Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization

Transcription

1 Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization APPROVED MEETING MINUTES Board of Managers Regular Meeting June 11, 2014 ~ 3:00 P.M. Mendota Heights City Hall Managers in attendance: Bob Bullard (Chair), Lilydale Mary Jeanne Schneeman, (Sec/Tres) Mendota Heights Sharon Lencowski, Inver Grove Heights G.G. Williams, Sunfish Lake Others in attendance: Marilyn Lundberg, Lilydale Alternate Manager Tom Kaldunski, Inver Grove Heights Luke Sandstrom, West St. Paul Brian Watson, WMO Administrator/Dakota County SWCD Mary Lou Sabin (Vice Chair), West St. Paul Jill Smith, Mendota Heights John Sachi, South St. Paul Anne Weber, St. Paul John Mazzitello, Mendota Heights Janna Kieffer, Barr Engineering Joe Barten, Dakota County SWCD I. Call Meeting to Order The Board meeting was called to order by Chair Bullard at 3:03 p.m. II. III. IV. Approval of the Agenda Bullard asked if there were any requested changes to the agenda. There were none. MOTION by Schneeman to approve the agenda as presented, second by Williams; motion passed. Approval of May 14, 2014 Meeting Minutes Bullard asked if there were any additions or corrections to the May 14 th, 2014 meeting minutes. There were none. MOTION by Lencowski to approve minutes from the May 14 th, 2014 meeting, second by Williams; motion passed. Treasurer s Report a) June 11, 2014 Financial Summary, Invoices to be Paid, Budget Performance Mazzitello noted that there is a summary in the packet. There are also two deposits, one from the Sunfish Lake dues and one from the WRAPS study, as well as 3 invoices. He recommended approval of the financial summary and payment of the invoices. MOTION by Williams to approve the invoices to be paid and the treasurer s report, second by Schneeman; motion passed. Sabin asked about the budget spreadsheet and whether the fund balance included the money set aside for future watershed plan development expenses. Mazzitello said that the fund balance number includes the set aside funds for future plan development costs. Lencowski asked whether this started in PAGE 1

2 Mazzitello said that it passed in 2011 and took effect in 2012 and that there should be $15,000 balance in the set aside funding for watershed plan development at the end of V. Data Practices Policy Watson explained that this item was discussed at the previous meeting and that a data practices policy is a requirement from the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) and that the policy in the packet is essentially a copy of the former Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization and the North Cannon River Watershed Management Organizations policy that the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District helped develop. He also mentioned that included in the packet is the cover letter to the Minnesota Historical Society which is the entity that approves the record retention policy. Watson said that the policy is necessary should there be a request for information under the data practices act. Bullard asked who looks at this policy and Watson replied that it is not often looked at but BWSR would likely request a copy of the policy under their Performance Review Assistance Program where they evaluate the core standards of watershed management organizations. Watson added that the City of South St. Paul had been the official repository of files for the Lower Mississippi River WMO (WMO). Watson said that the member cities of watershed management organizations don t often change but that the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) staff serving the WMO s Administrator may change and it is therefore a good idea to have a Member City be identified as the official location for files. Kieffer noted that she didn t see reports/feasibility studies included in the policy. Sachi noted that the all of the recently completed reports or feasibility studies are located on the WMO s website. Mazzitello asked whether that was allowed and Sachi replied that it should be. Watson noted that digital storage is the SWCD s preferred method. Sachi added that the city of South St. Paul is going to digital for all storage. Bullard suggested doing electronic and paper storage for all data. Sabin asked for clarification on whether we will continue with paper files and noted that technology gets replaced over time. Sachi replied that it is safer with automatic offsite backup of digital files. Bullard said that he is comfortable with the change in storage media to electronic and the addition of reports/feasibility studies to the administration section. Sachi said he has most of the historical documents from before 1997 and that they can likely be thrown away as it is typically 6 or 7 years to keep most documents unless it is a capital improvement project. Mazzitello noted that if it is a city project, it is kept by the city and doesn t need to be kept by the WMO. Watson recommended that the current fiscal agent be the depository of files and at the end of each calendar year the WMO Administrator will compile a disc with information to be kept from that year. Bullard agreed that the Administrator provide this task. MOTION by Sachi to adopt the Data Practices Policy with the changes mentioned above, including changing method of storage media to incorporate electronic with the paper option and adding reports/feasibility studies to the policy, second by Schneeman; motion passed. VI. Adoption of 2015 Budget Watson presented a Draft 2015 budget. He explained that after further review of the current year (2014) budget with projected revenues and expenses through December, it is anticipated that limited, if any, cash reserves will be needed. He indicated that the primary reason for this is that 10% of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) grant for the WRAPS, or approximately $20,000, has been withheld until the final report is approved. With approval of the final grant report by MPCA anticipated yet in 2014 this revenue would be recognized. PAGE 2

