March 9, 2016 cac packet

Citizen Advisory Committee 7:00 PM, Wednesday, March 9, 2016 – Capitol Region Watershed District 1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4, Saint Paul, MN 55108 Agenda

Materials Enclosed

7:00

I)

Welcome, Announcements and Updates – Introductions

7:05

II)

Public Comment for issues not on the Agenda (3 minutes per person)

7:08

III)

Approval of the Agenda

7:09

IV)

Approval of Minutes A) Approval of the February 10, 2016 Minutes

7:10

V)

Special Report - Characterization of the microbiological quality of two non-potable water reuse systems in Minnesota, Cheryl Haines, Unverstiy of Minnesota

7:30

VI

District Initiatives for Review, Comment and Recommendations A) Stewardship Grant Program Update, Gustavo Castro B) Strategic Communication and Education Program Updates, Lindsay VanPatten

8:20

VII)

CAC Initiatives A) 2016 Student Worker Update B) Governor’s Water Summit

8:45

VIII) Project and Program Updates A) Snelling Midway Redevelopment Project

8:50

IX)

CAC Observer Update

8:55

X)

Discussion A) New & Old Issues B) CAC Observer for March 16 and April 6, 2016 Board of Managers Meetings C) 2016 Meeting Schedule

9:00

XI)

Adjourn

W:\05 Citizen Advisory Committee\Agendas\2016\March 9, 2016 CAC Agenda.docx

Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.

Draft

Citizen Advisory Committee Meeting Wednesday, February 10, 2016 – 7:00 p.m.

CAC Members Present: David Arbeit Bill Barton Pat Cavanaugh Steve Duerre Claudia Hochstein Mike MacDonald Rick Sanders Michelle Ulrich Richard Weil Gwen Willems

Others Present: Mark Doneux, CRWD Michelle Sylvander, CRWD Anna Eleria, CRWD Joe Collins, CRWD Board President Nathan Campeau, Barr Engineering Mike McKinney, Barr Engineering Mae Davenport, University of Minnesota Trista Briese, University of Minnesota Student

Members absent: Kathryn Swanson, w/notice Nicole Soderholm, w/notice

Welcome, Announcements, and Updates Mr. MacDonald opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. with introductions. After introductions Mr. MacDonald asked for any public comments. Ms. Cavanaugh shared two announcements. Freshwater Society will have a Moos Family Speaker Series on water resources. Evolution to Cleaner Water and Greener Water Companies will take place on April 13, 2016 at the University of Minnesota, St. Paul Student Center Theater. Ms. Cavanaugh also shared that the 2016 State of The Water will be held at Arrowwood Resort on April 14th & 15th.

Mr. Arbeit asked about staff working on Como Lake. Administrator Doneux replied that staff has been collecting core samples from Lake McCarrons and Como Lake to test sediment levels in the lakes. This information will be used to help determine the role of sediment in water quality.

III. Approval of Agenda Mr. MacDonald asked for any additions or changes to the Agenda.

CAC 16-004 Motion: To approve the CAC February 10, 2016 agenda.

Arbeit/Duerre Unanimously approved IV. Approval of the January 13, 2016 Minutes 1

Ms. Ulrich and Ms. Willems noted a correction in the Announcements of the minutes.

CAC 16-005 Motion: To approve the January 13, 2016 Minutes with corrections.

Duerre/Weil Unanimously approved V. District Initiatives A)

Community Capacity Assessment, Mae Davenport, University of Minnesota

Administrator Doneux reviewed that in 2013, CRWD Board of Managers approved a partnership with Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) and Mississippi Watershed Management Organization (MWMO) to study individual actions and public decision making within the framework of a community’s actual abilities – its capacity – to engage in clean water behaviors. This joint watershed assessment is led by Professor Mae Davenport of University of Minnesota Department of Forest Resources.

Dr. Davenport reviewed the draft copy of the Community Capacity Assessment for Stormwater Management in the Twin Cities Metro Area. The primary research questions of the study were:    

What are drivers of and constraints to community capacity to engage in stormwater management in the watersheds?

What are community member values, beliefs and norms associated with water and water resource management?

What are community member perceptions of existing water programs?

What water programming is most likely to influence future conservation behavior among community members?

In 2014, stakeholder interviews were conducted with business and community leaders along the Green Line and on Saint Paul’s East Side. In 2015, the final stages of data gathering were completed through focus groups and a mail survey. Dr. Davenport reviewed recommendations of neighbors needing to talk and share existing community issues and to engage water into conversations. Dr. Davenport also pointed out the link into what is working.

Mr. Duerre asked how the interview results compared to the other watersheds that were surveyed. Dr. Davenport replied that there were many similarities in the results. Ms. Cavanaugh asked for clarification, is the survey asking about personal needs or the needs of others. Dr. Davenport replied that community leaders were survey to gather a social approach on how to get other people in the community involved and thinking about water. Dr. Davenport concluded that people need to see how they connect to water and the ways they use water like gardening. Mr. Arbeit asked for clarification on one of the business owners’ comments regarding the care of tree trenches and rain gardens along the corridor. Dr. Davenport replied that they were unpleased about not being involved with the planning process and now felt it was their responsibility to care for these gardens. President Collins asked how this compares to recycling. Dr. Davenport agreed that recycling is a good comparison to this project. Administrator Doneux requested any additional recommendations be forwarded to the office by the end of next week. The plan will be presented to the Board of Managers in April for approval. Recommendations will be added to the Education and Outreach program in 2017.

“Our mission is to protect, manage, and improve the water resources of the Capitol Region Watershed District.”

2

B)

Technical Report: Eustis Street Regional Modeling, Nathan Campeau, Barr Engineering

Ms. Eleria reviewed that last summer, CRWD, in partnership with City of Lauderdale and Ramsey County, began evaluating opportunities for managing stormwater runoff in a portion of the City of Lauderdale.

Originally the focus of the project was to evaluate the feasibility of implementing green infrastructure practices along Eustis Street south of Larpenteur Avenue and within an adjacent County-held drainage easement. Based on further discussions with project partners and a private property owner during this evaluation, localized flooding issues were raised and the project scope was expanded to a regional analysis of the hydrologic and water quality concerns within approximately 150 acres. It also includes identification of potential flood mitigation and water quality improvement options in the study area.

