Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Water Access Boat Structures topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Representative Bliss seeks to grandfather existing boat-storage roofs after DNR enforcement

Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee (House) · March 24, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Rep. Mark Bliss introduced HF4253 to allow certain existing non-canvas boat-storage roofs to remain in place after DNR enforcement removed several structures; the DNR said it helped craft the grandfathering language but would not permit new installations. The committee laid the bill over for possible inclusion.

Representative Mark Bliss introduced House File 4253 to create a narrow grandfathering exemption for certain existing boat-storage roofs after recent DNR enforcement in his district.

Bliss told the committee the bill responds to a local issue where the Department of Natural Resources was requiring removal of multiple structures. "This simply grandfathers those existing ones in," he said, arguing that replacing them could cost homeowners "several thousand dollars" in retirement communities where structures are privately owned.

Jason Mekel, assistant division director for ecological and water resources at the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, said the agency worked with the bill author on the language. "The language that we've worked with the representative on provides a grandfathering, if you will, but it doesn't allow these to continue to be installed going forward," Mekel said, emphasizing the agency’s interest in limiting new construction while addressing legacy situations.

Committee members asked how widespread the non-canvas roofs are and how enforcement would be handled. Mekel said the DNR does not have a full inventory but has seen concentrations near Leech Lake and in parts of northern Minnesota; he said enforcement would rely on existing authorities and aerial imagery to confirm whether structures predated the statutory cutoff.

After member questions and closing remarks from the author, Chair Heintzeman renewed a motion that HF4253, as amended, be laid over for possible inclusion in a future bill. The committee laid the bill over by voice agreement.

The bill was not voted on for final passage; it was laid over for further consideration.