Board Workshop and Regular Meeting of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board of Managers, for Wednesday, November 6, 2019, 5:00 p.m. (Workshop) and 6:00 p.m. (Regular Meeting) at the office of the CRWD, 595 Aldine Street, St. Paul, Minnesota.
I. II. III.
I.
WORKSHOP AGENDA (5:00 PM) Call to Order of Board Workshop Current and Future Facility Management Adjourn Board Workshop
Materials enclosed
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Call to Order of Regular Meeting (President Joe Collins) A) Attendance B) Review, Amendments, and Approval of the Agenda
II.
Public Comment – For Items not on the Agenda (Please observe a limit of three minutes per person.)
III.
Permit Applications and Program Updates (Permit Process: 1) Staff Review/Recommendation, 2) Applicant Response, 3) Public Comment, and 4) Board Discussion and Action.) A) Permit 17-015 Wheelock Parkway Paving – Closure (Hosch) B) Permit 19-007 Luther Seminary South Campus (Hosch)
IV.
Special Reports – Como Park BMPs Design
V.
Action Items A) AR: Approve Minutes of the October 16, 2019 Regular Board Meeting (Sylvander) B) AR: Appoint Delegates for the MAWD Annual Meeting (Doneux) C) AR: Approve 2019 MAWD Resolutions and Recommendations (Doneux) D) AR: Approve 2020 Employee Benefit Program (Doneux) E) AR: Approve Program Manager Position and Promotion of Michelle Sylvander (Doneux) Unfinished Business A) Ford Site Area C (Fossum)
VI.
VII.
General Information A) Board of Manager’s Updates B) Administrator’s Report (Doneux)
VIII. Next Meetings A) Wednesday, November 13, 2019 7:00 PM - CAC Meeting B) Wednesday, November 20, 2019 6:00 PM - Regular Board Meeting IX. Adjournment
Our mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District
October 30, 2019 III. Permit Applications A. Permit Close Out (Hosch) DATE: TO: FROM: RE:
October 30, 2019 CRWD Board of Managers Elizabeth Hosch Permit Closeout
Background Construction activity is complete for permit #17-015 Wheelock Pkwy paving. Issues Wheelock Pkwy paving #17-015 This permit was issued for reconstruction of Wheelock Parkway from Victoria to Danforth in St. Paul. Stormwater is treated via one undground infiltration trench between Alameda and St. Albans. The site is stable and the stormwater treatment system has been confirmed to be functional. No surety was required for this public project. Action Requested Approve Certificate of Completion for permit #17-015, Wheelock Pkwy paving.
W:\07 Programs\Permitting\Board Memos\2019-11-06 Permit Closeout Board Memo.docx
Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.
Capitol Region Watershed District Applicant:
Permit 19-007 Luther Seminary south campus
Michael Morrow Luther Seminary 2481 Como Ave. Saint Paul, MN 55108
Consultant: Paul Schroeder SRF Consulting Group 1 Carlson Parkway North Plymouth, MN 55447
Description: Pavement, stormwater, landscape, building improvements Stormwater Management: Series of BMPs, both infiltration and filtration as soils allow. District Rule: C, D, F Disturbed Area: 2.78 Acres Impervious Area: 0.97 Acres
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve with 4 Conditions: 1. Receipt of $4,800 surety. 2. Receipt of documentation of maintenance agreement recorded with Ramsey County. 3. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit. 4. Provide a site-specific maintenance plan that includes the following: a. List all stormwater management practices. Include a map to show practice locations. b. Person(s) responsible for maintenance of stormwater devices. c. Frequency of inspection/ indicator that maintenance is needed for each practice/structure type. d. Description of inspection activities. e. Description of maintenance activities. f. Inspect in winter months to ensure plowed snow is not being stored on infiltration/filtration practices. g. Establish a watering plan that extends a minimum of one year after planting. h. Annual maintenance to include trimming vegetation, replacing vegetation where needed, mulch replacement, and removal of accumulated sediment and debris.
First Street Second Ave
Permit Location Aerial Photo Permit Report 19-007
Board Meeting Date: 11-06-2019
Capitol Region Watershed District Permit Report CRWD Permit #: Review date: Project Name: Applicant: Purpose:
19‐007 October 21, 2019 Luther Seminary South Campus Paul Schroeder SRF Consulting Group One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 Plymouth, MN 55447 763.249.6796 pschroeder@srfconsulting.com Pavement, stormwater, landscape, building improvements. Permanent stormwater management consists of a series of two CMP infiltration systems and three rain garden filtration systems.
Location: 2481 Como Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108 Applicable Rules: C, D, and F Recommendation: Approve with 4 Conditions EXHIBITS: 1. Civil Plans (32 Sheets), by SRF, dated 6/10/19, recv. 6/7/19. 2. Stormwater Narrative (376 Pages), by SRF, dated 9/24/19, recv. 9/25/19. 3. Geotechnical Report, by Terracon, dated 1/15/19, recv. 9/25/19. 4. Full Plan Set, by SFR dated 6/10/19, recv. 6/7/19. 5. Civil Plans (19 Sheets), by SRF, dated 9/23/19, recv. 9/25/19. 6. Landscaping Plans (13 Sheets), by SRF, dated 9/23/19, recv. 9/25/19. 7. Underground Stormwater Infiltration System Specifications (6 Pages), by SRF, dated 9/24/19, recv. 9/25/19. 8. Updated Civil Plans (Sheets C5.0 & C6.4), by SRF, dated 10/11/19, recv. 10/14/19. 9. Updated Landscaping Plans (Sheets L102.1 & 102.2), by SRF, dated 10/11/19, recv. 10/14/19. HISTORY & CONSIDERATIONS: CRWD Permit 15‐040 (Zvago Cooperation – Luther Seminary Senior Housing) is located just to the south of this project and requested to meet runoff volume requirements using filtration through alternative compliance due to poor soils. W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2019\19-007 Luther Seminary south campus\19-007 Permit Report_R4.doc Page 1 of 5
RULE C: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Standards Proposed discharge rates for the 2‐, 10‐, and 100‐year events shall not exceed existing rates. Developments and redevelopments must reduce runoff volumes in the amount equivalent to an inch of runoff from the impervious areas of the site. Stormwater must be pretreated before discharging to infiltration areas to maintain the long‐term viability of the infiltration area. Developments and redevelopments must incorporate effective non‐point source pollution reduction BMPs to achieve 90% total suspended solid removal. Findings 1. A hydrograph method based on sound hydrologic theory is used to analyze runoff for the design or analysis of flows and water levels. 2. Runoff rates for the proposed activity do not exceed existing runoff rates for the 2‐, 10‐, and 100‐year critical storm events. Stormwater leaving the project area is discharged into a well‐defined receiving channel or pipe and routed to a public drainage system. 3. Stormwater runoff volume retention is achieved onsite in the amount equivalent to the runoff generated from 1.1‐inch of rainfall over the impervious surfaces of the development. a. The amount of proposed impervious is 42,142 square feet. b. Volume retention required: 42,142 ft2 x 1.1 inches x 1 ft/12 inches = 3,863 ft3 Table 1. Proposed volume retention through abstraction (i.e. infiltration, reuse). Volume Volume Retention 1.1‐inch 2.5‐inch Retention Runoff Runoff BMP Provided below Required 3 3 ) (ft ) (ft3) outlet (ft (ft3) West CMP Infiltration 3,544 1,088 2,473 East CMP Infiltration 3,319 1,380 3,137 3,863 Total 5,610 ft3 c. Banking of excess volume retention of is not proposed. d. Infiltration volume and facility sizes have been calculated using the appropriate hydrologic soil group classification and design infiltration rate. e. The infiltration areas are capable of infiltrating the required volume within 48 hours. f. Stormwater runoff is pretreated to remove solids before discharging to infiltration areas. g. The Hantush groundwater mound spreadsheet predicts a mound depth of approximately 0.3’ at the house footprint on 1504 Fulham St. MnTopo shows surface elevation of 972’ at house. Assuming 8 ft basement depth (964’) and groundwater at 953’ (per Soil Boring #1), there is sufficient separation and no anticipated impacts.
W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2019\19-007 Luther Seminary south campus\19-007 Permit Report_R4.doc Page 2 of 5
h. The Hantush groundwater mound spreadsheet predicts a mound depth of approximately 3.0’ at the house footprint on 1479 Branston St. MnTopo shows surface elevation of 979’ at house. Assuming 8 ft basement depth (971’) and groundwater at 953’ (per Soil Boring #1), there is sufficient separation and no anticipated impacts. 4. Alternative compliance has been requested due to poor soils. a. The applicant did partially comply with the volume retention standard. b. Filtration using sand media (55% credit) is proposed; no additional filtration volume is required. The rain gardens listed below; however, are necessary for the project to achieve CRWD rate control. Table 2. Proposed volume retention through filtration (i.e. sand, enhanced). Filtration Filtration Volume 1.1‐inch 2.5‐inch Volume BMP Provided below Runoff Runoff Required 3 3 outlet (ft ) (ft ) (ft3) (ft3) Rain Garden E49R 220 366 833 Rain Garden F43‐A 1,311 1,572 3,573 0 Rain Garden F43‐C 170 521 1,184 3 Total 1,701 ft i. Filtration volume and facility sizes have not been calculated using the appropriate hydrologic soil group classification and design filtration rate. However, revisions to the calculation are unlikely to change the design and recommendation to approve. ii. The filtration areas are capable of filtering the required volume within 48 hours. iii. Stormwater runoff is pretreated to remove solids before discharging to filtration areas. c. The applicant did not partially comply with the volume retention standard at an offsite location or through the use of qualified banking credits. d. The applicant is not required to submit money to the Stormwater Impact Fund. e. The project is not linear. 5. Best management practices achieve 90% total suspended solids removal from the runoff generated on an annual basis. 6. A maintenance agreement recorded with Ramsey County has not been submitted. 7. Adequate maintenance access is provided for surface and/or underground systems. A site‐specific plan, schedule, and narrative for maintenance of the proposed stormwater management practices has not been submitted. RULE D: FLOOD CONTROL Standards Compensatory storage shall be provided for fill placed within the 100‐year floodplain. All habitable buildings, roads, and parking structures on or adjacent to a project site shall comply with District freeboard requirements.
W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2019\19-007 Luther Seminary south campus\19-007 Permit Report_R4.doc Page 3 of 5
Findings 1. There is no floodplain on the property according to FEMA. 2. All habitable buildings, roads, and parking structures on or adjacent to the project site comply with CRWD freeboard requirements. RULE E: WETLAND MANAGEMENT Standard Wetlands shall not be drained, filled (wholly or in part), excavated, or have sustaining hydrology impacted such that there will be a decrease in the inherent (existing) functions and values of the wetland. A minimum buffer of 25 feet of permanent nonimpacted vegetative ground cover abutting and surrounding a wetland is required. Findings 1. There are no known wetlands located on the property. RULE F: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Standards A plan shall demonstrate that appropriate erosion and sediment control measures protect downstream water bodies from the effects of a land‐disturbing activity. Erosion Control Plans must adhere to the MPCA Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas Manual. Findings 1. Erosion and sediment control measures are consistent with best management practices, as demonstrated in the MPCA manual Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas. 2. Adjacent properties are protected from sediment transport/deposition. 3. Wetlands, waterbodies and water conveyance systems are protected from erosion/sediment transport/deposition. 4. Total disturbed area is 2.78 acres; an NPDES permit is required. A SWPPP has been submitted. RULE G: ILLICIT DISCHARGE AND CONNECTION Standard Stormwater management and utility plans shall indicate all existing and proposed connections from developed and undeveloped lands for all water that drains to the District MS4. Findings 1. New direct connections or replacement of existing connections are not proposed. 2. Prohibited discharges are not proposed. Recommendation: Approve with 4 Conditions Conditions: 1. Receipt of $4,800 surety. 2. Receipt of documentation of maintenance agreement recorded with Ramsey County. W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2019\19-007 Luther Seminary south campus\19-007 Permit Report_R4.doc Page 4 of 5
3. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit. 4. Provide a site‐specific maintenance plan that includes the following: a. List all stormwater management practices. Include a map to show practice locations. b. Person(s) responsible for maintenance of stormwater devices. c. Frequency of inspection/ indicator that maintenance is needed for each practice/structure type. d. Description of inspection activities. e. Description of maintenance activities. f. Inspect in winter months to ensure plowed snow is not being stored on infiltration/filtration practices. g. Establish a watering plan that extends a minimum of one year after planting. h. Annual maintenance to include trimming vegetation, replacing vegetation where needed, mulch replacement, and removal of accumulated sediment and debris.
