing it in good working condition. If, teer fire departments that do not
equipment in fighting fires, nor are however, the operation and mainte- qualify as a branch or department of I
they liable for acts of omission, corn- nance of the water system is profit- local government are not entitled to
mission, misfeasance, or nonfeasance. based, the locality can be held liable if governmental immunity. Private fire
Localities are ordinarily not liable for a negligently maintained fire hydrant companies may not be entitled to I
firefighters' injuries sustained result- leads to toss or injury. governmental immunity.
ing from the operation and mainte-
nance of fire stations and firefighting + Liability for Firefighters 4. Fire Station and Equipment 1
equipment. Liability
Generally, a locality is not liable
,:• Emergency Medical Service for the negligence or improper con - Localities are generally not liable 1
duct of firefighters performing their for injuries caused by defective
A local fire department's opera- duties. This general rule of non -li-
tion of an emergency ambulance set-
ability applies to the negligence of a CI
volunteer fire department's members Please see page 3
I
Public Risk Insurance Systems Manager September 1992 5
s eN Fire Department Liability On -Call Hours Compensable Under
Continued from page 4 Fair Labor Standards Act
I efficient operation. Firefighters,how-
Identifying and reducing risks associated with
ever, have the right to be free from fire departments
unreasonable govemmental restric-
I tions on their personal relationships.
They also have the right to join with
others to promote valid political, so- he Fair LaborStandards Act 2201 and § 2202 for the court to
,. I cial, or economic gains. (FLSA) requires that em- declare the City's practices illegal.
ployers pay theiremployees The City argued that the firefighters
1 + Regulation of Political Activity overtime for additional hours worked had been paid overtime for their extra
1 over 40 hours per week. Section 207 hours, and that its policy was not so
Local govemment has the right (k) of the Act specifically applies to restrictive as to keep the firefighters
to curb and control partisan political law enforcement and fire protection from having a personal life. Both
I activities of firefighters. As citizens, agencies. The following case illus- parties filed for summary jud gment.
however, firefighters have the right to trates how amunicipality may be held
express opinions and participate in liable for violating FLSA provisions. In granting partial summary judg-
1 political matters although that right is menu to the firefighters, the United
not absolute. Govemmental restric- In Renfro v. City of Emporia, States District Court for the District
tionsdonotviolateFirstAmendment Kansas, 948 F.2d 1528 (10th Cir. of Kansas determined that the
I rights when they do not stifle public 1991), firefighters employed by the firefighters had been "engaged to
and private political expressions. City of Emporia (City) were regularly wait" by the City and were therefore
scheduled to work six shifts of 24 entitled to compensation under the
1
❖ Firefighters' Rule and . hours each in a 19-day cycle, for a FLSA. The court said the frequent
Rescue Doctrine total of 144 hours. The firefighters callbacks distinguished this case from
also wereonamandatory callbacklist other cases that have held on-call
Firefighters cannot recover for for each 24 -hour period following a time as noncompensable.
injuries resultingfromknowinglyand regularly scheduled shift. Although
voluntarily encountering hazards. firefighters on call were not required On appeal, the 10th Circuit
1 There is no duty owed to firefighters to stay at the stationhouse, they had to Court of Appeals ruled:
to exercise care so as not to require the wear pagers and report to work within
special services for which they are twenty minutes of being paged. • the firefighters' 24 -hour on -call
I trained. These rules do not apply, Firefighters who were late or missed periods were compensable under
however, when injuries are caused by a callback were disciplined. On an FLSA;
an independent third party's negli- average, firefighters were called back
I gence. A firefighter may seek recov- to duty three to five times during any • the trial court properly assessed
ery from that third party alone. Since given 24 -hour callback period. damages;
firefighters are contractually bound
to rescue persons in distress, they Claiming that the City's policy • the City was liable for statutory
have no cause of action for recove
ry was so restrictive they could not plan damages in the amount of over
1 against the person rescued based on personal pursuits or work second jobs, time pay plus an additional equal
the rescue doctrine. and that the on -call duty time ex- amount; and
ceeded the hourly levels set forth in
1 g the FLSA, the firefighters brought
} ■ suit against the City under 28 U.S.C. § Please see page 6
1
1
4 Public Risk Insurance Systems Manager September 1992
Fire Department Liability right to organize for collective bar- ity to enact such regulations, rules
Continued from page 3 gaining purposes and also have the preventing firefighters from seeking
right to a separate public employees' off -duty employment are considered
would provide workers' compensa- organization exclusive of and distinct reasonable and valid. Outside em- 1
tion to firefighters injured or killed from otherpublic employees' groups. ployment, however, doesn't have to
during the call. Under applicable state be totally prohibited. Localities may
statutes, a volunteer firefighter who is ❖ Residency Requirements limit the number of hours that can be 1
injured while assisting another dis- spent on outside employment. Prior
trict can be compensated by the juris- Generally, residency require - approval may be required before a
diction being assisted. The provisions ments for firefighters are not valid firefighter engages in other employ- 1
and application of a workers' com- unless there is state statutory author- ment. Outside employment may be
pensationactmaypreventafirefighter ity to enact continuous residency re- limited to uncompensated employ -
from suing a locality for injuries. quirements. Residency requirements ment or non -public employment. 1
may be considered necessary because Outside employment may be re-
, Conduct and Discipline they allow public safety personnel to stricted to occupations that do not
respond on short notice during emer- conflict with the employee's public 1
Firefightersshouldnotbeallowed gencies or while off -duty. Confirm- image or increase the possibility of
to disobey direct orders. Discipline ous residency requirements promote abuse of one's position.
must be enforced. Department mem- a stable and diverse urban population
bars give up certain individual pow- and enhance jobperformance by giv- Regulation of Speech
ers and freedoms in favor of undi- ing employees an interest in the corn -
vided allegiance to their public duty. munity they serve. As an employer, a local govern- II
Firefighters must exercise tact, re- ment may place reasonable restraints
strairit, and good judgrnent where the ti• Personal Appearance on its employees' rights to free speech. t
public is concerned. They must main- Regulations Local govemment has the right to 1
twin an image of personal integrity restrain employees' speech when such
and dependability to ensure the re- Regulations governing a speech may impair operational effi-
spect of the public, particularly in firefighter's personal appearance and ciency or render employees unfit to
small communities. In departmental grooming are valid as long as they are perform normal duties. The local gov-
operations, transfers, demotions, and reasonable and related to the emmentemployermaynot,however,
the like are assumed valid until suc- government's interest in maintaining impose such speech restraints that
cessfully challenged through estab- discipline and safety of personnel. unreasonablyrestnctconstitutionally
fished grievance procedures. The fire Regulations for uniforms are valid. protected expressions of speech. As
department's semi - military nature citizens, firefighters have the right to
justifies the use of a different griev- 4 Off-Duty Conduct comment on matters of public con -
ance procedure than that utilized by cem and interest.
other public employees. Fire departments may set rules
and regulations for off -duty conduct. + Regulation of Association
• Collective Bargaining In order to be a valid basis for disci-
plinary action, a rule regulating off - Local government may regulate 1
Firefighters may not engage in duty conduct must reasonably con- its employees' associations and rela-
strikes, and without an enabling star- tribute to the continued efficiency of tionships if those regulations don't
ute, they may have no right to bargain the public service. infringe upon the constitutional rights
collectively. It is unconstitutional, of freedom of association, and if they
however, for a state to prohibit 4 Moonlighting are necessary for the department's
firefighters from forming or joining
labor unions. Firefighters have the Generally, where there is author- Please see page 5
1
1
Public Risk Insurance Systems Manager September 1992 7
II hen a police officer discov Law Enforcement Issues of Interest
en a detainee in a holding
cell hanging by his neck, is
the officer constitutionally required rt _
to cut him down? Rich v. Cth of�_
Mayfield Heights, 955 F. 2d 1092 w ,,i1_
I (6th Cir. 1992) addresses this issue, = �'��
aswellastheissueofqualifiedimmu �/�- -- 1
nity. mary judgment. a —
1 On April 24, 1987, Mayfield The United States District Court ics once \Valczak's hanging body
discovered.
Heights police officers arrested Daniel for the Northem District of Ohio de-
' Walczak on a grand theft larceny nied the police officers' summary The 6th Circuit cited Supreme
charge. Walczak was taken to jai l and judgment motion based on qualified
Court rulmc.ts and federal case law.
placed in a holding cell to await the immunity. (Qualified immunity is noting pnsoners and pretrial detain-
' setting of bond. When one of the availabletogovemmentofficialswho ees have a due process right to ad
arresting officers went to Walczak's act with objective reasonableness equate medical care even when inju-
cell to tell him the amount of the bond while performing discretionary func- nes are self - inflicted. The "right" of
I and to allow him to make a phone call, tions.) The police officers appealed issue in this case was whether
he found Walczak hanging by his the decision. Walczak had the right to be cut
neck from his socks, which he had down b� police officers when dis-
I lodged in the hinge of his jail cell On appeal, the 6th Circuit covered hanging in a jail cell. Since
door. The officer immediately went Court of Appeals reversed the trial there was no case brought before the
for help, instructing a dispatcher to court's decision, concluding that the coup that recognized aconstitutional
I call the rescue squad for medical as- defendant police officers were en- duty on the part of jail officials to
sistance. Paramedics arrived on the titled to qualified immunity on the immediately cut down a prisoner
scene within one minute ofthe call for plaintiff's claim of deliberate indif found ban ding in his or her cell, the
II help, administered emergency aid to ference to medical needs. court held that because medical care
Walczak, and took him to a hospital. for Walczak had been promptly sum -
Walczak suffered permanent loss of To determine whether the defen moved. his constitutional tights had
I mental and physical faculties caused dant police officers's actions violated not been violated. The police officers
by lack of oxygen, resulting in his any clearly established constitutional did not intentionally deny or delay
permanent institutionalization. rights, the court had to decide: (1) Walczak's access to medical care,
ffecting nor did their actions constitute the
Walczak 's guardian brought an thedefendants' immunityexisted ;and "unnecessary and wanton infliction
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2) what was the state of the law on of pain" necessary to establish delib
' alleging that the police officers and April 24, 1987. erate indifference to medical needs.
paramedics had failed to properly
screen Walczak for suicidal tenden- In reviewing the evidence, the .y Comment
1 cies before incarcerating him, and 6th Circuit held there was no factual
had failed to provide him with proper dispute as to the conduct of the police
Qualified immunity (also known
I emergency medical care in violation officers when they discovered as "good faith" immunity) is an affir
of his Eighth Amendment constitu- Walczak hanging and that their con- mauve defense available to govern-
tional rights. The guardian also sued duct was not contrary to conduct rea- ment officials. It disallows personal
1 the City of Mayfield Heights and its sonable officials would have taken. liability for allegedly unlawful offs
police chief for negligent training and The plaintiff failed to show there was cial action when officials act with
hiring. All defendants sought sum- any delay in calling for the paramed please see page 8
1
1
r, Pithlu Rik lnAurrtn: e SI. %tem.% , %t(inas;['r Sep either /99' 1
On -Call Hours Tennessee Coal Co t' Maw oda 1st0- apply to fi refi .zhters employed in a 1
( 'otttttu ed from page 5 ca1,321 U.S 590).591 (194-4),Armour bona fide "executt\e.adntinistraane.
& Co v. Warwick. 323 U S. 126. 132 or professional position on a sala-
(1944). The Supreme Court held that ned basis. Local 1Tovemment em- I
"IR leafiness to serve may be hired. plovers who assert thisexceptR nmust
• the application of the FLSA tb quite as much as service Itself .." prove the exemption cntena set totrth
municipalities does not violate Armour at 133, and "thatnopnnciple in 29 C.F.R. §§ 541.1 -3. In Renfro. 1
the Tenth Amendment. (The of law found either in the statute or in the court ruled the Cit waived this
- Tenth Amendment reserves regu- Court decisions precludes waiting defense b) not raising it until appeal
Litton not expressly made by time from also being working time " 1
Congress to states.) Skidmore v Swift & Co.. 323 U.S. Fora case discussing the e xcmp-
134 (1944). tions. see Firefighters Local 2141 u
The 10th Circuit noted that De Cttt o/A lerandrta. l "a.. 720 F Stipp '
partment of Labor regulations ad - The 10th Circuit held that he- 1210 (E D. Va. 1989)
dress whether on -call hours for pub cause the on I shifts were 24-hours
sic employees are compensable un in length, the firefighters' meal and • 1
dertheFLSA .Theseregulationsstate sleep time also were compensahle
in part: under 29 C.F.R §§ 553.222 -23. The
court noted that under 29 U.S.0 § 1
"An employee who is required to 216(h), employers who violate the
remain on call on the employer's FL are liable to employees for
premises or so close to that he cannot overt ime compensat ion and statutory
1
use the time effectively for his own damages of an additional equal
purposes is working while 'on call "' amount Since the ('ity was unable to
2 9 C.F.R. Section 785 17 convince the coup its failure to olie■
1
die statute was both in t ood t,uth ,ind The firefighters argued in
"Time spent away from the based on reasonable grounds. tt ∎ % as
their motion that theon - call polio
employer's premisesundercondtions held liable for statutory damages l,realI rest tided their personal
that are so circumscritxd that they act ivitics.%Vit het went∎
restrict the employee from effect ively Finally, the court rejected the linteeonstraint and thelarl;c•nunt
using the time for personal pursuits City's argument that the application her of callbacks, t hec couldn't do
also constitutes compensahle hours of the 11SA to municipalities is un simple things like work on their
of work." 29 C.F R. Section 553 221 constitutional. The court noted that cars. The■ couldn't go out to din -
the Supreme Coun addressed this ner for fear of being called back. 1
Based on undisputed facts and issue in Garcia t San Antonio Metro The couldn't be alone with their
applicable law. the 10th Circuit con- TraticttAuthority.4691.1.S 528(1985) children unless t he ■ had a
cluded that the firefighters' on -call where it held that the application of bahysitter on "stand - h% ". TheN
1
time was compensable under the the FLSA to state and local govern- couldn't dri 'eanywherewflhany-
FLSA The court noted that the Su- ments does not violate the Tenth one when on call, and had to take
pit :me Court had interpreted the mean- Amendment ofthel;ntedStatesCon- separate cars in case they were 1
ingfor "work "as "physical or mental stittittctn• called back. Thefirefighterswere
exertion (whether burdensome ornot) retuctant to participate in group I
controlled or required by the em- Comment activities for fear of being called
ployer and pursued necessarily; and away.
pnmanly for the benefit of the ern- Not all firefighters may he pro- • 1
ployer and his business." tected by the FLSA. The Act does not
II
1
1
I ' K Public Risk Insurance Systems Manager September 1992
LawLine •
'
Continued from page 7 Reading a pass -along ROUTE
"objective legal reasonableness" as issue? Call us today THIS
well as subjective good faith, in light at 1 452 - 1750 t0
I of the clearly established law at the
time of the acts in question. order your own sub ISSUE
scription! TO:
1 This defense recognizes it is un- .
fair to impose personal liability on
govemment officials who make a
I
The Public Risk Insurance Systems Manager newsletter is published monthly.
mistake in good faith while carrying For subscription information, call us toll -free at 1- 800 -452 -1750 or write to:
out official duties. Moreover, locali-
ties would find it difficult to attract Public Risk Insurance Systems Manager Publishing, Inc.
