DAS WASSER, VATTEN, AGUA, VANN, VODA,...WATER!!!

On August 18th, The Eureka Planning Commission held a Special Meeting to ask questions of local "water experts" and officials.  The Commission was in full attendance, with the late arrival of Commissioner Cleminson.  Supervisor Kenny Miller was present for the whole meeting, while Supervisor Ceminsky arrived later in the meeting.  The invited guests were Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization (VRWJPO) Administrator, Mark Zabel, Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) District Manager/Wetland Specialist, Brian Watson, and Dakota County Commissioner and VRWJPO Chair, Mike Slavik.

If I am keeping my meetings straight, Yours Truly was the sole audience member present.  As such, I report to you now, aided by my disc recording copy of the meeting without trying to go into too much detail on a very detailed subject.

Chair Hansen opened the meeting at 7:10 p.m., stating that the purpose of the meeting was "to discuss how hard it is for [Eureka] to manage the permitting process that [the VRWJPO] does now."  He stated that other communities are doing their own permitting and asked if the VRWJPO was "having any problems with those communities."  Mark Zabel replied that the answer thus far was "generally, no," but also that the JPO "has not instituted any strong evaluation program."  They have not been spot-checking permits or requiring any particular recording, for instance.  Zabel said that those elements are what the JPO would plan to do after it is through with the current Water Plan updating process.

Zabel then gave an overview of what would need to be done if Eureka wanted to do its own watershed permitting.  Eureka had previously adopted the Water Plan, he offered, but chose not to adopt the Ordinance, which is the enforceable mechanism by which the standards are upheld.  Zabel said that what the Township needs to do, if desired, is to develop a draft ordinance that meets the requirements of the standards and provide it to the JPO for its review.  Once the ordinance would pass review and be approved, Eureka could adopt the ordinance and the JPO "would rescind its earlier action and vacate the field of regulation."

Hansen then asked, "Would you prefer that we did that?"  Zabel replied, "We don't have a preference. Our goal is to have the watershed standards implemented.  Whether we do it or you do it, makes no difference.  It's just that the standards need to be implemented and they need to be enforced when somebody doesn't do what they are supposed to be doing."

Next, Commissioner Novacek asked, "What do you mean by 'draft an ordinance?'  To what effect?"  Zabel answered, "There are five standards: the buffer requirements, the storm water requirement/the erosion and sediment control requirements, wetland alteration, drainage alteration, and floodplain alteration.  As long as all those requirements are included within the [proposed] ordinance and it meets the level of implementation that we would do as the watershed, then you can go ahead and do it."  "Agriculture is the sixth standard, but that is all voluntary, so it doesn't have to be in the ordinance."

Commissioner Jennings asked questions that went into more detail about Township engineer involvement, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) and staff review, submission of the SWPPP to the Pollution Control Agency (PCA), SWCD involvement in the wetlands, trout stream designation, and so on.  Supervisor Miller joined in some of her questions.
Commissioner Novacek asked, "From the perspective of just some guy building a house, what would be the benefit for [Eureka] to take it over, or for you to keep it.  What would be the downside of either one?"
Administrator Zabel answered, "There shouldn't be any difference. If you take it on, then the VRWJPO would not have to approve the application at its monthly meeting.  The permitting process would be under local control."

The discussion moved on to the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), with Brian Watson commenting on the topic. The responsible authority for implementing the state WCA in Eureka Township is Eureka Township.  The SWCD entered into an agreement with all the townships back in 2002 to do field reviews and to assist landowners with what's required under WCA, and so forth."  (Similar to the agreement with the County involving Floodplain and Shoreland)  This wetland work is covered by a state grant to provide those services throughout all of Dakota County.  Wetland delineation is separate.  Any work above and beyond state requirements would involve a fee for service.