Mike McKinney with Barr Engineering reviewed how a model was developed to simulate the existing conditions. The goals of the modeling project were to minimize the flooding, enhance treatment and look for the opportunity to add water features. Mr. McKinney reviewed the draft of the Eustis Street Regional Modeling Project Report. Barr has estimated the 10-year and 100-year flow rates and pollutant loading for the subwatershed and the current pollutant removal efficiencies of several dry and wet ponds and evaluated alternatives to mitigate flooding and improve water quality. CRWD and Barr Engineering staff will present the scope of work and results of the project to the CAC and seek input on the findings and recommendations.

VI. CAC Initiatives A) 2016 Student Worker Update and Discussion Mr. MacDonald introduced Trista Briese with the University of Minnesota Service Learning Program. Mr. MacDonald reviewed potential service learning projects for Ms. Briese to work on. Potential projects include: 1)

Develop a table summarizing all of the 14 metro watershed district regulations

This work has been done previously just in Washington County in 2003. It would be beneficial and interesting to compare stormwater policies for rate, volume and water quality standards for the 14 metro watershed districts. This is of special interest following the adoption of the State-wide MIDS program over two years ago.

2)

Identify policies to encourage or incentivize Green Infrastructure

The Water Environment Federation (WEF) has developed some recommendations to create incentives for green infrastructure. Incentive programs provide a way to increase the use of green infrastructure on private property. These programs can help implement stormwater controls on both new and existing developments not covered by stormwater requirements. The project could involve evaluating the five WEF recommended approaches, documenting which approaches CRWD is already being effective in implementing and make recommendations for additional programs or policies that would provide greater incentives for green infrastructure.

3) Document existing and possible future polices for watershed district (MAWD and or CRWD) involvement in groundwater

“Our mission is to protect, manage, and improve the water resources of the Capitol Region Watershed District.�

3

A project similar to this was done 11 years ago in Washington County. Given the recent focus on groundwater, it would be useful to begin drafting groundwater protection policies for not only CRWD but other metro watershed districts. This is of special interest following the adoption of the North and East Metro Groundwater Management Area Plan in November of 2015.

Ms. Cavanaugh and Mr. Arbeit strongly recommended the first potential idea of developing a summary table of all 14 metro watershed district regulations. Ms. Briese will review and have further discussions with Mr. MacDonald.

B) 2016 Event, Doneux Administrator Doneux recommends continuing a fall event. President Collins noted that there were a wide range of attendees at the 2014 and 2015 events. Administrator Doneux will contact Freshwater Society about a list of potential speakers for CRWD to sponsor for the fall of 2016.

VII. Project and Program Updates A) Snelling Midway Redevelopment Project Ms. Eleria reviewed that a portion of the 35-acre superblock bounded by University Avenue, Snelling Avenue, I-94 and Pascal Street, herein known as the Snelling Midway Redevelopment. The site has been selected for the future MN United FC Soccer Stadium. Formerly known as the bus barn, the proposed site is owned by Metropolitan Council. The remaining land area owned by RK Midway will eventually be redeveloped with an emphasis on commercial (retail, entertainment and office), residential and open space land uses. The development of a master plan for the entire site and a stadium site plan that will be reviewed and approved by the City of Saint Paul.

Ms. Eleria serves on the technical advisory committee. The City of Saint Paul held a stormwater workshop for the Snelling Midway Redevelopment Site in January. The purpose of the workshop is to catalyze a comprehensive, district-wide stormwater planning effort. The goals of the workshop are: facilitate a discussion of shared, stacked green infrastructure (SSGI) options and identify TAC priorities, develop narrative and visual suggestions for the site’s master plan and collect ideas to present to the CAC and community.

SRF Consulting Group Inc. in conducting a comprehensive, district- wide stormwater planning effort. The services being sought are assistance in planning the stormwater workshop, preparing workshop materials, facilitating the workshop and preparing renderings based on workshop findings.

B) CRWD Public Map Viewer Discussion Mr. Zwonitzer shared with the members of the CAC a demonstration of the GIS interactive maps at the January CAC meeting. The mapping system helps to identify points for the next phase of a development and set goals. Administrator Doneux encouraged the CAC to review and test the system. A link can be found on the CRWD website. The BMP data base is used to track BMP’s, permits, grant and capital projects.

Administrator Doneux encouraged members of the CAC to share any feedback with Nate Zwontizer. Mr. Arbiet shared that the site needs more general language for the general public to review and should include samples of items like a catch basin, what is it and how it works.

“Our mission is to protect, manage, and improve the water resources of the Capitol Region Watershed District.”

4

C) Education Program Review Administrator Doneux shared with the CAC that Ms. VanPatten has moved from Administration into Education and Outreach full time. Ms. VanPatten was previously 75% Education and Outreach and 25% Administrative Assistant. Belinda Gardner is now temporarily filling the Administrative Assistant position.

D) CAC Project and Program Review Update Administrator Doneux compiled a list of projects for the CAC to review. The list contains twenty two projects. Administrator Doneux will review the list with the CAC co-chairs to help decide which projects would be best presented to the CAC for review and comment. Other projects would be sent with a google form for members to add recommendations and comments.

VIII. CAC Observer Update Ms. Cavanaugh attended the February 3, 2016 Board of Managers meeting. Ms. Cavanaugh reviewed that she enjoyed attending the Education and Outreach workshop and hearing the discussions of future planning.

An update was given on the Ford site, Willow Reserve and Personnel. Ms. Cavanaugh encouraged other CAC Members to attend the Board of Manager meetings.

Discussion A) New & Old Issues Mr. MacDonald talked to someone at the University of Minnesota, where rainwater runoff is being captured and reused for flushing toilets. Mr. MacDonald will be in contact with this person to schedule a time for them to come and share a presentation on water reuse with the CAC. B) CAC Observer for the Board of Managers Meetings February 22 & March 2, 2016.

The February 17th Board of Managers Meeting has been rescheduled to February 22nd at 5:00 pm. No members identified.

C) 2015 Meeting Schedule The March 9, 2016 CAC meeting will include Strategic Communication Plan, Stewardship Grants program update and Event Planning.

Adjourn – CAC 16-006 Motion: To adjourn the February 10, 2016 CAC Meeting.

Barton/Willems Unanimously approved The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 PM. Respectfully submitted, Michelle Sylvander “Our mission is to protect, manage, and improve the water resources of the Capitol Region Watershed District.”