1 employees without being able to of- P.O. Box 927
fer some immunity from liability for Meridian, MS 39302 - 0927
exercising their duties.
I This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information on the
subject matter covered, If legal or other assistance is required, the services of a
The court in Rich further noted competent professional person should be sought.
1 that because the individual officers
were immune, liability of the City or Editors: James W. Hopper
the City police chief for negligent William E. Ready
1 hiring and training could not be im-
posed. • e 1992 Public Risk Insurance Systems Manager Publishing, Inc.
1
1
1 ...,4<>. BULK RATE
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
Meridian, MS
I PUBLIC • RISK • INSURANCE • SYSTEMS • MANAGER PertnitNo. 635
P.O. BOX 927
MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI 39302
1
1
S1 AlLS -502cl
I
1 CUI....."..1.(1.: �115`�F_tI
�, ,H14lJ, - .��
r
t .
1
1
' J THE MINNESOTA STATE AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION
m 7 TRAVELERS TRAIL, BURNSVILLE, MINNESOTA 55337-2594 • (612) 890 -2500 • TELEX NUMBER 290960 I
•
1
November 1992
Chief Scott Harr
Chanhassen Police Department
1
Chanhassen MN 55317
Dear Chief Harr:
1
Congratulations on winning an award in AAA's 53rd annual Pedestrian Protection 1
Program.
We're sorry that you could not attend the Awards Luncheon held in St. Paul on
November 5. It is a chance to socialize with other award winners and we enjoy meeting
you.
Enclosed in this folder are two copies of a new release for you to give to your local '
media. If you have someone take a black and white glossy photo of you with the plaque,
the newspaper will probably print it.
Also enclosed in the package is the AAA Pedestrian Protection Program Appraisal for
your city. This might help you with future planning for pedestrian safety in your
community.
The goal of this program is to focus attention on pedestrian safety across the country by
recognizing those communities that are most successful in their efforts.
This award recognizes your efforts to emphasize this important area of traffic safety. 1
Sincerely,
/Ail:-.44 41
1
Barbara Mittelstadt 1
Traffic Safety Coordinator
1
1
•
1
1
111111 -- OM I• MI OM - • MI • OM NM MN • --
s
CHANHASSEN H.R.A. ACCOUNTS P A Y A B L E 12 -14 -92 PAGE 1
• CHECK N A M O U N T C L A I M A N T P U R P O S E 4
i 034911 145.56 DONALD ASHWORTH TRAVEL & TRAINING 4
034912 81,923.00 COUNTY 17 CHANHASSEN SPL ASSESSMENT PAYMENTS
0
034935 400.00 RUSS PAULY FEES, SERVICE '
0 034937 100,000.00 ROBERT DITTRICH SPL ASSESSMENT PAYMENTS
034954 15,431.00 UNITED CONTRACTING AWARDED CONST CONTRACTS
• 034961 11,695.32 CARVER COUNTY TREASURER OTHER ACQUISITION COSTS
• 6 209,594.88 NECESSARY EXPENDITURES SINCE LAST COUNCIL MEETING 4
• 4
• i
•
0
•
•
• 4
•
• 4
• 4
•
•
4 CHANHASSEN H.R.A. A C C O U N T S P A Y A B L E 12 -14-92 PAGE 2 4
CHECK * A M O U N T C L A I M A N T P U R P O S E
1 1
035242 113.18 DONALD ASHWORTH TRAVEL & TRAINING
4 1
035243 53.00 TODD GERHARDT TRAVEL & TRAINING
4 035244 283.13 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP FEES, SERVICE 1
035245 8,794.07 HOLMES & GRAVEN FEES, SERVICE
1
035246 27.59 SW SUBURBAN PUBLISHING PRINTING AND PUBLISHING
4 5 9,270.97 CHECKS WRITTEN %
TOTAL OF 11 CHECKS TOTAL 218,865.85
%
4 4
4 ,
1
1 .
1 r
• a
fo i
• 6
N %
- - - - - OM ME - M in M - - - NM NM
CITYOF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
' (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1 December 10, 1992
1
' Mr. and Mrs. Pete Krebsbach
3891 Meadow Lane
Excelsior, MN 55331
' Re: Letter of Complaint
1 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Krebsbach:
I have received a copy of your letter dated November 30, 1992 sent in general attention to
' the City of Chanhassen regarding proposed property taxes for 1993. While I am not the
proper person to address your property tax issue concerns, as City Engineer I feel it
necessary to respond to some of the other concerns that you raised in your letter.
Your letter raised some concern for the detention and located in your backyard. P Y kY ard. Similar
to other residential developments within the City, the Minnewashta Meadows subdivision
was required to construct an on -site ponding basin to retain runoff from the subdivision at
the predeveloped runoff rate as required by City Ordinance. As a part of the development
design and platting of the property, this detention pond was located by the developer over
' portions of Lots 9 and 10 in the southerly area of the subdivision and an associated drainage
easement was granted. Therefore, the pond facility was a pre - existing condition prior to
' your purchase of Lot 10.
You also mentioned that "Chanhassen does nothing for our area" and that the road
maintenance was not up to "par ". Given that Meadow Lane is a relatively new street,
annual maintenance primarily involves street sweeping and snow removal which you have
identified as not being acceptable since a significant amount of snow ends up in your yard.
' This is a common experience for property owners living on a cul -de -sac due to the
significant amount of pavement area which needs to be cleared. One of the primary
purposes for boulevards along streets is for snow storage. I will ask the Street Maintenance
' Superintendent to contact you to answer any further questions you may have on snow
removal and street maintenance in general. Please also keep in mind that the City of
Chanhassen provides and maintains sanitary sewer and water service for your property.
�i 411 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
Mr. and Mrs. Krebsbach 1
December 10, 1992
Page 2
1
On the matter of your property still needing black dirt, this is an issue between yourselves
and from whom you purchased the property. Following the completion of the subdivision
improvements, the developer's engineer has certified that all of the improvements, including
site grading, have been completed according to approved plans. Final lot grading following I
the completion of a home construction is the responsibility of the home builder or home
purchaser, depending on actual agreements made.
Again, I am not the proper person to discuss property values and associated taxes for 1993; 1
however, I trust that I have addressed your other concerns related to public works.
Sincerely, 1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
I
Charles D. Folch, P.E. 1
City Engineer
CDF:ktm 1
c: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician w /attachment 1
Don Ashworth, City Manager w /attachment
Mike Wegler, Street Superintendent w /attachment
City Council Administrative Packet (12/14/92) w /attachment 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I -
RECEIVED
1 011992
(c) / - i;;�: rC - , .om (� ?raj Cl j ' .
CITY OF C:hHivhHSSEN
1 n
FE: t 0,S PeQpez,I--It row 9� .
.
het o-k- buf(i2A-- 00X. Aofrik-- CL;
P-- j J v e 8e- �n ( &a cJ w 0 ce_Z C cJ
c\le v o .eR /max` -c m e S o0.4. on --
d pee z �,/� Zh •� <'
1 pt-t-"& C Q,c ) G U • F7 Lt) On DLcf' ectpe-&--tt.
CU u s Q al c;,--, s o (a/1cl
c,Ca Q � (a' c/
1 an c/ re- 7 copes iaXt.S -- 9
Al. d ekc acfa'ee,ss / S
1 FxcE- s /Ue ?tne-/ ouc a:L-0 sds c% r ee-'2-cl
6L r)(ce-es;c) asl- 0 rrf tu-e_
1
C �- -�,6a , c eS o Cn rpe owe
1 aeeQ ccZ f �a� n. n S / no-- Gc 1-1O
Ceep 6 /e .
1 We Zt n C � -Set - a G G c�
�S n � Aappen S
1 7 bn 1-,c) 6 aXLLAC
Can d Sr) eY-L) eemocs602 in 00
1 ( Le- $ J nee-o/ ( 66jok GYt
in Cc-LC ilaed Ci c q ka_ chUei c6t2A p bES
o peDrierr, ,c cka- &Jet-0_,
s 9
1
e ,mot u-e- cb
1
1
- 1
s !As p er, c S koL.02ci cb nod
i+r\5p �rJ Foy a p o - L•
,U) k- k beer-, i a. kpp n P O �-
- - Q - kes ae,e 400 2 1
tfl
coe., C pte , pet;p2-E,tv 1 I
t2e sponcre Fl o peaioierr .
•
a 1
a
ti- PR s6
- 3qG ► M e Lc Car, er
CKC�s�o� nThr SS33 1
P-- 410 -1D-
1
1
1
' 1.
It
`t 1
1
1
1
G c. _ / Cc /3>c_ ( n 'tN
r .
CITYOF
CHANHASSEN
f
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1 MEMORANDUM
TO: State Patrol
1 Carver County Sheriff's Department
FROM: Scott Harr, Public Safety Director y
1 DATE: December 9, 1992
SUBJ: Traffic Enforcement Request
The City Planner has brought to my attention a complaint that at
Moon Valley Aggregate, semis are blocking the road with one semi,
while others pull out. This is apparently taking place early in
the morning. Any assistance will be appreciated.
cc: Paul Krauss, Planning Director
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
s41 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
it.) November 25, 1992 1
1
Fteshu'aler •
Foundation Jo Ann Olsen
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
1
at Spring Hill Center P.O. Box 147
'25 County Road Six Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
t■dv,ata. MN 55191 '
t h121 449 -109
tax ,61 -0592 Dear Jo Ann:
Water is Life Enclosed is the final report of the Minnesota Lake Management Forum. '
As you are well aware, this has been a substantial effort, of which you
played an important role. My thanks for your time and effort. I believe
Founder '
that this effort represents a large step toward the better management
Richard G Gra... Sr D 5, P g P ement of g
Officers of the Board Minnesota's lakes.
' mds Arthur. Jr 1
i'i,a,rman
Richard S Caldecott Ph D I especially want to thank you for your detailed comments. Your main
'-U s' ,r concern regarding changing the presentation was difficult to address. I
s,:rc•lars think that, through the revision, we have included the substance of your
i h.,mas I Warner
7:easorer comments. I hope as you read this draft you agree. Also, I know you
"'r' `- B` e.,svren•r '"
,s•ncn appreciate that we have tried to balance your input in the perspective of
Treasurer
Board of Directors many other points of view. At any rate, should any other questions or
1
Howard A Andersen Nt D
Be;., Baker concerns arise, I always welcome your input.
Hain Blount -
Donald G Brauer
M Bv.d Rurton Jr PI .D
Daniel C Chabot We are turning our attentions to the delivery of the report and
1
James A Gras
Clark C Griffith recommendations. I have made several presentations to lake management
John Elen Hu t
Jo Ellen rr interest groups. The Forum's report and Executive Summary are being
Robert ael T. Lindsay sent to hundreds of lake management interests around Minnesota. I also
1
Joseph T Ling. Ph D
lohn B Lundquist plan to meet with agency heads and other critical leaders to present the
W. Duncan MacMillan Warren G Maikersun Forum's recommendations. If you are interested in being involved with any
Charles M Mom
Marc Retsner of these activities, please let me know.
1
Stephen Rosiell
D Dean Spat/
Emily Anne Staples
Mrs Warde F Wheaton Your efforts in this process are greatly appreciated. The thoroughness of
Doug Whitaker
the report reflects the commitment of all the Forum members. Thanks.
1
H Martin lessen
President and C E.0
Adsisory Board Sincerely,
Ri'eer L. Baker
V, !Blain M. Baker -
Ram 1
,ond D Black 1
���
E W Blanch, Jr. { 1 e k —
M-• Herbert W Buscher bbd"
Henry Doerr
James L. Hetland. Jr. 1
Ma John O Irvine Dick Osgood, Director _
Fail H Mosiman ‘ . 1 s •
William G Phillips Surface Water Programs
Robert L. Searles
Mrs Edward R. Titcomb
REC -: JED 1
. .: 1992
1
A Public Nonprofit Foundation
ontributions are Tax-Deductible f V 1 4 CH "i;`+: .. 1
n
. Primed , Re : led Pal r
1
rx.
•
{ MANAGING MINNESOTA'S LAKES
Lfi t5,.
..: A REPORT OF THE
MINNESOTA LAKE MANAGEMENT FORUM
it.