3 Based on budgeting scenarios provided at the May meeting, Watson asked if the Board wanted to look at a 10% membership dues increase or stay at 5% which was the maximum amount under current WMO guidance policy. Sabin asked why the approved 2014 budget did not include any revenue or expenses for the MPCA WRAPS grant. Watson explained that originally the grant was to be completed in 2013 but a grant extension was necessary and the budget was not amended to reflect that change. Sabin asked why there will be no increase in general administration for this year. Watson replied that $16,000 was budgeted for 2014 and that based on current level of service this amount would be sufficient even though the SWCD Board of Supervisors is expected to increase hourly rates for Sabin stated she did not know how to conceptualize the 4 th generation plan. Sachi said that there is really only $70,000 for reserves, not $85,000 if you recognize the set aside amount for developing the next watershed plan. Auditors do not need this information, but it would be useful for the WMO Board to know what funds area available for use and what funds are designated or encumbered. Sachi suggested having a cumulative total for encumbered funds included in the budget. Sabin asked how much the plan will cost. Sachi answered that it was $45,000 to complete the 2011 Watershed Plan. Kaldunski asked about the plan implementation line item and why the 2015 budget has an increase to $13,275 increase up from $10,000 approved for Watson explained that the WMOs goal should be to implement programs and activities identified in the watershed plan where possible. Lencowski asked how the budget compares to the adopted watershed plan. Mazzitello responded that the much of the funding in the implementation tables of the watershed plan comes from individual member cities. Sachi added that the WMO s budget includes the necessary administrative items. He said if the WMO wants to be the lead in implementing more items identified in the watershed plan, the WMO would need to increase the membership dues and plan implementation line item of the budget. Kaldunski said that the City of Inver Grove Heights has discussed the draft budget and finds the 10% increase option acceptable. Sachi indicated he felt that the WMO should move forward with a 10% membership dues increase so the WMO has more options and could build reserves. Smith added that it would be good to have a list of projects to implement. Bullard said that the WMO would only initiate a project if the cities don t. Sabin added that she would like to do projects identified from the WRAPS. Both Sabin and Sachi mentioned that the WMO budget until 2014 hadn t increased for 10 years. Sachi added that the budget should be a moving document and can be modified as needed during the calendar year. MOTION by Lencowski to adopt the 2015 budget as presented, second by Sachi. Discussion by Mazzitello asking for confirmation that the 10% increase in membership dues were the numbers provided in last month s packet. Bullard said that they were. Watson added that he will send an to each of the cities notifying them of the 2015 membership dues. Motion passed. VII. Update on Watershed Management Plan Amendment Watson explained the timeline for the watershed plan referred to a handout in the Board packet. Watson stated that he has been working with Jake Newhall from WSB and Mary Peterson from BWSR on the amendment process and getting the WRAPS information into the draft plan prior to distribution. Watson said that depending on the outcome of the MPCA s WRAPS public notice and comments received, he anticipates the draft plan being in the August Board meeting packet for authorization to submit for comments. Watson indicated that once the WMO approves the draft plan for review, it would be roughly a 6-7 month timeline prior to final adoption by the BWSR Board. Sachi asked if there was an issue with the WSB contract should there be multiple comments from review agencies to address during the 60 day comment period. Kieffer replied that WSB might not have known PAGE 3

4 that the review process for a new plan would be the same required for this amendment. Significant comments from review agencies are not anticipated. Mazzitello asked for clarification as to whether the review by BWSR is of the whole plan or just the changes. Watson replied that the focus for the review agencies should just be the changes but he was uncertain if they could comment on any part of the plan. He added that WSB will have to do a language strikeout and underlined version to show changes. VIII. IX. Update on the Cherokee Heights Culvert Analysis and Erosion Control Feasibility Study Barr Engineering Kiefer explained a field review was held in May where they identified locations for two additional borings, one upstream and one downstream. Since the memo was written and provided to the WMO Board, the City of St. Paul has taken on the cost of the borings. She added that it took longer than expected for hiring contractors and the borings so construction and stakeholder involvement may be pushed back. Smith asked, considering the topography in the area and steep slopes to the river, whether there are implications for the project. Kieffer replied that there are challenges with this project due to the steep slopes and instability but they are partnering some of the work with the adjacent St. Paul park project. She added that they are looking into water storage options upstream and the potential implications and issues that may be associated with that strategy. Lundberg said that there has been a mudslide near this project area and that MN DOT has reported many mudslides affecting roads this spring. She added that the mudslide area is a continuation of the same slope as the Cherokee Heights area and that these issues highlight the importance of setbacks. Update on WRAPS Project Barr Engineering Kieffer presented the key strategies that came out of the WRAPS. The study covered Sunfish, Pickerel, Thompson, Rogers, and Augusta Lakes and was funded by the MPCA with the goal of phosphorus reductions. Both internal sources and external sources of phosphorus loading were evaluated for the lakes. Kieffer explained that both Sunfish and Augusta Lakes were very similar in having internal loading issues. Both had small drainage areas and are landlocked, somewhat deep lakes. There is potential for an alum treatment to bind the phosphorus particles. Sachi asked how long an alum treatment lasts. Kieffer replied that it varies lake to lake but roughly 6 to 10 years depending on level of historic buildup of phosphorus in the lake bottom. Sachi also asked about the estimated cost of an alum treatment and Kieffer replied that it could be anywhere from $60,000 to $100,000. Sachi added that with Clean Water funding, there is typically a 25% match. Kieffer also indicated that many state agencies with grant funds typically suggest taking care of external loading first, but in this case, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) was receptive to the idea of an alum treatment because it is clearly a case of internal loading. Watson said that when applying for State Clean Water funds grants, it is important the WMO includes the pollutant reduction strategies in their amended watershed plan. Sabin questioned that if the alum treatment costs $60,000 to $100,000, and if people are not willing to provide the 25% match, would the project happen? Williams replied that it is possible landowners would commit some financial resources but would depend on a variety of factors at the time of the grant application. Lundberg said that Great River Greening received $30,000 to complete a vegetation enhancement plan along the Mississippi River. She said that there was a project in Nisswa also where they were able to raise $200,000 themselves for lakeshore implementation projects. She added that is possible to do these things PAGE 4