5

W:\05 Citizen Advisory Committee\Minutes\2016\February 10, 2016 Draft Minutes.doc

“Our mission is to protect, manage, and improve the water resources of the Capitol Region Watershed District.�

6

March 2, 2016 VII. Project and Program Updates A) Stewardship Grant Update (Castro) DATE: TO: FROM: RE:

March 2, 2016 CRWD Citizen Advisory Committee Gustavo Castro, Water Resource Specialist Stewardship Grant Update

Background Since 2015, the CRWD Stewardship Grant program offers technical and financial assistance to property owners interested in implementing stormwater best management practices ( BMPs) on their property. Projects that capture runoff from streets, parking lots, or other larger impervious surfaces receive higher awards due to their higher water quality benefits. These projects could potentially receive up to 100% of the total project costs in addition to free design services. On the other hand, projects that have a small impact in reducing stormwater volume and pollutants receive a lower grant award, or may not qualify for Stewardship Grant funds. Regardless of size or benefits of the project, CRWD provides free site visits and technical resources to all grant applicants.

Update CRWD has distributed around 250 education packages since 2014. A total of 99 site visits were conducted in 2015 and 165 in 2016. An increase of 120% and 266% respectively, when compared to the average of 45 site visits prior to the 2014 updates. The number of installed projects also increase from 7 in 2013 to 18 in 2015, an increase of 157% in two years. In addition, CRWD has also seen an increase in the quality/size of projects installed. Overall the new program has received positive feedback from grant applicants and other watershed districts. Other districts in the metro area have created their own versions of Clean Water Plans (CWPs), or are considering adding CWPs and a grant calculator to their grant programs.

Staff Request None, for your information only enc:

Stewardship Grant Map

W:\07 Programs\Stewardship Grant Program\Board Memos\CAC Stewardship Grant Program Update 03-09-16.

March 9, 2016 CAC Meeting VI. District Initiatives B) Strategic Communications Plan and Education Program Update

DATE: TO: FROM: RE:

March 3, 2016 CRWD CAC Lindsay VanPatten, Interim Education and Outreach Coordinator Strategic Communications Plan and Education and Outreach Program Update

Background With the departure of CRWD Education and Outreach Coordinator, Elizabeth Beckman and the completion of three studies related to Education and Outreach, Staff and the Board have been reviewing the District’s Education and Outreach Program.

At the February 10 CAC meeting, Dr. Mae Davenport from the University of Minnesota, Department of Forest Resources presented a summary of the Community Capacity Study that was completed in collaboration with Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District and Mississippi Watershed Management Organization. At the February 17 Board meeting, the Board supported a staff recommendation to draft Education and Outreach Objective No. 5 that incorporates findings from the Draft Community Capacity Study, Watershed Management Plan Mid Term Review and Strategic Communications Plans to guide the work of the District’s Education program moving forward.

Updates A Final Strategic Communications Plan for Joint Communications with CRWD, RWMWD and MWMO was completed in December, 2015. Staff will review a summary of findings from the report and recommended next steps with the CAC. If you would like a paper copy of the full report at the meeting please contact Lindsay, lindsay@capitolregionwd.org.

Staff will also review the 2016 Education and Outreach Work Plan and Education and Outreach Program Objective No. 5 that was drafted based on findings of the three, recently completed studies.

Requested Action No action needed, for review and comment only. enc:

Audit Findings and Joint Communications Collaboration Plan (pages 7-14 in print, full report available upon request) CRWD Education and Outreach Program Objective No. 5 2016 Education and Outreach Work Plan Table

W:\07 Programs\Edu-Outreach\Admin-Workplan\2016 Program Evaluation\CAC Memo Strat Comm EO Update 3-9-16.docx

Our Mission is to protect, manage and improve the water resources of Capitol Region Watershed District.

MEMO TO: Tina Carstens and Sage Passi, Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District; Elizabeth Beckman, Lindsay VanPatten, and Mark Doneux, Capitol Region Watershed District; Doug Snyder and Nick Busse, Mississippi Watershed Management Organization FROM: Katie Eukel, Tom Elko and Cleo Zins, Fourth Sector Consulting; Cathy Kennedy, Cathryn Kennedy Consulting, Ltd. SUBJECT: Audit Findings and Joint Communications Collaboration Plan DATE: December 23, 2015 Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD), Mississippi Watershed Management Organization (MWMO) and Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) hired Fourth Sector Consulting and Cathryn Kennedy Consulting, Ltd. to create individual communications plans for each watershed, along with a joint communications plan outlining opportunities for collaboration among the three watersheds. The joint communications work was undertaken for several reasons – many staff members believed that the watersheds shared similar communications and that staff and cost efficiencies could result from exploring collaboration.

Following are our team’s recommendations, along with a timeline and staffing recommendations, for collaborating over the next 18 months.

RESEARCH SUMMARY To create the communications plans, Fourth Sector Consulting and Cathryn Kennedy 1

Consulting, Ltd. used the following research process, which ran during the summer and fall of 2015: ● Onboarding Days. Three members of our team – Katie Eukel, Tom Elko and Cathy Kennedy – each spent a full onboarding day with each watershed district. These onboarding days featured project tours, staff conversations and identification of potential communications opportunities. ● One-on-One Interviews. Our team conducted a series of 45 to 60-minute interviews with key staff members from each watershed. Interviewees included: ○ Sage Passi, Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District ○ Tina Carstens, Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District ○ Elizabeth Beckman, Capitol Region Watershed District ○ Lindsay VanPatten, Capitol Region Watershed District ○ Doug Snyder, Mississippi Watershed Management Organizations ● Group Interviews. Our team conducted 60 to 120 minute group interviews with staff members and board members from each watershed. Individual interviews were conducted with executive staff members and communications/education staff members, while group interviews were conducted with other staff members and board members. ● Research Review. Our team reviewed previous research conducted by the watershed districts, including the Capitol Region Watershed District’s communications research and Mae Davenport’s community capacity interviews. ● Materials Audit. Our team audited? each of the watershed districts’ existing communications materials to assess how the districts currently communicate about their organizations and their issues. Materials reviewed included 2

brochures, briefing materials, messaging documents, visual brand materials, websites, social media posts and other materials shared by the watersheds. ● Best Practices Comparison. Our team reviewed the communications practices of other watersheds in Minnesota and similar campaigns from across the country.

Our team facilitated a full-day planning meeting in August 2015 to review research findings and recommendations and prepared draft communications plans for each of the watersheds, along with a list of potential opportunities for collaboration. The first half of the meeting focused on working with each watershed to review and gain feedback on individual communications plans, while the latter half of the meeting focused on discussing opportunities for collaboration among the three watersheds.

The three individual communications plans were finalized during September/October 2015. The following memo outlines our team’s recommendations for the joint communications plan.