•
November 1992
■!_
Freshwater
Foundation
yS
t
t. • 1
MANAGING MINNESOTA'S LAKES
1 •
A REPORT OF THE
1
MINNESOTA LAKE MANAGEMENT FORUM
1
November 1992
1
1
ti
T, 1
1
1
A Project of the Freshwater Foundation
Funding Provided by a Grant from the Blandin Foundation
1
Freshwater Foundation
725 County R Six 1
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
"� • 612- 449 -0092 printed on recycled paper 1
ti . ' S
1
Acknowledgements
The time and dedication of.the members of the Minnesota Lake Management Forum is
gratefully acknowledged. ratefull acknowled ed Obviously, without their efforts, this project could not have
Y
happened.
We also acknowledge the Blandin Foundation for their financial support of the Minnesota
Lake Management Forum. Their dedication to environmental protection, especially in
rural Minnesota, makes Minnesota a better place to live.
Dave Brostrom and Don Imsland kept the Forum focused and challenged. Their
assistance in this project as well as their dedication to its success must be acknowledged.
Thanks to the efforts and support of those mentioned above, Minnesota's lakes ought to
remain the centerpiece of our natural environment. We are all better off with healthy
lakes.
Table of Contents
1 111
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
I. INTRODUCTION 5
1
1I. THE MINNESOTA LAKE MANAGEMENT FORUM 1
• Description 6
History 7 1
Rationale 8
Future Work 11 1
III. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Value of Lakes to Minnesota 12 1
The Goal of Lake Management - Sustainability 13
Shared State/Local Lake Management Responsibility 14 1 •
Watershed -Based Lake Management 18
Coordinated Lake Management Data Collection/Application 22
Comprehensive Lake Classification System 24
Education and Information Delivery System 27
IV. FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS 30 1
APPENDICES 1
1. Roster of Lake Management Forum Participants 32
2. A Lake Management Planning Approach 34 1
3. Lake Management Stakeholders 36
4. Lake Management Data Components 37
5. Lake Classification Factors 42 1
6. Previous Lake Classification Efforts 45
s 1
1
1
1
1
Executive Summary
1 ! Perhaps no aspect of Minnesota's environment symbolizes its rich natural heritage as well
as its lake resources. By any measure, lakes have contributed tremendously to
Minnesota's economic, commercial, and recreational development. Yet in spite of their
I nearly incalculable value, the quality of our lakes is suffering from increasing use. The
increasing impacts on Minnesota's lakes include water quality deterioration, more surface
use and users, shoreland and watershed development, the spread of exotic species, and
I exposure to toxic contaminants. In spite of the resources applied to the management of
lakes in Minnesota, we are faced with the inescapable conclusion that our lakes are being
threatened and degraded. The efforts undertaken in the past to manage lakes in
Minnesota are no longer sufficient.
' The Minnesota Lake Management Forum was created in early 1991 through the efforts
of the Blandin Foundation and the Freshwater Foundation. Its purpose is to critically
review lake management in Minnesota and to recommend how this management can be
improved. Through a series of thirty personal interviews, four two -day workshops,
approximately thirty -five task force meetings, and numerous reports, the Forum has
addressed lake management issues in Minnesota and suggested strategic responses to
' those issues. Membership in the Forum is comprised of individuals who are actively
involved in lake management in Minnesota: , State and local government, lake
associations and lake user groups, environmental groups, academia, and other lake
interests.
The Lake Management Forum has reviewed the status of lake management in Minnesota,
identified those factors that constrain effective lake management, and formulated
recommended actions and strategies to overcome these constraints and build a
coordinated lake management system in the state. The following recommendations
represent the primary conclusions of the Lake Management Forum. Accompanying each
recommendation is a brief description of the problem as well as the opportunity related
to it. The text of the report provides an elaboration of each recommendation, including
a description of the specific actions necessary to implement the recommendations.
Recommendation: The economic value of Minnesota's lakes should be determined and
this information should become an integral part of a lake management system for the
state.
1 The probleth: The contribution of our lakes to Minnesota's state and local
economies has not been measured, which prevents the calculation of appropriate
lake management budgets, and results in a lack of appreciation for the value of
lake resources.
r 1
1
1
.1
1 The opportunity: By developing an understanding of the economic value of
i lakes state and local government can establish lake management budgets and
priorities that reflect their value and provide for the Tong -term protection of valuable
economic, as well as environmental, resources.
Recommendation: The concept of lake sustainability should be the primary goal of lake I
management, to be achieved by the evaluation of impacts on the quality of Minnesota
lakes.
i The problem: Lake management activities in Minnesota have typically not been
centered on broad goals, which makes lake improvement more difficult to
I
accomplish and measure. The ability of lakes to withstand the impacts of the
•
demands placed on them is not currently a primary lake management
consideration: 1
i The opportunity: The concept of sustainability represents an ecologically sound
basis for managing and protecting lakes that provides a common management 1
goal that can be understood and shared by all lake management entities.
Recommendation: A partnership should be developed between state and local lake I
management interests to foster a collaborative approach to lake management in
Minnesota, including the initiation of planning processes at the local level to develop I
comprehensive management plans for lakes.
The problem: The lack of a well - defined and systematic approach to lake '
management in Minnesota discourages broad and cooperative participation in
managing lakes, particularly on the part of local government and lake
organizations, thereby reducing lake management capacity. 1
The opportunity: By developing and using a collaborative approach to lake
management, the considerable skills and energy available through local
I
z govemment and lake organizations can be used to complement state -level lake
management efforts.
Recommendation: Lake management in Minnesota should be based on natural I
boundaries - lake watersheds.
I
The problem: Historically, management activities relating to lakes have focused
on the lake and its shoreline. Many lake impacts, however, are associated with
activities that take place away from the lake, in its watershed. Therefore, much 1
of the activity that affects lakes has not been addressed by traditional lake
management efforts. I
1 2 1
1
1
The opportunity: Focusing lake management on lake watersheds provides an
opportunity to address the most significant source of lake pollution, namely non -
point source pollution. The causes, rather than the symptoms, of lake impacts are
more readily addressed by adopting a watershed -based approach to lake
' management.
Recommendation: A coordinated lake data collection and application system should be
1 established to support the management of lakes in Minnesota at the state and local
levels.
1 The problem: There are currently insufficient data to support effective lake
management in Minnesota. While considerable lake resource data exist, and are
collected by various entities, such data are not collected with comprehensive lake
management needs in mind, and tend to relate to specific program needs.
' The opportunity: Developing a coordinated lake data collection and application
system in Minnesota would not only yield the information necessary to
comprehensively manage lakes, but would make current lake - related data efforts
' more efficient, useful, and cost- effective.
Recommendation: A comprehensive lake classification system should be developed and
implemented in Minnesota to guide the management of lakes.
The problem: Lake use in Minnesota is guided more by user demands than by
' the characteristics of the resource. As a result, lakes may be degraded by the
uses made of them. There does not currently exist in Minnesota a lake
classification system to guide lake use and management, taking into account lake
1 sustainability and the ecological characteristics of lakes.
The opportunity: The development of a lake classification system that
1 incorporates ecological as well as cuttural factors will provide a guide for the
management and use of lakes, as well as a means to evaluate the effectiveness
of lake management over time.
Recommendation: A comprehensive lake management education and information
delivery system should be established in Minnesota to support the management of lakes.
I The problem: Education and communication is a critical and necessary
I component for achieving the goal of an integrated, comprehensive, watershed-
based lake management system. A systematic program to gather and distribute
lake resource information does not exist, and needs to be established.
3
1
The opportunity: The quality of lakes, and the effectiveness of their
management, can be improved through the education of those whose actions
influence lakes, including lake managers, lake users, decision- makers, and the
general public. Improving the level of lake knowledge will expand lake
management capacity in Minnesota.
Future work of the Forum should center on two activities. The first is the communication
and delivery of the Forum's findings, conclusions, and recommendations to various
audiences throughout the state. These audiences include state agencies and executive
offices, the legislature, local communities and government bodies, and lake users and
user groups. The second activity relates to the implementation of the Forum's
recommendations, resulting in the establishment of a lake management system in
Minnesota. In order to advance these recommendations, several working groups should
be established and implementation measures undertaken. This would entail a
continuation of the Forum effort and the coordination of the specific initiatives that are the
product of the Forum's work. Putting this system in place could require several years.
However, the lake management partnership and sense of lake stewardship fostered by
the Forum should become a permanent feature of lake management in Minnesota. 1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
I. Introduction
' Perhaps no aspect of Minnesota's environment symbolizes its rich natural heritage as well
as its lake resources. By any measure, lakes have contributed tremendously to
Minnesota's economic, commercial, and recreational development. Yet in spite of their
nearly incalculable value, the quality of our lakes is suffering from increasing use. The
increasing impacts on Minnesota's lakes include water quality deterioration, more surface
uses and users, shoreland and watershed development, the spread of exotic species, and
' • potential exposure to toxic contaminants. In spite of the resources applied to the
management of lakes in Minnesota, we are faced with the inescapable conclusion that
our lakes are being threatened and degraded. The efforts undertaken in the past to
manage lakes in Minnesota are no longer sufficient.
This report describes the work of the Minnesota Lake Management Forum, which was
formed in 1991 to critically evaluate the management of lakes in Minnesota. The central
goal of the Forum is to propose an appropriate lake management system for Minnesota.
' The Forum has completed its initial task, and has prepared this report on its findings,
conclusions and recommendations.
Throughout its work, the Forum has been aware of the large number of lake
"stakeholders" who have an interest in Minnesota's lakes. It recognizes that these
interests are important and must be addressed in any serious examination of lake
management. Accordingly, the membership of the Forum reflects the number and variety
of lake management interests in this state. An important theme of the Forum's work is
the need to involve a wide range of stakeholders in the efforts to manage lakes, and this
' report is an initial step in engaging these stakeholders.
The Forum has accomplished an examination of the problems confronting lake
management in Minnesota, and has formulated a broad strategy to protect and enhance
lake resources through the implementation of a lake management system. This system
must be a collaborative effort of both public and private sectors, and it must evolve as a
result of a new partnership among state and local levels, based on shared objectives for
lake management.
5
• 1
11. The Minnesota Lake Management Forum
1
This report is the product of the Forum; it is not a report of the Blandin Foundation or the
I
Freshwater Foundation. The Forum roster reflects its diverse membership and varied
st points of view (APPENDIX 1). Because of this diversity, and the nature and scope of the
issues being by ein addressed b the Forum, complete agreement on each issue was not
I
anticipated. Consequently, this report does not reflect unanimity of opinion on every
point. However, it does reflect strong and broad consensus on the major lake I
management issues currently facing Minnesota, and it does describe the nature of the
action that must be taken to effectively respond to the lake management challenges that
confront us. I
A. Forum Description
The Minnesota Lake Management Forum was created through the efforts of the Blandin
1
Foundation and the Freshwater Foundation. Its purpose is to critically review lake
management in Minnesota and to recommend how this management can be improved. I
Through a series of interviews, workshops, task force meetings, and reports that began
. in February 1991, the Forum has addressed lake management issues in Minnesota and
. suggested strategic responses to those issues. Membership in the Forum is comprised I
of individuals who are actively involved in lake management in Minnesota: State and
local government, lake associations and lake user groups, environmental groups,
academia, and other lake interests.
° ' r ' The Blandin Foundation is a private grant- making foundation located in Grand Rapids, •
Minnesota. Blandin's financial support of the Lake Management Forum reflects its
I
interest in environmental affairs in Minnesota. The Freshwater Foundation is a non - profit
organization dedicated to the protection of freshwater resources. As the convener of the
Lake Management Forum, the Freshwater Foundation represents a neutral entity that has 1
t brought together diverse interests to discuss the central lake management issues using
i , a consensus - building approach. This .role includes management and coordination of the
overall Forum process, and delivering the Forum's report to selected audiences. 1
The Lake Management Forum was established in response to the increasing demands
being placed on Minnesota's lakes, their apparently declining quality, and, therefore, the 1
need to examine the ways in which we are managing our lakes. There is a strong sense
,. among lake users and managers that the quality of lakes in Minnesota is being I
increasingly affected, and fhat our past and current approach to lake management needs
to be evaluated and modified if we are to maintain or improve the quality of our lakes.
1
6
1
I
B. Forum History
In February 1991, the Freshwater Foundation received a grant from the Blandin
Foundation to examine lake management in Minnesota and consider how this
management could be advanced. During February and March of 1991, approximately 35
' individuals who are prominently associated with lake management in Minnesota were
interviewed, in order to obtain their views relative to lake management issues. On the
basis of these interviews, a briefing paper was prepared and distributed to the interview
' participants. Following this, the participants were convened at a Lake Management
Workshop on April 1991 to discuss the interview results. The outcome of this workshop
was a clear consensus that the process developed by the Freshwater Foundation to
' examine lake management issues needed to be expanded and continued.
In May 1991, the Freshwater Foundation prepared a grant proposal to the Blandin
' Foundation to further develop this process, and to focus on the substantive
recommendations of the participants. These recommendations centered on the need to
examine six discrete lake management themes.
' 1. Managing lakes on a watershed basis
9 9
2. Developing a coordinated data base for lake management
3. Establishing a common lake classification system
4. Examining the institutional framework for lake management
5. The need for a strategic lake management planning process
6. Improving education and communication regarding lake management
' In August 1991, the Blandin Foundation awarded a grant to the Freshwater Foundation
to establish and convene the Minnesota Lake Management Forum.
' In order to expand participation and verify the validity of the six lake management themes,
a survey was designed and distributed to approximately 320 individuals involved in lake
management activities in Minnesota. The survey audience included representatives from
lake associations, local and special units of government, state govemment, academia,
environmental interests, lake user groups, industry groups, tribal government, and
legislative offices. Approximately 40% of survey recipients responded. The survey
results confirmed the validity of the six lake management themes, and provided an
expanded roster, from which the Forum members were invited (see APPENDIX 1).
