Attorney will advise Winona board on next steps for mining regs - Post-Bulletin

Attorney will advise Winona board on next steps for mining regs - Post-Bulletin

WINONA — A compromise measure on silica sand mining advanced a step Tuesday night with the Winona County Board of Commissioners.

Commissioners voted unanimously to receive a modified proposed amendment to the Winona County ban on the mining and processing of silica sand. The amendment, sent to the board after a 5-3 vote at the Aug. 11 planning commission meeting, will now be reviewed by the county attorney and discussed at a public meeting set for Oct. 13.

It is a compromise between an outright ban and the status quo. It would limit the number of industrial mineral mines, those for frac sand mining, to six in the county, with no mine allowed to exceed 40 acres.

County Attorney Karin Sonneman's review will determine the next steps in the county's process to implement new regulations on mining of silica sand for hydraulic fracturing in the oil and gas industry.

"If we have a public hearing on this amendment and we choose to go back to the original language (an outright ban on silica sand mining), would we need another public hearing?" asked Commissioner Greg Olson.

Sonneman said that question, among others, will need to be answered as part of her review.

For example, Olson said the amendment forwarded by the planning commission looked less like an amendment and more like a completely new change to the zoning ordinance. He questioned whether that amendment would need to be sent back to square one — a 60-day public comment period and another trip to the planning commission, where it originated — or if it indeed constituted an amendment. "The original proposal this board sent to the planning commission, it was not accepted or rejected," he said. "This is not a modification, in my opinion."

But that will be up to interpretation of the public discussion to this point, Sonneman said.

"We have to see if the record supports this," she said. If the record — the minutes from the planning commission meeting — support an interpretation of the current proposal as an amendment, then the next step is, indeed, the meeting scheduled for Oct. 13. If not, the board will need to adjust. "One of the key things to making a change in the zoning ordinance is the record must reflect whatever decision you make," Sonneman said.

Sonneman will also assess the viability of the amendment, and give an opinion on that to the board.

Commissioner Steve Jacob, a member of the planning commission and the leader in support of the amendment at the Aug. 11 meeting, said he thought the Oct. 13 meeting should cover just the amendment and not be a free-for-all on both the amendment and the original ban language.

"There has not been public hearing on this language, but there has been on previous language," he said. "There should be a public hearing on this, then a decision can be made."

Marie Kovecsi, the board president, said she hoped the board could move forward by either accepting the amendment, accepting the original ban language, or rejecting both.

"I don't want to say you have only these three options," Sonneman said.

While the board did not discuss the merits of the amendment on Tuesday, several members of the public did. One woman, who made use of a wheelchair, said she wanted the board to go back to the original ban language for health reasons.

"It's scary to think I could come to Winona and not wheel around the lakes or around town if the frac sand trucks are unloading that day," she said. "I support a ban, not a compromise."

Another woman said the amendment might be billed as a compromise, "…but what it is compromising is public health, safety and the neighbors' property values."

• In other business, the board held a public meeting to collect input on a possible transportation sales tax. The half-cent tax would generate $1.68 million annually, according to a Minnesota Department of Revenue estimate. The county board began pursuing the tax when the state legislature failed to pass a transportation or a bonding bill in 2016.

One Winona County resident said the tax would create an undue burden on low-income families since most of their wages go toward taxable purchases. "If this comes out of property taxes, it would still affect them, but would affect them in a fairer way," she said.

Another county resident, a man from Winona, said since the county roads are used by everyone — poor, wealthy, city and rural residents — everybody should pay to keep the roads repaired. "It's obvious the state legislature isn't coming in with any money," he said.

• The board named Ken Fritz, the Winona County administrator, the interim planning and environmental services director after Eric Evenson-Marden left the post last week. Fritz, citing privacy concerns, would not elaborate on why Evenson-Marden left the position.

Let's block ads! (Why?)