W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2019\19-007 Luther Seminary south campus\19-007 Permit Report_R4.doc Page 5 of 5
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL (GSOC)
E-TICKET: BY PHONE:
EMERGENCY TICKETS: 866-640-3637 TWIN CITIES METRO: 651-454-0002 GREATER MN AREA: 800-252-1166 NATIONALLY: 811
WWW.GSOCSUBMIT.ORG
STATE LAW REQUIRES CONTRACTOR TO CONTACT AND PROVIDE NOTICE TO THE NOTIFICATION CENTER BEFORE BEGINNING ANY EXCAVATION. (REFER TO MINNESOTA STATE STATUTE CHAPTER 216D FOR DETAILS)
Ten x Ten Studio 575 SE 9th St, Suite 210 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel 612.440.8369 SRF Consulting Group 1 Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443 Tel 763.249.6796
Description
JUNE 10, 2019 56607 LICENSE #:
© 2018 Gensler
C5.0
UTILITY PLAN - NORTH
Description
1" = 20'
Scale
30.7644.000 (SRF #11404.00)
Project Number
LUTHER SEMINARY OLSON CENTER + GULLIXSON HALL
Project Name
DATE:
SIGNATURE:
PRINT NAME:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Seal / Signature
3 02/22/19 Site Plan Review & Watershed Submittal 4 05/21/19 Design Team Review 5 06/10/19 Issue for Permit and Construction 6 09/23/19 Site Plan Review/Watershed Resubmittal 7 10/11/19 Watershed Comments
2 02/15/19 DD Pricing
1 12/07/18 SD Pricing
Date
THIS DRAWING DEVELOPED BY: SRF CONSULTING GROUP
BKBM Engineers 6120 Earle Brown Dr, Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 55430 Tel 763.843.0420
Tel 612.333.1113 Fax 612.333.1997
Dunham Engineering 50 South Sixth Street, Suite 1100 Minneapolis, MN 55402-1540 Tel 612.465.7550 Fax 612.465.7551
706 2nd Avenue South Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 United States
2375 Como Avenue St. Paul, MN 55108
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL (GSOC)
E-TICKET: BY PHONE:
EMERGENCY TICKETS: 866-640-3637 TWIN CITIES METRO: 651-454-0002 GREATER MN AREA: 800-252-1166 NATIONALLY: 811
WWW.GSOCSUBMIT.ORG
STATE LAW REQUIRES CONTRACTOR TO CONTACT AND PROVIDE NOTICE TO THE NOTIFICATION CENTER BEFORE BEGINNING ANY EXCAVATION. (REFER TO MINNESOTA STATE STATUTE CHAPTER 216D FOR DETAILS)
Ten x Ten Studio 575 SE 9th St, Suite 210 Minneapolis, MN 55414 Tel 612.440.8369 SRF Consulting Group 1 Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443 Tel 763.249.6796
Description
JUNE 10, 2019 56607 LICENSE #:
© 2018 Gensler
C5.1
UTILITY PLAN - SOUTH
Description
1" = 20'
Scale
30.7644.000 (SRF #11404.00)
Project Number
LUTHER SEMINARY OLSON CENTER + GULLIXSON HALL
Project Name
DATE:
SIGNATURE:
PRINT NAME:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Seal / Signature
3 02/22/19 Site Plan Review & Watershed Submittal 4 05/21/19 Design Team Review 5 06/10/19 Issue for Permit and Construction 6 09/23/19 Site Plan Review/Watershed Resubmittal
2 02/15/19 DD Pricing
1 12/07/18 SD Pricing
Date
THIS DRAWING DEVELOPED BY: SRF CONSULTING GROUP
BKBM Engineers 6120 Earle Brown Dr, Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 55430 Tel 763.843.0420
Tel 612.333.1113 Fax 612.333.1997
Dunham Engineering 50 South Sixth Street, Suite 1100 Minneapolis, MN 55402-1540 Tel 612.465.7550 Fax 612.465.7551
706 2nd Avenue South Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 United States
2375 Como Avenue St. Paul, MN 55108
November 6, 2019 Board Meeting IV. Special Reports: Como Park Golf Course BMP Design
DATE: TO: FROM: RE:
Action Requested: Approve Contract Amendment for Como BMP Additional Engineering (Kelley)
October 31, 2019 CRWD Board of Managers Forrest Kelley, PE Regulatory Division Manager Approve Contract Amendment with HEI for Como Regional Park Stormwater BMPs
Background CRWD worked with the City of Saint Paul to develop a stormwater master plan for Como Regional Park, which identified several potential regional Best Management Practice (BMP) sites. In 2016 CRWD was awarded a $1.76 million grant through BWSR’s Targeted Watershed Program (TWP) for work in the Como and McCarrons sub-watersheds, and in 2018 CRWD contracted with Houston Engineering Inc. (HEI) to advance design on the Iron Enhanced Sand Filter Bench at the northwest Golf Course Pond, and expansion of the existing Polar Bear Infiltration Basin combined with additional underground infiltration pipes at Hole 7 near the zoo Issues Current plans for the two BMPs are currently at 90% completion. During the final design stage, questions and concerns arose related to impacts to golf play from the IESF Bench near Hole 3, high water conditions at the land locked pond near Hole 8, and the classification areas around the pond as wetlands. While the construction schedule has now been shifted from fall of 2019 to fall of 2020, at the time that these issues were identified, the intent was to address them quickly and still go out to bid for 2019 construction. Staff directed Houston Engineering to re-configure the layout of the IESF bench, obtain survey data for the tow rope footings for the sledding hill, and conduct a wetland delineation for the area surrounding Holes 8 and 9. Houston has provided the attached memo that summarizes the scope and budget for the requested out of scope services. Staff will present an overview of the project and the issues that necessitated the out of scope work with the Board and answer any questions. Requested Action Approve Contract Amendment with HEI for Como Park BMP Project Additional Services totaling $36,581 and a new total contract not to exceed $156,292 Enc: HEI Task Order Revision and Change in Scope of Services #2 dated September 6, 2019 W:\06 Projects\Como Lake Projects\Como Regional Park BMPs\HEI Contract\2019-11-06 Board Memo Como BMPs Contract Amendment.docx
Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.
Memorandum Task Order Revision & Change in Scope of Services #2 To:
Forrest Kelley, CRWD Project Manager
From:
Greg Bowles, PE, Houston Engineering Inc.
Subject:
Como Zoo and Golf Course Stormwater BMPs Final Design
Date:
September 6, 2019
Project:
HEI: 6475-0020
Houston Engineering, Inc. (Houston Engineering, HEI) entered into a contractual agreement (i.e., AGREEMENT) on May 25, 2018 to provide professional consulting services to the Capitol Region Watershed District (District, CRWD). The AGREEMENT identifies various services to be performed in fulfillment of the contract and an associated compensation amount. The AGREEMENT identifies the services to be performed in return for an estimated compensation of $99,559. Subsequently, a first task order revision & change in Scope of Services was executed for an additional fee of $20,152 on February 21, 2019. This memorandum is the second task order revision & change in Scope of Services for an additional fee of $36,581, resulting in a revised total of $156,292. The purpose of this memorandum is to document a change in the Scope of Services provided by Houston Engineering under our AGREEMENT and to document additional fees associated with the change in the Scope of Services. All additional services list in the table below have been approved through emails or communication with CRWD staff and additional service tasks are complete. The following items are identified as additional services and therefore represent a change in the original Scope of Services. Item No.
1
2
Description Zoo BMP Underground Infiltration 60/90/100% plans. The effort is estimated to be roughly equivalent to the design of the Golf Lot site (which is currently not expected to be incorporated into designs or plans). Survey, design, and coordination for Hole 8. Excess earthwork from the underground Zoo BMP was desired by the golf course to be placed at Hole 8. This location is outside the original project area and required additional field work and design. Services included adding access plan and restoration sheets for the haul route to Hole 8, preliminary fill calculations, area sketch, providing CAD
7550 MERIDIAN CIRCLE NORTH, STE 120 | MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 PAGE 1 OF 4
Additional Hours
Additional Fee
n/a
$0
47.5
$6,992
Item No.
3
4
5
6
7
Description drawings to the Golf Course, and coordination to assist in determining the extents and grading of the fill area. Next, field work was performed on 6/19/2019 including survey, site investigation and hand borings, which revealed possible wetland conditions. NW Pond IESF tow rope footing. An HEI design field visit on 4/19/2019 (after 60% plans were complete) revealed unknown footings for the sledding hill tow rope that were located in the proposed location of the IESF. This was an unforeseen site condition and considered beyond the original scope. Initial design impacts and potential design solutions were analyzed and discussed internally and with CRWD. NW Pond IESF design revisions. Comments from the Golf Course on impacts from the original IESF footprint prompted the investigation of relocating the IESF. Through discussions with CRWD, various design configurations were discussed. Per CRWD direction the footprint was moved approximately 80 feet to the north and slightly into the pond. HEI reconfigured the design of the IESF to maintain a feasible design while providing the original treatment benefit; and provided a sketch of the design changes (sent 6/7/2019). NW Pond IESF design revisions – second iteration. Subsequently, further requests from the Golf Course prompted HEI to investigate other options to move the IESF further north, into the pond, and/or along the pond’s north shore. HEI re-designed the IESF and sent the design in a plan sheet, also communicating design changes/impacts on 6/14/2019. Once concurrence was gained, HEI revised the 90% construction plans to incorporate the new design including plans, profile, sections and details. Note that the original scope included revisions from comments at 90%, however the scope provided the final comments would “assume minor comments”. The changes to the NW Pond IESF are considered major, and many plan sheets and details were required to be re-worked. This inflated the cost of re-designing, as opposed to if the changes and comments would have been presented earlier in the design. Summarize treatment results with design changes. The NW Pond IESF treatment results were updated by incorporating into the P8 model (revised with new impervious data in 2018). Secondly the model was also updated with the most recent design of the underground Zoo BMP, as the previous results were from previous design iterations of the Zoo BMP. Treatment volumes and load reductions were summarized and sent on 6/26/2018. Labor rate increase due to schedule delay into 2019.
7550 MERIDIAN CIRCLE NORTH, STE 120 | MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 PAGE 2 OF 4
Additional Hours
Additional Fee
7
$1,064
55.25
$7,785
91
$12,567
4
$604
n/a
$1,882
Item No.
8 9
10
Description The rate increase from 2018 to 2019 was 3%. The rate increase was applied to the work performed in 2019, less this additional service time. Wetland Delineation near Hole 6, 8 and 9 (per Attached Scope of Services) Additional meeting with the project partners on the wetland delineation and a phone call in preparation. Services for project renderings were not completed and thus this amount is removed from the compensation requested. The renderings were under a sub-contract with Loucks Inc. that also included services for assisting HEI in the landscape architecture design for 3 BMPs (see Loucks proposal dated May 3, 2018 included in the AGREEMENT). No services were performed by Loucks, however, HEI performed the landscape architecture services for 3 BMPs (note that as in item 1, the Golf Lot BMP was estimated as an equivalent fee to the Zoo Underground BMP). The following summarizes the fees from the Loucks sub-contract: HEI Completed: $2,200 – Preliminary Design $4,000 – Construction Documents Not Completed: **$1,200 – Renderings **$1,000 – Project Meetings (for Loucks) **The items not completed are removed from the compensation requested in this additional services. Subtotal: Original Contract: Previous Additional Services (dated 2/21/2019): Revised Total:
Additional Hours
Additional Fee
45
$6,865
7
$1,022
n/a
- ($2,200)
$36,581 $99,559 $20,152 $156,292
In consideration of these items identified, the additional compensation requested is $36,581. Please indicate the following: Amend the contract to incorporate the additional services provided and the revised estimated total compensation nearer to the time of project completion, based on the anticipated cost to complete. X
Amend the contract now to incorporate the additional services provided and the revised estimated total compensation.
The completion of these additional services will result in changes to the deliverables and project schedule.
7550 MERIDIAN CIRCLE NORTH, STE 120 | MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 PAGE 3 OF 4
SIGNATURES: This Additional Services Request shall be effective immediately as authorized by the signatures of representatives of the Capitol Region Watershed District and Houston Engineering, Inc. Capitol Region Watershed District
Houston Engineering, Inc.
By:
By:
Name:
Name: Greg Bowles, PE
Title:
Title:
Client Manager
Date:
Date:
September 6, 2019
7550 MERIDIAN CIRCLE NORTH, STE 120 | MAPLE GROVE, MN 55369 PAGE 4 OF 4
VIA EMAIL: fkelley@capitolregionwd.org October 7, 2019 Forrest Kelley, Project Manager Capitol Region Watershed District 595 Aldine Street St. Paul, MN 55108 Subject: Como Park Golf Course Wetland Delineation
Dear Forrest: Houston Engineering, Inc. (HEI) is pleased to provide you with a quote for a wetland delineation at the Como Park Golf Course. Attachment 1 describes our wetland delineation scope and estimated compensation. Your final product will consist of a wetland delineation report and boundary approval by the Local Government Unit. The information collected during this activity will be utilized during the next steps and will guide our regulatory options and strategies of the future project(s). We know that CRWD is dedicated to improving the water quality of Como Lake and we are honored to continue to serve CRWD in working toward achieving this goal. Please contact me directly if you have any questions regarding our proposal before this time. Sincerely, HOUSTON ENGINEERING, INC.
Emmy Baskerville Environmental Scientist 763.493.6669 ebaskerville@houstoneng.com
Greg Bowles, PE Project Manager; Principal-in-Charge 763.493.6670 gbowles@houstoneng.com
Como Park Golf Course Wetland Delineation October 7, 2019 Attachment 1
ATTACHMENT 1. PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK Task 1: Wetland Delineation A wetland delineation will be completed in an area near and including portions of Hole 8, as shown in the attached Area of Investigation map. The wetland delineation is an atypical situation, as defined by the 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual, and therefore we will use alternative methods to define the wetland boundary. This will include reviewing a collection of data, including aerial photography, soils survey, precipitation, adjacent vegetation, and other sources of information as available, to gather an understanding of the hydrologic, vegetative and soil conditions of the site historically and currently. Using this information, we will complete a site visit and make detailed observations throughout the Area of Investigation, including soil borings, observations of hydrologic conditions, and vegetative conditions. We will delineate the wetland boundary based on this assembly of offsite and onsite information. We will prepare a Wetland Delineation Report summarizing our methods and conclusions and send a draft report to CRWD for review prior to submittal. After CRWD review, we will submit the Wetland Delineation Report and request for boundary approval to the Local Government Unit (LGU). An onsite TEP meeting will likely take place with the LGU and Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) to review the data presented on the report and for boundary approval.
ASSUMPTIONS: 1. One site visit will be needed to capture data needed to delineate the wetland boundary. 2. One TEP meeting (on site) is assumed to review data, conclusions, and obtain boundary approval. 3. The data collected in this task will be used to review the regulatory options and strategies as a component of the next project phase.
DELIVERABLES: 1. Wetland Delineation Report 2. Wetland Boundary Approval from LGU
ANTICIPATED PROJECT SCHEDULE HEI will begin work on the project as soon as the signed contract between HEI and Capitol Region Watershed District is executed. We anticipate that the offsite investigation will take place at the end of July, and fieldwork will be scheduled for the second week in August, with a draft Wetland Delineation Report delivered to CRWD, for review by the third week in August, assuming a signed contract is received by July 26, 2019.
Como Park Golf Course Wetland Delineation October 7, 2019 Attachment 1
ESTIMATED COMPENSATION Table 1 shows the estimated compensation for completing the tasks describe in the Scope of Work. Table 1. Estimated compensation for completing the Scope of Work.
Task
Cost
Task 1: Wetland Delineation Expenses (mileage, survey equipment) Total
$6,840 $25 $6,865
November 6, 2019 Board Meeting V. Action Item A) Approve Minutes of October 16, 2019 Regular Board Meeting (Sylvander)
Regular Board Meeting of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board of Managers, for Wednesday, October 16, 2019, 6:00 p.m. (Regular Meeting) at the office of CRWD, 595 Aldine Street, St. Paul, Minnesota. MEETING MINUTES I.
A)
Call to Order of Regular Meeting (President Joe Collins)
Managers Joe Collins Seitu Jones, absent Shawn Murphy Rick Sanders Mary Texer
B)
Staff Present Public Attendees Mark Doneux, CRWD Elizabeth Hosch, CRWD Andrew Novak, CRWD Lindsay Schwantes, CRWD Michelle Sylvander, CRWD James Mogen, Ramsey County Attorney
Review, Amendments and Approval of the Agenda.
Motion 19-197: Approve the Agenda of October 16, 2019. Texer/Sanders Unanimously Approved II.
Public Comment – None
President Collins shared that the Grand Opening was a great event. Managers were very pleased with the attendance. Many neighbors came for tours and complemented the new building. III.
Permit Applications and Program Updates A) 11-020 Nova Classical Academy – Closure (Hosch)
This permit was issued for a new school building by Victoria Park in St. Paul. Stormwater is treated via one surface filtration basin on the south side of the school. St. Paul Parks and Recreation now owns the property where the filtration basin is located and holds the MOA for basin maintenance. The site is stable, and the stormwater treatment system has been confirmed functional. There is $6,000 surety to return.