' The Freshwater Foundation convened the first workshop of the Lake Management Forum
in November 1991. At this workshop, Task Forces were established to examine the six
lake management themes identified earlier. The Task Forces met from December 1991
through April 1992/o investigate and discuss their respective issues, and prepare a report
of their deliberations. These reports were the topic of a May 1992 workshop of the Lake
Management Forum, after which the reports were revised and submitted to the
Freshwater Foundation for compilation.
7
r - -
i
r;
1
C. Forum Rationale I
1. The Increasing Impacts on Lakes in Minnesota
A working assumption of the Lake Management Forum is that in the context of 1
deteriorating lake quality, the term lake quality" refers to a lake's total character, both
< quantitative and qualitative. In recognition of the diverse uses supported by lakes, the
relative values of lake users in part determine lake 'quality.' This assumption is based 1
largely on general observations and scattered evidence. As the pressures on lakes
increase the concern about the lakes' ability to withstand the associated impacts
correspondingly increases. One of the limitations of lake data in Minnesota is the inability
to undertake trend analyses; data are not available to thoroughly document large trends
relative to lake water quality and lake use. This prevents or diminishes effective control
• of problems and management of lake resources. In spite of this limitation, the evidence 1
of declining lake quality in this state is convincing. This deterioration is attributable to
t several factors, including continued development in the watershed and on the shore, I
increasing use of lakes, the introduction and spread of exotic species, and toxic pollution.
Land use activities within a lake's watershed are currently the most significant cause of
lake water quality problems, principally through sediment and nutrient runoff. The decline
I
in the quality of so many lakes in Minnesota, and the future threats to all lakes in the
state, are expected to continue unless we modify the way lakes are managed. This
• change needs to take place over time, but it must happen if we are going to maintain or
I
improve our lakes.
Certainly, there are lakes in Minnesota that do not fit this profile. Many lakes in the
I
northeastern part of the state have been relatively unaffected by development. Except for
atmospheric deposition of pollutants, such as mercury and acid rain, their condition today
is similar to what it probably was a century ago (although this does not suggest that such 1
pollution is insignificant). While these lakes may be unaffected by pollution relative to
other lakes in the state, they have to be considered as threatened, and therefore in need
of management. There are also lakes in Minnesota that have been the targets of specific 1
management or remedial efforts, which have often been extremely effective. While it is
unfortunate that such lakes have been allowed to deteriorate, the remedial and I
management efforts demonstrate the effectiveness of various lake management
measures. Virtually all lakes in Minnesota are either degraded or threatened, largely as
the result of activities that take place or have taken place within the lakes' watersheds. I
Activities that take place within a lake watershed require the complementary activity of
lake management. There is no such thing in Minnesota as a lake that does not need
some level of management attention.
I
2. Current Lake Management in Minnesota
•
The Forum concluded that lake management in Minnesota is that it is fragmented and
1
I uncoordinated. Lake management has not developed as a comprehensive and
t 1
8
1
1
1
systematic response to a broad resource need; instead, it has developed incremental,
over time, in reaction to specific Take- related problems. Lake management is not
fragmented in the sense that a system has fallen apart, but that it was never cohesive in
the first place. We have a number of lake management components, some of which work
1 well and some not so well, but we do not have a 'lake management system" in this state.
The lack of a coordinated approach to lake management, combined with the diversity of
lake environments, needs, uses, and expectations, has led to an inability to respond ,
effectively to the increasing impacts on lakes and accelerated changes to them.
The concepts of lake "management' and lake use cannot be separated. On a societal
1 level, there has been a general lack of appreciation that lakes are the ultimate
environmental repositories. Too often, getting rid of what we don't want has meant
' putting it in a lake, either consciously or unconsciously. It is in this sense that a lake is
a reflection of its watershed.
' The Lake Management Forum has reviewed the status of lake management in Minnesota,
identified those factors that constrain effective lake management, and formulated
recommended actions and strategies to overcome these constraints and build a
coordinated lake management system in the state.
3. The Capacity to Manage Lakes in Minnesota
1 Over the past several years, several lake and surface water programs have been
developed and implemented in Minnesota, on both a state and local level. At the same
time, federal programs and resources have been reduced. Moreover, demands on lakes
have been increasing, as has our realization of how lakes are being affected by various
"non -lake" activities. Correspondingly, demands for lake management have increased -
I new management programs have fostered interest that has exceeded management
resources. As a consequence, the capacity of state and local govemment in Minnesota
to manage our lake resources, relative to the management needs, has decreased.
' As the Lake Management Forum demonstrates, there exists a relatively untapped
capacity for lake management in Minnesota beyond the traditional management entities,
1 in the form of citizens, lake user groups, and water - related organizations. While the
expectation that government can and will solve lake management problems is changing,
we are seeing the potential of what lake management interests of all types can
I accomplish through the establishment of partnerships and collaborative efforts to improve
lakes. Several examples exist of successful, locally initiated lake management planning
I • efforts, including Lake Bemidji, Clear Lake in Waseca, Big Stone Lake, and Lake
Minnetonka, to name just a few. Other programs similarly demonstrate successful
collaborative efforts between state and local entities, such as the Citizens Lake Monitoring
' Program, Freshwater Foundation's Lakewatch Program, the Lake Assessment Program,
the revised Shoreland Management Rules, and Local Water Planning.
1 9
1
4. Major Challenges to Implementing a Lake Management System
There is a lack of lake management resource s and expertise available to support the 1
effective involvement of local entities in lake management. The traditional focus of
management efforts on the lake itself, rather than on th lak s m n data ited
d
their success. The lack of appropriate and su
availability of existing data, particularly at the local level, has limited us in measuring and
responding to lake problems. No single, comprehensive classification system for lakes
I
exists in Minnesota. The management f lakes is often carried
management is not
ot
guidelines to evaluate the efficacy o f the management. Lake
consistently carried out, and is often not carried out at all, in part because there does not
exist a comprehensive lake management planning process at the local level that engages
all relevant and interested lake stakeholders. Finally, inadequate delivery of education
and information, at all levels, regarding lakes and their management restricts lake
managers and users from becoming effective lake stewards.
Several barriers exist in Minnesota that prevent an effective and timely response to these 1
problems. The institutional framework for managing lakes in Minnesota does not naturally
lend itself to developing state /local partnerships for lake management or adopting a
management approach that focuses on lake watersheds rather than lakes. The traditional
state agency lake management roles inadequately respond to the overall needs of the
resource. Funding is inadequate, at the state and local levels, to support management
that is reflective of the value of lakes to Minnesota. As long as knowledge of lakes and
their management is not improved, particularly at the local level, the quality of lake
management in Minnesota cannot be meaningfully improved. Finally, a successful
- response to many lake problems is inhibited to y conflacts certain lake uses.rt of
some lake users, expectations that often lead
barriers, the basis of these problems and , the Forum has described the major lake 1
management needs in Minnesota. A lake management system needs to be developed
to replace the current collection of narrowly focused and relatively uncoordinated lake
management programs. This system must be oriented to the protection of lakes. Within
this system, communication needs to be improved among the state agencies involved in
lake management in order to improve the delivery of services. There has to be greater
collaboration between state ag ota role local
to al government in lake management
t
manageme of lakes in Minnesota.
should be expanded. In order to accomplish this, the capacity of local government to
carry out its expanded responsibilities has to be increased, including the acquisition of
greater lake management expertise. roved to increase lake
involvement in managing all stakeholders needs to be imp g lakes.
1
1
10
1
1
•
1
D. Future Work
Future work of the Forum should center on two activities. The first is the communication
and delivery of the Forum's findings, conclusions, and recommendations to various
audiences throughout the state. These audiences include state agencies and executive
offices, the legislature, local communities and govemment bodies, and lake users and
user groups. The second activity relates to the implementation of the Forum's
recommendations. This implementation includes the formation of state /local partnerships,
the establishment of a watershed approach to lake management, and the building of an
information system for data collection, lake classification, and education. This process
I should include the formation of several regional forum groups, various working groups,
and a communication and public awareness program. The implementation of the Forum's
recommendations requires a continued convening process to form working groups,
facilitate discussions, and build consensus based on shared objectives.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 .
1 r
1
11
1
1
111. Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations
I
The Findings and Conclusions of the Lake Management Forum are based on the
I
dominant issues that emerged from the collective work of the individual Task Forces.
Each section in this chapter represents the recommendations of the Forum.
. 1
A. The Value of Lakes to Minnesota .
The economic value of Minnesota's lakes should be determined and this I
information should become an integral part of a lake management system for the
state.
I
The problem:
The contribution of our lakes to Minnesota's state and local economies has not I
been measured, which prevents the calculation of appropriate lake management
budgets, and results in a lack of appreciation for the value of lake resources.
1
The opportunity:
By developing an understanding of the economic value of lakes, state and local
1
govemment can establish lake management budgets and priorities that reflect their
value and provide for the long -term protection of valuable economic, as well as
environmental, resources. I
The Forum has developed the following lake management charter for Minnesota: 1
It shall be Minnesota public policy to protect, preserve, and enhance
its many lakes as irreplaceable natural assets, held in trust for future
generations, while encouraging responsible current use for widely
diverse purposes.
I
Because the state has not assessed the value of Minnesota's lakes to the state's
economy, it is not possible to calculate budgets and funding priorities for lake
management that are proportional to the value of the resource. The view of the Forum 1
is that Minnesota has not made an investment in the management of its lakes that is •
commensurate with their value. By determining the economic value of lakes, this
assumption of the Forum can be tested. The contribution of Minnesota's lakes to portions
• of the state's economy has been variously, but not comprehensively, evaluated in the
past. The economic impacts of certain aspects of lake- related activity, such as fishing,
have been the subject of past examination. Clearly, Minnesota's lake resources
contribute substantially to the state's economy; expenditures for hunting and fishing
12
1
I
1
licenses and equipment, boats and motors, tourism, and tax payments attributable to lake
property constitute a substantial industry. The economic value of Minnesota's lake
resources is significant to the present and future well -being of the state and its citizens.
In response to the lack of documentation relative to the economic value of Minnesota's
lakes, the Forum has recommended that the Department of Trade and Economic
' Development compile economic summaries of Minnesota lake values by region and/or
county and analyze the economic contribution of lake- related activities to the state. This
work should address real estate values and expenditures, taxes (sales and property),
I tourism, retail goods and service expenditures related to lake activities, and county
multipliers. This information should be gathered and expressed on as local a scale as
possible. Information on the economic value of lakes should become part of our lake
knowledge base - an essential and recognized set of facts about lakes that supports
future lake management activities in Minnesota at the state and local levels.
1 B. The Goal of Lake Management - Sustainability
The concept of lake sustainability should be the primary goal of lake management,
1 to be achieved by the evaluation of impacts on the quality of Minnesota lakes.
The problem:
1 Lake management activities in Minnesota have typically not been centered on
broad goals, which makes lake improvement more difficult to accomplish and
' measure. The ability of lakes to withstand the impacts of the demands placed on
them is not currently a primary lake management consideration.
1 The opportunity:
The concept of sustainability represents an ecologically sound basis for managing
and protecting lakes that provides a common management goal that can be
understood and shared by all lake management entities.
For the most part, we in Minnesota have engaged in de facto lake management, through
our demands on and expectations of takes. Whether or not the lake could sustain itself
' in the face of our demands and expectations has not been part of the equation. There
is a need in Minnesota for a vision of what our lakes should be, and lake management
planning should respond to this vision by providing for both short-term and long -term
preservation of lakg resources. The concept of sustainability requires us to reconcile our
• expectations of and demands on a lake with the natural capabilities of that lake. The
Lake Management Forum has defined ' sustainability" as follows:
1
13
1
1
Sustainability is the capacity of a lake to assimilate cultural activities while
maintaining the preferred condition; the preferred condition of a lake is
based on its geomorphic and biologic characteristics, and relates to past
and current uses in and around it. The preferred condition is not
necessarily the same as existing conditions.
Sustainability, preferred condition, and existing condition vary considerably from one lake
to another. Moreover, lakes are dynamic systems, and will change over time in response
to natural conditions. The use of the terms 'sustainability,' "preferred condition,' and
"existing condition' acknowledges that lakes are influenced by natural forces as well as
cultural forces associated with human activity. Therefore, the management of lakes must
account for and accommodate these varying factors. Toward this end, a single,
comprehensive lake classification system should be established in Minnesota that will
guide lake management aimed at the goal of lake sustainability, understanding that the
implementation of this concept will be difficult and controversial.
sustainability management based on the concept of susta qty will require evaluation tools that 1
are not now routinely used. Monitoring and measuring the effectiveness of lake
management needs to be based on data that is collected systematically and over long 1
periods of time. The ability to conduct trend analyses is necessary if sustainability is to
become a meaningful lake management goal. The issues and data necessary to support
lake trend analysis have to be identified.
1
This report discusses the need to manage lakes by managing their respective
watersheds, which introduces the notion of addressing land uses in terms of their i
s 1
on lakes. Simply put, impacts on a lake associated with land use in its watershed
not exceed the lake's capacity to sustain itself. The concept of lake sustainability should
be a major factor in determining the land use practices within a lakes watershed.
C. Shared State/Local Lake Management Responsibility
A partnership should be developed between state and local lake management
interests to foster a collaborative approach to lake management in Minnesota, 1
including the initiation of planning processes at the local level to develop
comprehensive management plans for lakes.
The problem:
The lack of a well- defined and systematic approach to lake management in
Minnesota discourages broad and cooperative participation in managing lakes, II
particularly on the part of local government and lake organizations, thereby
reducing lake management capacity. 1
1
14
1
1
" I
The opportunity:
, By developing and using a collaborative approach to lake management, the
considerable skills and energy available through local government and lake
organizations can be used to complement state -level lake management efforts.
