November 4, 2015 board packet updated

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

Regular Meeting of Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board Of Managers, for Wednesday,

November 4, 2015 6:00 p.m. at the office of CRWD, 1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4, St. Paul, Minnesota.

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

I. 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 #15-032 Victoria Park East Trails 60-Day Review Extension Request (Kelley)

B) Permit # 09-014 Carondelet Village – Permit Closeout (Kelley)

IV. Special Reports –

A) Connecting Recreation Center Youth to the Watershed, Faith Krogstad, City of St. Paul,

Parks and Recreation Department, Natural Resources Section

B) Ford Site Update, Bob Fossum

C) TBI Easement Analysis (Eleria)

V. Action Items

A) Approve Minutes of the October 21, 2015 Regular Meeting (Sylvander)

B) Approve Change Order # 1 New Look Contracting for the Upper Villa Project (Kelley)

C) Adopt 2015 Mid-Term Review (Fossum)

D) Approve 2016 District Employee Benefit Program (Doneux)

VI. Unfinished Business

A) Education and Outreach Update (Beckman)

VII. General Information

A) Administrator’s Report

VIII. Next Meetings

A) Thursday, November 12, 2015 CAC Meeting

B) Wednesday, November 18, 2015 Board Meeting

IX. Adjournment

W:\04 Board of Managers\Agendas\2015\Novembe 4, 2015 Agenda Regular Mtg.docx

Materials Enclosed

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

DATE: October 27, 2015

TO: CRWD Board of Managers

FROM: Forrest Kelley, PE

RE: 60-day Review Period Extensions for Permit 15-032

Background

The 60-day review period for Permit 15-032 Victoria Park East Trail will expire on November 10, 2015.

Issues

The applicant has requested the review period be extended. City staff are contemplating some design

changes, and plans are on hold until decisions are made regarding their inclusion.

Requested Action

Approve 60-day review period extension for permit 15-032 Victoria Park East Trails to expire January 8,

2016.

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\2015\15-032 Victoria Park East Trails\Brd Memo Extension 15-032 Victoria Park East Trail Extension request.docx

November 4, 2015

Regular Board Meeting III. Permits A) 15-032 Victoria Park

East Trail Review Extension

Request




FROM: Forrest Kelley, PE

RE: Permit Closeouts

Background

Construction activity is complete for permit #09-014 Carondelet Village

Issues

Final inspection has been conducted to confirm BMP function and site stabilization. One of the basins

was holding water, and repairs have been made to ensure the drain tile removes water from the system.

No excessive non-compliance occurred, and staff recommend issuing the Certificate of Completion and

return of the full $19,150 surety.

Action Requested

Approve Certificate of Completion for permit #09-014 Carondelet Village and issue surety return check

for $19,150.

W:\07 Programs\Permitting\Board Memos\2015-11-04 Permit Closeout Board Memo.docx

November 4, 2015

III. Permit Applications

(B.) Permit Close Outs

(Kelley)



FROM: Elizabeth Beckman

RE: Special Report: Saint Paul Parks and Recreation Natural Resources

Background

CRWD Board of Managers approved a 2015 Partner Grant to City of Saint Paul Parks and

Recreation Natural Resources division to carry out environmental education programming with 6-

12-year-olds in summer 2015.

Issues

The mission of Saint Paul Natural Resources is to create lifelong connections to a healthy

environment for all. Low income families and communities of color use regional parkland at

markedly lower rates than the white population due to a variety of reasons including a lack of

awareness, safety and security concerns and lack of transportation. Building on a summer 2014

pilot with youth from Arlington Hills Community Center at Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary (TBNS),

in 2015 Natural Resources staff proposed to engage summer youth from four recreation centers in

learning and habitat restoration at TBNS and Como Regional Park. The goals were to offer

opportunities to learn about ecosystems, actively restore wetland habitat at the park, and above all,

allow students to connect to these places and make them their own.

City of Saint Paul Parks and Recreation Natural Resources education staff will present program

results at the November 4 board meeting.

Request action

None requested.

W:\07 Programs\Stewardship Grant Program\Partner Grants\2015 Grants\06-Saint Paul Natural Resources\BM Oct 2015 Special Report.docx

November 4, 2015

Board Meeting

IV. Special Report

A) St. Paul Natural Resources

Education Report


DATE: October 29, 2015 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Bob Fossum, Program Manager RE: Ford Site Stormwater Evaluation, Phase 2 Update Background Ford's former Twin Cities Assembly Plant will be redeveloped in the coming years on more than 135 acres of land situated along the Mississippi River. The City of St. Paul’s vision for the site is that it will be a livable, mixed-use neighborhood that looks to the future with clean technologies and high quality design for energy, buildings and infrastructure. This site will support walking, biking and transit, and provide services, jobs and activities that every generation can enjoy. At the March 4, 2015 Board meeting, the Managers approved the Ford Site Stormwater Evaluation, Phase 1 with Barr Engineering Co. for an amount not to exceed $35,000. At the July 27, 2015 Board Meeting, the Managers approved the scope of work and budget for Ford Site Stormwater Evaluation, Phase 2 for an amount not to exceed $73,600. Issues Phase 2 analysis consists of determining the costs and benefits associated with two stormwater management scenarios. This information is needed to inform decision making relative to the City of St. Paul’s Public Realm and Infrastructure Plan for the Ford Site. The two stormwater management scenarios to be analyzed are: 1. Baseline or conventional; and 2. Centralized. A key component of the proposed analysis will be to monetize ALL of the costs and benefits of each scenario. A series of meetings with City staff were conducted on Monday October 26th to review the work planned and gain input and feedback from the City of St. Paul. Staff will review the project and the content of those meetings with the Managers. Requested Action None, information only. enc: Ford Site Stormwater Evaluation Presentations Boards \\CRwDC01\company\06 Projects\Ford Site\2015 Stormwater Phase 2\Brd Memo -Ford Site phase 2 update 10-29-15.docx

November 4, 2015

IV. Special Reports B) Ford Site Stormwater Update

North

(urban)

Stormwater Treatment Train

Transition

South

(Naturalized)

URBAN ZONE

TRANSITION ZONE

NATURAL ZONE

Hidden

Falls

Stormwater Modeling & Concept Development

Concept Plan & Renderings of a “Centralized” Stormwater Management Approach

Geothermal

Hydroelectric

Nuclear

Coal

Natural Gas

Oil Refinery

Wind

Solar

Biomass

Potable water

distribution

Capture Storage

Water Reuse

Storm Water

Flood Control

Solid waste

Recycling

Hazardous

Waste

Collection &

Transfer

Airports

Roads

Highways

Bikes

Pedestrians

Railways

Public Transit

Ports

Waterways

Public Realm

Parks

Ecosystem

Services

Telecommunications

Internet

Phones

Satellites

Data Centers

Sensors

ENERGY WATER WASTE TRANSPORT LANDSCAPE INFORMATION

Infrastructure

June 23, 2015 Public Meeting

Citizen Engagement Quotes:

“capture it, hold it, use it, then release”

“Saint Paul needs to rediscover Hidden Falls”

“Stacked functions - get other functions out of your stormwater features - parking, park, plaza�water feature, minimize land loss, add

value to the property with the amenity”

“It would be a great step in developing a more livable environmentally friendly city”

“love the ability to touch and walk up to the water” “Easy Access to River”

�image modified from Institute for

Sustainable Infrastructure

Stormwater Costs, Benefits, & Sustainability Comparison

Sustainable Return on Investment (SROI):Triple Bottom Line Valuation Framework

Outputs

Monetary valuation of Triple Bottom Line

Proven method in multiple contexts

Applicable for program, project level

decisions

Accounts for risk & uncertainty

Restore Hidden Falls Creek

Green Space �Trees

Impervious Area

Above Ground Storage

Below Ground Storage

Stormwater Pipes

LESS

LESS

LESS

LESS

MORE

MORE

MORE

MORE

PUBLIC

PRIVATE NONE

PUBLIC �

Ongoing Maintenance Efforts

and Erosion Prevention

Stormwater Management

Underground Instead of Above

Ground Shrinks Development

Potential

Underground Stormwater

Management Make More Area

Developable But Generates More

Runoff

Some Developable Area is Replaced

with Green Infrastructure with

Multiple Benefits

Standard Conveyance Practices

All Public Runoff is Managed

Above Ground

88-10% of Private Stormwater

Management is Below Ground

All Public & Private Runoff is

Managed Above Ground

All Public & Private Runoff

is to be Managed in Above

Ground Features

Increase Overland Flow Through

Above Ground Stormwater

Management Features

Restored Hidden Falls Creek

and Green Infrastructure

Stormwater Management to

Restore Naturalized Flows and

Daylight the Creek

PRIVATE

Graphic Courtesy of Impact Infrastructure, LLC

Baseline Scenario Centralized Scenario

Employment�Pipe

Underground Storage

Impervious Surface

Green Infrastructure

Open Water

Green Space�Mixed Use Business�Mixed Use Low Rise�Mixed Use Mid Rise�Park�River Gateway�River Residential��

Preliminary land use plans

provided by the City of Saint Paul

to inform comparative analysis

Example Outputs, For Discussion Purposes Only

Graphics Courtesy of Impact Infrastructure, LLC

ExxExExxxxxxxxxExxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxExExxxExExEEExExExExEExxxEExExExEExEEExEExxEEEExExxxxxxxxxxxamamamamamamamamamamamamamamamamamamamammmamamamamamamamamamamamaamamamaamaamaamamamammamamaamammamammmamammamaammamamamaamamammmmmmmmmmmmmmmplplplplplplpplplplplplplplpplplplpplplplppplplplplpplplppplplpplplplpplplplplpplpplpppplpplpppplpplplpppplplplpppppllpplplplpplplpllplllplllpppppppp eeeeee eee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeee eeeee OnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnnOnOnOnOOnnnnOnOOOOOnOnOOOnOnOnOnOnOOOnOOOOnOOOnOOnOnnnnOOnOnOnOOOOnnnOOOOnOOOOOOnOnOnnnOnOOOOnOnOnnnOOOOOOnOnOnOOnOOnnOnnOOOnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnlylylylylylylylylylylylylylylylylyllylylylylylylyllyllllylylyllylllllylyllllllylllyllllllllllyllylllllylllllllllllylylylyllllllylllllllllllylylllylyllyllylylylylylylylylllylylylylyllylylllylyllylllllylylyllllylylylylylylylylylyllylylyllylylylylylylylylylylylllylylylyllylylylyly

ExExExExxExExExExxxExExammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmplplplplpppplpplplplppplplpple OnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOOOnOOOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOOnOnOnOOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOOOnOOOOOnOOnOnnnOOOnOnlyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

ExExExExExExxExExExxxExExExExExExxExExExEExExEEEEExExEExExEEEExExEEEEExExExExEEExEExExExEEEEExEEEEEExEEExExEExEEEExExEExExxExExExxExxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxamamamamamamammmmmmammmmmmmmmamamamammmmmmaammmmmaamammmmamaamammmmamaammmmmamamamammmmmammmmmmamammmammmmmmmmmmaammmaaammmamaaaammamamaamamamaammamamaamammmamamammmammmmamamamaamaamammmmaamaammamamammaammamamaamammaamaaammammmmmaammmmamaammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmple OnOnOnOnOnnnnnOnOOnOOnOnOOOOOOOnOOOOOOOOnOnnnnnnOnOnnnnnly

ExaExaExaExExaExExaExaExaExaExaExaEEExaExaExaExaExaExaExEEExaExaEExaExaExaxaExaEExaEExaEExaaEEExaEEExEEExaEExaEExaxaaExExExaExaExExaxaxaExaEExaxaExaamplmplmplmplmplmplmplmplmpmpmplmplmpmpmpmplmplmplpmmplmplplmpmplmmplmplmmmplmplpmplmpmmplmpmplplmplmplmpmplmmplplpllmmmmplpplmplmplmplmpllmmmmpppppllmmpppplllpppllllmmpplmppppp e Oe Oe Oe Oe Oe Oe Oe Oe Oe Oe Oeee OOe Oe Oe Oe Oe OOOe OOe OOee Oeee Oe Oe Oe Oe Oee Oee Oe OOee Oeee Oe Oee Oe Oe OOOe Oeeeeee OOe Oe OOOOeeee OOOe Oeeeeeee OOOOOOOnlynlynlynlynlnlnlnlnlnlnnnlynlnlynlnlnnlnnllllllnlnlynlnlnlnnnlllnlllnlnlnnnnllyyyynlyyy

ExaaaaaaaaaExammmmmplmplmplmplmplmppplplpplppllllplpllppp eeeee Oeee Oeeeeee nlynly


DATE: October 29, 2015 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Anna Eleria, Water Resource Project Manager RE: TBI Easement Analysis

