For nearly a decade, the City of Hastings has attempted to have the Mississippi River flowing through the city deemed a no-wake zone. For lack of a term, the request seems to be dead in the water.

The city wanted to make the portion of the Mississippi River from Lock and Dam 2 to the Hastings Marina officially a no-wake zone to slow down speeding boat traffic. The matter would have needed the blessings of the Dakota and Washington County Sheriff’s Offices, and they aren’t currently willing to grant that. It also would need final approval from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

The Friends of Hastings No Wake Zone told the city council in spring 2021 that public safety is the biggest reason they want the city to pass a no-wake zone ordinance. The wakes can knock over people on docks and swamp small boats.

Then-Police Chief Bryan Schafer told the city council, “The ‘no wake’ discussion has been ongoing for the past several years. The request for ‘no wake’ is borne out of concern for erosion of the shoreline and safety. In addition, the revitalization of downtown now presents an opportunity to attract more boat traffic and visitors if a ‘no-wake’ zone is enacted. Realizing ‘no-wake’ zones are present throughout neighboring cities to include, but not limited to Afton, Prescott, Red Wing, it begs the question, ‘Why not Hastings?’”

Current Police Chief David Wilske issued a memorandum on the issue to the city council for review at its meeting last week. It answered the question, “Why not Hastings?”

There’s still no support from the two counties.

“Dakota County Sheriff’s Office and Washington County Sheriff’s Office are not interested in having this stretch of river be no wake,” Wilske wrote.

The criteria the departments are using is that there isn’t an observed erosion problem, unless the river level is high. In that case, such as in coming weeks, a no wake zone can be put in place.

“The sheriff’s departments have observed erosion issues when the river levels are high, but not at regular levels, and neither department has observed public safety issues and therefore will not support a standing no wake zone for this portion of the river,” Wilske said.

City Administrator Dan Wietecha said that as of mid-summer last year, city officials were hopeful the no-wake zone could get passed.

“I think it was received more accommodatingly from the Dakota County Sheriff’s Office. There was a process they wanted to go through, including checking boat speeds and getting some actual data to determine the need for an ordinance rather than just putting an ordinance in place,” Wietecha said. “As recent as mid-summer 2022, I think it still looked promising with Dakota County, although Washington County was certainly reluctant. In late summer, early fall, Dakota County Said they’re not seeing the public need for this and said they’re not taking it any further. That’s essentially where it is. It’s not our jurisdiction, and the two counties are not interested in going forward with it.”

That angered Councilmember Tina Folch, who asked to see the data Dakota County came up with on boat speed to make their decision.

“All you have to do is walk down there and see the erosion that’s occurring down there with people going too fast on the river,” she said. “I’m sorry, that’s a bunch of baloney in my opinion. When you have folks coming forward multiple times and asking for us to do something about the erosion, about the safety issues, about when people are down at their boat docks with individual boats going by at fast speeds and the safety repercussion of that,” she said.

Boats are hesitant to dock in Hastings because of the wake when Prescott has a no-wake zone.

“I’m told by folks that do have boats that we don’t see Prescott day drinkers coming over to Hastings because it’s not safe for them to dock their boats on that public dock and tie them off because there’s not a no-wake zone there. Boats can zip right by,” said Folch. “It affects our downtown tourism opportunities as well. There’s an economic impact there.:

“It’s very troubling,” Folch continued. “The Dakota County Sheriff’s Office told us they were doing a speed study. Where is the speed study?”

Folch said she was told by representatives of the departments that they were awaiting the speed study.

“Where’s the information that shows what has gone on so far?” she asked. “This memo just infuriates me. Residents over the last decade have multiple times come forward asking for this. I’m personally upset that we would be treated with such little respect than to disregard the concerns our business community and residents have brought forward. I’d really like to know, what are the next steps? Do we have to get a petition going? What is it going to take to get the sheriff’s offices serious about moving this forward?”

Wilske apologized for drafting the memo, as he was detailing response from the sheriff’s offices.

“It’s a process,” he said, noting that Dakota County Sheriff Joe Leko is “More than willing to talk about this and continue the conversation.”

He pointed out that the sheriff’s departments are the ones responsible for enforcing rules on the water.

“This is more of a heavy lift for the counties,” Wilske said. “If we don’t have both counties in agreement, it’s probably less likely the DNR would approve that.”