JOINT COMMUNICATIONS PLAN Following is the joint communications plan, outlining collaboration opportunities for Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, Capitol Region Watershed District and Mississippi Watershed Management Organization.

GOALS As Fourth Sector Consulting and Cathryn Kennedy Consulting, Ltd. conducted individual communications planning processes with each of the watersheds, we learned that each watershed shared similar goals for their communications work. The following goals are the same goals used in each watershed’s individual

3

communications plan; we also recommend that these goals govern joint communications work. ● Goal One: Increase overall awareness and understanding of the importance of water quality, stormwater management and watershed protection. ● Goal Two: Increase awareness and knowledge of actions that key audiences can take to improve water quality in the watershed. ● Goal Three: Increase awareness and understanding of watersheds and their role in water quality management.

AUDIENCES Fourth Sector Consulting and Cathryn Kennedy Consulting, Ltd. also found that the watersheds shared similar audiences, although there were variations in the prioritization of those audiences among watersheds (e.g. one watershed may prioritize engaging homeowners in a specific neighborhood, while another watershed may prioritize engaging homeowners across the district). Within joint communications work, our team recommends prioritizing the following categories of audiences, recognizing that the precise scope of audience engagement may vary across watersheds. ● Homeowners/Residents ○ Youth (CRWD w/stronger focus) ○ Empty nesters (RWMWD w/stronger focus) ○ Lakeshore property owners (RWMWD) ○ Property owners who don’t live directly on water (RWMWD) ● Municipalities ○ City agencies (all watersheds) ○ County agencies (all watersheds) ○ State agencies (all watersheds) 4

● Elected Officials ○ City elected officials and staff (all watersheds) ○ County elected officials and staff (all watersheds) ○ State elected officials and staff (all watersheds) ● Businesses/Property/Land Owners (Large) ○ Churches (RWMWD, MWMO w/stronger focus) ○ Schools (MWMO w/stronger focus) ○ Commercial property owners (all watersheds) ○ Developers (all watersheds) ● Underserved Communities ○ Communities of color (all watersheds) ○ Immigrant populations (all watersheds) ● Partners/Advocates ○ University of Minnesota (all watersheds) ○ Engineering Firms (all watersheds) ○ Teachers (RWMWD w/stronger focus) ○ Master gardeners/Master stewards (all watersheds) ○ Volunteers (all watersheds) ○ Advisory Committees (all watersheds) ● Community Organizations ○ Non-profit organizations (all watersheds) ○ Neighborhood associations (all watersheds) MESSAGES: ORGANIZATIONAL Fourth Sector Consulting and Cathryn Kennedy Consulting also found similarities in organizational messaging across the watersheds. As the watersheds seek to help others understand the work of watersheds, we recommend using similar messaging 5

– tailored to the interests/needs of specific audiences – to help people understand the work of the watersheds. ● Message One: RESOURCE & PARTNER – The watersheds partner with homeowners, municipalities, businesses and other organizations to help improve water quality and solve water runoff issues in the district. ● Message Two: FUNDER – The watersheds provide grants to homeowners, businesses and municipalities for qualifying projects, such as rain gardens, that will help conserve water and keep our water clean, as well as training (and grants) for municipalities. ● Message Three: EXPERTS – Staff members at the watersheds are experts in their fields and serve as resources for advice and guidance on any watershed issue. ● Message Four: PROTECTING AMERICA’S WATER ICONS – Watersheds direct-ly affect water quality, whether it's for wildlife or recreation. By protecting water in the local watersheds, we are helping to protect rivers, lakes, and streams from Minnesota all the way to the Gulf of Mexico.

We also recommend using the following targeted messages with specific audiences. ● Additional Message for Homeowners: HELPER/TRAINER – The watersheds provide training on a variety of water conservation and quality issues for homeowners, ranging from installing a rain barrel to building a rain garden that captures and filters water before it heads to local lakes, rivers and streams. ● Additional Message for Municipalities: HELPER/TRAINER – The watersheds provide training on a variety of water conservation and quality issues for municipal staffs, ranging from snowplow drivers to county commissioners.

6

● Additional/Refined Key Message for Elected Officials & Staff: HERE TO HELP YOU – The watersheds are your water quality partners in helping make Minnesota an even better place to live, work and play.

MESSAGES: EDUCATION Each watershed places a different emphasis on educational efforts – some focus on behavior change, while others approach education using a policy/systems/environmental change lens. All three watersheds employ a combination of both approaches, however, and share a commitment to thoughtful messaging focused on changing behaviors and attitudes toward water quality and protection.

Vanessa Perry and Mae. A Davenport, working for the Department of Forest Resources at the University of Minnesota, conducted a thorough research process to uncover key messages that resonate with specific constituencies.

Following is a brief summary of themes that arose for two of the three watersheds:

CRWD ● 1. Community members are not thinking much about stormwater ○ Community considers water important in other ways (e.g. recreation, fish consumption, watering, etc.) ○ Concerns about water (e.g. availability, drinking water quality) ● 2. Local community connections and relationships matter ○ Success stories all included strong partnerships ○ Cultural context is critical ○ Strong potential partners already exist in communities. ● 3. Businesses are driven by economic concerns and limiting risk 7

○ Businesses respond to initiatives perceived to have positive economic return (e.g., energy) ○ New immigrants and minority populations are challenged to navigate regulatory hurdles ○ Businesses may be wary to share “secrets to success” with other businesses.

RWMWD ● High awareness of and concern for water quantity issues ○ Perception that drinking water is clean ○ Observation of decreased water levels ● RWMWD plays an important role ○ A good partner ○ Technical assistance a driver to implement water management projects ○ Financial assistance a driver to implement water management projects ● Concern for natural environment is not a primary decision making driver ○ Aesthetic concerns ○ Financial concerns ○ Community concerns (e.g. norms and impacts) STRATEGIES The following strategies were determined as part of a shared workshop between Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, Capitol Region Watershed District and Mississippi Watershed Management Organization. Fourth Sector Consulting and Cathryn Kennedy Consulting, Ltd. presented the findings of our thorough research process (summarized in Appendix A) and facilitated a conversation focused on identifying opportunities to collaborate in 2016 and 2017. The following strategies 8

are focused on narrowing down strategies to those that watersheds will commit to work on together during 2016 and 2017.