Background In late July, CRWD’s Administrator approved a TBI work order for Barr Engineering to inventory the existing TBI easements, identify where additional easements are needed to meet a desired width of 40 feet, prioritize acquisition of easements, and define potential uses of the easements. The results from this technical analysis will help guide the work of CRWD’s attorney to acquire additional easements. Issues CRWD and Barr Engineering staff have completed the TBI easement analysis and summarized the results in the enclosed technical memorandum. Nearly ten acres of easement area exists along TBI and 12 acres of 40-foot wide easement area needs to be acquired, which does not include public right-of-way. A database of properties with missing easement area lists the acquisition priority level (low, medium or high) and the amount of easement area needed on each parcel. The high priority criteria for acquiring missing easement area include being located on railroad property, presence of manhole or other surface structure, near upcoming 5-year CIP project, and missing easement over TBI centerline. Results of the analysis will be presented at the Nov. 4th Board meeting. Action Requested None, for information only. enc: TBI Easement Analysis Technical Memorandum Example of TBI figures (Figure 3.9) W:\06 Projects\Trout Brook Interceptor\Easements\Ramsey County Project 2014-2016\Board Memo\BM TBI Easement Analysis 11-04-15.docx

November 4, 2015 IV. Special Report –

C) TBI Easement Analysis (Eleria)

Memorandum

To: Anna Eleria, CRWD From: Nathan Campeau, PE Subject: Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Easement Recommendations Date: October 29, 2015 Project: TBI Easement Assistance

The Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) identified numerous locations along the Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor (TBI) where CRWD either does not own a permanent easement or the easement that CRWD owns is insufficient to perform maintenance and repair activities. CRWD retained Barr Engineering Co. (Barr) to assist in:

1. Identifying locations where additional easement should be acquired 2. Prioritizing easement acquisition, and 3. Determining the potential uses/restrictions of the easement

1.0 Easement Gaps and Excess Easement Barr performed a geographic information systems (GIS) analysis of the TBI alignment to determine locations where gaps in the existing TBI easement exist and locations where CRWD may own easements that are not necessary. To perform the GIS analysis, Barr used the software ArcGIS, version 10, analyzing the following GIS layers, provided by CRWD or other public sources:

1. TBI centerline and structures 2. Existing TBI easements

a. From Sewer Easement Doc. No. 2567551 b. Per City Resolution c. BNSF Easement acquired in 2012 as part of TBI realignment

3. Ramsey County parcel data from July 2015

1.1 Desired Easement Width We understand the CRWD owns a 40-foot wide easement over many segments of the TBI. Obtaining an easement width of 40 feet (20 feet either side of the centerline of TBI) along other segments of the TBI appears to be appropriate, if the CRWD elects to obtain additional easements. This width is consistent with most, but not all, locations where CRWD currently owns easement. Additionally, this is the width of easement that CRWD acquired from BNSF during the 2012 TBI realignment project.

To: Anna Eleria, CRWD From: Nathan Campeau, PE Subject: Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Easement Recommendations Date: October 29, 2015 Page: 2

P:\Mpls\23 MN\62\2362944\WorkFiles\TBI Engineer\TBI Easement Assistance\TBI Easement Assistance Memo rev3.docx

Based on our review, the width of TBI does not exceed 40 feet at any location, thus, a 40-foot easement would cover the physical extents of the TBI. A 40-foot width would allow continuous inspection at the surface along the TBI, and would accommodate access for construction projects, although it is likely that additional temporary construction easements from adjacent property owners may need to be obtained for specific construction projects as was the case for CRWD’s TBI Maryland Avenue Repair Project.

1.2 Buffer Analysis Using a 40-foot buffer centered on TBI, a GIS analysis was performed using the parcel data and existing easements to determine where:

1. 40-foot easement exists 2. Full 40-foot easement does not exist in:

a. Public right-of-way (ROW) b. Public property c. Private property

3. CRWD owns easement that is outside of the 40-foot buffer

The tabular and graphical results of that analysis are contained in the attached Excel spreadsheet and figures. Each parcel where TBI easement is missing, or where TBI easement exists that is outside of the 40-foot buffer is identified. Table 1 shows a summary of where easement exists and does not. Table 2 shows the top ten (10) landowners of missing easements, measured by the total acreage of missing easement.

Table 1. Easement Summary

Easement Status Parcels Acres

Currently Has Some Easement 56 9.51

Missing 40-Foot Easement (Private) 94 5.70

Missing 40-Foot Easement (Public) 26 6.47

Missing 40-Foot Easement (Public ROW) N/A 12.66

Currently Has Easement Outside of 40-Foot Buffer 24 5.26

TOTAL 200 39.61



Table 2. Landowners with Most Missing Easement

Landowner Total Parcels

Total Acres of Missing Easement

Rank

St Paul ROW NA 12.66 1

BNSF Railway Company 16 2.40 2

Saint Paul 12 2.36 3

Union Pacific Railroad Company 3 0.64 4

State of MN (various) 11 0.49 5

Twin City Concrete Products 3 0.37 6

Northern Pacific Railroad 8 0.34 7

Brackey, Robert L 1 0.30 8

Trautz Park Vista Llc 1 0.27 9

Shidler/West Finance Partners V Lp 2 0.21 10

TOTAL 57 20.04

2.0 Prioritizing Easement Acquisition In the attached Excel spreadsheet, Barr has categorized the missing easements into three (3) levels of priority incorporating CRWD direction on desired levels of priority:

1. Low Priority: a. The missing easement is in public ROW (not identified in spreadsheet). b. The missing easement is relatively small (less than 200 square feet), unless within the

areal extent of TBI (approximately 20-foot width centered on the centerline of TBI). Exceptions also include public property (medium) and railroad property (high).

2. Medium Priority a. The missing easement is on public property. b. Existing easement over the TBI exists: If easement covering TBI exists, but does not extend

the full 40 feet, that is deemed a medium priority. c. All other private property not fitting the category of Low or High.

3. High Priority a. Located on rail property: Acquiring easement on rail property is a high priority. b. Existence of surface structures: If manholes or catch basins associated with TBI on private

(non-railroad) property have surface structures that need to be inspected, it is deemed a high priority.



c. Upcoming repairs: Missing easements near upcoming (next 5 year CIP) repairs are deemed a high priority, unless the property is public (medium) or the missing easement extent is less than 200 square feet (low).

d. Easement over TBI centerline does not exist: Missing easements over the centerline of TBI (preventing surface access) are deemed a high priority, unless the property is public (medium).

Table 3 shows the breakdown in missing easements by priority:

Table 3. Prioritized Easements

Priority No. of Properties with Missing Easements

Total Acreage

Low* 27 12.7 Medium 46 3.7 High 39 3.5 N/A** 9 1.4 Total 120 8.6

**Parcel count excludes the City right-of-way, total acreage includes City right-of-way **Tunnel owned by City, not CRWD

3.0 Potential Uses / Restrictions of Easement This section describes several potential uses of an easement by CRWD and provides suggestions on the restricted uses of an easement. The uses and restrictions should be reviewed by CRWD and its legal counsel.