Motion 19-198: Approve $6,000 surety return and Certificate of Completion for permit #11-020, Nova Classical Academy Sanders/Murphy Unanimously Approved B) 16-018 American Paper Building Demo – Closure (Hosch) This permit was issued for the building demolition erosion and sediment control at 601 Prior in St. Paul. The site has been sold to neighboring Menards and is currently under subsequent permit for additional development, with this newer permit superseding the older one. No surety was required for this project. Motion 19-199: Approve Certificate of Completion for permit #16-018, American Paper Building Demo. Sanders/Texer Unanimously Approved C) 16-023 Linwood Lower School – Closeout (Martinkosky) Ms. Hosch reviewed for Mr. Martinkowky, this permit was issued for redevelopment of an existing school including a new building addition, parking lot and playground. Stormwater is treated via one underground infiltration system. The site is stable, and the stormwater treatment system has been confirmed to be functional. No surety was required for this project. Motion 19-200: Approve Certificate of Completion for permit #16-023, Linwood Lower School. Sanders/Murphy Unanimously Approved D) 17-021 Macalester Theatre Building – Closure (Hosch) This permit was issued for the demolition and reconstruction of an existing theater building on the Macalester campus in St. Paul. The site stormwater is treated through two surface filtration basins, both of which are functional. The site is stable and there is $4,500 surety to return. Motion 19-201: Approve $4,500 surety return and Certificate of Completion for permit #17-021, Macalester Theater Building. Sanders/Murphy Unanimously Approved E) 19-021 Como Animal Hospital – Review Period Extension (Martinkosky) Ms. Hosch reviewed for Mr. Martinkowky, the applicant requested an extension to the 60-day review period prior to the expiration. Additional time is still needed to work through CRWD Rule requirements. The applicant is also working through City of Roseville requirements.
Motion 19-202: Approve 60-day review period extension for Permit 19-021 Como Animal Hospital to expire December 21, 2019. Sanders/Murphy Unanimously Approved IV.
Special Reports
No Special Report V.
Action Items A) AR: (Sylvander)
Approve Minutes of the October 2, 2019 Workshop and Regular Board Meeting
Motion 19-203: Approve the Minutes of the October 2, 2019 Regular Board Meeting. Texer/Sanders Unanimously approved B)
AR:
Approve September 2019 Accounts Payable/Receivable (Sylvander)
Motion 19-204: Approve September 2019 Accounts Payable/Receivable and Budget Report and direct Board Treasurer and President to endorse and disperse checks for these payments. Texer/Sanders Unanimously approved C)
AR:
Approve Interim Board Officer (Doneux)
Administrator Doneux shared that with Manager Reiders not being reappointed, a void for the role of Treasurer needed to be filled. Manager Texer nominated Manager Sanders as Treasure till the end of 2019. Motion 19-205: Appoint Manager Sanders as the Treasurer. Texer/Murphy Unanimously approved VI. Unfinished Business A) Roseville TWP Blvd Rain Gardens (Novak) Mr. Novak provided a review of the targeted watershed partner boulevard rain gardens. CRWD reached out to the Lake McCarrons neighborhood through the TWP program. Thirty neighbors were interested
in a raingarden. After site visits and soil boring tests, fourteen sights were identified as suitable for a raingarden construction. Mr. Novak and staff worked with City of Roseville on the removals and excavation to install fourteen raingardens around Lake McCarrons. Mr. Novak shared that the annual volume and pollutant reduction results are better than anticipated removing 10 pounds of phosphorus a year. President Collins inquired about retaining walls in the raingarden projects. Mr. Novak replied that several the sites had a steep slope to work with, the retaining walls help in managing the runoff collection. Manager Texer described how this project tells a story of investment and asked that this project be shared. No action was taken, information was provided as an update. B) Partner Grant Program Update (Schwantes) Ms. Schwantes provided an update of the Partner Grant Program. Applications are currently being accepted until Oct. 30. An information workshop was started last year and will be offered again this year. Historical information will be included with review process. Manager Reider served on the Partner Grant committee resulting in a vacancy. Manger Jones has abstained in the past. Manger Murphy offered to serve on the committee. Administrator Doneux asked about the budget for Partner Grants. Ms. Schwantes replied that the budget is $102,000. Manger Murphy asked how organizations can learn about program. Ms. Schwantes replied that program information is shared with an extensive list of partners that we work with. Ms. Van Sant has been posting information on social media. VII.
General Information
A) Board of Managers’ Updates Manger Texer shared that the Grand Opening party was a fabulous event. Administrator Doneux added regarding the Grand Opening event, about 346 attendees signed in. Many neighbors were in attendance and very welcoming. Manager Texer stated that Metro MAWD had a good meeting in October. Administrator Doneux shared that the 2019 ReScape Awards are coming up and Manger Texer has attended in the past. CRWD has been nominated in two categories. The awards event will be on Thurs, Nov. 7th. Administrator Doneux will send out email to Managers with more information. Administrator Doneux shared that more meetings are taking place in the building. Staff are working on an easier way to share the room calendar and availability. A meeting regarding Lake McCarrons was scheduled on Monday 10/21 at the Galilee Lutheran Church on McCarrons Blvd and Rice Street.
Manager Texer made a motion to move the first meeting in December from Wednesday, December 4th to Tuesday, December 3rd. Motion 19-206: Move the December 4th, 2019 Board Meeting to Tuesday, December 3rd.. Texer/Sander Unanimously approved VIII. Next Meetings Monday, October 21, 2019 6:00 Galilee Church re: Lake McCarron’s Wednesday, November 6, 2019 6:00 PM Board Meeting, workshop at 5:00 pm Wednesday, November 13, 2019 6:00 PM CAC Meeting, President Collins will attend Wednesday, November 20, 2019 6:00 PM Board Meeting IX.
Adjournment
Motion 19-206: Adjournment of the October 16, 2019 Regular Board Meeting at 6:45 P.M. Sanders/Texer Unanimously Approved Respectfully submitted, Michelle Sylvander
November 6, 2019 Board Meeting V. Action Items – B) MAWD Delegates (Doneux)
DATE: October 30, 2019 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Mark Doneux, Administrator RE: Appoint Delegates for the MAWD Annual Meeting _________________________________________________________________________________ Background Each year watershed districts are asked to appoint and certify two delegates and one alternate for the Minnesota Association of Watershed District (MAWD) annual meeting. A mailing was sent recently to all Board Members for the Annual Meeting and Trade Show and is enclosed with this memo. Issues Two Board Members must be appointed delegates and one alternate for the Annual Meeting Action Requested Appoint two Managers and alternate as delegates to the MAWD Annual Meeting. enc:
Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts, Inc. Annual Meeting Packet
November 6, 2019 Board Meeting V. Action Items – C) MAWD Approve 2019 MAWD Resolutions (Doneux)
DATE: October 30, 2019 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Mark Doneux, Administrator RE: Approve 2019 MAWD Resolutions Recommendations _________________________________________________________________________________ Background As part of the annual meeting of the Minnesota Association of Watershed District (MAWD), delegates are asked to consider and take action resolutions submitted to the membership. This year several resolutions are being considered at the annual meeting. Issues Attached are the recommendations of the MAWD Resolutions/Policy Committee to MAWD membership for the 2019 MAWD Annual Meeting. The MAWD Resolution committee will meet at the Annual Meeting on Friday, December 6, 2019 to entertain any questions regarding their recommendations from the proposing watershed district or other member districts and review any Board of Director's Resolutions. The location of this meeting will be posted on the Annual Meeting program. The Board of Managers should provide direction and recommendations to the CRWD delegates for this year’s slate of resolutions. Requested Action Provide recommendations for CRWD Delegates regarding MAWD Annual meeting resolutions. enc:
2019 MAWD Resolution packet
W:\08 Orgs-Cities-Agencies\MAWD\MAWD 2019 Annual Conference\Bd Memo MAWD Appoint Delegates 2019.docx
Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet DATE:
September 27, 2019
TO:
MAWD Resolutions Committee Members
FROM:
Sherry Davis White, Resolutions Committee Chair
RE:
Resolutions Committee Meeting
The Resolutions Committee will meet 10 a.m. to 12 noon on Friday, October 4, at Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, 15320 Minnetonka Blvd, Minnetonka to review the resolutions submitted by MAWD members. The following call-in will also be available: Conference line: 612.351.3093 Conference Code: 159096 Enclosed are the materials for the meeting. The objective of the meeting is to complete the following tasks: 1. Decide if any proposed resolutions are duplicative of current policy. If so, they should not be forwarded to the members for a vote at the annual meeting. 2. Decide if any resolutions are so similar that they should be combined into one. 3. Modify the “THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED” statements to make sure they don’t direct HOW or WHEN to do the work, but simply state what the organization supports or opposes. 4. Debate the merits of each resolution and make recommendations to the membership on whether each resolution should be adopted or rejected.
Resolutions Committee Recommendations # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Resolution Title Request the DNR enact legislation and policies to streamline the permitting process Legislation Increasing the General Fund Ad Valorem Tax Levy Default Classification for Artificial Watercourses That Serve as Public Drainage Ditches Heron Lake Watershed District General Operating Levy Adjustment Resolution to Clarify County Financing Obligation and Authorize Watershed District General Obligation Bonds for Public Drainage Projects Requiring Wetland Replacements to Occur in the Basin Where They Were Drained or Filled MAWD Opposition to Any Legislation That Establishes Watershed District Spending Requirements by Political Regions or Boundaries Incorporating Nutrient Management into State Funded Practices Incorporating Soil Management Best Practices into Groundwater Appropriation Support for Managing Water Flows in the Minnesota River Basin Through Increased Water Storage and Other Strategies and Practices Chinese Mystery Snail Designation Change and Research Needs General Fund Levy Adjustment Resolution to Ban the Use of Pesticides and Herbicides that are Known Carcinogens on Residential and Commercial Lawns Resolution to Limit Wake Boat Activities that Directly Cause Shoreline Erosion and Spread Aquatic Invasive Species
Committee Recommendation
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
1|Page
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #1
Request the DNR enact legislation and policies to streamline the permitting process Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Bois de Sioux WD Jamie Beyer 320-563-4185 bdswd@runestone.net
Background that led to submission of this resolution: Climate change is manifesting as increased precipitation in our region. The increased precipitation is adding to our historical flood pressure. Lake water levels are rising, and there is a renewed importance to ensure unimpeded stream flows. We need proactive management by the DNR on two key issues: 1)Lake Draw-downs: We began dealing with flood issues in January 2019. We believe that the weight of ice on a chain of lakes forced water into drainage ditches - which caused flooding issues for downstream property owners. Our District spent a great deal of time and money opening-up frozen drainage ditches, because the flow of water was so significant and threatened public roads and private residences. We fear, with water levels at continued elevated levels, flooding will be repeated in 2020. Waterbodies in our area need to be more actively managed by the DNR, with regular, planned draw-downs, in order to prevent future flood damages to property and infrastructure. 2)Public Water Stream Clean-outs: We have areas in the watershed that rely on streams to convey excess surface water, and currently some streamflows are impeded due to sediment and plant debris. In these areas, clean-outs are needed to protect streamflow. We have had groups of private landowners experience great frustration and failure in navigating the permitting process (with its associated costs) over the past 2 years. The DNR has provided us with district climate change information, and our on-going projects are being developed in response to changing environmental conditions; we would like to see the same climate change information act as a catalyst for the DNR's physical management of waterbodies. Ideas for how this issue could be solved: Support legislation and policies that require DNR lake level management action and applicant permitting success. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? Unknown
This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X - In areas of need of active water management Only our Region: Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
2|Page
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #1
Request the DNR enact legislation and policies to streamline the permitting process Submitted by: Bois de Sioux Watershed District
WHEREAS, the DNR manages waterbody water levels and permits for public water drainage outlet clean-outs; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 103G.245 defines actions under which a permit is required for work proposed in Public Waters; and, WHEREAS, in the Red River Valley, we are noting increased precipitation trends and rising water levels in many waterbodies, which increases the threat of flood damage to neighboring properties and infrastructure; and, WHEREAS, the DNR acknowledges that they have a responsibility to adapt to climate change; and, WHEREAS, private and public landowners have run into difficulty completing the DNR permit process and have reported that the current DNR permitting process is: 1. Potentially very expensive and difficult to predict, and that also means lengthy. The application fee is $300 - $3,000 and payment is no guarantee of permit approval. It is unclear when an EAW will be required, and how extensive the EAW will need to be – and costs could be from $10,000 - $30,000 if the EAW requirement is not clearly defined. 2. Not always based on scientific data. In some cases, soil borings are not being taken by third-party organizations and industry standards.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
that the Bois de Sioux Watershed District requests the DNR enact legislation, rules, and/or agency policies to streamline the permitting process by increasing responsiveness, decreasing the amount of time it takes to approve permits, providing a detailed fee schedule prior to application, and conducting water level management practices that result in the DNR reacting more quickly to serious, changing climate conditions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports the Bois de Sioux Watershed District requests the DNR enact legislation, rules, and/or agency policies to streamline the DNR permitting process by increasing responsiveness, decreasing the amount of time it takes to approve permits, providing a detailed fee schedule prior to application, and conducting water level management practices that result in the DNR reacting more quickly to serious, changing climate conditions.”
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
3|Page
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #2
MAWD Support of New Legislation Increasing the General Fund Ad Valorem Tax Levy Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Bois de Sioux WD Jamie Beyer 320-563-4185 bdswd@runestone.net
Background that led to submission of this resolution: The General Fund ad valorem tax levy has not been adjusted since [I need some help here - looks like many, many years], despite increasing water quality and water quantity demands and responsibilities placed on Watershed Districts. At the very least, the figure could be updated based on an inflationary index. Ideas for how this issue could be solved: Support the pursuit of legislation that increases the maximum amount or net formula result or adds an annual inflationary adjustment. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? Unknown This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
4|Page
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #2
MAWD Support of New Legislation Increasing the General Fund Ad Valorem Tax Levy Submitted by: Bois de Sioux Watershed District
WHEREAS, Minnesota watershed district administrative levies are restricted to $250,000 by MN Statute 103D.905 Subd. 3; and, WHEREAS, Bois de Sioux Board Managers understand that the $250,000 has not kept pace with the current needs and expectations placed on watershed district operations; and, WHEREAS, the ability fulfill water quantity and quality governing expectations are hampered by the outdated levy limit,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Bois de Sioux Watershed District recognizes and supports the pursuit of legislation to increase the $250,000 administrative levy limit.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED inflationary adjustment.
that the Bois de Sioux Watershed District supports the inclusion of an annual
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends this resolution be eliminated since it is duplicative of existing policy 2018-02.