Buffer and setback requirements were next discussed. Wetlands are assessed as to quality which determines the required setback and easement.  In a recent lot split in Eureka, an exemption was met, so just setbacks were determined.  If there should be a subsequent lot split on this property, then the buffer would "be developed, The owner did not have to put it into an easement at this time," Zabel stated.  In  another recent Eureka lot split discussed, the size of the lot was large enough so that it qualified for Green Acres, thus meeting an exemption.  Parcels such as this do not have to actually be enrolled in Green Acres, but must meet requirements that would make them eligible for that program.  (These are exemptions that the VRWJPO agreed to after community feedback to make the process less onerous for "initial" splits.)  Commissioner Jennings asked how this would be done if Eureka would take over the process.  Would the SWCD come into play?

Brian Watson replied, "This is where it gets a little bit challenging. As I mentioned before, we (SWCD) currently get a grant to do work with wetlands-doing buffers on those wetlands. But we (SWCD) would not enter into a contract with any township or city to implement the Vermillion River Watershed standards because we are already under contract with the Vermillion River (VRWJPO).  I would see that as a conflict of interest.  As long as I am doing work that can be transferred to that state grant, that's okay."  He stated that when dealing with the VRWJPO standards then it gets "a little gray," and the SWCD would not be able to enter into a contract with any Local Government Unit (LGU). The grant mentioned provides funds for nearly a full-time employee to work on wetlands regarding the state requirements.  Waterway buffers are a different category.  To this point, the VRWJPO has not yet had a buffer installed.

Most Floodplain standards for the Vermillion are captured by the County's Floodplain/Shoreland Ordinance, Zabel commented.  He said if a situation came up where the County's standards for Shoreland and Floodplain did not apply, but the Vermillion's standards did, then Eureka would have to enforce that.

Continuing to the Drainage Alteration standards, to date, Mark Zabel said, the Vermillion has not yet had a request for such an alteration.  The Ordinance covers "a wide swath" on drainage alteration.  Changing a ditch is a drainage alteration.  There can be drainage alterations which also have a wetland impact, Zabel stated.  Kenny Miller asked about "natural" drainage vs. man-made drainage from the '20's and '30's.  Mark replied that the Ordinance applies to existing conveyances, whether "natural" or historical man-made.  The idea is not to alter, obstruct, or divert the drainage flow so that it impedes the system and possibly causes a problem for a neighboring landowner or neighboring community.  Supervisor Ceminsky asked whether there is cost-sharing for such things as (grassed) waterways for farmers, for example.  The short answer was "yes." Zabel clarified the chain of authority and money between the VRWJPO and the SWCD. Commissioner Hansen asked about drain tile regulations.  Zabel said that currently the VRWJPO does not have regulations for that, but would welcome any input if a change were desired.  Brian Watson said that there have been discussions about drain tile regulations in many venues of late.  It is being looked at pretty closely, he stated.  Connecting the tile drainage to the right of way requires a permit.  Wetlands can come into play. Watson talked briefly about what typically happens, however, whereby the requirement for a permit is avoided or skirted, such as "daylighting" the drainage two feet short of a right of way. Zabel said the same thing often happens in regard to someone else's property.  To drain onto someone else's property would be illegal, but oftentimes, it is stopped a foot short of the line.

Commissioner Jennings stated that, if the Ordinance were adopted, Eureka would be the "eyes on the ground" to detect whether some things are happening that might require a permit that hasn't been sought out.  She indicated that she felt the Township would need assistance with that, however.

Keeping soil at tolerable loss levels on Ag Preserves land was brought up.  Eureka as a township is currently required to do this and should be checking this when an application for Ag Preserves is made.  Because there is a tax advantage, the soil loss is to be kept at "tolerable" levels.  Watson said that there is a model that can be used.  Each situation varies, due to things such as slopes, rain events, and so on.  There has been discussion in watersheds whether it would be better to have the watershed, and not the townships, do the applications and renewals, so that this is actually being determined, and it is not just sort of "an automatic approval."  The various LGUs execute the process in different ways and there are no checks and balance, really.