3.1 Potential Uses of Easement CRWD has several current and potential uses of an easement over the TBI, including:

1. Inspection of surface structures (manholes, catch basins, etc.) and ground surface damage and/or erosion

2. Inspection of surface above TBI to confirm that no restricted uses are occurring in the easement 3. Access for internal TBI inspection activities 4. Monitoring of stormwater within TBI 5. Maintenance activities 6. Construction activities

3.2 Potential Restrictions of the Easement Potentially-restricted or regulated uses and activities in the TBI easement could include:



1. Material storage 2. Placement of temporary or permanent structures, utilities, or equipment 3. Excavation activities 4. Significant loading above or within TBI due to factors including:

a. Soil storage/stockpiling b. Heavy equipment operations c. Dewatering activities

Attachments • Spreadsheet (Excel): Missing Easements by Parcels and Easements Outside of 40-foot Buffer • Figures: Easement Assessment Maps and Priority Areas

456755

TROUT BROOK CIRCLE

JACKSON STREET

192922310004

192922310007

192922310003

192922310002

192922430012

192922420022

192922310005

192922340058

192922420016

192922420025

192922420026

192922310012

192922340001

192922340053

192922340054

192922310016192922310018

192922340059

MUNICIPAL ROW

ROW

CO

UN

TY

RO

W

CO

UN

TY

RO

W

192922310019

192922310020

192922420023

114+50

115+00

115+50

116+00

116+50

117+00

117+50

118+00

118+50

119+00

119+50

120+00

120+50

121+00

121+50

122+00

122+50

123+00

123+50

124+00

124+50

125+00

125+50

126+00126+50127+00127+50128+00128+50129+00

Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.3.1, 2015-10-29 09:21 File: I:\Client\CapitolRegionWD\Maps\Trout_Brook_EasementAssessment\Figure3\Trout_Brook_EasementAssessment_Mapbook_Figure3_Landscape.mxd User: mac2

§̈¦94§̈¦945

DALE STREET NORTH

COMO AVENUE

RICE STREET

EDGERTON STREET

UNIVERSITY AVENUE WEST

£¤10

11

9876

5

4321

24

25

21

1026

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

2223

Aerial Source: USGS HRO

!;N

Figure 3.9

TROUT BROOK STORMSEWER INTERCEPTOR

EASEMENT ASSESSMENT MAPCapitol Region Watershed District

St. Paul, Minnesota

100 0 100

Feet

Trout Brook Interceptor Alignment

!( Alignment Stationing

Easement Needed (Non Public ROW)

40 ft. Buffer Area (20 ft. from c/l)

Parcel (July 2015)*

Easement Priority

High

Medium

Low

Existing Easements (2004 survey)DENOTES AREA DESCRIBED IN SEWER EASEMENTDOC. NO. 2567551, EXHIBITS B-1 THROUGH B-7(BETWEEN B.N. R.R AND METRO WASTE CONTROLCOMMISSION). INDIVIDUAL PARCELS DESCRIBED INEXHIBITS A-1 THROUGH A-7 OF SAID DOCUMENT

HAVE NOT BEEN INDENTIFIED OR LOCATED HEREON.

DENOTES SEWER EASEMENTPER CITY RESOLUTIONS

*All Ramsey County parcel identification numbers begin '123-', which was removed purposes of labeling.

Parcel labels are color coded to match their priority level.


Regular Meeting of the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD) Board of Managers, for Wednesday,

October 21, 2015 6:00 p.m. at the office of CRWD, 1410 Energy Park Drive, Suite 4, St. Paul, Minnesota

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES

I. A) Call to Order of Regular Meeting (President Joe Collins)

Managers

Joe Collins

Seitu Jones

Shirley Reider

Mary Texer

Mike Thienes

Staff Present

Mark Doneux, CRWD

Elizabeth Hosch, CRWD

Forrest Kelley, CRWD

Michelle Sylvander, CRWD

Lindsay VanPatten, CRWD

Public Attendees Carrie Wasley, Ramsey

Conservation District

Todd Shoemaker, Wenck

Associates, Inc.

B) Review, Amendments and Approval of the Agenda

President Collins asked for additions or changes to the agenda. No changes were made.

Motion 15-219: Approve the October 21, 2015 Agenda with no changes.

Reider/Thienes

Unanimously approved

II. Public Comment

Ms. Carrie Wasley shared a copy of Ramsey Conservation District updated brochure. Ms. Wasley attended

State of the Water hosted by Ramsey Conservation District.

III. Permit Applications and Program Updates

A) Permit #15-030 Farrington Estates (Hosch)

Ms. Hosch reviewed Permit #15-030 Farrington Estates. The applicant, Farrington Estates, LLC, will construct

six single-family lots. The applicable rules are Stormwater Management (Rule C), and Erosion and Sediment

Control (Rule F). The disturbed area of this project is 3.5 acres with .55 acres impervious surface.

Motion 15-220: Approve Permit #15-030 Farrington Estates with 3 Conditions:

1. Receipt of $3,200 surety.

2. Provide a copy of the NPDES permit.

November 4, 2015 Board Meeting

V. Action Item A) Approve Minutes

of October 21, 2015

DRAFT Regular Board Meeting

(Sylvander)


3. City of St. Paul shall maintain the BMP.

Reider/Jones


Mr. Jones asked about efforts to try and save mature trees. Mr. Shoemaker replied that a number of trees have

been flagged to save in the BMP. Mr. Kelley replied that it is hard to calculate a credit for tree coverage.

Administrator Doneux stated there is new software the District is learning about that can estimate the runoff

reduction potential with increased tree coverage.

B) Permit 15-034 TH 94 at West 7th (Kelley).

Mr. Kelley reviewed Permit #15-034 TH 94 at West 7th. The applicant, MnDOT, will construct six single-

family lots and make improvements to a noise wall. The applicable rules are Stormwater Management (Rule

C), Flood Control (Rule D), and Erosion and Sediment Control (Rule F). The disturbed area of this project is

6.59 acres with .73 acres impervious surface.

Motion 15-221: Approve Permit #15-034 TH 94 at West 7th with 2 Conditions:


2. Provide additional drainage area and storm sewer information to determine project discharge points

and potential gross pollutant removal locations.

Reider/Thienes


Motion 15-222: Approve withdrawal of 2,385 cubic feet from Mn/DOT’s volume reduction bank.

Reider/Thienes


C) Permit 15-035 Madison Studio Apartments (Hosch).

Ms. Hosch reviewed Permit #15-035 Madison Studio Apartments. The applicant, Stuart Companies, will

construct multifamily residential housing. The applicable rules Stormwater Management (Rule C), and Erosion

and Sediment Control (Rule F). The disturbed area of this project is .95 acres with .73 acres impervious

surface.