2018-02 Increase or Remove the $250k General Fund Tax Levy Limit THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports legislation to increase or remove the $250,000 general fund ad valorem tax levy limit set in MN statute 103D.905 subd. 3. If the limit is raised to a new dollar amount, MAWD supports an inflationary adjustment be added to statute.
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
5|Page
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #3
Default Classification for Artificial Watercourses That Serve as Public Drainage Ditches Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Bois de Sioux WD Linda Vavra 320-760-1774 Ivavra@fedtel.net
Bois de Sioux WD Jamie Beyer 320-563-8510 bdswd@runestone.net
Background that led to submission of this resolution: In December 2018, our watershed was selected to begin MPCA's Use Attainment Assessment (UAA) to evaluate and categorize watercourses for Tiered Aquatic Life Use (TALU) Standards. We have been told that these standards have been implemented by the State of Minnesota to fulfill EPA WOTUS requirements. To date, our District has spent $10,000 attending and responding to these meetings. And we have not completed the process. Our frustration and severe concern is with the default inclusion of man-made, non-tidal drainage ditches excavated on dry land, that were given the default categorization of Class 2 Aquatic Life and Recreational Use under the Dayton administration. Our watershed is at the headwaters of the Red River Valley, and is extremely prone to flooding - in winter, spring, and summer. Drainage ditches are vital public infrastructure, protecting private property and public property (which includes our roads, highways and bridges) from flood damage. Our watershed is a drainage ditch authority for 65 systems in Grant, Traverse, and Wilkin County. The majority of our drainage systems are in need of significant repairs and/or improvements. These projects are expensive and complicated. Repairs/ improvements are funded by private landowners, whose properties were assessed when the ditches were constructed, and have since been assessed for maintenance on an annual basis. Recently, we have seen great local support and participation in repairing/improving District drainage systems. Over the past four years, landowners have initiated three major repairs/improvements - at a potential cost to themselves of over $3,060,000. Often times, ditches that are out-of-repair have sedimented and eroded sides; instead of moving water, the out-ofrepair ditches hold water, which encourages the growth of cattails, which further catches sediment and further holds back water. The more water a ditch is holding, the less capacity it has to accept and move new water during high precipitation events. This is where the conflict with UAA and TALU enters: ditches in good repair will be ephemeral in nature, not supporting fish and macroinvertebrates (which will result in an "impaired water"), and ditches in need of repair may meet fish and macroinvertebrate standards (which may prevent us from repairing them and returning them to their designed ephemeral state). Ideas for how this issue could be solved: The State of Minnesota could abandon the overregulation instituted by the Dayton administration and recognize the EPA's own exclusions: Rule Text § 230.3(s)(2)(iii): “The following are not ‘waters of the United States... the following ditches: (A) Ditches with ephemeral flow that are not a relocated tributary or excavated in a tributary. (B) Ditches with intermittent flow that are not a relocated tributary, excavated in a tributary, or drain wetlands. (C) Ditches that do not flow, either directly or through another water, into [a traditional navigable water, interstate water, or the territorial seas. https://www.jswcd.org/files/c141e89d1/Clean+Water+Rule+Factsheet.pdf
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
6|Page
For manmade drainage ditches excavated on dry land, the State of Minnesota could replace the default Class 2 Aquatic Life and Recreational Use with a default Class 7 Limited Resource Value Water. Per Administrative Rule 7050.0227, Class 7 does have water quality standards for E.coli, dissolved oxygen, pH and toxic pollutants. We are open to other suggestions! Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? We have met with MPCA many times and expressed our concern over the past 10 months, but there has been no acknowledgment or suggestion on how we can protect, maintain, and ensure fulfillment of our duty to repair our drainage system infrastructure. In fact, at the last meeting we were at the question was raised by MPCA staff - why would we want to repair a ditch, if it is supporting biology? This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X - areas of the state that rely on manmade drainage systems to protect Only our Region: infrastructure and property from excess precipitation. Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
7|Page
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #3
Default Classification for Artificial Watercourses That Serve as Public Drainage Ditches Submitted by: Bois de Sioux Watershed District
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 103G.005 defines three watercourses: natural watercourses, altered natural watercourses, and artificial watercourses; and WHEREAS, some natural watercourses are used as public drainage systems; and WHEREAS, some altered natural watercourses are used as public drainage systems; and WHEREAS, some public roadside drainage systems are 100% manmade, designed and built for one, limited purpose: to convey excess precipitation, alleviating flood damages to public and private property and it is this category that are considered artificial watercourses because they lack natural stream features and do not provide stream habitat by their design; and WHEREAS, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the unique nature of drainage ditches on June 19, 2006 in its Rapanos decision, stating that for Clean Water Act implementation, Waters of the United States does not automatically apply to ditch systems in which water flows intermittently or ephemerally. The EPA itself advises: “In addition, ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only uplands and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water are generally not waters of the United States because they are not tributaries or they do not have a significant nexus to downstream traditional navigable waters.” https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-04/documents/rapanosguidance6507.pdf WHEREAS, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is implementing its Clean Water Act Tiered Aquatic Life Uses (TALU) for all watercourses in Minnesota based on the assumption that all waters by default should be categorized by Minnesota Pollution Control Agency as Class 2 Waters (Aquatic Life and Recreation); the Class 2 label declares universally that all waters by default “support or may support aquatic biota, bathing, boating, or other recreational purposes and for which quality control is or may be necessary to protect aquatic or terrestrial life or their habitats or the public health, safety, or welfare” per Minnesota Administrative Rules 7050.0140 Subp. 3; and WHEREAS, the default Class 2 Aquatic Life standard is applied by Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to public roadside drainage systems that are artificial watercourses, 100% manmade, even though these roadside drainage systems were not designed to provide habitat, and – in fact – when are in optimal operation, only hold water ephemerally when they provide flood control, storing excess precipitation until it can be metered downstream; and WHEREAS, when applied to a public roadside drainage systems that are artificial watercourses, 100% manmade, the Class 2 Aquatic Life standard mandates 10-year cycle biological monitoring and testing under TALU that is lengthy and timeconsuming for state and particularly local government agencies - and ultimately very expensive for state and local taxpayers; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency does acknowledge in its own Rules that some watercourses should be exempt from needless TALU regulation. According to Minnesota Administrative Rules, Class 7 waters (limited resource value waters) are those that demonstrate that: A. the existing and potential faunal and floral communities are severely limited by natural conditions as exhibited by poor water quality characteristics, lack of habitat, or lack of water; B. the quality of the resource has been significantly altered by human activity and the effect is essentially irreversible; or 2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
8|Page
C. there are limited recreational opportunities, such as fishing, swimming, wading, or boating, in and on the water resource.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Bois de Sioux Watershed District, acting as a drainage ditch authority in
Traverse, Wilkin, and Grant County supports removal of the default Class 2 categorization for public roadside drainage systems that are artificial watercourses, and supports a default Class 7 categorization for public roadside drainage systems that are artificial watercourses.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports the Bois de Sioux Watershed District, acting as a drainage ditch authority in Traverse, Wilkin, and Grant County supports removal of the default Class 2 categorization for public roadside drainage systems that are artificial watercourses, and supports a default Class 7 categorization for public roadside drainage systems that are artificial watercourses.�
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
9|Page
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #4
Heron Lake Watershed District General Operating Levy Adjustment Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Heron Lake Watershed District Jan Voit, District Administrator 507-793-2462 jvoit@hlwdonline.org
Background that led to submission of this resolution: 1. The general operating levy limit, as set by Minnesota Statues 103D.905, Subd. 3, is 0.048 percent of the taxable market value or $250,000, whichever is less. This legislation has not changed since 2001 – 18 years. 2. The general operating levy is used to pay for manager per diems, staff, building rent, supplies, equipment, consultants, monitoring, project implementation, and matching funds for grants. 3. Workload and responsibilities for watershed districts have grown substantially since 2001. In addition to general operations, work related to developing Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategies, increasing community involvement, acquiring tools for targeting and prioritizing best management practices installation, and implementing One Watershed One Plan are undertaken to fulfill a watershed district’s mission and goals. 4. Competition for grant funds has increased significantly. Matching funds for grants have always been committed through the general operating levy. Because of the current levy limit, providing matching funds has become more difficult. 5. The HLWD has long-term water sampling sites at three locations within the watershed. Year to year data varies based on weather patterns and land use change. The data from 2003 to 2017 shows a decline in Total Suspended Solids, Orthophosphorus, and Total Phosphorus. 6. Current levy limits constrain capacity to issue general obligation bonds to finance projects in public drainage systems. 7. The HLWD took several years to reach the general operating levy of $250,000 cap has remained unchanged for the last 18 years, which shows the managers’ fiscal responsibility. Ideas for how this issue could be solved: Increasing the general operating levy is the only long-term solution to provide sustainable funding for personnel and projects within the watershed. Having the revenue to provide grant match would also be beneficial. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? The Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts and Board of Water and Soil Resources support adjusting the general operating levy to allow watershed districts to fulfill their responsibilities as required by statute. This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: Only our Region: Only our District: X
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 10 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #4
Heron Lake Watershed District General Operating Levy Adjustment Submitted by: Heron Lake Watershed District
WHEREAS, the Heron Lake Watershed District (HLWD) generates revenue through a general operating levy as authorized for watershed districts under MN Statute 103D.901 subdivision 1. This statute caps each watershed district’s levy at 0.048% of the estimated market value (EMV) or $250,000, whichever is less, regardless of the size or tax capacity of each district; WHEREAS, if the levy was only limited to the 0.048% EMV cap, HLWD would be allowed to levy $951,007 in 2020, but is instead limited to $250,000; WHEREAS, the $250,000 limit authorized by the legislature in 2001 is equal to $361,000 in today’s dollars and that amount does not take into account the additional workload created for watershed districts by new state water management programs over the past 19 years; WHEREAS, the HLWD uses the general levy to not only fund operational expenses such as rent, equipment, and supplies, it also uses the money to pay for staff time and laboratory analysis to monitor our lakes and streams for water quality issues, conduct community education and outreach activities, prioritize the best location for best management practices, and will be needed to implement activities planned for and documented in the new statewide One Watershed One Plan initiative; WHEREAS, the HLWD must also use this levy when it wants to construct pollution or flood reduction projects or to provide match dollars for state or federal implementation grants to build these same projects; WHEREAS, the HLWD has successfully brought in $3,205,672 in grants while only taxing $4,364,322 locally from 1996 to 2018. This represents $0.77 of additional funds coming into the district for every $1 taxed. This is also equivalent to $14.54 taxed over the course of 23 years and $10.69 brought in for each of the approximately 300,000 acres in the HLWD; WHEREAS, an unchanged $250,000 annual budget has ultimately led to staff reductions and an increasingly diminished capacity to be able to provide match dollars required when applying for grants to build the projects and activities desired and vetted by its local citizens; WHEREAS, the HLWD has also found that current levy limits constrain its capacity to issue general obligation bonds to finance projects in public drainage systems; WHEREAS, the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts (MAWD) assists districts with legislation that is needed by its members to provide adequate service to its residents;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the HLWD asks MAWD members to support an increase in HLWD’s general
operating levy cap from $250,000 to an amount not to exceed $500,000.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports the HLWD asks MAWD members to support an increase in Heron Lake Watershed District’s HLWD’s general operating levy cap from $250,000 to an amount not to exceed $500,000.”
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 11 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #5
Resolution to Clarify County Financing Obligation and Authorize Watershed District General Obligation Bonds for Public Drainage Projects Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Heron Lake Watershed District Jan Voit, District Administrator 507-793-2462 jvoit@hlwdonline.org
Background that led to submission of this resolution: The Heron Lake Watershed District (HLWD) ahs served as a drainage authority for numerous public drainage systems for decades and until recently relied on county bonding to finance its drainage projects. Recently, one county has conditioned its willingness to bond for a drainage projects on the HLWD surrendering its role as drainage authority. Integrated management of the watershed and public drainage systems within it are central to our mission and there is no statutory authority to require a watershed district to abandon its role as a drainage authority. Watershed districts outside the metro area have levy limits that constrain their ability to issue general obligation bonds pledging their full faith and credit. Ideas for how this issue could be solved: We have identified two possible solutions: 1. Clarify that an affected county must finance a watershed district project establishment and construction by issuance of bonds payable from assessments, backed by the full faith and credit of the watershed district; and further provide for adequate tax levy authority to assure the watershed district’s credit capacity. 2. Authorize watershed districts to finance drainage project establishment and construction by issuance of bonds payable from assessments, backed by the full faith and credit of the watershed district; and further provide for adequate tax levy authority to assure the watershed district’s credit capacity. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? Most counties have cooperative relationships with watershed districts functioning as drainage authorities and work together in financing drainage projects. Some counties may feel that they wish to take over drainage management and therefore may not support this clarification in the drainage code and watershed law. This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 12 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #5
Resolution to Clarify County Financing Obligation and Authorize Watershed District General Obligation Bonds for Public Drainage Projects Submitted by: Heron Lake Watershed District
WHEREAS, watershed districts serve as public drainage authorities under the Minnesota Drainage Code (chapter 103E) and are responsible to construct projects to establish, improve, and extend public drainage systems and provide outlets for such systems; WHEREAS, projects are funded by multi-year assessment of benefited lands and financing typically I s required to pay costs of project establishment and construction in advance of assessments; WHEREAS, watershed districts may issue bonds, but those not within the seven-county metropolitan area have a limited ad valorem taxing authority and therefore lack adequate capacity to pledge full faith and credit for such bonds, beyond a limited principal amount that is insufficient for a project of substantial scope; WHEREAS, limited ad valorem taxing authority means that project financing bonds issued by watershed districts will have limited marketability and impose higher interest costs on projects, as will long term commercial loans in place of bonds; WHEREAS, the Drainage Code (Minnesota Statues §103E.635) states that a county may finance a watershed district drainage project by issuing bonds payable from assessments and backed by the full faith and credit of the county; WHEREAS, some counties have taken the position that under this Drainage Code language, financing watershed district drainage projects by bond issuance or by another method is a matter for county discretion, and in certain cases have elected not to provide such financing; WHEREAS, without the certainty of project financing at an acceptable rate of interest, a watershed district cannot responsibly begin to accrue project establishment costs, cannot contract for project construction, and therefore cannot fulfill its statutory responsibilities as drainage authority; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts will seek legislation to achieve one or both of the following: (a) To clarify that an affected county must finance a watershed district drainage project on project establishment and request of the watershed district; and (b) To authorize watershed districts to finance drainage project establishment and construction by issuance of bonds payable from assessments and backed by the full faith and credit of the watershed district; and further provide for adequate tax levy authority to assure the watershed district’s credit capacity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts will seek legislation to achieve one or both of the following: a) To clarify that an affected county must finance a watershed district drainage project on project establishment and request of the watershed district; and b) To authorize watershed districts to finance drainage project establishment and construction by issuance of bonds payable from assessments and backed by the full faith and credit of the watershed district; and further provide for adequate tax levy authority to assure the watershed district’s credit capacity.”