Minnesota currently lacks a coordinated and comprehensive approach to planning for and
managing its lakes. Existing lake management programs in the state are inadequately
coordinated, sometimes conflicting, poorly communicated, and as a result, often fail to
i ` protect the resource. The current program focus of our lake management framework
,: leads to the perception, and in some cases the reality, of an overly complex
permit/approval 'system* relative to lakes. Lake management stakeholders are often
unaware of their roles and responsibilities in developing lake management plans and
managing lakes. There is lacking a well - communicated description of existing lake
* i management programs, assistance (including technical assistance), and authorities. A
'4 .- systematic approach to lake planning and management would address these constraints
and provide for partnerships and the establishment of shared objectives among local,
:Pr' = ._'. private, state, and federal lake management interests. (For the purposes of this report, •
_-- local is defined as any govemmental entity with a sub -state jurisdiction.)
Lake management should be based on shared leadership. State government currently
s �° plays the dominant, nearly exclusive, role in managing lakes in Minnesota; lake
• .k
management roles for local govemment and lake users are not well - developed.
i Moreover, there does not exist a clearly understood description of lake management roles
t.; and responsibilities. The role of all stakeholders should be recognized and clearly
'; r established in the lake management framework. The lake management framework must
'4
'. ` Tc -�
y: be flexible enough to accommodate differing circumstances and needs of lakes
,: throughout the state. Strong roles for local govemment and lake user organizations in
x;Lq�. lake management provide for this management flexibility. Local govemment should have
x
a primary responsibility for planning and implementing watershed -based lake
i . : _ management, including best management practices. Lake management plans should be
t-,- prepared by local govemment or organizations designated by the local water planning
- ..
-� authority, with the state carrying out a coordinating role. A lake management coordinator
and a technical position, such as a limnologist or hydrologist, should be established at the
county or watershed district level. These positions, either of which could be the local
III : 4 A. , :kyl water p ,
lan coordinator, should be funded jointly by state and county government, which
II lt,7= I
could be accomplished through the county comprehensive local water plan.
ti
The local water plan coordinator should be involved in lake management at the county
F .t:. level; in counties with lakes, the coordinator should have a limnology background.
-
7 Additionally, lake management coordinators should be established at the state level as
a liaison among state agencies and local lake management coordinators. Lake
management plans should fit within the existing framework of comprehensive local water
`, plans, which in turn must encourage the development and implementation of lake
. 15
I 3 �:
A
management plans. The comprehensive local water plan authority should have approval 1
authority for lake management plans, consistent with the lake classification and state law-
Once approved, a lake management plan should become a component of the
comprehensive water plan. Lake management partnerships could be initiated and 1
structured through the process described in Minnesota Statutes 103B.301, dealing with
state and local roles in the preparation of local water management plans. Joint Powers
Agreements would be drafted between counties within the same watershed as needed. 1
The Board of Water and Soil Resources has worked successfully in establishing
state /local partnerships. Its local water planning process could serve as a model for
shared lake management in Minnesota 1
There exists a general lack of local initiative and commitment towards lake management
on the part of citizens and government, and lake management data are not used in local
govemment decision - making. At the same time, the current lake management framework
•
in Minnesota does not reinforce local lake management initiatives. Local govemments
face various barriers to using their authorities to properly manage lakes. They need to
use existing planning and zoning authorities for land and water resource protection, such
as on -site sewage systems, agricultural and urban land use controls, and landfill
authorities.
A characteristic common to successful lake management efforts is that they bring
together all affected parties into a coordinated lake management planning and
implementation process. Each has a role that is essential to successful lake
management, particularly as it relates to the adoption of a watershed -based approach to 1
lake management, described later in this report. Local leadership, local commitment, and
locally directed efforts are the foundation for successful lake management. The lack of
a model approach to lake management represents a major impediment to the involvement 1
of citizens, local government, and lake organizations in lake management planning.
The capacity of local govemment to become an effective lake management partner is not
currently sufficient. State agencies should help local govemment in identifying and
addressing funding, implementation, and enforcement barriers. In their oversight of lake
management plans, state agencies should provide direction and, when necessary, 1
guidance to local units of government in the proper management of lakes. The state
must provide adequate and stable funding assistance to supplement local govemment
efforts to assume their full responsibilities and ownership of the management of lakes.
Enforcement and administration of lake management plans should be achieved at the
local government level, with the assistance and oversight of state agencies (such as
technical services, legal advice, funding). 1
In terms of implementing lake management, there is a need to examine the relationship
between state govemment and all other lake management interests (citizens, local
govemment, and lake organizations). Additionally, the development of lake management
partnerships will entail the modification of existing roles and responsibilities, and the
16
1
1
creation of new ones, among all lake management interests, leading to a change in the
1 way lakes are managed in Minnesota. For example, state government should modify its
historically dominant role in lake management toward a lake management "service
1 provider" to local govemment, delivering technical services and funding, while maintaining
a necessary role in oversight, training, quality assurance and quality control. Such a
change in management approach could result in cost savings.
1 . An effective lake management system must be tied to a planning process that provides
a mechanism for developing the lake management partnerships. The planning process
I is the mechanism by which the partnership approach to lake management is
accomplished. Through this planning process, the lake management roles of all lake
management interests become identified, and common goals and shared objectives for
lakes are formulated and described. To the extent that local entities and individuals will
become increasingly involved in and responsible for lake management, the need for a
model is essential. The planning process must respond to the comprehensive nature of
lake management, that is, it must address all of the diverse programs, interests, and uses
that are related to the lake and its watershed, such as fisheries management, shoreland
management, waters permits, and sewage treatment systems. The planning process
' thereby provides the link among all of the management interests on a lake and the means
to foster cooperation among them. The emphasis on the part of all lake interests must
be focused on sustainability and the prevention, as opposed to the correction, of lake
problems. It is simpler and less expensive to protect resources from degradation (the
proactive, or pollution prevention, approach) than to respond only after lake degradation
becomes manifest.
The Lake Management Forum has prepared "An Approach to Preparing a Lake
Management Plan," which is included as APPENDIX 2. It is a model based in part on
1 successful lake planning efforts in Minnesota. This model provides a context for the
development of locally based lake management efforts. Coordinated lake management
will be possible with a management plan that outlines goals based on ecological
1 principles, as well as social and economic realities. The plan should result in the
description of primary actions agreed upon by a diverse group of people that will occur
over a short term (1 -2 years) and the long term (3 -10 years). It is important that the plan
1 move beyond the "quick fix" mentality. Adopting a deliberate, long -term approach has
proven to be very effective at improving the quality of lakes. This approach, or one
I similar to it, should be implemented on a pilot basis on two or three lakes to demonstrate
its effectiveness. These pilot tests should be carried out through a partnership of state
and local entities. The list of "Lake Management Stakeholders" (APPENDIX 3) should
1 be consulted in the early stages of the lake management planning process.
If this locally based planning process is to be effective, a formal information exchange
process between state agencies and local lake management interests will have to be
developed; no such process currently exists. State agencies will need to better
1
17
1
1
coordinate their lake data collection with local groups, and these groups must become
actively engaged in the collection and application of lake data in making lake
management decisions.
There is an important role for lake associations in lake management, and the
rm
suggests that incentives be considered for lake associations to organize and participate
in lake management. For example, property tax credits could be provided for members 1
of cooperating lake associations, along with cost- sharing for remedial projects.
Assistance could be provided to the lake associations in such areas as data application,
participation in the development of lake management plans, and carrying out lake
management activities. ,
Lake management, and Minnesota's institutional framework for managing lakes, must
I
respond to the need to balance state and local interests. Included among this state's lake
r are those that have a statewide, or even national, significance.
instances, the state has a special intereste of conf ict in the past. There isn o
interests in lake management has been the ssourc
process currently available by which state and local interests in lake management can be
reconciled and balanced. The lake management framework needs to recognize and
address this important need.
D. Watershed -Based Lake Management 1
Lake management in Minnesota should be based on natural boundaries - lake
watersheds. 1
The problem:
Historically, management activities relating to lakes have focused on the lake and
its shoreline. Many lake impacts, however, are associated with activities that take
place away from the lake, in its watershed. Therefore, much of the activity that 1
affects lakes has not been addressed by traditional lake management efforts.
The opportunity:
Focusing lake management on lake watersheds provides an opportunity to address
the most significant source of lake pollution, namely non -point source pollution. 1
The causes, rather than the symptoms, of lake impacts are more readily
addressed by adopting a watershed -based approach to lake management.
Inevitably, what is put into the environment uttimately shows up in the water. All of the
land uses within a watershed are linked by water. In other words, a lake is a reflection
of its watershed. Therefore, the most important factor for the management of a lake is
the management of land use activities within its watershed. However, lake management
1
18
• 1
1
1
in Minnesota has traditionally been focused on the lake and its shoreline, and advocates
for lake management typically have been Iakeshore residents or are lake users.
The Forum has defined the term "watershed" as follows:
A drainage basin or area in which all the water drains towards the
1 waterbody of concern. It includes natural and artificial drainage systems,
such as storm sewers, ditches, and tile lines. The watershed of the
waterbody of concern may be comprised of smaller watersheds. Drainage
' may include overland flow, stream flow, and groundwater flow; the surface
and groundwater watersheds are not identical in size and shape. The
relative contribution of each may vary considerably.
The problems that cause the deterioration of lakes are associated to a large degree with
activities that take place away from the lake and within the area that drains into the lake,
that is, the lake's watershed. By limiting management attention to the lake itself, we treat
the symptoms of the problems, and not the causes. Lake management must address
both the lake and its watershed, if it is to be successful and cost- effective. Permit
applications must be reviewed within the context of the watershed and the management
plan of the lake that will be affected by the proposed action.
Resource management in Minnesota, including lake management, is structured on a
programmatic basis, not on a resource or watershed basis. Within this framework are
many programs that focus on some aspect of lakes, but no mechanism to bring them
together in the scope of a lake's watershed. Several lake aspects are addressed, but
independently, within the rather narrow scope of the individual resource management
program. Several entities may conduct individual programs on a specific lake, each with
' its own purpose and goals, and possibly in duplication or conflict with one another. Each
of these entities may have a certain jurisdiction relative to the lake, but there is no
coordinating mechanism that brings all of these increments together into a comprehensive
resource -based management effort.
The state should examine existing state and local land use and resource management
programs, with a view toward accomplishing watershed management. There should be
established at the state level a coordinating mechanism to achieve lake management on
' a watershed basis. The concept of using lake watersheds as a basis for implementing
lake management programs provides a vehicle not only for coordinating the activities of
several lake management interests, but also for addressing the sources of many of the
' problems causing he continuing deterioration of our lakes. Adopting a watershed basis
for lake management is designed to establish a management focus that approaches lakes
from a resource and geographic perspective. Moreover, a watershed approach logically
' draws local govemment prominently into lake management, inasmuch as it entails the
management of land within a lake's watershed; the regulation of land use in Minnesota
is essentially a role for local government, through planning and zoning.
19
• 1
There exists a general lack of watershed awareness and understanding of the I
interconnections between a lake and its watershed. Most individuals simply do not think
in terms of watersheds, and would be unable to identify the boundaries of the watershed
in which they live. Membership in lake associations tends to include those who live on 111
the shore of a lake, but not those who live away from the lake, in its watershed, and
whose actions may significantly affect the lake. I
Historically, resource management programs at the state govemment level have not been
structured to accomplish watershed management. At a more basic level, there is a lack
of watershed information and maps in Minnesota to support watershed management. ,
Watershed boundaries for Minnesota's lakes should be available on a geographic
information system. This information should be made widely available. There needs to
be an established and ongoing educational component to work with local decision- makers 1
and citizens.
Watershed management entails the use of best management practices tied to a sound 1
management plan - the use of land use practices that are intended to minimize
environmental degradation. However, best management practices currently lack
specificity; we do not know what 'best' is for a given situation. The adoption of a
watershed basis for lake management, by bringing land use into the process, necessarily
requires that sociological and economic factors, in addition to ecological factors, be
considered in developing management plans for lakes. For example, the use of best
management factors in agriculture is problematic, in view of the economic consequences
of their implementation. There is a need for agencies to develop a common approach
to defining and demonstrating best management practices in various situations and for
g 9
various objectives. Technical training of local staff, including resource user groups,
should be increased by the state. 1
The Lake Management Forum has determined that comprehensive watershed -based lake
management in Minnesota is currently limited by several factors at both the state and '
local govemment levels. Several Take- related programs of the state are limited by their
inherent inflexibility, which thereby diminishes their effectiveness. This inflexibility derives
from both statutory and administrative sources. For example, the cost -share program of I
the Board of Water and Soil Resources, the Pollution Control Agency's On -site Septic
System Program, and Feedlot Program could be more effective in the context of lake
management if they were more adaptable, and implemented with a watershed focus in 1
mind. In general, state programs that relate to lakes and lake management are not well
marketed. The establishment of partnerships between the state and the public could be
enhanced if communication from the state about state programs were improved. This '
communication must include a clear °watershed message,' which would provide a context
for program implementation on a local level.
There exists the perception, or the reality, that the state is resistant to the empowerment
of local govemment and the delegation of authority to them in lake management affairs.
20 i
Y'.
1
1
At the same time, state agencies maintain differences in priorities, even differences that
' exist among divisions within a single agency. Adopting a watershed -based approach to
lake management could reduce this element of confusion by providing a common focus
for all lake management entities that is based on the resource, rather than individual
programs.
Many state programs that relate directly or indirectly to lake management, and should be
I important elements of a watershed approach, are inadequately funded: Clean Water
Partnership; Lake Assessment Program; on -site sewage treatment; shoreland
management; data collection and management; Reinvest in Minnesota; wetland
conservation; Local Water Planning; feedlots; and Board of Water and Soil Resources
cost - share. In addition to insufficient funding levels, the success of these programs, and
lake management in general, is reduced by the lack of a long -term commitment to sustain
financial support for them.