Strategy One: Develop Shared Communications Resources and Training Opportunities. Several watersheds raised concerns about potentially duplicating efforts on developing communications resources and pursuing training opportunities. The following tactics are intended to streamline messaging, resources, training and evaluation across watersheds. â—? Tactic One: Finalize and Adopt Messaging Toolkit. Implement shared organizational and educational messaging that could be used in individual and joint communications efforts. Toolkit could include: o Organizational Messaging: What is a watershed? What are the types of watersheds? How do they work? What do they do? o Educational Messaging: How should residents care for lawns? How do we talk about blue-green algae? o Final Deliverable: Messaging toolkit, featuring shared messaging across watersheds and answers to frequently asked questions. o Short-Term Measure(s) of Success: 1) Completion of toolkit; 2) Adoption of messaging by individual watersheds. o Long-Term Measure(s) of Success: 1) Increased understanding of organizational and educational priorities for watersheds among target audiences. â—? Tactic Two: Develop a Shared Set of Wayfinding/Signage Iconography.

The watersheds currently use different iconography for wayfinding and signage, with different standards on when and where to deploy these 9

resources. Watersheds expressed an interest in developing shared iconography for wayfinding and signage, which would help key audiences understand watershed concepts as they travel across the boundaries of watershed districts. o Final Deliverable: Shared set of iconography for wayfinding and signage, along with a set of standards for usage. o Short-Term Measure(s) of Success: 1) Completion of shared set of iconography and signage; 2) Completion of standards for usage. o Long-Term Measure(s) of Success: 1) Implementation of shared iconography and signage across watersheds; 2) Increased identification of watershed resources among key audiences.

Following are examples of different types of rain garden signage and iconography used by the watersheds.

10

â—? Tactic Three: Invest in Jointly Produced Educational Content. Each of the watersheds identified education as a priority, but there were variances in how educational work was structured, managed/staffed and implemented. There was, however, a shared interest in developing educational content that would be used across watersheds. Fourth Sector Consulting and Cathryn Kennedy Consulting, Ltd. recommend that the watersheds identify at least three concrete opportunities to pursue this tactic during 2016 and 2017. o Idea #1: Create three brief, well-produced videos, targeted toward local homeowners, answering key questions facing the watersheds: 1) What is a watershed? 2) What are the top five things residents can do to protect their local rivers, lakes and streams? 3) Why should I care about stormwater? Watersheds could potentially build upon imagery developed by Capitol Region Watershed District and/or employ illustrations and animation that could be repurposed on social media or websites.

11

o Idea #2: Create a shared editorial calendar. Each watershed produces its own content; the watersheds would build a shared, 12month editorial calendar to guide content development decisions at each of the watersheds. For instance, each watershed would commit to sharing content related to snow management in January, etc.

Ultimately, this calendar would also help the watersheds determine opportunities to collaborate on developing content. o Idea #3: Create a website providing a one-stop shop for news and information about water quality in Minnesota. This website would be targeted toward thought leaders – municipalities, elected officials, journalists – and focus on advancing thought leadership on water quality. The website would highlight existing news coverage, lift up innovative examples of water quality management from the watersheds and help target audiences understand the importance of water quality to their work. o Final Deliverables: ▪

Idea #1: The final deliverable would be three brief, wellproduced videos.

▪

Idea #2: The final deliverable would be a 12-month editorial calendar.

▪

Idea #3: The final deliverable would be a website providing a one-stop shop for news and information about water quality in Minnesota.

o Short-Term Measure(s) of Success:

12

▪

Idea #1: Completion of the videos, along with the completion/execution of a thoughtful distribution plan.

Viewership goals: 1,000 views/video.

▪

Idea #2: Completion of the 12-month editorial calendar.

▪

Idea #3: Completion of the website, along with completion of a plan for management over time.

o Long-Term Measure(s) of Success: ▪

Idea #1: Viewers able to articulate what watersheds are, what they can do to protect local rivers/lakes/streams and why they should care about stormwater.

▪

Idea #2: Editorial calendar drives broader, public dialogue on key priorities for the watersheds (e.g. more earned media stories on snow management in January, etc.)

▪

Idea #3: Thought leaders can articulate the importance of watersheds to advancing water quality in Minnesota.

● Tactic Four: Develop Shared Training Opportunities. The watersheds expressed interest in pursuing shared communications training opportunities, focused on building skillsets in key areas of interest. These trainings would include: o Crisis Communications Training. The watersheds would participate in a crisis communications training facilitated by an outside consultant, then work with that consultant to build a shared approach to managing crisis communications situations across watersheds.

13

o Spokesperson/Media Trainings. Key watershed leaders would participate in a spokesperson training, ensuring that people designated as spokespeople have the skills necessary to serve as a spokesperson in numerous media engagement situations (e.g. TV interviews, radio interviews, print reporting interviews, etc.).

Strategy Two: Develop a Shared Understanding of Key Communications Metrics.

All watersheds expressed a strong interest in measurement, which could be managed by Watershed Partners. Following are key metrics, which the watersheds could use to gauge ongoing impact of communications activities: ● Earned Media. Earned media is most easily tracked by the number of media hits; it is often helpful to set up a shared tracking system that captures the title of the piece, the date of placement, the name of the outlet, the name of the reporter, the general subject of the article (e.g. watershed project, water quality, etc.), and tone (e.g. positive/neutral/negative). This can help the watersheds, over time, gain a better understanding of water quality media coverage and opportunities to shape stronger coverage. ● Social Media. There are numerous metrics for tracking social media effectiveness, but one of the strongest metrics is engagement – how many people are liking/favoriting posts? How many people are commenting on posts? How many people are sharing posts? Tracking this in an ongoing way, ideally in a spreadsheet, can help the watersheds better understand which posts are garnering the strongest levels of engagement, which can help guide content development decisions. ● Survey Audience. Develop and conduct communications surveys every six months. How are we doing? Which tools are most effective? Where are we making progress.

14

STAFFING, BUDGETS AND TIMELINES We recommend that the watersheds appoint one person from each watershed to staff a small working group to oversee the joint communications work undertaken

by Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, Mississippi Watershed Management Organization and Capitol Region Watershed District. We recommend that this working group convene once per month to review the joint communications strategy and determine necessary adjustments. We also recommend that this working group have one representative designated as the person accountable for making final decisions on behalf of the working group.

We also recommend that the watersheds undertake much of this work with consulting partners. Most of the watersheds do not have dedicated communications staff, which would make it challenging to advance joint work without additional support. We also recommend that a consulting partner participate in the small communications working group calls/meetings.

TIMELINE Responsible?

