Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lake Management Districts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board delays Long Lake management-district decision after residents raise equity concerns about assessments
Summary
After a contested public hearing, the board moved the Long Lake Management District No. 25 resolution and related assessment roll to the next appropriate meeting (scheduled for Oct. 7) to allow staff and commissioners more time to review objections from upland property owners who said assessments are inequitable.
The Board of County Commissioners paused final action on a resolution of findings and determinations for Long Lake Management District (LMD) No. 25 and moved the item to the next appropriate meeting after an hour-plus of public testimony that included both support and objections to the proposed assessment structure.
Dr. Jen Freiheit, director of Public Health and Social Services, summarized the formation process and the board's prior steps. Staff noted the board had called for the public-hearing sequence earlier in the summer and that the current hearing was the required next step in the LMD formation and assessment process.
Speakers were divided. Chad Booth, a civil engineer representing an HOA on Long Lake, said the proposed assessment structure was "vastly inequitable," noting that non-lakeshore community parcels could be assessed 11 to 365 times more, by his calculation, than their fair share given use and access. Booth presented a petition signed by 114 residents asking the board to revise how assessments are calculated.
Other speakers, including Eric Casino and Steven Mower, urged commissioners to move the measure to the ballot so voters can decide. Casino summarized existing LMD services including weed management, water-quality testing, safety buoys and phosphorus mitigation programs and said the fee structure had historical precedent and been discussed over more than a year in steering-committee meetings.
Commissioners and staff discussed timing and public-notice constraints. Staff said missing the board's next steps could require reworking notification schedules; commissioners determined a brief additional interval for staff review and commissioner deliberation was feasible. The board voted to place the resolution of findings and determinations on the next appropriate meeting after the public comments were considered and to return the item for a board work session and further deliberation on October 7. The motion passed 4 in favor, 0 opposed with 1 abstention.
Ending: Staff will provide supplemental materials and commissioners requested a Tuesday morning work session before the board takes final action; the assessment roll itself will be the subject of a later ordinance and vote.