There is not a clear definition of staff leadership roles in lake management at the local
' level. With respect to local water planning in Minnesota, the watershed district and
municipality are the basic local units of government responsible for water management
in the metro area, while the county has this responsibility in outstate areas. Historically,
local governments have not established priorities with respect to managing lakes, and
have not used a watershed -based approach in their land use planning activities.
Local government suffers from a lack of technical expertise with respect to lakes and their
management. Consequently, impacts on lakes that result from various activities within
the lake's watershed are not anticipated. This is compounded by a lack of knowledge of
existing resource management programs, and often a failure to use existing statutory
authorities to protect manage lake resources.
1 Like the state, local government efforts are constrained by funding limitations, but also
by the failure to use existing funding mechanisms. Moreover, local govemment is faced
1 with the economic conflict between business development and resource protection.
The state should evaluate state and local funding mechanisms that relate to local
' watershed management. Based on this evaluation, these funding mechanisms should
be restructured to accomplish local watershed management. Comprehensive local water
plans already provide the structure and state oversight necessary to carry out locally
I based lake management. This role should be increased to encourage local involvement
in lake management. The state should expand its delivery of technical services and
funding to assist local watershed management activities and better clarify its management
role. For example, the Pollution Control Agency's Citizen Lake Monitoring Program
should include an expanded role for local water managers. The state should coordinate
the program, and should advise and support local efforts.
21
1
1
E. Coordinated Lake Management Data Collection/Application 1
A coordinated lake data collection and application system should be established
to support the management of lakes in Minnesota at the state and local levels.
The problem: 1
There are currently insufficient data to support effective lake management in
Minnesota. While considerable lake resource data exist, and are collected by
various entities, such data are not collected with comprehensive lake management
needs in mind, and tend to relate to specific program needs.
The opportunity:
Developing a coordinated lake data collection and application system in Minnesota
would not only yield the information necessary to comprehensively manage lakes,
but would make current lake - related data efforts more efficient, useful, and cost -
effective. '
Lake management in Minnesota requires an improved and expanded information base
for managing and regulating lakes. Several organizations and agencies are involved in
1
the collection and application of lake data, but there is inadequate coordination among
those who collect lake data. Data are collected for specific resource assessment needs,
rather than for broad lake management purposes. There does not exist widespread 1
agreement as to what data are necessary for effective lake management. Existing data
will not support evaluation of lake management efforts, and are insufficient for Tong -term
trend analysis. Data collection roles need to be more clearly defined and well-
established, and measures to protect the integrity of lake data need to be formulated.
The Lake Management Forum has described four basic goals that should guide the '
development of a lake management data system in Minnesota: The data that are
necessary for effective lake management need to be identified and agreed upon; lake
data collection roles need to be established and processes developed to insure that the
data collected are standardized and useful; a framework needs to be developed for easy
access to the data sources to meet the needs of all public and private agencies and
organizations involved with lake management; and lake data collection and management
activities need to be promoted among local stakeholders, including local govemmental
units, water management grganizations, lake associations, and other citizens. '
The Forum identified six major components that are necessary for effective lake
management: Watershed, water quality, aquatic plants and animals, fish and wildlife, use,
and economic value. These components were grouped into three major categories:
Watershed, biota, and societal. This information, along with associated lake management
priority factors, is presented in APPENDIX 4. Currently, the collection of lake data does 1
22 1
1
NNW
1 not adequately address all of these areas. Lake data are being collected and stored for
specific studies or program needs, rather than for general lake management applications.
I With respect to these general applications, there is not widespread agreement as to what
data we need. Different lake management issues require different data elements. A
group should be established to identify and prioritize lake management data needs, and
I the potential application of existing data to other lake management issues should be
evaluated. This evaluation should d of r the lake class classification lake mnagment described en the
data to support the implementation i following section.
1
A coordinated mina d lake management data collection and application system requires
I 9
standardized information that has a useful application. The roles of those who are
involved in collecting data therefore must be clearly identified and procedures for data
collection need to be carefully established for all aspects of lake management t data
I standardized methods have not
collection. No inventory currently exists of lake management information. A
computerized inventory of all useful lake management information should be established
I and maintained by the state. It is not well -known what lake data are being collected and
stored, by whom, for what purpose, and by what methods. Those agencies that are
collecting data are not well - coordinated. A committee of state and federal agencies
1 should be established to coordinate their lake management data collection on an annual
basis. Quality control and quality assurance methods have not been consistently
incorporated into lake management data collection and storage, and the integrity of the
1 data therefore cannot be assured. The established to produce a pof revents recommendled
lake management. A group should be
methods for information collection and storage. The manual should recognize that
I methods of measuring conditions will change in response to advancing technology,
economic factors, changing user perceptions, and other factors.
1 The application of lake data to the actual management of lakes requires easy access to
the data and data sources by all of the diverse interests who have a lake management
I role. There does not exist in Minnesota a central data base for lake management
information, nor is there a clearinghouse or directory for lake management information.
Information that is collected is not always maintained or stored in a compatible, useful,
or retrievable format. An expanded local role in lake management requires that a
I formalized and coordinated information exchange process be created that links state
agencies with local stakeholders. A lake management information clearinghouse should
II be established, modeled after the groundwater clearinghouse. The clearinghouse should
I not function solely as a depository, but should emphasize the provision of specific data
I to all users in a useful format. Current lake management does not accommodate some
I data formats, such as video. These developing technologies may be effective information
sources or analytical techniques. The use of alternate lake management data collection
formats and technologies should be explored.
1
1 23
1
1
The expanded lake management responsibilities �eocal stakeho stakeholders collection lake
and management of lake data. The potential contributions of units, water
management data collection associateons' d other c� Local ns we
become increasingly
management organizations, lake
involved in data collection' and application. The process r State agen should coordinate
interests does not exist, and needs to be develop
- their volunteer programs to improve participation
results to facilitate this s has been I
should include recruiting, training, and reporting re
accomplished, additional coordination involving consultants, lake
to a c training in
nonp organizations should be undertaken. This s p
data collection, interpretation, and application techniques, and the issue of quality
controVquality assurance at the local level requires careful examination. An interpretation
system should be developed among state agencies, lake associations, and other
organizations to help people understand technical lake t' Ohe lake use
management making
lake management decisions. This could be housed within
information clearinghouse. 1
F. A Comprehensive Lake Classification System
A comprehensive lake classification system
should be developed and implemented 1
in Minnesota to guide the management of lakes.
The problem:
Lake use in Minnesota is guided more by user demands than by the
made of them.
I
of the resource. As a result; lakes may be degraded by the
There does not currently exist in Minnesota a lake classification system to guide
lake use and management, taking into account lake sustainability and the 1
ecological characteristics of lakes.
1
The opportunity:
The development of a lake classification system that incorporates ecological as
es, 1
well as cultural factors will provide a gui �V e e o ness of management
ake management over t
as well as a means to evaluate the effe
Lake classification provides ides a tool by which to evaluate the effects of past, present, and 1
future lake management, and helps to guide lake have been t aimed in a gal of
for vari lake - related purposes f
sustainability. Several fake classification programs ere does not exist a single, comprehensive
ural
lake classification system which brings together all °The important i minimum factors, values, factors that influence a lake and its management. III tools to be considered in a lake classification �sys ete i n l T
in APPENDIX 5. An analysis of existing data in the fram e
1
24
1
I
I system should be completed by the interdisciplinary team (referenced below) to validate
and refine definitions and descriptions of lake types and their preferred condition. Such
a classification system requires a sufficient data base to be scientifically valid, and the
I classification of lakes should be an objective, rather than a subjective, exercise. The
classification system would allow lake managers to share information on a lake in an
organized manner, and provide for a more thorough evaluation by lake managers of the
consequences of various activities, alternatives, and decisions relative to the classification
of a lake.
I ' A comprehensive lake classification system is necessary because existing lake
classification systems were developed independently of each other in response to specific
needs of their creators, and therefore may not meet other lake management needs.
1 These existing systems have emphasized some factors over others, whereas a
comprehensive classification system should balance all factors, presenting them in
relation to one another. In this respect, the system must permit systematic collection,
1 organization, and distribution of information. It must allow for new factors to be added,
and new interpretations to be made, in response to changes in technology, enforcement,
and social needs.
I The Lake Management Forum compiled a bibliography of existin lake classification
9 P existing cat
' systems in Minnesota (APPENDIX 6). The development of a comprehensive
classification system should take advantage of these systems, otherwise it may duplicate
or conflict with them. The existence of the different classification systems demonstrates
I the many responsibilities and needs of lake managers and users. Descriptions of lake
types in the classification system must meet the users' needs without overwhelming them
in detail. The system, and its language, must invite use by a wide variety of
I professionals, and facilitate communication among diverse audiences. It must provide
sufficient detail, at all levels of use, for both local and statewide audiences, with either
layman or expert knowledge. It must provide information that enables decision- makers
I to communicate existing and preferred lake conditions. The classification system should
be created and stored within an accessible computer data base, and also published and
made available to all potential users of the system.
1 The lake classification system should be developed by an interdisciplinary team,
representing potential users of the system, under the auspices of a non- govemmental
I organization representing the diversity of lake interests in Minnesota. The work of this
team should be reviewed and evaluated by a group of potential users of the classification
system. The system should involve all levels of lake management interests: The lake
I and its watershed; city, county, and district govemment agencies and organizations;
regional government; and state and federal govemment. Lake classification should be
the basis of lake management plans. The state, in consultation with the other lake
1 management interests, should establish the classification for individual lakes.
Development and implementation of a lake classification system, however, should be
based on scientific discussion. All lakes should be classified as to their "preferred" and/or
I
25
1
1
1
ucurrent condition (described in Section 01. B.). All users of a specific lake should
contribute to the management of the lake on the basis of shared objectives derived from
the classification. Disputes related to use and management of the lake would be settled
through existing mechanisms, such as Chapter 14 rule- making procedures or the Board
of Water and Soil Resources dispute resolution process.
To the extent that lake classification may affect the uses of lakes and watersheds,
implementation will be controversial, based on experience with other lake and resource
management efforts. First of all, a lead agency has to be determined to carry on the
work of classifying lakes. The successful implementation of the lake classification system
will require the support of all stakeholders, who will need to agree to both the
classification process and the product. Implementation could be hampered by the
possibility of inherent flaws in the system, which needs to be acknowledged and corrected
if necessary. If formal action is necessary to establish the 'preferred condition" of a lake,
it may be difficult to generate broad support for the classification effort. Similarly, if rules
`►, are based on the classification system, enforcement will be a problem.
The Lake Management Forum has not identified the specific non - govemmental
organization under whose auspices the lake classification system should be developed.
However, the attributes of the responsible organization should include: Sufficient
finances, or the ability to raise finances, to carry out the work; credibility (the absence of
a vested interest in lake classification, an organization that is unaffected by the outcome);
logistical support capabilities; and the ability to build consensus for implementation.
Prior to full -scale implementation of the lake classification system, it should be verified
through field testing. This exercise, which should be carried out in conjunction with
existing lake management efforts, will determine whether or not the lake classification
system is consistently applicable to lakes and will lead to stakeholder cooperation and
agency involvement. The field testing should address several critical issues. For
example, the usefulness of the terms 'current' and "preferred' have to be demonstrated.
Inasmuch as the classification system is a comerstone of lake management, it must be
proven to be a predictive tool and to help improve lake management. Finally, the
classification process must be evaluated in terms of its ability to bring lake interests
together and result in the development of common expectations of the lake resource and
shared management objectives. 1
1
1
1
26
1
1
G. Education and Information Delivery System
I A comprehensive lake management education and information delivery system
should be established in Minnesota to support the management of lakes.
I The problem:
1 , Education and communication is a critical and necessary component for achieving
the goal of an integrated, comprehensive, watershed -based lake management
system. A systematic program to gather and distribute lake resource information
does not exist, and needs to be established.
1 The opportunity:
The quality of lakes, and the effectiveness of their management, can be improved
I through the education of those whose actions influence lakes, including lake
managers, lake users, decision - makers, and the general public. Improving the
level of lake knowledge will expand lake management capacity in Minnesota.
1 Effective lake management in Minnesota requires a strong education component that
recognizes the different needs of lake users, managers, and the general public, and
I makes use of traditional and non - traditional educational needs and delivery systems.
Significant lake management educational materials and resources exist, but there is
lacking a delivery system to get lake data to the necessary audiences, including property
I owners, tourists, lake associations, business interests, resource managers, and elected
officials. Certainly, lake management education, like lake management plans, must be
specific to each lake and its watershed, but there are basic principles related to lake
1 ecosystems and policy development that are generally applicable to most situations.
Education about lake resources should be provided for all ages and all types of
audiences, and it should be categorized for age or location of the audience. Education
1 must recognize that each individual is a decision -maker whose choices and actions affect
the resource. Education should be experiential and based on real life factors for all
audiences, and should incorporate the concepts of motivation and stewardship.
I Education about lakes should be purposeful, that is, it should point toward changing
behavior to better protect or manage the resource. This is accomplished by linking
I resource education with implementation actions, management skills, and the political
process. Improved lake management will result from the use of innovative education
strategies, better and expanded use of media to get the message out, and combining the
use of lake management education, regulations, and incentives. Effective education and
communication must exist in a non - political setting. It must carry with it the mandate of
the state to provide for the essential participation of state agencies and personnel.
1
1 27
1
1 .