Motion 15-223: Approve Permit #15-035 Madison Studio Apartments with 4 Conditions:

1. Receipt of $3,700 surety and documentation of maintenance agreement recorded with Ramsey County.


3. Revise plans to:

a. Show high water elevation on sheet C400 for FB1N as 793.51. CRWD staff revised the

applicant’s HydroCAD model to match the plan elevations for FB2N and FB3N. As a result the

retention volume increased and the 100-yr high water elevation was reduced from 793.81 to

793.51

b. Show Rain Guardian grade elevation on FB2S as 793.30 to remain consistent with HydroCAD


model and relocate the Rain Guardian to match site grading.

4. Revise ‘Operations and Maintenance Plan’ to state that restrictor plates will be inspected monthly for

debris accumulation.

Reider/Jones


Manager Reider asked what a Rain Guardian was. Ms. Hosch replied that a Rain Guardian is a pretreatment

box developed by Anoka Conservation District. Mr. Zwonitzer helped design the Rain Guardian.

IV. Special Reports – No Special Reports

V. Action Items

A) AR: Approve Minutes of the October 7, 2015 Regular Meeting (Sylvander)

Motion 15-224: Approve Minutes of the October 7, 2015 Regular Meeting.

Jones/Reider


B) AR: Approve September 2015 Accounts Payables/Receivables (Sylvander)

Administrator Doneux provided a review of the budget report created from the new Sage software. The

Managers are very pleased with the new layout of the reports.

Motion 15-225: Approve September 2015 Accounts Payables/Receivables.

Thienes/Reider


C) Authorize Distribution of 2016 Partner Grant Request for Proposals (VanPatten)

Ms. VanPatten reviewed that Partner Grants range from $2,000 to $20,000 and are granted to organizations,

schools and businesses for clean water education and outreach projects. The 2016 budget for Partner Grants is

$75,000. Ms. VanPatten shared the proposed timeline, applications will be due December 4, 2015, the Partner

Grant committee will review applications from December 9 thru December 22, 2015, the Board will approve

grants on January 6, 2016, and recipients will be notified and agreements sent on January 7, 2016. Manager

Jones and Manager Reider will serve on the Partner Grant committee with Manager Thienes as an alternate.

From the CAC Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Duerre will also serve on the Partner Grant committee.

Motion 15-226: Authorize Distribution of 2016 Partner Grant Request for Proposals and proceed with

approval process according to the proposed timeline.

Reider/Thienes


D) Fabrication and Installation of Green Line Tree Trench Signage (Eleria)


Ms. VanPatten reviewed in place of Ms. Eleria that in 2013 CRWD installed interpretative signage for the green

infrastructure practices along the Green Line. Twenty two signs were installed including signage to the

adjacent side street practices. CRWD has sought additional signage for the tree trench system along University

Avenue. CRWD staff have identified suitable locations on both the north and south sides of University Avenue.

The City of Saint Paul and Ramsey County have approved the locations of the signage. The estimated cost for

19 Green Line signs is $27,892. Manager Jones asked where the additional signage would be installed. Ms.

VanPatten replied that this signage would be installed in the tree trenches where there is currently no signage.

Motion 15-227: Approve the proposal from Vacker, Inc. for the fabrication and installation of Green Lin tree

trench signage and authorize Administrator to execute a purchase order with Vacker, Inc. subject to the review

and approval of the Ramsey County Attorney.

Reider/Thienes


VI. Unfinished Business

A) Upper Villa Park Stormwater Improvement Project (Kelley)

Mr. Kelley shared an update on the Upper Villa Park Stormwater Improvement Project. The light poles will be

coming down this week. A time lapse camera has been installed with viewing access on the CRWD website.

The contractor will begin work on Monday, November 2nd.

VII. General Information

A) Moos Family Lecture Series, Bill Stowe, November 3rd, U of M St. Paul Campus

Ms. VanPatten reviewed the Moos Family Lecture Series. Mr. Bill Stowe, CEO and General Manager of Des

Moines Water Works will be speaking about agriculture runoff that is not currently regulated. He will be speaking

at 7:00 pm on Tuesday, November 3rd at the U of M St. Paul Campus. Ms. VanPatten encouraged the managers

to register for the event. The event is free but registration is required.

VIII. Next Meeting

A) Wednesday, November 4, 2015 Board Meeting.

B) Thursday, November 12, 2015 CAC Meeting, President Collins plans to attend.

Motion 15-228: Adjournment of the October 20, 2015 Regular Board Meeting at 6:50 p.m.

Texer/Reider

Unanimously Approved

Respectfully submitted,

Michelle Sylvander

W:\04 Board of Managers\Minutes\2015\October 21, 2015 DRAFT.docx

W:\06Projects\McCarrons\LakeMcCarronsSubwatershedCWPGrant\Construction\ChangeOrders\BrdMemoChangeorder#12015‐11‐04.docx


DATE: October 29, 2015 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Forrest Kelley, Regulatory and Construction Program Manager RE: Approve Change Order #1 with New Look Contracting for the Upper Villa Project ____________________________________________________________________________________ Background In August of 2015, the Board approved a contract amendment with SRF for planning and design of an exfiltration monitoring system at the Upper Villa Park Stormwater Infiltration and Reuse project. This addition to the project was a result of a partnership with MPCA and their research staff and the joint desire to obtain water quality data at various depths in the native soils below large infiltration systems. Discussion Updated plans and specifications were submitted to New Look to provide a proposal to complete the installation of three pan lysimeters at depths of 3, 7, and 12 feet below the system. Plans are attached for reference. New Look has submitted their proposal and have requested an additional $23,400 for the work. CRWD and SRF have reviewed the proposal and find it to be reasonable based on the depth of excavation, and the custom fabrication required for a unique system such as this. Staff will discuss the system, proposal from New Look, and recommendation from the engineer with the Board of Managers. The total project cost is $60,850 of which $30,825 is funded through a grant from MPCA. Requested Actions Approve Change Order #1 for $23,400 with New Look Contracting for the installation of the exfiltration monitoring well system. enc: SRF Recommendation Memo Proposal Request #1 to Furnish and Install the Stormwater

Exfiltration Monitoring System Stormwater Exfiltration Monitoring System Plans

November 4, 2015 Regular Board Meeting

V. Action Items B) Approve Change Order

#1 with New Look Contracting (Kelley)


DATE: October 29, 2015 TO: CRWD Board of Managers FROM: Bob Fossum, Water Resource Program Manager SUBJECT: 2010 Watershed Management Plan Mid-Term Review Background On September 1, 2010, the Board of Managers adopted the District’s Watershed Management Plan (WMP). The plan covers the term from 2010—2020. As the District is approaching the half-way point in the term of the WMP, it is a good time to evaluate implementation of the plan and consider adjustments if any, to the WMP. At the February 18, 2015 Board meeting the Managers approved 2010 WMP Mid-Term Review Project. At the May 12th Board workshop the Managers reviewed the draft Summary of Progress toward Addressing Issues document. The draft Recommendations document was reviewed on June 10th by the CAC and on July 8th by the Managers. Issues Staff and EOR, Inc. have worked complete a final draft of the mid-term review which includes all information previously reviewed by the Mangers. Staff are requesting adoption of the Mid-Term Review. During the remainder of the WMP period (2016-2020) staff anticipate the document being used as follows:

As companion document to the 2010 WMP Annual Budget Development Annual Workplan Development Guiding focus in Programs and Project of the District Providing an example for other Watershed Districts considering a mid-term plan review

Requested Action Adopt the 2010 WMP Mid-Term Review enc: 2010 WMP Mid-term Review, final draft dated 10/28/2015 \\CRwDC01\company\06 Projects\WMP 2010\Mid-Term Review\Brd Memo WMP Mid-term Review, 10-29-2015.docx

November 4, 2015 V. Action Items C)

2010 WMP Mid-Term Review

2010 Watershed Management Plan: The 2015 Mid-Term Review Prepared by: Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. Date: 10/28/2015

CRWD 2010 Watershed Management Plan; The 2015 Mid Term Review 1

Midterm Review Methodology Introduction The Capitol Region Watershed District adopted its 2010 Watershed Management Plan (WMP) on September 1, 2010. The WMP describes the important issues facing the District, establishes goals related to the issues and identifies specific actions to meet those goals. The WMP covers the ten‐year period from 2010 to 2020. As the District approaches the half‐way point of the WMP, it was decided that a check‐in on plan progress was warranted. The check‐in would essentially be a review of the progress the District has made towards meeting the objectives of the Plan. The findings of the review could then be used to guide and potentially adjust the Districts approach for the second half of the plan period.

The WMP review process began with a thorough review and documentation of all the activities that the District has undertaken since 2010. Several evaluation methods were developed and executed to determine the progress being made towards; addressing issues, meeting goals, and implementing planned activities. Based on the findings of these evaluations, a series of recommendations were developed for slight adjustments to be made for the remaining time period of the WMP.

The 2010 Watershed Management Plan includes an appendix (Appendix J) that describes two alternative approaches that the District could use to evaluate its programs. At the onset of the plan review process, these alternative methods served as a starting point in developing the methodology to be used. Alternative 1 would be to conduct a Level II Review as outlined by the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) Performance Review and Assistance Program (PRAP). In reviewing this alternative, it was determined that this option was too simplistic to meet the objectives of the project. The Level II PRAP is simply a check list of items that can be used to determine if an organization is meeting the basic requirements of a Watershed District. Alternative 2, included in Appendix J, is a Goal Based Evaluation Methodology that calls for evaluating progress based upon each goal within the Plan by; quantitative actions taken, quantitative results and qualitative results. In reviewing this alternative, it was determined that this option could serve as a starting point for the goal evaluation component of the evaluation, but a more thorough methodology was needed for the overall review process. The following describes the methodology used for each component of the WMP Mid Term review process.

Methodology Review of District Initiatives The first step in the Midterm Review process was to summarize all of the work that the District had accomplished since the adoption of the WMP. In order to accomplish this task, the District’s annual reports for 2011‐2014 were reviewed. The annual reports include a very detailed description of the work completed by the District during each given year. A database was then developed to catalogue all of initiatives that the District was involved with for the 4 year period. Since one of the themes of the WMP is for the District to work collaboratively with various partners, initiatives that were funded by the District through its cost‐share programs, but were conducted by partners, were included in the database. This approach gives a more accurate evaluation of the progress being made by the District. The database, or initiatives matrix, was initially populated with all of the initiatives described in the


annual reports as well as through a review of past District meeting minutes and website. District staff reviewed and added to the initiatives matrix based upon their knowledge of work conducted throughout the time frame.

The initiative matrix was built in order to evaluate the work conducted by the District as it relates to the issues and goals identified in the WMP and was a critical tool throughout the Midterm Review process.

Issues Evaluation Methodology With the knowledge gained through developing the initiatives matrix, the next step in the process was to review and evaluate progress made towards addressing issues identified in the 2010 Watershed Management Plan. The WMP contains twenty issue statements that were developed through the watershed management planning process; a series of stakeholder meetings and open houses with residents of the District. Each issue statement in the WMP includes one or more goals that were established as a means for measuring progress toward addressing the issues.

A workshop was held with key District staff to review and discuss the twenty issue statements. The discussion centered primarily on progress made towards addressing the issues. The goals for each issue were also discussed in support of the evaluation. Staff performed a qualitative review of each issue and goal and provided examples to illustrate their impressions. The result of the workshop was a summary memorandum detailing the outcomes. In addition to the issues and goals discussion, the group also discussed the overall Themes of the WMP and determined that those Themes were still relevant.

The outcome and findings of the issues workshop were presented to the District’s Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) for further input. An additional workshop was later held with the CAC to solicit their impression of the progress being made toward addressing District issues and to get feedback on the content of the memorandum. Based on discussion with the CAC, the summary memorandum was updated for presentation to the District Board of Managers. For each of the twenty issues identified in the WMP, a list of the initiatives that address that issue are provided, as well as a summary of the staff and CAC impressions of the progress made to date.

A Board workshop was held on May 12, 2015 to present the findings of the issues evaluation and to solicit feedback from the Managers. The final issues evaluation based on the outcome of this workshop is summarized in the section Summary of Progress Toward Addressing Issues beginning on page 5. Goal Assessment Methodology Following completion of the issues evaluation, it was determined that a more detailed review was needed to assess the goals found within the WMP. The initiatives matrix (exhaustive listing of District work done to date) was used to review each of the goals. The goals were assessed as to whether; a) the goal had been largely achieved, b) the goal had been partially achieved or would shortly be achieved, or c) the goal had not been achieved. The findings of this assessment were presented to the Board of Managers at the May 12, 2015 workshop. Based upon their input, the assessment was updated. The finding of the goal assessment can be found in the Section Assessment of Goals beginning on page 22.

Financial Evaluation The WMP implementation plan includes a projected annual budget for each 10‐years of the plan. The projected budget can be viewed as an indication of the level of effort planned for each activity included in the plan. The projected budget for each of the 4‐years covered in the review was compared to actual expenditures and the findings are found in the section Financial Comparison beginning on page 29.


Key Findings Condensed List of Recommendations per Area of Relevance (-for a complete review summary of the recommendations, see pages 32-36)

Program and Planning Efforts

Recommendation #1: The District should allocate additional resources, staffing and/or outside assistance to education and outreach activities.

Recommendation #2: Additional focus should be placed in meeting the goal of increasing communication and encouraging long term commitment with groups not previously involved in District programs.