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 13 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #6
Requiring Wetland Replacements to Occur in the Basin Where They Were Drained or Filled Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District Diane Lynch 952-440-0067 dlynch@plslwd.org
Background that led to submission of this resolution: Minnesota Statute 103G.2242 Wetland Subdivision 2. Evaluation states that: a. Questions concerning the public value, location, size or type of a wetland shall be submitted to and determined by a Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) after on-site inspection b. The TEP is composed of technical professional employees of the Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources, local soil and water conservation district, and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for projects affecting public waters or wetland adjacent to public waters 1. Technical professional employees of watershed districts may be invited to attend and comment on the questions, but their comments are not considered with the same value as official TEP representatives. 2. Watershed districts have rules that affect draining, filling, excavating or otherwise altering wetlands. 3. Wetlands play a vital role in the health of watersheds. 4. Technical professional employees of watershed districts offer an important perspective regarding protecting wetlands within their watersheds.
Ideas for how this issue could be solved: Initiate legislation to amend the statute to require technical representatives of watershed districts to be on the TEP. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? We would expect watershed districts to support it. This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 14 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #6
Requiring Wetland Replacements to Occur in the Basin Where They Were Drained or Filled Submitted by: Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District
WHEREAS, the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District (PLSLWD) is a watershed management organization and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota established under and operating with powers and purposes set forth at Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D; and WHEREAS, the District has rules that affect drilling, filling, excavating or otherwise altering wetlands; and WHEREAS, by state statute, questions concerning the public value, location, size or type of wetland are required to be submitted to and determined by a Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP); and WHEREAS, technical professional employees of watershed districts are not official members of a TEP; and WHEREAS, wetlands play a vital role in the health of watersheds
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the PLSLWD Board of Managers supports 2020 state legislation to require technical representatives of watershed districts to be official members of TEPs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports the PLSLWD Board of Managers supports 2020 state legislation to require technical representatives of watershed districts to be official members of TEPs.�
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 15 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #7
MAWD Opposition to Any Legislation That Establishes Watershed District Spending Requirements by Political Regions or Boundaries Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Rice Creek Watershed District Nick Tomczik 763-398-3079 ntomczik@ricecreek.org
Background that led to submission of this resolution: During the 2019 legislative session, HF 2314 and SF 2372 were introduced that set spending requirements on the Rice Creek Watershed District based on a county’s boundaries. No action was taken on either bill since the initial introductions and addition of authors. Since it was the first year of the biennium, it is possible the bills could be acted on during the 2020 legislative session. It is also possible that other counties or communities could attempt to get legislation that restricts spending to political boundaries in another watershed. Any legislation that restricts watershed district spending by political regions or boundaries interferes with a district’s fundamental responsibility to implement critical flood control and water quality projects. Water does not follow political boundaries. Watershed districts were established to reduce the political nature of water and ensure fair and equitable management. Projects are consistently developed and selected based on priorities including flooding, AIS management, stormwater management, mandated water goals, and critical regional issues. Efforts to address flooding, drainage, and water quality on a county or political basis have failed in the past. • The Watershed Act demonstrates the legislature’s determination that water resources are best managed on a watershed basis and not at the city or county levels. • The State’s efforts and commitment to One Watershed One Plan policies demonstrate the continued need for watershed-based solutions. • Restricting watershed spending by county or political boundary is in direct conflict with the purpose and basis of the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act and other watershed management laws. Any legislation that establishes watershed district spending requirements by county or political boundaries would disrupt watershed-based planning and implementation in watershed districts. • Using district-wide taxes to fund programs and projects allows districts to fund the highest priority watershed-based regional solutions based on science, hydrology, and critical input from partners. • Restricting watershed spending by county or political boundary jeopardizes the ability to do regional projects. Implementing projects based on political boundaries instead of watersheds decreases the ability to implement multicounty solutions. Water management issues are not county-specific. • Restricting regional or multi-county solutions decreases efficiency and increases implementation costs and delays • Drainage system repairs would become more difficult because District-wide tax funds for trunk conveyance maintenance and minor drainage system maintenance activities would be restricted or unavailable • District-wide funding policies would need replacement • One county’s water management issues are often best addressed in another county Restricting watershed spending by county or political boundaries will likely cause a domino-effect with other communities and counties demanding that funds collected within their political boundaries be spent within those boundaries or at the very least demanding their funds not be spent in the restricting counties or communities. Such legislation could increase the costs and timelines for implementation of critical projects. Opposition to such legislation would align with the purpose 2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 16 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
and basis for the State’s watershed management laws and promote the highest priority regional solutions based on science, hydrology, and critical input from partners. This is the very foundation of watershed-based management.
Ideas for how this issue could be solved: Effective communication and outreach to stakeholders and legislative delegations is critical to their understanding that water resources are best managed on a watershed basis and not at the city or county levels. Emphasis should be given to: 1. The success of implementing highest priority regional watershed-based solutions based on science, hydrology, and critical input from partners; 2. Watershed management plans as a tool for identifying those highest priority solutions; 3. The increased cost to all communities without watershed-based funding and implementation; and 4. The potential increase in damage due to flooding or water quality impairments caused by delays in implementing projects without watershed-based funding. Any legislation restricting spending by watershed districts based political boundaries (instead of resource priorities) would contradict the State’s One Watershed One Plan policies, the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act, and the State’s other watershed management laws.
Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? Watershed districts, watershed management organizations, and state agencies and organizations with water management interests should support efforts to maintain non-political, watershed-based funding and management of water resources. Opposition may come from a few individual counties with an interest in restricting watershed-based prioritization and spending efforts and individuals who do not want watershed-based management of the resource.
This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 17 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #7
MAWD Opposition to Any Legislation that Establishes Watershed District Spending Requirements by Political Regions or Boundaries Submitted by: Rice Creek Watershed District
WHEREAS, many watershed districts use district-wide taxes to fund programs and projects; and WHEREAS, many watershed districts fund the highest priority regional solutions based on science, hydrology, and critical input from partners; and WHEREAS, the Watershed Act demonstrates the legislature’s determination that water resources are best managed on a watershed basis and not at the city or county levels; and WHEREAS, the Watershed Act, the Watershed Act Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act, and other watershed management laws established watershed districts to reduce the political nature of water and ensure fair and equitable management of the resource; and WHEREAS, the State’s One Watershed One Plan policies demonstrate a continued need for watershed-based solutions; and WHEREAS, HF2314 and SF 2372 were introduced during the 2019 legislative session to set spending requirements on the Rice Creek Watershed District based on a county boundary; and WHEREAS, any legislation that restricts watershed district spending by county or political boundaries interferes with a district’s fundamental responsibility to implement critical flood control and water quality projects; and WHEREAS, any legislation that restricts watershed district spending by county or political boundaries jeopardizes the ability to do regional projects; and WHEREAS, no action was taken on HF 2314 and SF 2372, however this legislation could be considered during 2020 or legislation could be introduced that would similar affects in other regions across the state.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts opposes any legislation that
establishes spending requirements or restricts watershed district spending by political regions or boundaries.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD opposes Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts opposes any legislation that establishes spending requirements or restricts watershed district spending by political regions or boundaries.”
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 18 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #8
Incorporating Nutrient Management into State Funded Practices Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District Mike Kinney, District Administrator (651) 395-5855 Michael.Kinney@clflwd.org
Background that led to submission of this resolution: The State of MN DNR offers a variety of financial incentives to agricultural producers for conservation and water quality purposes. The MN Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) 2014 Minnesota Nutrient Reduction Strategy report indicates a 2025 goal of reducing nitrogen loading by 20% and a 2040 goal of reducing nitrogen by 45% in order to meet water quality standards for the Mississippi River. Ideas for how this issue could be solved: The CLFLWD proposes this resolution in order to utilize agricultural incentive programs to make measurable progress toward the MPCA’s nitrogen reduction goals. Further, implementation of certain practices, namely maximum return to nitrogen (MRTN) and nutrient management plans, have economic benefits for the agricultural producers themselves. Therefore, benefits resulting from the proposed resolution are twofold: measurable reductions in nitrogen loading and cost savings for agricultural producers. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? CLFLWD anticipates support from MN Department of Agriculture and the Board of Water and Soil Resources. Given the economic benefit of the proposed resolution, strong opposition is not anticipated from producers. This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 19 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #8
Incorporating Nutrient Management into State Funded Practices Submitted by: Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District
WHEREAS, the State of MN DNR offers a variety of financial incentives to agricultural producers for conservation and water quality purposes; WHEREAS, the MN Pollution Control Agency 2014 Minnesota Nutrient Reduction Strategy report indicates a 2025 goal of reducing nitrogen loading by 20% and a 2040 goal of reducing nitrogen by 45% in order to meet water quality standards for the Mississippi River; WHEREAS, there are demonstrated and effective tools and best management practices to help maximize profits for growing row crops while limiting environmental impact; WHEREAS, the concept of “maximum return to nitrogen” (MRTN) refers to the rate of nitrogen (N) application that maximizes net economic return; WHEREAS, soil fertility specialists from six state universities (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin) have used data from ongoing research trials to create a method to calculate MRTN at selected prices of N and corn; WHEREAS, MRTN and nutrient management plans reduce nitrogen impacts to surface water and groundwater resources and avoid overapplication of nitrogen, while also serving the economic interests of agricultural producers; WHEREAS, implementation of the MRTN and nutrient management plans by agricultural producers is considered a best business practice and thus should not require taxpayer funds to implement; WHEREAS, the Minnesota state agencies can calculate excess nitrogen losses by comparing crop needs to the amount of nitrogen imported into the state, so as to establish a goal for reduction;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
that the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts shall engage the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and the Board of Water and Soil Resources with the goal to implement the MRTN and nutrient management plans generally into management of all fields that receive state financial support.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts shall engage the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and the Board of Water and Soil Resources with the goal to implementing the concept of “maximum return to nitrogen (MRTN)” and nutrient management plans generally into management of all fields that receive state financial support.”
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 20 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #9
Incorporating Soil Management Best Practices into Groundwater Appropriation Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District Mike Kinney, District Administrator (651) 395-5855 Michael.Kinney@dlflwd.org
Background that led to submission of this resolution: The MN DNR issues permits for groundwater appropriation pursuant to Minnesota Statute 103G.271 and has the authority to place reasonable conditions on appropriations authorized by permit. Agricultural producers obtain highcapacity appropriation permits to irrigate crops as a consequence of low soil water levels. Groundwater conservation is a high priority issue for the state of MN. Ideas for how this issue could be solved: There are demonstrated and effective best management practices to retain water in the soil profile and otherwise reduce needed irrigation volumes. Management options such as cover crops, no-till, strip-till, and other methods maintain or improve water holding capacity of the soil during the growing season. Prairie and wetland restoration efforts enhance groundwater recharge and are important components of the rural landscape. Other approaches such as improving irrigation efficiency are not specifically addressed by the resolution but may be elements of the discussion. Reducing groundwater appropriation and avoiding unnecessary irrigation serve the economic interests of agricultural producers. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units: The MN Department of Natural Resources likely would support the goals but may have concerns about implementation within its permitting program. Given the economic benefit of the best practices promoted by the proposed resolution, strong opposition is not anticipated from producers. This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 21 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #9
Incorporating Soil Management Best Practices into Groundwater Appropriation Submitted by: Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District
WHEREAS, the MN DNR issues permits for groundwater appropriation pursuant to Minnesota Statute 103G.271, and has the authority to place reasonable conditions on appropriations authorized by permit; WHEREAS, agricultural producers obtain high-capacity appropriation permits to irrigate crops as a consequence of low soil water levels; WHEREAS, there are demonstrated and effective best management practices to retain water in the soil profile and otherwise reduce needed irrigation volumes; WHEREAS, management options such as cover crops, no-till, strip-till, and other methods maintain or improve water holding capacity of the soil during the growing season; WHEREAS, prairie and wetland restoration efforts enhance groundwater recharge and are important components of the rural landscape; WHEREAS, reducing groundwater appropriation and avoiding unnecessary irrigation serve the economic interests of agricultural producers;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
that the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts shall engage the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to incorporate soil management best management practices into groundwater appropriations permitting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts shall engage the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to incorporate incorporation of soil management best management practices into groundwater appropriations permitting.�
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 22 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #10
Support for Managing Water Flows in the Minnesota River Basin Through Increased Water Storage and Other Strategies and Practices Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Lower Minnesota River Watershed District Linda Loomis 763-545-4659 naiadconsulting@gmail.com
Background that led to submission of this resolution: The Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD) is the local sponsor for the US Army Corps of Engineers maintenance of the navigation channel in the Minnesota River. As the local sponsor the LMRWD has seen the amount of sediment increase significantly. The increase in sediment has increased the cost for the LMRWD to manage dredge material that is removed from the river to maintain navigation. Numerous studies of the MN River Basin attribute the increase in sediment to an increase in the flow of water from increased agriculture drainage; increased impervious surfaces created by municipal development and increased precipitation patterns. The LMRWD was approached by the Minnesota River Congress to ask for support for its initiative to increase the amount of water storage in the MN River Basin and seek funding for this initiative at the state and federal levels. The LMRWD agreed to support the MN River Congress and the Board of Managers felt it was appropriate to request support from MAWD for this initiative.
Ideas for how this issue could be solved: The Minnesota River Congress is approaching organizations responsible for managing water in the MN River Basin, such as Counties and SWCDs (drainage authorities) to solicit support. Several MASWCD Areas have adopted resolutions of support for increasing water storage. In addition, several area legislators have agreed to introduce legislation to commit state funding to support CREP programs or develop a new program similar to CREP to take land that could be used for water storage out of production. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? The Minnesota River Congress is a coalition of many organizations in the MN River Basin and many of the governmental units are part of the coalition. There may be oppositions from any group that feels their own funding may be lessened because of this program.