I -
The establishment of a statewide lake resource clearinghouse in Minnesota would provide
the facility to house and deliver information on lakes and lake management. This
clearinghouse would serve as a resource for management and planning activities,
providing educational materials, management strategies, and technical assistance. The
lake education clearinghouse should be linked to the regulatory framework, and include
a comprehensive system to evaluate its effectiveness. However, it should not be a state
agency function; it should be a partnership of the public and private sectors, but with a
strong commitment of support from state agencies. Funding for the clearinghouse should
come from a variety of sources, including state government, a portion of tax revenues
from lake -based property or recreation, foundation grants, and use or service fees. The
clearinghouse needs to be easily accessible for all users, at all levels, through such
means as regional outlets around the state and the use of a toll -free telephone number.
The lake education clearinghouse should provide a mechanism to collect, evaluate, and
1
distribute materials relating to all aspects of lakes and lake management, such as
regulations, incentive programs, data sources and assistance, best management I
practices, models, and lake associations. It should receive, deliver, and help interpret
data about lakes and watersheds. The clearinghouse should identify and promote basic
levels of lake knowledge, develop educational materials, and encourage the inclusion of
an educational component in lake management plans. The clearinghouse should develop
and sponsor training workshops for monitoring and developing lake management plans,
interpreting data, and related activities. Through these functions, the clearinghouse will
empower lake stakeholders and increase their involvement in lake management by
providing information, motivation, referrals, and assistance in participating in lake
management activities.
1
Lake management education and communication includes more than traditional materials '
such as brochures, workbooks, or videos. Education and communication also include
activities, programs, newsletters, models and demonstrations, use of the media, and the
lake management planning process, as well as the delivery of messages in informal
settings. There are different educational roles for different purposes, and different levels
of education for different audiences. A vital part of lake planning and management is
building awareness, through education, of the value of lakes and the problems affecting
them. Additional roles and purposes of education are the development of motivation and
stewardship, imparting technical skills for implementation, and increasing understanding
about the political or policy process as it affects lakes. 1
Certain background information should be compiled and organized prior to establishing
the lake education clearinghouse:
1
1. Review and analyze state statutes and administrative rules relating to education
and which agencies provide education. This activity should include a I
recommendation as to who should coordinate education on lake management
regulation.
1
28
1
-__ 1
I
I 2. Identify, review, and analyze non - govemmental groups with a lake management
interest or mission, including the objectives and activities of these groups.
I 3. Analyze environmental education activities in the state, and provide inventories
and/or bibliographies of related statutory language, education providers,
nontraditional or informal environmental education for adults, and educational
1 • materials related to lakes, streams, and freshwater.
4. Identify basic levels of lake knowledge and stewardship. For each of the
1 respective audiences, identify their level of lake awareness, the basic principles
they need to know, and the most efficient means of reaching the audience.
1
1
1
1
1
•
1
1
1
1.
1
1
1 29
1
I
1
IV. Funding Considerations
The Lake Management Forum has stressed the importance o f understanding the
economic value of lakes in Minnesota. The Forum did not address the economics of lake
management in Minnesota per se, either in terms of revenues generated by Take- related
activity or in terms of the cost of managing lakes in Minnesota. However, the Forum has
addressed what it sees as certain basic funding principles regarding lake management.
Funding for lake management should reflect the fact that everybody benefits from lakes.
Moreover, the importance of Minnesota's lakes to its economy is enormous. This
suggests the need for a significant commitment on the part of the state to providing for
the management of lake resources, through such means as committing revenues from
} the state's General Fund for lake management purposes. To date, the state has not
recognized the value of its lakes in terms of its funding of lake management. '
As a cornerstone of Minnesota's rich natural resource heritage, lakes symbolize the
quality of Minnesota's environment and quality of life as does no other feature of the
state. Thus, it would be appropriate to dedicate a portion of the proceeds of the state's
Environmental Trust Fund to lake management. Other sources of funding for lake
management include a portion of local property tax revenues (which are to varying
degrees attributable to the proximity of lakes) being returned to local units of govemment
to support local lake management. The dedication of sales tax revenues generated
through the sale of lake related goods represents a source of lake management funds
that is currently not being used. Lake user fees represent another source of lake
management funds. Public funds for lake management in Minnesota will never be
sufficient. Therefore, rather than depending solely on public funds, private money should
be raised, on a willing basis, to move ahead with lake management.
A portion of state lake management budgets should go directly to local government, 1
perhaps through the county comprehensive local water plans, based on guidelines
developed by the Board of Water and Soil Resources. The participation of local
govemment in lake management becomes easier if funds are provided by the state.
Because of limited funding, the lake management framework must be creative. There
currently are no established priorities to guide the allocation of money and staff in
v
responding to resource needs. The Legislative Water Commission or the Board of Water
and Soil Resources should evaluate state and local funding mechanisms that relate to
local lake and watershed management. There is a need to evaluate how money is spent;
expenditures on lake management must be based on need. The various potential funding
sources for lake management carry certain restrictions and implications, in terms of °who
benefits versus who pays° and state versus local lake interests. Therefore, the selection
of lake management funding sources needs to be carefully considered.
30
1
' � Appendices
I 31
t
t
Y .
1
f
1 Appendix One
Roster of Lake Management Participants
1 1
Pat Alberg D ick Hawley
Hubbard County Commissioner Lake Zumbra Lake Association
John Alden Steve Heiskary
Director, Ten Mile Lk. Assn. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
R andy A nhom Jim Hodgson
Metropolitan Council Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
John Batten Gene Hollenstein 1
Hennepin County Parks Izaak Walton League
Ronald Beare Tim James 1
Becker County COLA SWOAP
Bill Becker Floyd Jorgenson
I
Minnesota DNR Bettrami County SWCD
Terry Bovee Beth Kluthe
LeSueur County Planning & Zoning Hubbard County Planning & Zoning
I Rich Brasch Arlo Knoll I
City of Eagan MN Department of Natural Resources - Division
of Minerals
Kim Chapman
The Nature Conservancy Dale Krystosek I
i Soil Conservation Service
Wally Christensen
Girl, Child, Woman Lakes Assoc. Jeff Lee
Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board
I Bob De Vries
Minnesota Sportsfishing Congress Barb Liuldconen I
Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources
David Dotzenroth
Lake Minnetonka Lakeowners Assoc.
Molly MacGregor
Mississippi Headwaters Board '
Todd Driscoll
Blandin Foundation Bill Maucker
Observer Cullen Lakes Association
I
Rick Hanna Don McCarty
Environmental Services Retired - Volunteer
Judy Hartsoe Dave Neiman
j Metropolitan Council Crow Wing County Planning Director
• 32
1
II
1
I Terry Noonan Kathy Svanda
Ramsey Co. Public Works MN Pollution Control Agency
Water Quality Division
Ray Norrgard
I Carlos Avery Wildlife Center Carl Swanson
Minnesota Lake Association
Art Norton
I Itasca Co. SWCD Paul Swenson
Minnesota DNR
Don O'Brien
Cullen Lake Association George Tengwall
I Minnesota Rural Water
JoAnn Olsen
City of Chanhassen Douglas Thomas
I Minnesota Board of Water & Soil
George Oming
International Coalition Sue Thomton
Legislative Commission on Minnesota's
I Pete Otterson Resources, Observer
Minnesota DNR, Div. of Waters
Wayne Weller
I Howard Peterson Retired - Volunteer
Minnesota Association Watershed Districts
John Wells
I Paula Ripley Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
Northern States Power
Bruce Wilson
Patricia Ruble Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
1 s Ruble Consulting
E Dave Wright
Robert Salonek Minnesota DNR
I f Lake Restoration
Pat Wulff
Timothy Scherkenbach Minnesota Lake Association
1 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
J. W. Schwartz
Ten Mile Lake Association
I ' Jack Skrypek
Minnesota DNR
1 Dan Steward
Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resources
1 Gene Strommen
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
1
1
33
1
1
1 1
Appendix Two
1 An Approach to Preparing a Lake Management Plan 1
I
1
I 1. Perceive the Need to Protect the Resource
I
i
i Usually, interest in taking management action on a lake is prompted by the sudden or gradual
I awareness of a problem in the lake, such as a fish kill or increasing algae growth, or by an apparent
I
threat to the lake, such as a proposal for development. However, initiating the planning process should
not require a problem or threat. The desire to protect the resource is reason enough, in fact it is the
ideal reason, to initiate lake management planning. This interest does not require any formal
authorization or scientific background; it simply requires the desire to improve the lake. This perception
t can emerge from any number of sources, including local citizens, govemment agencies, or special
1 interests.
2. Discuss and Define the Issues 1
The point of this step is to explore and discuss the issues with others, to determine the level of interest
4 in the lake. It is the first step in building local support for the effort, and verifying the need, through I
informal discussions with citizens and resource people to further investigate the issues and possibly
take action on the lake.
E 1
t
3. Identify the Participants
t Prepare a roster of all individuals and groups who affect the lake, or who are affected by the lake.
Examples include lake associations, service and resort industries, agricultural interests, government (all
I
levels), special purpose groups, and citizens. The process needs to involve from the beginning those
who are contributing to the problems and those who can contribute to solving the problems. The
geographic scope of this exercise is the watershed of the lake. 1
! 4. Build Partnerships
1
1
The purpose in building partnerships is to remove institutional barriers that can interfere with resolving
1 problems. All participants need to individually and collectively take ownership of the process. The
effort requires an element of organizational structure, such as the establishment of a steering 1
committee. The roles of all participants need to be clearly defined, and the linkages among participants
identified. This step provides for the development of shared lake management goals and objectives,
encourages long -term commitment to the process, and leads to the generation of broad local support
for the effort. 1
5. Focus on the Problem
It is important to properly identify and define the issues to be addressed, since this will be the basis of 1
future lake management action. The scope of the issues must not be limited to the lake itself, but
include the lake's watershed. This step should include a process for describing the relative significance
and priority of each problem. Sources for information and assistance (technical and financial) need to 1
be identified and contacted, including county offices, state agencies, and special purpose organizations,
such as chambers of commerce and Soil and Water Conservation Districts. It is also important to
identify the management issues affecting the lake, since these may represent significant problems. For 1
34 1
1
1
example, lack of enforcement of existing regulations, too much reliance on local govemment, or the
need for additional regulation are management issues that may limit future lake management if not
addressed. The collected data must be evaluated, and the need for additional information determined.
Once the data has been collected and evaluated, the issues and problems affecting the lake can be
prioritized for action.
6. Develop an Action Plan for Managing the Lake
The action plan responds to the questions "Where are we now?; Where do we want to be ?; and How
do we get there ?" This step involves the establishment of realistic goals and objectives for the lake,
consideration of practical aftematives and solutions for each of the problems described above, and the
identification of barriers to solving the problems. In addition, alternatives and approaches for action are
prioritized, and individuals and organizations are assigned the responsibility to address each set of
goals and objectives, along with a schedule for their accomplishment. Funding to support the
prescribed action needs to be secured. The plan should also provide for routine meetings to monitor
implementation progress, including periodic informational meetings.
7. Take Action
This step simply involves putting the action plan into operation. A local individual or organization must
be designated to manage the effort, including providing for communication among participants and
coordinating their efforts, chairing meetings, and serving as a spokesperson for the participants.
Implementation must include educating the public, by developing a mechanism to reach everyone who
affects or is affected by the lake.
8. Evaluate and Maintain the Plan
Evaluating and maintaining the effectiveness of the action plan must be carried out routinely, but should
' also include a formal annual meeting. It may be necessary to modify the action steps in the plan,
change assignments, or accommodate new issues. The roster of participants should be updated.
Finally, this step recognizes that a successful lake plan is not a one -time effort, but requires continuing
interest, involvement, consensus, and action.
1
1
1•
1
1
1: 35
1
1
III
} r
I Appendix Three
3
i
I Lake Management Stakeholders
I •
Property owners with an investment/interest in Lakeshore property of facilities:
Coalition of Lakeshore owners (COLA's)
Resorts 1
f Homeowner associations Agriculture/Farms
Lake associations Marinas
Irrigators (surface water) Native American Tribes
TouristsNisitors — lake and Lakeshore users, but not owners
t Tourists Recreationists
i Local tourist services Hunters • Anglers Divers
I
j Pleasure watercraft
Agencies/Regulators of public lakes
Lake improvement districts Townships
I Watershed districts Regional regulatory/Planning agencies
} County govemment (elected & appointed) Native American Tribes
1. City govemment Soil and Water Conservation Districts
I State and federal agencies Law enforcement
Municipal water supply Water management organizations
I
State Legislature
1 Organizations/Special interest groups — private non - commercial
Sportsmen (local & state)
Chambers of Commerce
r Native American Tribes Fisheries and wildlife interests
Environment special interest groups
Research, education 1
Organization/Industry special interest groups—private, commercial
Power companies Point source industries that discharge 1
Aquaculture Taconite/mining
Forest Products industry Agricuttural industries
• Land developers Realtors
Consultants (technical) Construction (general contractors)
Pollution cleaning industry Banking- financial community
Transportation industry t Wild rice industry
Aquatic treatment industry
Lakebed/Lake shore industry
Resorts (individual & resort associations) I
Marine industry (manufacturers, retailers, services)
Fishing equipment ( manufacturers, retailers, services)
1
36
a 1
I
1
.
Appendix Four
1.
Lake Management Data Components
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1'
1
1
37
1 '
■ 1
..- -..... w. Y , .....� .. . „.� � rP..+►...„— e* eM�I.MI"w_MItC+.rF,rF+.^.AH'Y. .r'IYM ... _.