Recommendation #3: The District should develop a comprehensive BMP Maintenance approach and program that can more efficiently and effectively ensure BMP’s are functioning as planned and designed on all BMPs within the District. The District’s approach should draw upon all of the tools available such as education, collaborations with partners and permit enforcement.

Recommendation #4: Determine what, if any, role the District should have in groundwater management. This effort will need to be coordinated with other state agencies, and the MN Association of Watershed Districts.

Recommendation#5: In the short‐term, the District should increase its knowledge of the local groundwater system and how it interacts with District surface water resources and stormwater management practices (infiltration areas).

Recommendation#6: The District should focus on increased efficiency with the current level of resources allocated to the Monitoring Program.

Recommendation#7: The District should focus on its goal to make monitoring and research data easily understood and accessible to the public. Specific focus should be on illustrations that depict water quality data.

Recommendation #8: The District should develop a research approach and program that can more efficiently and effectively ensure appropriate research is conducted for specific District needs as well as the needs of the larger stormwater community both regionally and nationally. This program could be modeled after the Special Grants process.

Recommendation #9: The District should determine the impact climate change may have on the way water resources & storm sewer infrastructure are managed and incorporate climate adaptation into its programs & projects.

Recommendation #10: The primary focus for management of Como Lake should remain on reducing watershed loading but a greater emphasis should be placed on in‐lake management practices/techniques.

Recommendation #11: Additional emphasis should be placed on better protecting and improving wetland, stream and lake ecosystem health within the District.


Recommendation #12: Additional emphasis should be made to establish greenways and wildlife corridor connections.

Recommendation #13: Ecological restoration of wetlands within the District should be emphasized. The District should develop a specific plan that identifies wetland restoration opportunities along with an implementation schedule and budget.

District Operations Recommendation #14:

The District should move into a new facility that can better achieve its mission and accommodate its various programs.

Recommendation #15: The District should develop a more formal process/schedule to review its programs.

Recommendation #16: The District should use the “Prioritize Target Measure” focus for its programs and projects (while this is currently accomplished through the District’s Subwatershed Analysis approach there may be value in adopting the PTM terminology to be consistent with statewide efforts). The District should consider incorporating this approach into existing District programs.

Recommendation #17: Additional emphasis should be placed on incorporating art and historical context into the projects and programs of the District.

Capital Improvement Projects Recommendation #18:

For the remainder of the Plan period, the District should attempt to balance its capital improvement projects by moving its focus to Como Lake Subwatershed BMPs. Further balance can be achieved by focusing on Como Lake subwatershed areas outside of Como Subwatershed 7.

Recommendation #19: For the remainder of the Plan period, the District should balance its capital improvement projects by reducing its focus on McCarrons Subwatershed BMPs.

Recommendation #20: The District should continue to focus infrastructure management of the Trout Brook Interceptor but a greater emphasis should be placed on subwatershed BMPs to reduce loading to the Mississippi River.

Additional Recommendations The following items were noted as being areas of emphasis for the District.

The District should continue to advance the staffing/organization plan to achieve its mission.

The District should continue to use grants and other funding mechanisms to more effectively address mission.

The District should continue to be a leader nationally in urban stormwater management

The District should continue to conduct cutting edge research and approach stormwater management in an innovative manner.

The District should continue to invest strategically by weighing alternatives to effectively use public money to best address water resource issues.


Summary of Progress Toward Addressing Issues

Description and Purpose of Activity The following is a summary of the CRWD staff and CAC impressions of the progress that has been made in addressing the 20 issues that were identified in the 2010 Watershed Management Plan. Included for each issue statement is a brief summary of the goals and objectives that were developed for addressing the issue. Following that is listing of the Initiatives completed that have addresses the Issue. The narrative describing the progress that has been made was developed through a working session with District Staff and CAC.

Issues 1. Many District residents, businesses and institutions do not feel a personal connection with water

and natural resources and therefore do not have a sense of responsibility or ownership which negatively impacts their ability to change behaviors and increase stewardship.

Goals: Increase awareness of water, appreciation for local resources, the District.

Initiatives that helped address Issue 1:

Education/Outreach Events

Sponsored Education Outreach Intern

Illicit discharge and winter maintenance trainings

Clean water interpretive signage at the new

Lowertown baseball park, CHS Field

Hosting a Minnesota GreenCorps Member

Updated District Education Plan

Workshop about maintaining turf in a way that causes minimal impact to water quality

Hamline Midway boulevard raingarden planting event

Supported Children’s Water Fest

Membership in Watershed Partners (WSP)

Chloride education workshops

Knowledge Attitudes and Practices Study

Participation in Blue Thumb

Stewardship and Partner Grant Program

Workshop on landscaping for clean water

Sponsored Blooming Saint Paul Award program.


2. The District’s diverse community has a wide range of cultural, social and political relationships with water, community interests, priorities, and opinions of the District’s water resources.

Goal: Increase communication and encourage involvement.


Water Quality Event designed for Latino Youth

East Side Youth Environment Education Internship

Membership in Watershed Partners (WSP) Knowledge Attitudes and Practices Study

Community organizing project focused on supporting water quality projects of faith communities


Water quality education event for Latino youth

Supported a water themed dance event at the first Open Streets celebration in Saint Paul

Stipends for environmental education internships for East Side youth

Interpretive signage

Educational signage and construction of rain gardens at Beacon Bluff

Education Outreach Events


3. Regular maintenance is critical to the success of stormwater BMPs and is not consistently

performed to achieve desired performance

Goals: Improve short and long‐term maintenance of BMPs, coordinate with other jurisdictions.


BMP Monitoring and Maintenance

Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor



Sponsored Winter Maintenance training

Support of a street sweeping study


District BMP Database

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals

While the District does a very good job of maintaining its own BMPs they could do a better job of supporting their partners and ensuring that all BMPs installed in the District are well maintained. BMPs that are installed either through a permitted activity or by a partner on their own projects have not had the level of maintenance that is being done on District projects. The District has built technology infrastructure, including the BMP database that will help in achieving the goal of coordinating with other jurisdiction but work remains to be done.


4. The pollutant load of stormwater has impacted the quality of water in the District’s lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River

Goals: Reduce chemical, physical and biological pollution to District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River.

Objectives: Several specific objectives are enumerated in the plan for how this reduction would be quantified

Como, McCarrons, Loeb and Mississippi River phosphorus loading, including internal loading

Metals, pesticides, chlorides, organic contaminants

Illicit discharges

Trash, sediment, turbidity

E. coli bacteria


Center St/Rice St Subwatershed Analysis

Crosby Lake Management Plan

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project

Green Infrastructure on the Green Line Inspiring Communities Program

Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary

Villa Park Wetland Restoration Project William Street Pond

TBI Farrington Feasibility Study

Eustis Street Stormwater Feasibility Study

Stop the Rain Drain (SRD) gutter downspout redirection program


Hosting a Minnesota GreenCorps

Member Participation in Blue Thumb

Water quality education field trips

Co‐sponsored storm drain stenciling and trash cleanup Supported Children’s Water Fest


Workshop about maintaining turf in a way that causes minimal impact to water quality.