This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 23 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #10
Support for Managing Water Flows in the Minnesota River Basin Through Increased Water Storage and Other Strategies and Practices Submitted by: Lower Minnesota River Watershed District
WHEREAS, virtually all of the natural water storage that once existed on the landscape in the form of prairie potholes, wet meadows, and even small lakes in the Minnesota River Basin has been eliminated; and WHEREAS, increased agricultural drainage and increased impervious surfaces in municipal areas along with significantly increased precipitation patterns is dramatically increasing water flow in our rivers and streams; and WHEREAS, high water levels in rivers and streams flood adjacent low-lying areas, erode stream banks, create backups on existing tile and ditch systems, and increase sediment transfer downstream; and WHEREAS, many acres of farm fields are flooded each year, sometimes multiple times each year, by river and stream flooding thereby preventing planting or destroying growing crops; and WHEREAS, storing water in upstream areas of the landscape will mitigate and slow the amount of water moving into rivers and streams and reduce flooding and erosion; and WHEREAS, storing water in upstream areas of the landscape and other strategies such as improving soil health will mitigate and slow the amount of water moving into rivers and streams and reduce flooding and erosion; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota River Congress, [a citizen-led group focusing on the natural resource and economic health of the Minnesota River Basin] is spearheading an initiative to increase water storage on the landscape using recommendations from the Collaborative for Sediment Source Reduction (CSSR) study as a basis for its initiative; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota River Congress is planning to introduce legislation at the state and federal levels to secure significant funding, specifically for surface water storage on the landscape in the Minnesota River Watershed.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Managers of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District
supports efforts to manage the flow of water in the Minnesota River Basin and the Minnesota River Congress in its efforts to increase water storage on the landscape; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
by the Board of Managers of the LMRWD that it supports the Minnesota River Congress in its efforts to secure state and federal programs targeted specifically to increase surface water storage in the Minnesota River Watershed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD the Board of Managers of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District supports efforts to manage the flow of water in the Minnesota River Basin and the Minnesota River Congress in its efforts to increase water storage on the landscape; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board of Managers of the LMRWD that MAWD it supports the Minnesota River Congress in its efforts to secure state and federal programs targeted specifically to increase surface water storage in the Minnesota River Watershed.�
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 24 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #11
Chinese Mystery Snail Designation Change and Research Needs Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Pelican River Watershed District Tera Guetter, Administrator 218-846-0436 Tera.Guetter@arvig.net
Background that led to submission of this resolution: Chinese Mystery snails are present in most major recreational lakes within the Pelican River Watershed District and are a concern to area residents. Populations have increased to high density levels where shorelines can have up to 2-3 ft of washed up shells, fouling up beaches and causing odor problems. These species are used in aquariums, but when improperly disposed of in public waters, they cause recreational, ecological, and economical damage in our waters. Goal: The State of MN will conduct research to control populations of Chinese Mystery Snails and to change the Minnesota designation from a regulated species to a prohibited species.
Ideas for how this issue could be solved: Research to control populations below nuisance levels and to change the designated status from regulated to prohibited to prevent use in aquariums and unintended release into public waters. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 25 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #11
Chinese Mystery Snail Designation Change and Research Needs Submitted by: Pelican River Watershed District
WHEREAS, Aquatic Invasive species cause recreational, economic and ecological damage—changing how residents and visitors use and enjoy Minnesota waters; WHEREAS, the presence and spread of Chinese Mystery Snails, an aquatic invasive species, is a matter of growing concern in the State of Minnesota, transcending state and international lines; WHEREAS, Chinese mystery snails are native to East Asia, but were brought into the U.S. in the late 19th century as a possible food source, and appeared in Minnesota in the early 2000’s and have now spread to more than 27 states and the Great Lakes; WHEREAS, Chinese Mystery Snails are an ecological threat as they can achieve very high densities and adversely affect aquatic food webs buy competing with native snails for food and habitat and transmit harmful parasites and diseases that harm native mussels and waterfowl; WHEREAS, Chinese Mystery Snails are an economic nuisance as they can die-off in large numbers and foul beaches and clog water-intake pipes; WHEREAS, it is paramount to prevent the spread of Chinese Mystery Snail to un-infested waterways; WHEREAS, Chinese Mystery Snail is designated as a regulated invasive species (MN DNR) in Minnesota and it is legal to buy, sell, transport, and possess, but may not be introduced into a free-living state, such as released into public waters; WHEREAS, there is no known effective population control for Chinese mystery snails in natural water bodies at this time;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Pelican River Watershed District requests MAWD members to support to
advocate for the State of Minnesota to conduct Chinese Mystery Snail prevention and control research and to change the Chinese Mystery Snail designated status in Minnesota as a regulated species to a prohibited species.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports the Pelican River Watershed District requests MAWD members to support to advocate for the State of Minnesota to conduct Chinese Mystery Snail prevention and control research and to change the Chinese Mystery Snail designated status in Minnesota as a regulated species to a prohibited species.”
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 26 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #12 General Fund Levy Adjustment
Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Pelican River Watershed District Tera Guetter, Administrator 218-846-0436 Tera.Guetter@arvig.net
Background that led to submission of this resolution: Goal: Increase or remove the annual levy limit to provide adequate funding for natural resource conservation projects and programs. There is a substantial need to increase or remove the $250,000 general fund ad valorem tax levy limit, not to exceed 0048 percent of estimated market value, as set in MN Statute 103D.905, subd.3, last revised in 2001. The increase in the general fund ad valorem maximum is principally important to non-metro watershed districts who have not individually increased their levy limits through special legislation. Current Statute: “MN Statute 103D.905 FUNDS OF WATERSHED DISTRICT (2001 last updated) Subd. 3 General Fund. A general fund, consisting of an ad valorem tax levy, may not exceed 0.048 percent of estimated market value, or $250,000, whichever is less. The money in the fund shall be used for general administrative expenses and for the construction or implementation and maintenance of projects of common benefit to the watershed district. The managers may make an annual levy for the general fund as provided in section 103D.911. In addition to the annual general levy, the managers may annually levy a tax not to exceed 0.00798 percent of estimated market value for a period not to exceed 15 consecutive years to pay the cost attributable to the basic water management features of projects initiated by petition of at least 50 resident owners whose property is within the watershed district.” The workloads and responsibilities of watershed districts have grown substantially in the past 15 years. The general fund pays for the general administrative expenses of the district such as manager per diems, staff, building rent/utilities, supplies and equipment, consultants (accountants, engineer, legal), education/public engagement, as well as for the construction, implementation and maintenance of water resource projects. State and Federal grants also require local fund matches. Watershed Districts do not receive operations support funding from the State of MN. Ideas for how this issue could be solved: Adjust the general fund ad valorem tax levy limit from $250,000 to $500,000. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? The Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts and MN Board of Water and Soil Resources support adjusting the general fund ad valorem tax levy limit to carry out the responsibilities as outlined in the District’s Water Management Plan and in MN State Statutes.
This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 27 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #12 General Fund Levy Adjustment
Submitted by: Pelican River Watershed District WHEREAS, MN Statute 103D.905 Funds of the Watershed District, Sub 3. General Fund consists of an ad valorem tax levy, which may not exceed 0.048 percent of estimated market value, or $250,000, whichever is less, regardless of the tax capacity of each District. WHEREAS, the $250,000 levy limit has not been adjusted since 2001, and the workload and responsibilities of watershed districts have increased substantially, including administrative expenses such as manager per diems, staff, building rent/utilities, supplies and equipment, as well as consultants (accountants, engineer, legal), education/public engagement, and for the construction, implementation and maintenance of water resource projects, and required local matches for State and Federal Grants. WHEREAS, the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts (MAWD) assists districts with legislation that is needed by it’s membership to provide adequate funding to carry out watershed district roles and responsibilities as outlined in water management plans, One Watershed; One Plan (1W1P), and in MN State Statutes.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Pelican River Watershed District requests MAWD members to support an
adjustment to the general fund ad valorem tax levy limit from $250,000 to an amount not to exceed $500,000.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes:
If the MAWD membership voted in favor of this resolution, it would replace existing policy 2018-02.
2018-02 Increase or Remove the $250k General Fund Tax Levy Limit THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports legislation to increase or remove the $250,000 general fund ad valorem tax levy limit set in MN statute 103D.905 subd. 3. If the limit is raised to a new dollar amount, MAWD supports an inflationary adjustment be added to statute.
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 28 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #13
Resolution to Ban the Use of Pesticides and Herbicides that are Known Carcinogens on Residential and Commercial Lawns Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District Claire Bleser, Administrator 952-607-6512 cbleser@rpbcwd.org
Background that led to submission of this resolution: Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District seeks to address groundwater health challenges through the strategies included in its 2018 10-Year Watershed Management Plan to promote the sustainable management of groundwater resources. The District recognizes that groundwater can be contaminated by fertilizer and pesticide applications, and that surface water and groundwater resources are interdependent. (10-Year Plan, 2.3.6.2, 2-21). While these relationships are challenging to quantify, contaminated water from one source can impact the water quality of the other. The District is focused on prevention of groundwater contamination through best management practices, recognizing that groundwater clean-up, when feasible, is both expensive and complex. Pesticides and herbicides used on both commercial and residential lawns have been linked to human health problems, and some studies have connected pesticides and herbicides with carcinogenic properties, including promotion of tumors. 1 A variety of pesticide and herbicide products pose health concerns, and some pesticides include known endocrine-disrupting compounds that affect how natural hormones function in the body and interfere with the body’s regulation of the endocrine system. 2 There are two primary pathways to pesticide and herbicide exposure, both directly and via drinking water through groundwater contamination. Contaminated surface water moving through the soil carries pollutants into groundwater resources, resulting in an underground plume of polluted groundwater that may become unsuitable for drinking water.3 In Minnesota, pesticides shown to disrupt hormone activity have been detected in surface waters. 4 Some municipalities in Canada have restricted pesticide use for aesthetic purposes, including on golf courses, due to health effects concerns including the relation between surface-applied pesticide exposure and occurrence of cancer.5 A 2006 study reviewing medical literature on herbicide and pesticide exposure notes that “the balance of epidemiological research suggests the 2,4-D [a common herbicide used to kill weeds in grass] can be persuasively linked to cancers, neurological impairment and reproductive problems. These may arise from 2,4-D itself, from breakdown products or dioxin contamination, or from a combination of chemicals.” 6 The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center also notes that, although evidence is limited, the International Agency for Research on 1
Dich, J., Zahm, SH, Adami, HO. (1997). Pesticides and Cancer. Cancer Causes Control. May; 8(3), 420-43. Swackhamer, D. et al. (2010). Understanding Sources of Aquatic Contaminants of Emerging Concern. LCCMR Project Addendum. Available online: https://www.lccmr.leg.mn/documents/peer_review/2010/addendums/subd_5a_swackhamer_v1.pdf. 3 See Joyce Latimer, Mike Goatley, Greg Evanylo, Bonnie Appleton. (2009). Groundwater Quality and the Use of Lawn and Garden Chemicals by Homeowners. Virginia Tech and Virginia State University: Virginia Cooperative Extension. Available online: https://www.pubs.ext.vt.edu/426/426-059/426-059.html. 4 Swackhamer, D. et al. (2010). Understanding Sources of Aquatic Contaminants of Emerging Concern. LCCMR Project Addendum. Available online: https://www.lccmr.leg.mn/documents/peer_review/2010/addendums/subd_5a_swackhamer_v1.pdf. 5 Loren D. Knopper & David R.S. Lean. (2010) Carcinogenic and Genotoxic Potential of Turf Pesticides Commonly used on Golf Courses. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B. Vol. 7, 2004: 4, 267-279. Available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10937400490452697?scroll=top&needAccess=true. 6 Meg Sears, C. Robin Walker, Richard HC van der Jagt, Paul Claman. (2006) Pesticide assessment: Protecting public health on the home turf. Pediatrics & Child Health, vol. 11: 4, 229-234. Available online: https://academic.oup.com/pch/article/11/4/229/2648275. 2
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 29 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
Cancer linked certain herbicides, such as those containing glyphosate (2,4-D) with an increased risk of cancer.7 According to the non-profit group Beyond Pesticides, of the 36 most commonly used lawn care pesticides registered prior to 1984, “14 are probable or possible carcinogens, 15 are linked with birth defects, 21 with reproductive defects, 24 with neurotoxicity, 22 with liver or kidney damage, and 3 are sensitizers and/or irritants.” 8 Additionally, “[a] child in a household using home and garden pesticides is 6.5 times more likely to develop leukemia than in a home that does not.” A 2012 National Institute of Health study of companion animals exposed to lawn care products demonstrated an association between use of specific law care products and a greater risk of canine malignant lymphoma. 9 Ideas for how this issue could be solved: We have identified one potential solution: 1. Ban the use of carcinogenic pesticides and herbicides on residential and commercial lawns and encourage adoption of alternatives such as PRFCT lawns. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? Minnesota Department of Health lists pesticides as a chemical of special concern to children’s health and many be interested in partnering on legislation. The Minnesota Department of Agriculture offers voluntary turfgrass pesticide use Best Management Practices “to bring awareness to homeowners and lawn care companies on proper and judicious use of pesticides for homeowners, lawn care companies, and gold course managers to help protect water resources, humans, and non-target organisms including pollinators.” These BMPs include using non-chemical pest control methods.
This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
7
Kellie Bramlet. (2016) Lawn Care and Your Cancer Risk. University of Texas MS Anderson Cancer Center. Available online: https://www.mdanderson.org/publications/focused-on-health/lawncare-cancer-risk.h26Z1590624.html. 8 Beyond Pesticides. Commonly Asked Questions About Chemical Lawn Care. Available online: https://www.beyondpesticides.org/programs/lawnsand-landscapes/overview/faq-chemical-lawn-care. 9 Takashima-Uebehlhoer BB, Barber LG, Zagarins SE, Procter-Gray E, Gollenberg AL, Moore AS, Bertone-Johnson ER. (2012) Household chemical exposures and the risk of canine malignant lymphoma, a model for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. 112:171-176. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22222006.
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 30 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #13
Resolution to Ban the Use of Pesticides and Herbicides that are Known Carcinogens on Residential and Commercial Lawns Submitted by: Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District
WHEREAS, watershed districts engage in conserving the state’s natural resources “by land use planning, flood control, and other conservation projects by using sound scientific principles for the protection of the public health and welfare and the provident use of the natural resources.” Minn. Stat. 103D.201, subd. 1; WHEREAS, human and environmental health concerns arise from the use of health harming and potentially carcinogenic pesticides and herbicides on commercial and residential lawns because surface application exposes humans and animals to potential carcinogens, and surface water carries pesticide and herbicide pollution through soil and into groundwater sources that can affect drinking water and environmental health; WHEREAS, eliminating the use of specific pesticides and herbicides on lawns will reduce surface interaction with these health-harming, potential carcinogens, and limit their entry into groundwater; WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Health lists pesticides as a chemical of special concern to children’s and the Minnesota Department of Agriculture promotes turfgrass pesticide use BMPs including using non-chemical pest controls;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts will seek legislation in partnership with the Minnesota Department of Health and Minnesota Department of Agriculture to achieve the following: a) Ban the use of carcinogenic pesticides and herbicides on residential and commercial lawns.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports legislation that would ban the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts will seek legislation that would in partnership with the Minnesota Department of Health and Minnesota Department of Agriculture to achieve the following: a) Ban the use of carcinogenic pesticides and herbicides on residential and commercial lawns.”