• • . . .. .. — ... .. � 1!' T. � +MFIFl�rtM^ra....+ly.y,.i wYV'.w.rwM�Il•
; Watershed Data Components
Watershed Basin
Land -use Boundaries Wetlands Morphometry
Management priority Basic Basic Basic Basic
(Sequence = Basic, Intermediate and subsequent)
urban by density, agriculture, watershed & classification, area, surface area, volume,
Data elements open- space, conveyance system, subwatersheds volume, composition littoral area. mean
ponding, soils depth
LMIC DNR -major stream only USFWS - NWI DNR
Who gathers the data? International Coalition (SIS), MPCA, regional & DNR - Protected waters MPCA
LGU's - zoning, water planning LGU's LGU's regional & LGU's
watch - dog field measurement
What is the potential local involvement? update, edit delineation & mapping watch -dog mapping & digitizing
summary & analysis confirmation conservation easement
LAKESDB, SWIM
Where are the data stored? State /local GIS LMIC SIS - stream LMIC (future) LMIC -SIS lake outline
�^ _ paper paper paper DNR map unit
•
Are the data accessible locally? reports & maps reports & maps maps maps
state GIS access ? state GIS access ? state GIS access ?
What are hardware /software requirements? GIS - printer GIS - printer GIS - printer GIS - printer
summary by type, model', same as Land -use and WA/SA
What data analyses are needed? export /runoff coefficients same as Land -use by Watershed Boundaries; modeling
(' May involve complex monitoring /analytical components) approx. waterlTP loading* watershed functional values'
development decisions same as Land -use by wetland protection, recreational use,
Data impacts on lake management? conveyance / ponding design watershed mitigation, recreational water quality potential .
public education, surface use & water quality biota management
controls (sweep, erosion etc) public education lake level ^
.1111 MI 1111111 Ell
Watershed Data Components j ;Biota Data Components
Groundwater
Climate & Geology Water quality Macrophytes
Management priority Basic Basic /Subsequent Basic /Subsequent Basic /Subsequent
(Sequence - Basic, Intermediate and subsequent)
rainfall & evaporation, groundwater connection, seasonal, surface composition,
Data elements snowdepth lake level. confining & profile abundance
atmospheric deposition layer, water budget distribution
NOAA, university DNR. LGU eg. SWCD, MPCA, DNR,
Who gathers the data? state climatologist MGS regional, LGU's DNR, LGU's
LGU's eg. SWCD
lake level monitoring EWM watch
What is the potential local involvement? raingage network observation well monitoring citizen monitoring . treatment/control
DNR, MGS
Where are the data stored? state climatologist LMIC (GW Clearinghouse) STORET, electronic DNR
paper SWCD (County Well Index) paper paper
Are the data accessible locally? electronic access? County Well Index paper paper
S.
paper
What are hardware /software.requirements? PC PC, GIS PC, GIS PC, GIS
daily and'average, approx. lake level changes, long- modeling', trends, exotics, recreational
What data analyses are needed? water budget', surface over term & seasonal (winter), statistics', impacts', manage-
(' May involve complex monitoringlanalyticat components) flow rate & water residence' seepage /recharge* management" ment', trends, prod.
seasonal & annual water consumptive water uses public education, recreational use
Data impacts on lake management? quality, trends, ponding! augmentation perception, planning, management
conveyance design public education classification exotics
public education level control (eg. outlet) recreational Impacts
:Biota Data Components 1
Phyto /Zoo-
Fisheries Plankton Wildlife Sediment
Management priority Basic /Subsequent Intermediate /Subsequent Intermedlate /Subsequent Subsequent
(Sequence • Basic, Intermediate and subsequent)
composition, abundance composition & abundance exotics chemical /biological/
Data elements winterklll potential seasonal & annual composition physical composition
census habitat
DNR DNR ONR DNR
Who gathers the data? researchers researchers researchers researchers
sports groups LGU's volunteers LGU's
What is the potential local involvement? sampling limited sampling limited
observation observation
Where are the data stored? SWIM electronic electronic electronic
paper paper paper paper
Are the data accessible locally? SWIM paper paper paper
paper
What are hardware /software requirements? PC PC PC PC
nutrient limitation' trophic Interactions' dating'
What data analyses are needed? population biology' trophlc relationships' trends" internal loading'
C May Involve complex monitoring /analytical components) trophlc interaction* statistics'
aeration, stocking research, use public education research
Data impacts on lake management? classification, access recreational development management management
developmen t,biomanipulatlon exotics
public education biomanipulation
IIIlllll I M r MI NM • — • • IM Ili • NM Ill MI ill• IMI MI MI
•
;Societal Data Components
Economic Recreational Public
Ikea Value access . Perception
Management priority Basic Basic /Subsequent Basle Basic /Subsequent
(Sequence - Basic, intermediate and subsequent)
surface uses shorellne /nearby business public lands, access, surveys, Interviews
Data elements consumptive uses tourism, tax base nearby population public meetings
water level nearby lakes
DNR researchers ONR LGU's
Who gathers the data? LGU's DNR LOU's COLA's
COLA's LGU's, COLA's COLA's
volunteer level monitoring survey analysis survey
What is the potential local involvement? conservation analysis information analysis
information information Information
LAKESDB electronic maps video
Where are the data stored? paper paper paper pamplets
paper
Are the data ac.cessible locally? LAKESDB taxation records LAKESDB pathway to decision -
makers
What are hardware /software requirements? PC PC
GIS
trends, regional Impact of exotics, survey
What data analyses are needed? comparisons water quality /tourism /use regional summary summary reports
(' May inOolve complex monitoring /analytical components) use conflicts econ. value analysis
surface use controls development & planning planning &
Data impacts on lake management? augmentation of services, management, prioritization implementation,
recreational develop public education, funding management management, 1 & E
public education prioritization cooperation
NM MI MI IIIIII MI NE NE MI MI MI MI EN SIN �
I
I 1
t Appendix Five
t 1
Minnesota Lake Classification System
Classification Factors 1
Factors Measurement ,
Subfactors Groupings of Values Tool
Ecoregion The name of the eooregion EPA Ecoregion map
1
where lake is located (e.g., or other ecoregion 1
Northam Lakes and Forests) classification map
Watershed 1
Watershed area Absolute number identified Planimeter, etc.
by measurement
I
Ratio of watershed High, moderate, low Planimeter, etc.
area to lake
surface area
I
ii
Land use composition Classification of composition Land use maps
types (e.g., predominantly
agricultural, entirely forested) I
i
Shoreland development Natural, recreational, general *MDNR classification I
1
Lake Morphometry
Depth Deep, moderate, shallow Based on percentile by 1
' state or ecoregion (mean,
median or max ?)
I
• Area Large, medium, small Based on percentile by
state or ecoregion
Percent littoral High, moderate, low Percent of lake area with '
depth of 15 ft. or less
Shape Circular, elongate, bayed, etc. Not yet identified
1
Ratio of surface area High, moderate, low ' Shoreland I
to shorelength Development Index
Drainage Type Drained, seepage flowage Based on definitions
I
42
1
1
-
?
ji Irrigation Not yet identified Not yet identified
Aquacutture Not yet identified Not yet identified
4
ii Commercial fishing Not yet identified Not yet identified
Wastewater treatment Not yet identified Not yet identified
Storm Water Not yet identified Not yet identified
f1
Environmental
Endangered species Not yet identified Not yet identified
Educational/scientific Not yet identified Not yet identified
Waterfowl production Not yet identified Not yet identified
Ecological communities Not yet identified Not yet identified
• measurement tool already exists
{
1
44
Appendix Six
Bibliography of Previous Lake Classification Efforts 1
Barstad, W. and D. Karasov. 1987. Lake development: How much is too much? MDNR, Division of 1
Waters, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Borchert, J.R., G. W. Oming, J. Stenchfield, and L. Maid. 1970. Minnesota's Lakeshore: resources, I
development, policy needs. Summary of the Minnesota Lakeshore Development Study, University
of Minnesota, Dept. of Geog. and C.U.RA., Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Carlson, R.E. 1977. A trophic state index for lakes. Limnology and Oceanography 22 :361 -369.
Colby, P.J., P.A. Ryan, D.H. Schupp, and S.L. Sems. 1987. Sip 21 to rate fish
communities. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic
Cowardin, et. al. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep water habitats in the United States.
I
Eddy, S. 1938. A classification of Minnesota lakes for fish propagation. Prog. Fish. Cutturist 41:9 -13.
Gorham, E., W. Dean and J. Sanger. 1983. The chemical composition of lakes in the north - central I
United States. Limnology and Oceanography 28:287 -301.
•
Heiskary, S.A., C.B. Wilson and D.D. Larsen. 1987. Analysis of regional patterns in lake quality: using,
ecoregions for lake management in Minnesota. Lake and Reservoir Management 3:337 -344.
Heiskary, SA. and C.B. Wilson. 1989. The regional nature of lake water quality across Minnesota: : An
analysis for improving resource management. Journal of the Minnesota Academy I
55:71 -77.
Heiskary, SA. and C.B. Wilson. 1990. Minnesota Lake Water Quality Assessment Report. Second I
Ed. MPCA, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Hell, H.T. 1972. Environmental factors controlling the chemistry of Minnesota lakes. Geological
Society of America Abstracts 4:524. 1
Hughes, R.M. and D.P. Larsen. 1988. Eooregions: an approach to surface water protection. Journal
of the Water Pollution Control Federation 60:486 -493.
1
N.J. B.P. Neary, and P.J. Dillon. 1991. Validation and use of Ontarios Trophic Status
Hutc hinson
Model for Establishing lake development g uidelines. Lake and Reservoir Management 7:13 -23. 1
Macan, T.T. 1961. Factors that Omit the range of freshwater animals. Biological Revue 36:151 -198.
Maine Dept. of Environmental Protection. 1986. Section 465-A. Standards for classification of lakes'
and ponds.
Maloney, T.E. (ed) 1979. Lake and Reservoir Classification Systems. U.S. EPA Corvallis or EPA- I
600/3.79 -074.
1
is
t
-,, li MDNR 19_. Ecological classification of lakes, MDNR, St. Paul, Minnesota.
MDNR 1989. Statewide standards for "Management of Shoreland areas" MDNR, St. Paul, Minnesota.
- I Megard, R.O. 1967. Limnology, primary productivity, and carbonate sedimentation of Minnesota lakes.
); Interim Report No. 1. Limnobgicai Research Center, Univ. of Minn.
1 1
1 Moyle, J.B. 1945. Some chemical factors influencing the distrubition of aquatic plants in Minnesota.
II American Midland Naturalist 34:402 -420.
i j Moyle, J.B. 1949. Some indices of lake productivity. Transaction of the American Fisheries Society
i
i 76:322 -224.
Moyle, J.B. 1956. Relationships between the chemistry of Minnesota surface waters and wildlife
management. Journal of Wildlife Management 30:303 -320.
Omemik, J.M. 1987, Ecoregions of the oonterminous United States. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers 77:118 -125.
Omemik, J.M. and Gallant, A.I. 1988. Ecoregions of the Upper Midwest states. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Environmental Research Lab -- Corvallis.
Osgood, RA. 1982. Using difference among Carlson's trophic status index values in regional water
quality assessments. Water Resources Bulletin 18:67 -73.
Pearsall, W.H. 1981b. On the classification of aquatic plant communities. Journal of Ecology 6:75 -83.
Pennak, R. W. 1971. Toward a classification of btic habitats. Hydrobiologia 38:321 -334.
II Rawson, D.S. 1952. Mean depth and fish production of large lakes. Ecology 33:513-521.
Reckhow, K.H. and J.T. Simpson. 1980. A procedure using a modeling and error analysis for the
prediction of lake phosphorus concentration from land use information. Canadian Journal of
Fisheries and Aquatic Science 37:1439 -1448.
Ribaudo, M.O., C.E. Young, and J.S. Shortie. 1986. Impacts of Water Quality Improvement on Site
Visitation: A Probabilistic Modeling Approach. Water Resources Bulletin 22:559 -563.
Ryder, R.A. 1964. Chemical characteristics of Ontario lakes as related to glacial history. Transaction
of the American Fisheries Society 93260 -268.
I Ryder, R.A. 1965. A method for estimating the potential fish uction of north-temperate
Y �9 Pct P� lakes.
Transaction of the American Fisheries Society 94214 -218.
1 i Sargent, F.O. 1976. Land Use Pattems, Eutrophication, and Pollution in Selected Lakes. Vermont
! Water Resources Center and USDI Office of Water Research and Technology. NTIS Report No.
I PB -263 501. July 1976.
Sather, N. 1991. A proposed aquatic classification for use by the Minnesota Natural Heritage
Program. Natural Heritage Program. Nature Conservancy.
I 46
Schupp, D.. 1991. Susceptibility of lakes to Eurasian Milfoil, MDNR, St. Paul Minnesota.
Schupp, D. 1990( ?) Lake Classification System. MDNR Fisheries. 1
Scidmore, W. J. 1970. Manual of instructions for lake survey. Minn. Dept. Conserv. Spec. Pub. No. 1
(Revised):47 pp.
Seddon, B. Aquatic macrophytes as limnological indicators. Freshwater Biology 2:107 -130.
Teleki, G.C. and J. Herskowitz. 1986. Lakeshore capacity study - integration. Ontario Ministry of
Municipal Affairs.
Underhill, J.C. 1989. The distribution of Minnesota fishes and late Pleistocene glaciation. Joumal of I
the Minnesota Academy of Science 55:32 -37.
Wetzel, R.G. 1983. Limnology. Saunders College Publishing. Chicago.
Wietecld, K. 1973. Lakes of Ramsey County. MLMIS Report #4, Geog. Dept. University of Minnesota.
Winters, T.C. 1977. Classification of the hydrologic settings of lakes in the North Central United
States. Water Resources Research 13:753 -767.
Wright, H.E., Jr. 1989. Origin and developmental history of Minnesota Lakes. Journal of the
Minnesota Academy of Science 55:26 -31.
Young, C.E. 1984. Perceived water quality and the value of seasonal homes. Water Resources
Bulletin 20:163 -166.
Zumberge, J.H. 1952. The Lakes of Minnesota, their origin and classification. Minn. Geological
Survey, University of Minnesota Press. Minneapolis, Minnesota.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
47 1