Budget

Q1:

Q2:

Q3:

Q4:

2016

2016 2016

2016

$3,000 -

Q1:

Q2:

Q4:

$5,000

2016

2016 2016

Strategy One: Develop Shared Communications Resources and Training Opportunities.

Tactic One: Develop a Messaging Toolkit

Responsible?

Q3:

2016

15

Determine list of questions

Watershed Partners

to address in a messaging toolkit Write first draft of messaging

Watershed Partners

toolkit Compile feedback; share with

Watershed Partners

consulting partner Write second draft of

Watershed Partners

messaging toolkit Compile final feedback; share

Watershed Partners

with consulting partner Finalize messaging toolkit

Watershed Partners

Tactic Two: Develop a

Responsible?

Shared Set of

$15,000-

Q1:

Q2:

$20,000

2016

2016 2016

Q3:

Q4: 2016

Wayfinding/Signage Iconography Survey key audiences on

Watersheds

existing wayfinding signage

Communications

options

Group Lead, working closely with watershed communications group

Create RFP for developing a Watersheds shared set of

Communications

wayfinding/signage

Group Lead

iconography Conduct interviews to hire a Watersheds consultant

Communications Group

16

Develop and finalize shared

Watersheds

set of wayfinding/signage

Communications

iconography

Group

Tactic Three: Invest in

Responsible?

Jointly Produced

See

Q1:

Q2:

Below

2016

2016 2016

Q3:

Q4: 2016

Educational Content.

Idea #1: Create three brief,

$10,000

well-produced videos

$15,000

Discuss and determine final

Watersheds

video approach

Communications Group

Hire videographer

Watersheds Communications Group

Conduct filming (could

Videographer

occurs at different times of year, depending on focus of video) Compile feedback; share

Watersheds

with consulting

Communications

partner/videographer (could Group Lead also occur at different times of year, depending on focus of videos) Edit videos

Videographer

Compile second round of

Watersheds

feedback; share with

Communications

consulting

Group Lead

partner/videographer Finalize videos

Videographer

17

Develop and execute

Watershed

dissemination/advertising

Communications

plan

Group

Idea #2: Create a shared

$2,500 -

editorial calendar

$3,000

Collect and compile ideas

Watershed Partners

for a shared editorial calendar Create first draft of editorial Watershed Partners calendar Compile feedback; share

Watershed Partners

with consulting partner Create second draft of

Watershed Partners

editorial calendar Finalize editorial calendar

Watershed Partners

Idea #3: Create a website

$30,000 -

providing a one-stop shop

$50,000

for news and information about water quality in Minnesota.

Create RFP for web design

Watershed

firm

Communications Group Lead

Conduct interviews to hire a Watershed web design firm

Communications Group

Develop and finalize

Watershed

website

Communications Group Lead, with

18

support/feedback from Watershed Communications Group Tactic Four: Develop

$10,000

Shared Training

-

Opportunities

$20,000

Develop and conduct crisis

Watershed

communications training

Communications Group Lead/Consulting Partner, with support/feedback from Watershed Communications Group

Develop and conduct

Watershed

spokesperson/media

Communications

training

Group Lead/Consulting Partner, with support/feedback from Watershed Communications Group

Strategy Two: Develop a Shared Understanding of Key Communications Metrics

Finalize list of metrics used

Watershed Partners

to gauge communications

19

success; establish structure for gauging success

APPENDIX A: AUDIT FINDINGS

What do you see as some of the most important things your organization needs to tackle in the next year? In the next three years? ● New websites ● Address heavy workloads; strong desire for targeted work in communications and across the board ● Audience education

20

● Audiences should understand role of watershed district in water/ecosystem management ● Audiences should understand key topics of interest – blue-green algae, stormwater vs. groundwater, etc. ● Capital project communications ● Creative and effective communication with target audiences

How do you think communications could help achieve these goals? ● Develop new ways to explain what watersheds are ● Communicate effectively before, during and after projects ● Identify target audiences and reach them effectively

Whom do you see as priority audiences for your organization? ● Elected officials ● Government staff ● Community partners ● Community pillars ● “Regular people” (homeowners, students, people who live near water, people who don’t live near water) ● Underserved communities

For each of these audiences, what do you think is the most important information they need to know? ● Homeowners need to know how they connect to water resources, and that what they do has a direct impact on water quality. ● Businesses and developers need to be aware of healthy approaches to stormwater management.

21

● Government agencies need to know what watersheds do and that watersheds and cities share common water goals. ● Nonprofits and neighborhood groups need to know how watersheds can help and how to access watersheds.

Currently, what do you consider your organization’s most effective communications strategies and tactics? ● Face to face communication! When watersheds get an audience, they use it well.

Currently, what do you consider your organization’s least effective communications strategies and tactics? ● Digital/website/social media ● An overarching impression that we don’t know what’s working and what’s not working ● Translating the technical into more accessible formats

How do you think this list should change in the next year or two? Do practices need to be added or stopped? ● We’re “throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks.” We should be more deliberate, and kill what isn’t working. ● We need to determine whether or not we should be marketing our organization. What would “the larger world” find interesting? ● We need to make better use of technology and social media. ● “We need to pick out our top audiences, determine who the messaging needs to reach, apply it, evaluate it, and follow up.”

22

In your opinion, what resources are needed to achieve the communications vision?

E.g. Staff? Tools? Technology? Training? Etc. ● All of it! ● Better and more efficient ways of updating a blog, engaging Facebook followers, maintaining the website, etc. ● Effective storytelling methods ● Crisis communications training ● Embrace our scientific nature and make it more fun for our audience

What opportunities do you see for partnership with the other two watersheds? ● Development of a watersheds core message and collaboration on lifting up that message ● Share core messaging on general education topics ● Shared training on topics such as crisis communications and social media ● Shared learning. We each have different age diversity, ethnic diversity and political situations. We should be talking about that, seeing where our work merges, and learning where we can work together.

What would an effective collaboration feel like to you? What would success look like? ● Using one another as resources ● Developing a streamlined way to share information ● Establishing shared messaging ● Developing shared outreach materials ● Building a shared vocabulary ● Created a shared understanding of what communications success looks like

23

Do you see any challenges to partnering on communications? Do you have any ideas on how to overcome those challenges? ● Collaboration requires a different way of working from what we’re currently doing. We need to understand that there may be emotional attachments to work, board issues, and other things at play. We will all need to agree to do things differently. ● It’s already been hard to work through three separate process/timelines on this project. We should address that in future collaboration. ● Our communications goals might be different, and until we complete this process, it’s hard to know whether collaboration will be effective. ● Parochialism. We aren’t the same, but we can coordinate on key things and like helping people understand watersheds and seeing the bigger picture.