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 31 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
BACKGROUND INFO on PROPOSED RESOLUTION #14
Resolution to Limit Wake Boat Activities that Directly Cause Shoreline Erosion and Spread Aquatic Invasive Species Proposing District: Contact Name: Phone Number: Email Address:
Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District Claire Bleser, Administrator 952-607-6512 cbleser@rpbcwd.org
Background that led to submission of this resolution: Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District seeks to address erosion and shoreland health challenges through the water quality strategies included in its 2018 10-Year Watershed Management Plan, issues that fall within one of the plan’s primary focus areas: improving and protecting water quality. In its Watershed Management Plan, the District maintains that healthy shoreland areas are a key element of healthy hydrologic systems and provide habitat to support wildlife viability. Shoreland benefits can be compromised by erosion and sedimentation, among other resource threats. The District seeks to minimize the negative impacts of erosion and sedimentation – decreasing water depth, degrading water quality, smothering of fish and wildlife habitat – that result in major contributions to water pollution, recognizing that erosion and sedimentation are often accelerated by human activities. The District also seeks to minimize the spread and reduce the adverse ecological impacts of aquatic invasive species (AIS). Public groups and the scientific community have observed water quality issues, including scouring of lake bottoms by boat waves, sediment disturbance and damage to aquatic plants, damage to shoreline areas, and negative impacts to aquatic animals, that are linked to the large wakes created by wake boats on lakes. The current design of many wake boat ballast tanks does not enable the tanks to be completely drained or fully decontaminated, presenting an additional concern about transport of AIS. While most of the discussion has focused on wake boats, the same issues may arise with any water craft designed or operated in a manner to create wakes larger than wakes created by ordinary boats, including but not limited to boats with ballast, fins, trim tabs, or similar design features. A 2019 University of Minnesota Aquatic Invasive Species Research Center study showed that that large volume water holding ballast tanks of wake boats, which have the capacity to take on the most water of similar recreational boats, provide zebra mussels and larvae the greatest opportunity for inter-lake transport. These boats are not designed to fully drain all ballast tank water. 10 A 2018 report from the Oregon State Legislature summarizes studies on the various effects of wake boats, noting that boat speed is a primary factor in influencing wave size. 11 Also cited in this report is a report by the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee to the Chesapeake Bay Program that demonstrates a positive correlation between the size of boat wakes and the extent of shoreline erosion as well as sediment resuspension and nearshore turbidity. 12 A report to the City Council of Prior Lake, Indiana assesses environmental impacts from high speed boats on the 10
Dave Orrick. (2019) Zebra Mussel’s Best Friend: Wakeboard Boats, New U Study Finds. Livewell also Tested. Accessed through the Minnesota Aquatic Invasive Species Research Center (MAISRC), https://www.maisrc.umn.edu/news/wakeboards. 11 Item E: Staff report on safety around wake sports statewide. (2018) Oregon State Legislature. Available online: https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2018R1/Downloads/CommitteeMeetingDocument/144261. See also Sara MercierBlais & Yves Prairie. (2014) Project evaluation of the impact of the waves created by the type of boats wakeboat on the shores of Lake Memphremagog and Lovering; Ruprecht, Glamore, Cogland. (2015) Wakesurfing: Some Wakes are More Equal than Others. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294799932_Wakesurfing_Some_Wakes_are_More_Equal_than_Others. 12 Id. See also USDA NRCS. (1997) Slope Protection for Dams and Lakeshores: Minnesota Technical Note 2 (reviewing shoreline erosion processes and causes).
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 32 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
state’s lakes. The report summarizes studies focused on ecological impacts caused by waves, including shore and bank erosion, decreased water clarity, water quality degradation, and harm to aquatic plant and animal species. Shallow waters feel the most direct impacts of boat wakes, as well as shoreline areas adjacent to less than 1,000 feet of open water, making near-shore habitat where water depth is approximately 10 feet or less– the littoral zone—the most important to protect. 13 In spring 2019, Vermont considered legislation presented in Senate Bill 69 “to restrict or prohibit the use of wake boats in certain public waters.” 14 The bill as introduced proposes to limit wake boat speed within 200 feet of shoreline, imposing a $500 fine per violation, and proposes to restrict use of wake boats in certain public waters based on the size of the water body, the use of adjacent land, scenic beauty, or other recreational factors. 15 While the bill did not progress in the 2019 session, it may be re-introduced during a future session. Ideas for how this issue could be solved: We have identified three potential concurrent solutions: 1. Limiting wake boats to areas of lakes sufficiently distanced from shorelines to allow boat-generated waves to adequately dissipate and lessen energy before coming into impact with lake shorelines; and 2. Banning wake boats wakes in shallow lake areas where waves created by wake boats detrimentally impact sediment, aquatic vegetation, and aquatic habitat; and 3. Requiring wake boats to be designed, and existing boats to be modified, to enable complete drainage and decontamination of ballast tanks to stop the spread of AIS. Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units? Minnesota DNR is already engaged in an education campaign, “Own Your Wake – for Everyone’s Sake,” encouraging responsible boat use near shorelines. DNR also actively promotes state AIS law, requiring boat ballast tanks to be emptied by a shoreline or waterway before being transported. We anticipate seeking DNR support for and leadership of legislation reflecting joint ideas of how to solve issues caused by wake boating.
This issue is of importance (Check one): To the entire State: X Only our Region: Only our District:
13
City of Prior Lake, Agenda Item #16. Information Item: A review of environmental impacts from high speed boats on Indiana’s public freshwater lakes; Administrative Cause no. 10-029V. Available online: https://www.cityofpriorlake.com/documents/WSUM/info17.pdf. 14 Bruce Durgin. (2019) Wakeboard Boats Believed to Damage Lakes. The Federation of Vermont Lakes and Ponds. Available online: http://vermontlakes.org/wp-content/uploads//FOVLAP-Newsletter-Spring-2019-Final-digital.pdf 15 Vermont Legislature (2019). Bill as Introduced: S.69. Available online: https://legislature.vermont.gov/Documents/2020/Docs/BILLS/S-0069/S0069%20As%20Introduced.pdf
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 33 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
PROPOSED 2019 MAWD RESOLUTION #14
Resolution to Limit Wake Boat Activities that Directly Cause Shoreline Erosion and Spread Aquatic Invasive Species Submitted by: Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District
WHEREAS watershed districts engage in conserving the state’s natural resources “by land use planning, flood control, and other conservation projects by using sound scientific principles for the protection of the public health and welfare and the provident use of the natural resources.” Minn. Stat. 103D.201, subd. 1; WHEREAS wake boats driven in Minnesota lakes result in scouring of lake bottoms, disturbance of lake sediment and damage to aquatic plants, erosion of lake shoreline, disturbance of and damage to aquatic animals, and transfer of water in boat ballast tanks – many of which are not designed to drain completely or to be decontaminated – that results in transfer of aquatic invasive species (AIS) among Minnesota lakes; WHEREAS opportunities to limit the water quality impacts of wake boats include: restricting where within and in what waterbodies wake boats are allowed; defining the depth of water in which wake boats are allowed to create a wake; and requiring wake boats to be designed, and existing boats to be modified, to enable complete drainage and decontamination of ballast tanks to stop the spread of AIS WHEREAS the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is engaged in an education campaign, "Own Your Wake - for Everyone's Sake," encouraging responsible boat use near shorelines, and also actively promotes state AIS law, requiring boat ballast tanks to be emptied by a shoreline or waterway before being transported; WHEREAS other states have begun to regulate wake boat minimum distance from shoreline requirements and limit in what water bodies wake boating may take place; these regulations can serve as guidelines for regulations in Minnesota;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
that the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts will work with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to seek legislation to achieve one or more of the following: a) limiting wake boating to areas of lakes sufficiently distanced from shorelines to allow boat generated waves to adequately dissipate and lessen energy before coming into impact with lake shorelines; b) banning wake boats wakes in shallow lake areas where waves created by wake boats detrimentally impact sediment, aquatic vegetation, and aquatic habitat; and c) requiring new and existing wake boats to be able to completely drain and decontaminate their ballast tanks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Notes: Staff recommends the following edits:
“THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that MAWD supports the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts will work with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to seek legislation to achieve one or more of the following: a) limiting wake boating to areas of lakes sufficiently distanced from shorelines to allow boat generated waves to adequately dissipate and lessen energy before coming into impact with lake shorelines; b) banning wake boats wakes in shallow lake areas where waves created by wake boats detrimentally impact sediment, aquatic vegetation, and aquatic habitat; and c) requiring new and existing wake boats to be able to completely drain and decontaminate their ballast tanks.”
2019 Resolutions Committee Meeting Packet 34 | P a g e MN Association of Watershed Districts | 595 Aldine St, Saint Paul MN 55104 | 651.440.9407
Background Information 2019 MAWD Resolution
Proposing District:
Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District
Contact Name:
Tina Carstens, Administrator
Phone Number:
651-792-7960
Email Address:
tina.carstens@rwmwd.org
Resolution Title:
Resolution for MAWD to Support Additional State Funding to Watershed Management Organizations to Implement Flood Risk Mitigation Projects
Background that led to the submission of this resolution:
Formatted: Font: 12 pt
The extreme wet year and the increase in heavy precipitation is causing watershed districts to spend significantly more time and resources to mitigate and prevent flooding. The Minnesota Twin Cities area has now reached the wettest year on record. The last 5 years have been the wettest 5 years ever. The last 10 years have been the wettest 10 years ever. The intensity of rain events is also increasing. and is also experiencing the wettest 6 years on record for the state. Watersheds across the state are faced with challenges in leading and supporting our partners on reducing the flood risk to our residents. Our established flood levels are outdated because of the changes in precipitation. Our infrastructure is undersized. Homes, roads, and properties are flooding and the cost to address these challenges is enormous. and our changing climate is producing more intense and significant rain events that lead to flooding concerns. The Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District alone is conducting feasibility studies that estimate tens of millions of dollars in needed new infrastructure needed to address the concern. While state funding is available, the need across the state outweighs the allocation of funds and often times metro and/or urban infrastructure needs do not reach a top priority project and therefore are not funded through existing state funding resources.
Ideas for how this issue could be solved:
Formatted: Font: 12 pt
First, Minnesota it may be helpful for the state watershed management organizations could to compile their needs in their jurisdiction for flood risk mitigation planning and projects similar to what has been done for water quality project needs for the Clean Water Fund. If the state officials saw the need across the state, they would may be able to justify a greater allocation. Different funding resources It may also be helpful for there to be different pots of money for different kinds of flood risk mitigation wouldin order to address the needs in the metro/urban areas. This is due to the built nature of the environment which makes it more difficult and more costly to implement
Commented [JPH1]: Not sure what I’m trying to say‌
projects. And then ultimately, the state dedicating more money to this need would allow watersheds and our local government partners to address this issue.
Anticipated support or opposition from other governmental units?
We would anticipate that watersheds across the state as well as our local government partners would be in favor of more financial support for flood risk reduction. This issue is of importance to (check one): The entire state X Only our region Only our district
Formatted: Font: 12 pt
Resolution to Support Additional State Funding to Watershed Management Organizations to Implement Flood Risk Mitigation Projects
WHEREAS, watershed management organizations in partnership with other local units of government engage in working to control and/or alleviate damage from floodwaters; WHEREAS, the Twin Cities metro area has measured the wettest precipitation year on record and is also experiencing the wettest 5 and 106 year period on record; WHEREAS, watershed management organizations are experiencing impacts on our built and natural systems due to prolonged high water levels and rain flood events; WHEREAS, current public infrastructure in our urban, built up environments is not adequate to handle the increase in rainfall and the change in intensity of our rain storms; WHEREAS, the dollars required to address the watershed management organization and local units of government needs are considerably more than what is currently allocated for flood risk mitigation; WHEREAS, the current funding parameters and prioritization make it difficult for metro area applicants to qualify for the dollars allocated for this purpose; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED; that the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts will support additional state funding be allocated for watershed management organizations to implement flood risk mitigation projects with consideration given to a dedicated allocation for the especially in the TTwin Cities metro area.
November 6, 2019 V. Action Items D) Approve 2020 Employee Benefit Program (Doneux)
DATE: TO: FROM: RE:
November 1, 2019 Board of Managers Mark Doneux 2020 Employee Benefit Program
Background The District has purchased a health benefit package from Health Partners through the North Risk Partners (formerly Bearance Management Group) since 2012. Each year the District must renew and enroll employees into benefit plans. Issues Staff has obtained benefit quotes from the North Risk Partners for health, dental and insurance coverage. North Risk Partners obtains quotes from at least three vendors when soliciting benefit quotes. Overall employee rates increased 7-13% for medical and were unchanged for Dental. The ancillary benefits of life insurance, short term and long-term disability changed less than 1%. The proposed coverage costs for staff assumes for single coverage a 30-year-old, Single + 1 coverage is for two people, 35 years old and family coverage is for two people, 40 years old plus two dependents 17 years old or younger. The District, however, pays actual costs based on the employee and dependents actual age which may be above or below the employee cost. This is done to administratively streamline open enrollment, reduce errors in payroll deductions and internal management of the program. Open enrollment will begin on November 7th and end on November 25th. There will be an employee benefits informational meeting on Tuesday, November 12th. The Personnel Committee will meet on November 5th to review and will discuss their recommendation with the Board for the attached plan for 2020. Requested Action Approve the 2020 Employee Benefit Program enc:
2020 Capitol Region Watershed District Employee Benefit Program
W:\03 Human Resources\Benefits\2020 Benefits\Board Memo- 2020 Employee Benefit Program 11-1-19.docx
Our mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.
Capitol Region Watershed District 2020 Benefit Plans
2020 Medical Benefit Plans Alternate 1 - Health Partners SE Open Access Platinum 25-95
Change from 2019
$60.00 $464.61 $524.61
Employee Single + 1* District Total Employee District Total
Single*
Family*
Employee District Total
Monthly Rates
January 1, 2020 November 6, 2019
Effective Date: Approved:
% Change
Alternate 2 - Health Partners SE Open Access HSA Gold 2000-100
Change from 2019
$5.00 $18.76 $23.76
9% 4% 5%
$45.00 $389.73 $434.73
$5.00 $17.73 $22.73
13% 5% 6%
$145.00 $984.64 $1,129.64
$10.00 $41.64 $51.64
7% 4% 5%
$95.00 $841.10 $936.10
$10.00 $40.10 $50.10
12% 5% 6%
$205.00 $1,799.14 $2,004.14
$15.00 $79.14 $91.14
8% 5% 5%
$155.00 $1,505.78 $1,660.78
$15.00 $71.78 $86.78
11% 5% 6%
1st time enrollees, District Contribution to HSA. 1/2 Paid on January 1 and 1/2 on June 30, of plan year. New employees receive prorated contribution based effective date of benefits.