5 privately, sometimes it is just limited by vision. Kieffer added that sometimes it is the role of the WMO to support other organizations. Kieffer continued and explained that Thompson Lake is a smaller waterbody with a large watershed. There has been a feasibility study completed that recommends a pond be installed at the inlet of Thompson Lake to provide stormwater treatment. Kieffer explained how Pickerel Lake has a large influence and external loading issues from flooding on the Mississippi River. She added that water quality is largely determined by the river since it is a floodplain lake. There are also issues with bluff erosion such as at Ivy Falls Creek. Sachi asked how high the phosphorus levels in the river are and Kieffer said they are about 300 ppm. Sachi and Kieffer discussed how anything could ever be done to improve Pickerel Lake due to its interaction with Mississippi River flood waters. Kieffer noted that the MPCA ended up removing Pickerel Lake allocations from the study due to this concern. Smith said that Mendota Heights participated in a significant project to stabilize the bluffs and asked whether they are still finding a lot of erosion that ended up in Pickerel Lake. She added that nearly all of Ivy Falls Creek was stabilized. Kieffer replied that there are many different areas contributing to this issue. Sabin asked if we had an idea of how much of the watershed contributes to lake loading. Kieffer said they estimated that about 22% of the phosphorus load is from external loading. Sabin replied that the runoff really isn t a big issue in this case and Sachi agreed that it isn t. Mazzitello added that on the years that the river didn t flood, Pickeral Lake did not show impairments which suggest that external loading isn t much of an issue. Kieffer indicated that was correct and the MPCA agrees but this is only based on limited data and they will likely recommend more monitoring. Kieffer explained that Rogers Lake has unusually good water quality for how shallow it is. It currently meets the standard for phosphorus but the WMO could continue to look at opportunities to further protect the lake through installation of new stormwater practices or by maintenance of existing practices. X. Other Updates and Handouts a) Grant Tracking Update - Barr Engineering Kieffer explained an MPCA program called the Environmental Assistance Grant Program. She noted that there are 9 focus areas, one of which is funds available for city sustainability policy funding. b) Joint Powers Agreement Revision Update Watson indicated that he would be coordinating with the WMO attorney prior to the August meeting and the revised joint powers agreement would hopefully be sent out for each member city to adopt. c) Request for Public Comment on Proposed Rules Governing Land Development in Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA)* Watson referenced a MDNR publication within the Board packets regarding upcoming public meetings on the draft rules governing lands in the MRCCA. Mazzitello explained the history behind these rules and that it comes from an executive order in 1979 by Gov. Quie to identify protection strategies for the Mississippi River bluffs. One of those was a 40 foot setback on steep slopes but did not define a steep slope. Mazzitello said the previous definition was a 40% slope but it is changing to define a steep a slope as an 18% slope. Sachi said how difficult this has been for cities on the river with redevelopment projects as simple as adding a deck to a house. Mazzitello added that the intent of the rule is for undeveloped property but Sachi said it is used on redevelopment. Smith asked what cities can do. Mazzitello said they can ask to change the slope definition or incorporate changes for redevelopment vs. new development. Sachi added that it is hard to change the slope definition. Mazzitello said that the cities will ultimately be responsible for regulating the State s critical area ordinances. Smith noted that this will impact property PAGE 5

6 owners and Sachi added that it will impact areas adjacent to the river as well and not just the bluffs. He said that the city of South St. Paul is aware of the proposed rules and is going to meetings. Kaldunski said that there are big areas of Inver Grove Heights which will be considered undevelopable due to the proposed rule. Mazzitello and Sachi said that this rule could be considered a taking of the state and render some property useless. XI. Agenda Items, Date, and Location of Next Meeting Bullard indicated that there will be no July meeting. Bullard noted that the next meeting will be held on August 13, 2014 at the Mendota Heights City Hall. XII. Adjourn Meeting adjourned by Bullard at 4:50 p.m. PAGE 6