Mike Slavik stated that it would be possible for Eureka to implement the Ordinance.  Other townships are doing so.  He pointed out that in the next phase, there will be efforts to be sure that there is consistency among the different LGUs. Taking on this responsibility, he said, the Township needs to understand that consistency is important.  One township does not follow one set of rules and another township another.  "We can make that happen; you can make that happen."  As public officials we need to make sure the standards are enforced.  The other thing is that there is a net-zero cost to the LGU as the fees are passed through to the applicants.  Size of escrow is important.  All taxpayers do not subsidize an individual project.  "Do it. Don't do it.  We are indifferent...  We will support Eureka...  Just know that there are expectations.  We are going to make sure that those are consistent throughout the entire watershed...  It's your decision; it's been the whole time."

Commissioner  Lu Barfknecht asked, "What is your background as far as your knowledge with all of this?  How many years have you been doing it?  Degrees?  For us to take it on--your knowledge base is so vast.  You can answer the questions just like that, where we could be here for hours trying to interpret our own Ordinance that we might adopt based on this  What are your backgrounds? How long have you been doing this?"

Mark Zabel: Bachelor's Degree in Geology, hydrologist with the MN Dept. of Agriculture for 17 years before coming to the JPO, I have had other environmental jobs, including a short time with the Dakota County SWCD. Water and land conservation is my life.  I also serve as an elected supervisor for the Carver SWCD, and am currently serving as the president of the Minnesota Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts.  That's why I have some knowledge of state and federal laws and rules.

Mike Slavik: I am in my second year now serving as a Dakota County Commissioner for this area-District 1, also this is my second year on the JPO. Before that I did serve 6 years on the [Hastings] City Council, so I do have experience working with one of the Dakota County communities that is an MS4 (Discussed earlier-based on population triggering different requirements).  I was Chair of the Operations Committee which dealt with many of these issues on public works.  My degree is in Political Science and Public Policy, so I have learned a lot about water and continue to.

Brian Watson: I was born and raised on a dairy farm in Goodhue County.  Have a Bachelor's of Science degree from Mankato State in Natural Resource Management, my emphasis being in Plant Botany.  I have been a certified wetland delineator in the state of Minnesota for 14 years.  I worked with the US Corps of Engineers right out of college; I worked up and down the river on the lock and dam systems.  I moved to a private consulting firm over in Minnetonka and worked primarily on bridge and road design with engineers for 2 years, and I have been with the SWCD for 20 years.

Supervisor Ceminsky asked whether the other townships have had to go out and hire people with these qualifications.  Zabel answered that he understands that they have largely been going through their Building Inspectors. Mark Zabel also stated that the JPO has been holding training and question/answer sessions that they rotate through building inspectors, contractors, and local elected and appointed officials to talk about the standards and the implementation of the standards.  They are currently at the beginning of the cycle again and will set a date soon.

Brian Watson said he would like to weigh in on this topic as he had anticipated the question and

would speak from his wetland experience.  Eureka Township is normally busier than all the other townships.  You have the City of Lakeville knocking on your door to the north; you have the 35 corridor to your west.  You have a lot of different challenges that other townships, such as Hampton or Douglas, don't have.  You have developments that were done back in the '70's and '60's.  In my experience, not just with wetland issues, but also with conservation issues, with landowners with flooding concerns or whatever the issues are, Eureka has more issues than any other township. It gets to be competing interests.  When I look at Eureka ag in relation to the 5-acre, 10-acre homes that are not necessarily in agriculture business, it creates challenges.  Eureka has that more than any other township in Dakota.

Mark Zabel said he is open to questions or emails.  Carrie Jennings asked whether anyone from Eureka was ever involved with one of the JPO's workshops. (I have to put this in here, because Yours Truly is the only person who has actually done so. :-) This was acknowledged by Watson and Zabel.)


The Planning Commission has not yet approved the minutes from this meeting, so one can still request a copy of the recording.