Duluth Urban Watersheds Advisory Council

March 26, 2015

Today’s Objectives • Review outcomes from Jan. Advisory

Committee meeting • Finalize decision-making process • Create a vision for the Duluth Urban

WRAPS committee • Begin exploring other Watershed

Organizations

Roles

• Jesse and Andrea: Facilitation, coordination • Brian: Advisor, contract manager • Committee Members:

– Full Participation – Represent interests/values of your community to

the best of your abilities – Communicate efforts back to your community, as

appropriate

Ground Rules • Recognize and respect diversity within the group • Respect each other’s thinking and value their

contributions • Stay open to new ways of doing things • Establish goals and work towards accomplishing them • Seek common ground and understanding (not

problems and conflict) • Participate fully • Have fun!

Hats Exercise Summary

Red Hat: What, if any, value or use do you think this project will have for your community?

Improved sense of community through understanding of watershed issues and individual/community role in protecting water quality. Potential increased efficiency in reporting due to collaborations and sharing of information across political boundaries.

Black Hat: What flaws, problems, or risks do you see for either the success of this project, or

as a result of this project?

Conflicting priorities and/or unequitable resources of the various municipalities/stakeholders and the potential loss of individual freedoms for the sake of the watershed group could fracture group. Unrealistic expectations of the project outcomes could lead to frustration and implementing a plan without enforcement could be a challenge.

Hats Exercise Summary

Yellow Hat: At its best/most optimistic, what do you see as the possible successes or

achievements of this effort?

Improved water quality through collaborative approach to mgmt and improved public understanding of personal impacts on water quality and effort towards creating solutions.

Hats Exercise Summary

Decision Making Procedure • Fist-to-5 Consensus*

• Fist: A no vote - a way to block consensus. I need to talk more on the proposal and require changes for it to pass.

• 1 Finger: I still need to discuss certain issues and suggest changes that should be made.

• 2 Fingers: I am more comfortable with the proposal but would like to discuss some minor issues.

• 3 Fingers: I’m not in total agreement but feel comfortable to let this decision or a proposal pass without further discussion.

• 4 Fingers: I think it’s a good idea/decision and will work for it.

• 5 Fingers: It’s a great idea and I will be one of the leaders in implementing it.

• If we are stuck, facilitator calls for Majority Vote *Fletcher, A. (2002). FireStarter Youth Power Curriculum: Participant Guidebook. Olympia, WA: Freechild Project.

Visioning Group Exercise • 5 Minutes: Write responses • 10 Minutes: Pair up and exchange responses

– 5 Minutes each

• 7 Minutes: Switch partners and repeat – 3.5 minutes each

• 5 minutes: switch partners and repeat – 2.5 minutes each

• Group Discussion

Visioning Group Exercise

• Imagine that it is 10 years from now and answer the following questions: – What has been accomplished? What are the specific

successes that we have achieved for these watersheds?

– What are you most excited about?

– What changes do you see in how these watersheds are managed?

Watershed Mgmt Organizations Objective: Provide a frame of reference for shaping what our group could “look like”

Examples of Watershed Mgmt Districts and

Watershed Mgmt Organizations

MN WMOs MN WMDs

WMOs & WMDs what’s the difference?

Watershed Mgmt Districts • 44 WMDs in MN • Deal with surface &

groundwater, land use/development

• Local units of Gov’t bounded by watershed

• Created by citizen petition and administered by BWSR

• Governed by Board of Managers, appointed by county commissioners

• Must have a citizen advisory committee

• Taxing & Permitting authority

Watershed Mgmt Orgs • 36 in 1982, 22 currently in MN • Deal only with surface water • Boundaries may be political • Organized 3 ways:

– Joint Power Agreement between multiple gov’ts (Voluntary)

– Watershed Mgmt District – A function of county gov’t

• Governed by board, appointed by members

• Formed by Mandate • No taxing authority (unless

stated by JPA), funded by member municipalities

Both are interested in joint mgmt of watersheds through application of common standards and watershed

monitoring

Both are required to conduct activities according to an approved watershed

mgmt plan

30 Lakes WMD • Members: Cities-Nisswa, Merrifield, Breezy Point,

and 3 townships. 5 managers, an advisory committee, and 2 staff

• Mission: o conserve natural resources through land use planning, flood control and other conservation projects to protect public health, safety and welfare. The Thirty Lakes Watershed District has also concentrated efforts on stormwater management in response to the growth of the District.

• Funding: Tax levies on WMD residents ($6-10/$100,000)

Shingle Creek Watershed Mgmt Commission (JPA)

• Members: Joint Powers Agreement with W Mississippi Wshd, 10 cities in the Shingle Creek and W Mississippi watersheds plus staff

• Mission: Enhance the water quality of the water resources within the watersheds… through public information and education, analysis of the causes of harmful impacts on the water resources, regulation of the use of water bodies and their beds, regulation of land use, and capital improvement projects.

• Funding: Membership dues and special-purpose grants

Regional Multi-Agency Partnerships Regional Stormwater Protection Team

• Members: Twin Ports MS4s (cities, counties, townships, SWCDs, DOT, WLSSD, Universities, MPCA, FDL.

• Mission: Protect and enhance the region's shared water resources through coordinated stormwater pollution prevention educational programs and technical assistance

• Funding: Membership dues and special-purpose grants

Regional Multi-Agency Partnerships Pinole Creek Watershed Council

• Members: Property owners, Regional Redevelopment Agency, Municipal Utilities District, Public Works, Urban Creeks Council, Friends of Pinhole Creek Watershed, Army Corps of Engineers, Resource Conservation District, Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Regional Park District

• Mission: Public forum for community members to continue their involvement in the watershed planning process, allowing efficient resources mgmt

• Funding: Property Tax, Coastal Conservancy grant

Toronto Living City • Members: Toronto Region Conservation

Authority (TRAC) is made up of City of Toronto, regional municipalities and townships

• Mission: Help citizens understand, enjoy and look after the natural environment

• Funding: Living City Foundation raises money for projects undertaken by the TRCA.

National or Multi-National Watershed Mgmt Models

Wrap-up • Next meeting time/location • Adjourn