Whom do you consider the spokesperson for your organization? Who manages the daily communications work? Do you have opinions on how it should be organized? ● Across all three organizations, the administrator is the primary spokesperson, although several others are spokespeople in various capacities as well.

What does your organization need to be more effective in informal, one-to-one communications or conversations? ● We need to better communicate our vision/mission/work succinctly and clearly.

Do you feel external partners have a clear sense of your organizations work? Why or why not? ● Many agencies do, but elected officials don’t. Some get the big picture, but most don’t understand what we do on projects.

24

● Lots of nonprofits understand the piece we’re working on with them, but they might not understand the whole issue, big picture. ● Our biggest partners understand our work.

How do you currently gauge success / effectiveness in communications? How do you evaluate whether you’re successful or not? ● There’s a general feeling that we don’t have a good way of doing this right now. ● We don’t always know whether our message is resonating. ● Partner feedback ● Formal program evaluations ● Analytics ● numbers of newsletter subscriptions, ● website hits, ● Facebook likes, etc. ● Also measuring success of programs/activities – pollution reduction, etc.

Recommendations ● Share training ● Crisis communications ● Social media ● Share messaging ● Build out common message around who we are and what we do ● Develop a shared project communications plan ● Develop a common vocabulary ● Celebrate and promote one another’s work ● Build a Metro Watershed Identity 25

● Develop a shared website ● Create standard icons for inclusion on project signage ● Develop a shared evaluation mechanism ● Share resources and technology ● Develop and share interactive project maps on websites ● Share outreach materials such as blue green algae information, tips for homeowners, etc. ● Individual watersheds focus on targeted communications to defined audiences ● Outsource blog posts, newsletters, etc. ● Form a Watersheds Collaborative Council

APPENDIX B: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT MEDIA ENGAGEMENT PRACTICES

The purpose of this news audit is to examine the stories the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District placed with Minnesota media in 2014-2015. The questions we will ask are: ● Where were their stories placed? ● What types of stories were they telling? ● What types of partnerships were they utilizing? ● Do the stories look like they were placed and initiated by the Watershed District itself?

Minnehaha Creek news items from 2015

26

The following 21 stories are the news items listed on the website of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, along with outlet, date and likely source. The District had ten that were based directly on press releases (also found on its website), four bylined articles, and four likely based on partnerships (along with partner listed). Of the remaining three stories listed, one was the announcement of the reception of a grant, one was the reception of an award (likely self-nominated) and one was an announcement seeking volunteers.

“Christmas Lake holds off zebra mussel spread” Star Tribune | October 9, 2015 Based on press release “Meadowbrook Golf Course will reopen in 2017” Sun Sailor | October 6, 2015 Likely placed through partnership with the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board “Hopkins celebrates new park, transformed neighborhood” KARE 11 | September 30, 2015 Based on a press release “Master Water Stewards program expands” SW News Media | September 30, 2015 Based on a press release “More than buzzwords: Forming partnerships key for clean water” Sun Sailor | September 16, 2015 Bylined article “Minnehaha Creek Preserve celebrated” Sun Sailor | August 1, 2015 27

Based on a press release “Minnehaha Creek cleanup yields 4 tons of trash” Star Tribune | July 26, 2015 Based on a press release “St. Louis Park celebrates new boardwalk along restored Minnehaha Creek” Star Tribune | July 24, 2015 Based on a press release “MCWD provides tips on identifying dangerous blue-green algae” The Journal | July 14, 2015 Based on a press release “Join me in cleaning up Minnehaha Creek July 26” Lakeshore Weekly News | July 14, 2015 Bylined article “And the Environmental Initiative Award goes to …”

Star Tribune | May 27, 2015 Award for Environmental Education, likely self-nominated by MCWD “Union Congregation prepares for a rainy day” Sun Sailor | May 24, 2015 Photo series, based on partnership with Union Congregational Church “District expands early detection” Star Tribune | May 19, 2015 Seeking volunteers “Site of former sewage plant restored to wetland near Long Lake” 28

Star Tribune | April 24, 2015 Based on a press release “Treatments on Christmas Lake kill off zebra mussels” Star Tribune | April 20, 2015 Based on a press release “Celebrate Spring with a Stroll through Shorewood’s Gideon Glen” Lake Minnetonka Magazine | April 1, 2015 Likely based on partnerships with Hennepin County, Met Council and Lake Fellowship of Unitarian-Universalists.

“County awards grants to prevent spread of aquatic invasive species” Laker & Pioneer | March 28, 2015 Announcement of grant “Cottageville design and construction upcoming” Sun Sailor | March 28, 2015 Likely based on partnership with city of Hopkins and the Met Council “Forum examines shallow lakes” Chaska Herald | March 25, 2015 Based on a press release “Let’s get started working together” Sun Sailor | March 13, 2015 Bylined article “Turning back the clock for clean water” Lakeshore Weekly News | January 28, 2015 29

Bylined article Negative Press in 2014 and Response The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District earned some negative press in 2014. The head of its board of 15-years was ousted for unspecified reasons (http://m.startribune.com/minnehaha-creek-watershed-district-headousted/256789611/). Shortly thereafter, the Citizen’s Advisory Committee there held a vote of “no-confidence” in the board (http://current.mnsun.com/2014/08/07/noconfidence-vote-in-minnehaha-creek-watershed-district-board/).

After these two events, members of the public urged the Board to begin videotaping meetings and having those meetings made public (something the MCWD agreed to do) (http://m.startribune.com/after-increasing-public-pressureminnehaha-creek-watershed-district-to-start-videotaping-meetings/281982431/).

It is interesting to note the newspaper that published news of the “no-confidence” vote (The Sun Sailor) now appears to have an on-going current relationship by its acceptance of bylined articles by the MCWD. Despite these negative stories, the MCWD maintained a strong positive presence in the news by continually pushing Minnehaha Creek cleanup stories and bylined articles throughout 2014 and early 2015, when its election of a new district head was covered closely. It had several successful, "Let's clean up Minnehaha Creek together," stories throughout 2014. Even in the midst of negative press, such as when a story appeared about how the creek was too polluted to be safe for canoers (http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/05/23/water-levels-unsafe-for-canoes-kayaks/), the MCWD successfully defended itself several days later by announcing a massive clean-up. This response to public criticism demonstrated its value to the public 30

(http://www.startribune.com/twin-cities-metro-briefs-minnehaha-creekcleanup/261386431/). These optimistic stories gave way to those with slightly more substance in 2015, where they placed a great number of bylined articles on and a guide for the public to avoid water-borne illnesses.

