Robert Williams, PE
805 Des Moines Drive
Windom MN 56101
November 28, 2007
Mayor Tom Riordan
City Administrator
Steve Nasby
444 9th
Street
Windom MN 56101
Dear Sirs:
We are writing on
behalf of the concerned residents of Windom to request the city take action to
save the Windom Dam, a very important city asset, from further risk due to
erosive effects. As you know, the DNR
has failed to approve a permit for the city to restore the “status quo” of this
situation.
In a letter dated
October 18, 2007 (attached), we brought to the DNR’s attention several serious
and material factual errors in their permit denial letter, and several
engineering misjudgments and oversights.
These errors also include what appear to be errors in application of
state law and/or rule. The DNR November
20, 2007 response basically ignored the concerns we raised, and instead again
reiterated the “drowning machine” argument that in Windom has no basis in fact
and is easily addressed with a riprap retrofit. The DNR also again reasserts the false claim that “In essence,
the dam has already been removed..”.
Our October 18, 2007
letter to the DNR, and the September 18, 2007 City Council presentation we made
highlight a number of potentially serious risks to public (federal, state and
city) and private property that are being ignored in this situation.
The replacement value
of our public and private property located in Windom is easily worth millions
of dollars and the potential liability to the City, taxpayers and affected
residents in a worst-case scenario associated with an ill-conceived dam removal
would be especially serious. Taking
actions now to prevent negative unintended consequences later is essential and
prudent. Trying to address erosion concerns
during a major flood event, as the DNR would apparently intend for
others to attempt is far more dangerous and problematic than a conservative and
prudent approach. It would also be far
more hazardous than the demonstrated risks due to the so called “drowning
machine” effect.
Therefore we are
asking that the Council ask city legal counsel to evaluate the potential
liabilities and risks to public and private property associated with the DNR’s
actions and determine whether legal action should be pursued to protect the
city’s interests.
We envision this step
may result in actions to compel by court order the restoration of the riverbank
to the “status quo” condition with a design provided by the city engineer. It may also involve an Environmental Impact
Statement process if the DNR persists in forcing negative environmental changes
upon Windom.
Sincerely,
Save the Island Park Dam
Robert Williams, Representative
Enc: October 18,
2007 Correspondence to DNR
November
20, 2007 Correspondence from DNR