$0
Single - $1,000 Single + 1 - $2,000 Family - $2,000
Future annual District contribution to HSA All paid on February 1 of Plan Year
$0
Single - $500 Single + 1 - $1,000 Family - $1,000
DEDUCTIBLE Person/Family (Medical) OUT-OF-POCKET MAX Person/Family (Medical) COINSURANCE OFFICE VISITS & URGENT CARE COPAY EMERGENCY ROOM INPATIENT/OUTPATIENT HOSPITAL PRESCRIPTION DRUG
None
$2,000/$4,000
$3,000/$6,000
$2,000/$4,000
5%
0%
$25 Copay
Deductions & Coinsurance
$100 Copay
Deductions & Coinsurance
Deductions & Coinsurance
Deductions & Coinsurance
$15/$50/$100
Deductions & Coinsurance
This outline summarizes certain provisions of the plans illustrated. Complete plan information is included in the legal documents and brochures that govern each plan. If there is a difference between this handout and the legal documents, the documents which are available upon request, will govern.
2020 Dental Benefit Plan Health Partners Monthly Open Access Single*
Employee District Total
100/80/50 Plan $10.00 $36.61 $46.61
Change from % 2019 Change
$0.00 $1.30 $1.30
0% 4% 3%
Employee Single + 1* District Total
$20.00 $72.76 $92.76
$0.00 $2.60 $2.60
0% 4% 3%
Employee District Total
$40.00 $64.88 $104.88
$0.00 $2.94 $2.94
0% 5% 3%
Family*
*Coverage Cost Assumptions - Single = 30 Year Old, Single + 1 = Two 35 Year Olds, Family = Two 40 year olds plus two dependents <17 years old
% Change
2020 Capitol Region Watershed District Employee Benefit Program November 6, 2019 Open Enrollment CRWD will again be offering medical, dental and ancillary insurance benefits to staff in 2020. Open enrollment will begin on November 7th and end on November 25th, 2019. Plan Summary Medical The District will require a monthly employee contribution of $60.00, and $45.00 for single, $145.00, and $95.00 for single plus one and $205.00, and $155.00 for Family health insurance for the renewal plan, Alternate 1 (Health Partners SE Open Access Platinum) and Alternate 2 Health Partners SE Open Access HSA Gold) respectively. Rates effective January 1, 2020. These rates represent a $5, $10 and $15 increase for Single, Single Plus 1 and Family coverage respectively compared to 2018 and 2019. The District will contribute to a HSA plan for employees that select Alternative 2. First time enrollees will receive $1,000 for single, $2,000 for single plus one and $2,000 for family. Employees that start mid-year will receive a prorated contribution based on effective date of benefits. Contributions will be paid out at ½ by January 1, 2020 and ½ paid out by June 30, 2020. Renewing employees of Alternative 2 will receive $500 for single, $1,000 for single plus one and $1,000 for family. The District will provide payroll deductions and employee contributions to Health Care Flexible Spending Accounts, Health Savings Accounts, and Dependent Care Spending Accounts. Dental The District will require a monthly employee contribution of $10.00 for single, $20.00 for Single Plus One and $40.00 for Family dental insurance, effective January 1, 2020. These rates are the same as 2018 and 2019. Insurance Coverage The District will continue to provide ancillary employee benefits including life, short term disability and long-term disability insurance. These programs and the employee/District contributions will be consistent to those offered in 2019. The District will continue to provide Life Insurance and Long-Term Disability coverage consistent with the CRWD 2019 Program and allow employees to purchase additional coverage at their cost. In 2020, staff will have the ability to choose between seven (7) different elimination period options. The elimination period is the time from the event until coverage begins. Staff will also have the option to purchase accident insurance coverage.
CRWD 2020 Benefit Program Coverage Summary November 6, 2019 Page Two Table 1- Proposed 2020 Monthly Health Insurance Employee Contributions Employee Contribution Single Single +1 Family
Alternate 1 2020 – Platinum Renewal $60 $145 $205
Alternate 2 2020 – HSA Renewal $45 $95 $155
Table 2 - Proposed 2020 Monthly Dental Insurance Employee Contributions Employee Contribution
2020 Renewal
Single
$10
Single + 1
$20
Family
$40
Table 3 – Life Insurance 2019 Rates Life Insurance - MetLife Basic (Core) Life/AD&D Monthly Premium (District Paid equal to annual salary up to $100,000 coverage) $0.161/$1,000 annual salary Optional Life/AD&D (Employee Paid) (employee maximum: 5x salary or $500,000; spouse maximum $100,000, 50% of employee amount) Age Monthly Premium per $1,000 benefit 29 or less $0.098 30-34 $0.115 35-39 $0.125 40-44 $0.168 45-49 $0.245 50-54 $0.366 55-59 $0.547 Dependent Life Coverage (Employee Paid) $1,000, $2,000, $4,000, $5,000 OR $10,000 per month per dependent unit
Monthly Premium $0.29 per $1,000 coverage
Our mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.
CRWD 2020 Benefit Program Coverage Summary November 6, 2019 Page Three Table 4 - Long Term Disability Remained the same from 2019. LONG-TERM DISABILITY - MetLife 60% Income Replacement (District Paid) All ages $0.225/$100 monthly salary No Optional Buy up
Table 5 – Short-Term Disability Remained the same from 2019 SHORT-TERM DISABILITY – Colonial Life (All premiums employee paid) Up to $4,000/week, 22 weeks Elimination Period Accident/Illness 17-49 Years 50-64 Years
0/7 7/7 7/14 0/14 14/14 0/30 30/30 $3.74 $3.49 $2.66 $2.75 $2.45 $1.95 $1.57 $4.86 $4.61 $3.25 $5.54 $3.12 $2.75 $2.37
Table 6 Accident Insurance Remained the same from 2019 ACCIDENT INSURANCE - Colonial (All premiums employee paid) *rates are monthly Employee Employee + Spouse Employee +1Child Plan 2 $10.54 $16.78 $18.96 Plan 3 $15.76 $24.81 $27.26 enc:
Family $25.20 $36.31
2020 Health Partners Medical and Dental Plan for CRWD
W:\03 Human Resources\Benefits\2020 Benefits\2020 Employee Benefit Program 10-29-19.docx
Our mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.
November 6, 2019 Board Meeting V. Action Item E) Approve Program Manager Position and Promotion of Michelle Sylvander (Doneux)
DATE: TO: FROM: RE:
October 30, 2019 CRWD Board of Managers Mark Doneux, Administrator Approve Program Manager Position and Grade Promotion for Michelle Sylvander
Background Michelle Sylvander was hired in July of 2013 as the Office Manager with the District. Michelle started with the District at a Grade 6, Administrative Assistant III. In 2014, Michelle was promoted to Grade 7, Administrative Assistant IV. Issues The purpose of promoting Michelle and establishing this new position is to properly reflect the duties, responsibilities of his current work and to recognize Michelle for her contributions to the District. The primary duties of this position are to perform administrative, accounting and human resources work involving planning, organizing, and directing operational functions for the District. This revised position would be classified as a Program Manager I. The salary range of this position reflects the current Grade 9 salary range commensurate with the responsibilities of this position. The Personnel Committee met on November 5, 2019. The Committee recommends establishing this new position and the corresponding Grade Promotion of Michelle Sylvander to Program Manager I. A draft position description is enclosed. Requested Action Approve Program Manager Position and Grade Promotion for Michelle Sylvander.
enc: Draft Position Description â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Program Manager I â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Office Manager
W:\03 Human Resources\POSITIONS\All Current up to date position Descriptions\Board Memo - Program Manager I - Office Manager Position Description 10-30-19.docx
Revised 10/30/19 GRADE:
9
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Administrative Assistant IV POSITION TITLE:
Program Manager I â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Office Manager
REPORTS TO:
Administrator
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: Perform administrative, accounting and human resources work involving planning, organizing, and directing operational functions for the District. Evaluates, develops, and implements changes in office procedures and equipment in order to improve productivity and workflow, simply procedures, or reduce costs. Plans and conducts administrative studies and maintains administrative systems and policies such as recordkeeping, retention schedules, and departmental forms and document control. Supervises assigned administrative support staff to include hiring, assigning and reviewing duties, scheduling, training, and managing employee performance. Submits an annual budget for operation, assists in implementing budgetary controls, and participates in preparing annual reports. Researches, prepares, and compiles data into written reports. MAJOR AREAS OF ACCOUNTABILITY: 1.
Performs administrative and supervisory work involving planning, organizing, and directing administrative functions within the District
2.
Supervises assigned administrative support staff to include hiring, assigning and reviewing duties, scheduling, training, and managing employee performance.
3.
Collect incoming invoices and maintain accounts payable process to assist the Administrator in processing the monthly bill list. Maintains and prepares financial records for annual audit.
4.
Evaluates, develops, and implements changes in office procedures and equipment in order to improve productivity and workflow, simply procedures, or reduce costs.
5.
Plans and conducts administrative studies and maintains administrative systems and policies such as recordkeeping, retention schedules, and forms and document control.
6.
Submits an annual budget for the administrative operations, assists in implementing budgetary controls, and participates in preparing annual reports. Researches, prepares, and compiles data into written reports. Performs related duties as required.
7.
Perform administrative duties for the Administrator.
Our mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.
8.
Attend and take minutes at Board of Managers meetings, prepare minutes for Administrator's review; assemble and distribute Board packets. Attend and take minutes at CRWD Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) meetings for Administratorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s review; assemble and distribute CAC packets. Manage CRWD records, filing and information retrieval system, both manual and automated (computer). Document, maintain, and oversee office management systems, policies, and procedures, in order to maintain an efficient level of operation.
9.
10. Oversee the administration of the following operating systems and/or programs, as well as the design and maintenance of the associated databases: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i.
Electronic file archival, retrieval and back-up system (server) Phone system E-mail and internet system Alarm and security system Utilities and building maintenance Office equipment Office supplies Well Sealing Cost Share Program Web site
11. Active participant in the development and maintenance of the permit surety process. Coordinate with District staff in the administration of the permit surety process and maintenance of the permit fee, database and permit files. 12. Assist Administrator as needed to maintain personnel records, participate in new employee orientation, and coordinate facility changes necessary to accommodate new employees. GENERAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 1. Uses word processing, spreadsheet, and database management software (such as Word, Excel, Access, PowerPoint, etc.) to produce correspondence, minutes, reports, forms, budget and technical information. Staff may provide dictation, rough draft, or verbal instructions/criteria that are used by the secretary to produce the final product. 2. Greet the public and answer/screen phone calls in a courteous and professional manner, provide information and answer questions on a variety of issues related to the District, listen to concerns/complaints, assess needs, explain procedures, route calls, and/or take messages. 3. Compose letters, memoranda, reports, and other written communications. Assist staff with surveys, collects/researches data for special projects, assemble mass mailings, faxing, filing, mail distribution, review. 4. Keep staff informed of meetings, events, and deadlines by disseminating written and verbal information in a timely manner. Our mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.
5. Attend and participate in weekly staff meetings to keep abreast of staff activities and to share the same type of information with them so that work efforts can be coordinated when necessary. 6. Schedule and make arrangements for meetings, conferences, travel, and training for District staff; purchase food and supplies as needed for meetings. 7. Order and maintain office supplies. Perform routine maintenance, troubleshooting and staff training on office equipment (copier, laser printer, postage machine, phone equipment, fax machine) and arrange for necessary service calls. 8. Perform other duties as needed or required. (The examples given above are intended only as illustrations of various types of work performed and are not necessarily all-inclusive. This position description is subject to change as the needs of the employer and requirements of the position change.) SALARY $53,600 - $80,400, depending on qualifications and experience, plus benefits. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS The employee must possess High School diploma or GED equivalent. Five (5) years of experience as secretary to department head or higher-level executive. Regular use of a personal computer, database management, word processing and spreadsheet software required. Valid Minnesota Drivers License, personal auto for use on official business with mileage reimbursement, and auto insurance per CRWD. DESIRED QUALIFICATIONS Experience with small local units of government, secondary education and office management experience. KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS and ABILITIES Proficiency with a personal computer (PC) and Microsoft software packages for word processing, spreadsheet, database management and computer-generated graphics. Specifically, but not limited to; Microsoft Office, Excel, Word, Access and PowerPoint. Advanced skill required using email and internet applications and other common software applications. Ability to take direction, work independently with a minimum of supervision, use good time management practices, possess the ability to set priorities and balance large volumes of diverse work. Ability to develop and maintain effective working relationships with, the District Coordinator, CRWD Board of Managers, Citizens Advisory Committee, Ramsey SWCD staff, Ramsey County staff, City and agency staff, members of the public, and other interested parties. Communicate effectively in writing and orally. Conduct analysis, planning, and implementation for administrative programs. Ability to research and prepare detailed reports and analyses. SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES Supervised assigned administrative support staff. Our mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.
RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC CONTACT This position requires a high level of public contact requiring tact, courtesy and good judgment. EMPLOYMENT CLASSIFICATION: Salaried, exempt from the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY The Capitol Region Watershed District will not discriminate against or harass any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, or status with regard to public assistance.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS AND JOB DESCRIPTION SUPPLEMENT
WORK ENVIRONMENT 1.) Normal shift = eight (8) hours for five (5) consecutive days. 2.) Work location normally in controlled environment. 3.) Stress level varies from low to very high.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
Type of Activity Walking/standing:
Frequency O S
Sitting: Standing in One Place:
O
Climbing:
O
Pulling/Pushing:
O
Crawling/Kneeling/Squatting:
O
Bending/Stooping:
O
Our mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.
Twisting/Turning:
O
Repetitive movement:
O
Lifting waist to shoulder:
O
Lifting knee to waist:
O O
Lifting floor to knee: S = Significant
M = Moderate
O= Occasional
W:\03 Human Resources\POSITIONS\All Current up to date position Descriptions\Program Manager I - Office Manager Position Description 10-30
Our mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.
DATE: TO: FROM: RE:
October 29, 2019 CRWD Board of Managers and Staff Mark Doneux, Administrator October 2019 Administratorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Report
1) Administrator Approved or Executed Agreements a) Customized Training Contract with Minnesota for an amount not to exceed $750.00. b) Services agreement with Avison Young for an amount not to exceed $20,000. c) Stewardship Grant Agreement with Dave Crawford for an amount not to exceed $887.00. d) Stewardship Grant Agreement with Brian Bellendorf for an amount not to exceed $346.00. e) Construction Services Agreement Amendment for 2018 Lake McCarrons Boulevard Raingarden Project for an amount not to exceed $5,495. 2) Board Approved Agreements a) Water Quality Capital Improvement Project Grant Agreement for BMPs for Midway Peace Park for an amount not to exceed $295,000. b) Cooperative Agreement with City of Saint Paul for Maintenance of Snelling-Midway Infrastructure for an amount not to exceed $45,000. c) Cooperative Agreement with Roseville Area Schools for Installation and Maintenance of Stormwater BMP for an amount not to exceed $1,323,146. 3) General Updates â&#x20AC;&#x201C; No General Updates 4) Upcoming CRWD events and meetings a) Wednesday, November 13, 2019 CAC Meeting, 7:00 PM c) Wednesday, November 20, 2019 Board Meeting, 6:00 PM W:\04 Board of Managers\Correspondence\Administrator's Report 2019\Administrator's Report 10-29-19.docx
Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.