The final story of 2014 listed for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is also notable for its having been run on Minnpost.com, the most successful news blog in the state: http://www.minnpost.com/stroll/2014/12/6-most-interesting-comebacksreinventions-and-second-acts-2014.

In this story, Minnehaha Creek was listed as the one of the six “comebacks” of 2014, with the Watershed District noted specifically for its restoration projects. This was likely a situation where MinnPost set out feelers for nominations for this list and the District sent details about their “comeback” efforts. This is a good example of a place that was not an obvious environmental pitch, but which made an excellent success when reinterpreted by the District’s communications team.

Social Media An extensive social media analysis was not part of the set project, but I thought it interesting to note that the MCWD has 1,214 likes on Facebook, 1,039 followers on Twitter, and 116 followers on Instagram. It also has a YouTube channel where it now publishes its meetings, as well as video guides, and small, humorous sketches. Its guide about how to install a permeable paver driveway has garnered over 71k views.

Summary Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was able to overcome negative press in 2014 by consistently forging partnerships, placing stories demonstrating its value to the

31

community, winning fans on social media, and placing bylined articles establishing its authority in traditional media sources.

32

Updates to CRWD Education and Outreach Objectives Program Goal: Increase awareness of stormwater runoff in the community and use education to promote changes in behavior that will help restore and protect water quality in the District.

Objective 5: Remove community-water barriers by linking neighborhood beliefs and values of target audiences to water quality projects and programs through the following tasks: Note: as indicated in our Watershed Management Plan, CRWD will prioritize work with audiences of cultural and socio-economic diversity and with whom CRWD has not previously worked with.

I.

Identify ways to connect communities with water.

II.

Utilize existing community connections and relationships to implement water education programs. e.g. Work with neighborhood groups, community org and key residents etc.

Reduce barriers to engaging with business / commercial audiences by leveraging funding and cost-share opportunities.

Develop communications that reflect the values and beliefs of a target community Implement community based education programs that integrate monitoring and outreach programing

III. IV. V.

CRWD Watershed Plan Mid-term Review

Community Capacity Assessment

*1

***1 **1,2

***2

*10

**4

***3

*2

**4

*8

**2

*1,2,8,10: CRWD Watershed Management Plan Mid Term Review – Summary of Progress Toward Addressing Issues, Issues Section , pg. 5-15. **1-4: DRAFT_A Community Capacity Assessment for Stormwater Management in the Twin Cities Metro Area – Discussions and Recommendations Section, pg. 46-49. ***1-3: Audit Findings and Joint Communications Collaboration Plan – Messages: Education Section, themes for CRWD, pg. 7-8 W:\07 Programs\Edu-Outreach\Admin-Workplan\2016 E_O new objectives.docx

Shared Strategic Communications Plan (RWMWD and MWMO)

2016 CAPITOL REGION WATERSHED DISTRICT EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PLAN, FEBRUARY 18, 2016 – WORK PLAN TABLE

Budget Code Project Name

Goals

Project Description

Audiences

Objective 5 programs that help us achieve the goals of Objective 5

220-16250

Education and Outreach General

General communication/ongoing outreach

220-16253

Community Capacity Assessment

Survey in partnership with U of M, RWMWD and MWMO

220-16255

Clean Streets Outreach

Street sweeping study and outreach program and Support Adopt-a-Drain expansion to D6 and D11 residents

220-16260

Municipal Outreach

Seasonal maintenance trainings for City of Saint Paul staff

220-16262

Youth Outreach

Collaborate with partner organizations on clean water education to youth in schools or community organizations.

220-16265

Partnerships

Financial and staff time contributions to partner organizations and collaborative groups

220-16270

Website

Maintain and upgrade CRWD website

220-16271

Master Water Stewards

Support the MWS program

220-16275

Events

Event coordination and staffing

220-16285

Watershed Steward Awards

Clean water recognition program

210-16144

Partner Grants

210-16146

RSVPs

Grants program to community organizations, municipalities and youth organizations, increase outreach to more diverse audiences (ethnic, racial, socioeconomic diversity) Boulevard rain garden planting with RSVP homeowners

Various

Various

Loeb, Trout Brook Subwatershed

Goals Key:

Action

Knowledge Increase

Participation

TBD

TBD

TBD

TBD

NPS Pollution Reduction N

[Type here] Key: Audiences Residents / homeowners Youth Municipalities W:\07 Programs\Edu-Outreach\Admin-Workplan\Ed Plan\2016 Ed Plan\2016 Ed Plan Table_Condenssed.docx

Commercial/ Businesses

Community Organization

Capitol Region Watershed District Citizen Advisory Committee 2016 Agenda Plan CAC Meeting Date January 13, 2016

District Initiatives - Trout Brook 5 Year Inspection and CIP - BMP Database Review - Education Program Review - Community Capacity Assessment -Special Report -Strategic Communications Plan -Stewardship Grants Program Update

CAC Initiatives -Stewardship Awards Recap -2016 CAC Meeting Plan Discuss 2015 “Event”

May 11, 2016

- 2015 Permit Program Review - Lake and Stormwater Report -Upper Villa Update

- Election of Officers - Student Worker Program -Awards Program -Event Planning -CAC Tour Planning -Student Worker

June 8, 2016

Summer Tour

July 13, 2016

-Master Water Stewards

August 10, 2016

-Review and Comment on 2017 Budget

February 10, 2016 March 9, 2016

April 13, 2016

September 14, 2016 October 12, 2016

-Special and Partner Grant Committees

November 9, 2016

December 14, 2016

2017 Reappointment Recommendations

Updated: March 4, 2016 Pervious Parking Lot Eustis Street Feasibility Study Lafayette Park W:\05 Citizen Advisory Committee\Agendas\2016\2016 CAC Agenda Plan 1-5-16.doc

- Student Worker Program - Governor’s Water Summit - Snelling Midway Redevelopment

-Event Planning Update -Master Water Stewards -Student Worker Update -2016 Awards Program Adoption -Student Worker Program Approval - Fall Fresh Water Society Event -Awards Program -Student Worker Program Update - Awards Program - Awards Program - Student Worker Updates - Moos Family Lecture Series - Awards Program - Student Worker Update