Workshop on landscaping for clean water Tour of green roof projects


Led a stormwater BMP tour along the Green Line


Blooming Saint Paul Award program ‐ education displays targeted at adults

Neighborhood water festival

Presented to attendees of the MN Green Roof Symposium

Led a tour of Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary

Clean water interpretive signage at the new Lowertown baseball park, ‐ CHS Field Education displays at community events


Hosted the 2013 Clean Water Summit conference

Updated District Education Plan

Interpretive Signage

Hamline Midway boulevard rain garden planting event


Rain barrel construction workshop Grants

Stewardship Grants for: Raingarden, Green Roof, Pervious Paver, Erosion Control, Rain Barrel, Storm Drain Stenciling, Watershed Artist in Residence, and Como Lake


Community Clean up



East Side youth environment education internship

Support for Friends of Mississippi River volunteers


Native Plant Education Expo and Market




Educational signage and construction of rain gardens at Beacon Bluff


BMP Maintenance and Monitoring

Stormwater Quality Monitoring Permitting Program Review

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Watershed Rule Adoption


This is the fundamental issue facing the District. The District has worked extensively towards addressing this issue but it is an on‐going effort. Many of the specific goals (related to a particular resource) have been met (McCarrons and Loeb Lake water quality) while others are being actively worked on (Como Lake water quality. In addition to reorganizing the goals for this issue, staff recommended re‐visiting some of the specific objectives within this issue area specifically;

Achieving the TP loading requirement of the Lake Pepin TMDL (a TP reduction target was not established)

Developing a target reduction for the amount of trash entering District lakes (the District works towards reducing trash loading, the benefit of developing a target is unclear)

The primary focus of the District has been the conventional watershed pollutants, TP, sediment, nitrogen. Additional effort could be placed on additional contaminants such as pesticides, chlorides, etc.

McCarrons Lake


5. The quantity of runoff from a highly urbanized area increases the risk of flooding and puts added strain on the infrastructure within the District

Goals: Minimize flooding, evaluate impact of climate change, preserve and re‐establish floodplain, and to manage volume in the Trout Brook system.



Como 7 Subwatershed ‐ Curtis Field Crosby Lake Management Plan

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Gottfried's Pit Improvements

Green Infrastructure on the Green Line

Highland Ravine Stabilization Project

Inspiring Communities Program

Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary

Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor

Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Inspection

Villa Park Subwatershed Plan and BMP Design Villa Park Wetland Restoration Project

William Street Pond

Sunny Slope Stabilization Feasibility Study



East Kittsondale Subwatershed Analysis





Co‐sponsored storm drain stenciling and trash cleanup Supported Children’s Water Fest




Tour of green roof projects Supported Children’s Water Fest



Blooming Saint Paul Award program. Education displays targeted at adults


Presented to attendees of the MN Green Roof Symposium


Clean water interpretive signage at the new Lowertown baseball park, ‐ CHS Field Education displays at community events

Hosted the 2013 Clean Water Summit conference Updated District Education Plan




Stewardship Grants for: Raingarden, Green Roof, Pervious Paver, Erosion Control, Rain Barrel Construction, Storm Drain Stenciling, Watershed Artist in Residence, and Como Lake










Stipends for environmental education internships for East Side youth Educational signage and construction of rain gardens at Beacon Bluff Stewardship and Partner Grant Program





The issue has been primarily addressed through the 2010 H&H Study as well as subwatershed‐ specific studies, numerous capital improvement projects, the District Rules and through the management of the Trout Brook system. Little effort has been placed in identifying opportunities to re‐establish floodplain areas as this has been determined to be a low priority activity for the District.

Trout Brook System


6. Within an urbanized area, runoff from impervious surfaces is directed to storm sewers and discharged to surface waters rather than infiltrating into the ground resulting in reduced groundwater recharge and impacts to receiving waters

Goals: Promote groundwater recharge through infiltration, protect groundwater.



Como 7 Subwatershed ‐ Curtis Field Crosby Lake Management Plan

Curtiss Pond Improvement Project

Gottfried's Pit Improvements


Inspiring Communities Program

Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration

Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary

Villa Park Subwatershed Plan and BMP Design Villa Park Wetland Restoration Project

William Street Pond

Sunny Slope Stabilization Feasibility Study









Co‐sponsored storm drain stenciling and trash cleanup





Tour of green roof projects




Sponsored Blooming Saint Paul Award program ‐ education displays targeted at adults


Presented to attendees of the Minnesota Green Roof Symposium


Midway raingardens


Clean water interpretive signage at the new Lowertown baseball park, CHS Field Education displays at community events


Hosted the 2013 Clean Water Summit conference Updated District Eduction Plan




Stewardship Grants for: Raingarden, Green Roof, Pervious Paver, Erosion Control, Rain Barrel Construction, Storm Drain Stenciling, Watershed Artist in Residence, and Como Lake









Water quality education event for Latino youth


Educational signage and construction of rain gardens at Beacon Bluff Stewardship and Partner Grant Program





The District has completed significant work to encourage infiltration through Rules and various Grant programs. The District has identified areas where infiltrating stormwater is not recommended but has NOT developed a watershed‐wide evaluation of areas that are most conducive to infiltration. This type of evaluation has been done on a site specific and subwatershed basis. The Districts approach for protecting/managing groundwater at the time the plan was written was to collaborate with Ramsey County on their County Groundwater Plan which, ultimately, was not developed. While the District’s goals relative to stormwater and water quality are well defined, the role the District should play in groundwater management is not explicitly defined. This is a common situation for many watershed districts and as such there have been discussions at the State level about making recommendations for how watershed district address groundwater issues.

Oxford Street stormwater planters


7. Monitoring and research data are needed to understand the watershed, identify problems, and determine appropriate watershed management approaches within the District

Goals: Monitor watershed resources and BMPs, continually refine the program and use collected data to evaluate performance of District work


Monitoring Program Review Gross Solids Study



Held a summer macroinvertebrate study

2013 International Low Impact Development Symposium

Presentations WEFTEC 2013 Staff Presentations

WEFTEC 2014 Staff Presentations

District BMP Database


Stormwater Quality Monitoring

Lake and Wetland Monitoring

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals Monitoring is one of the core programs of the District and a great deal of data is being collected on the Districts resources as well as on the performance of District installed practices. Additional, more frequent evaluation of the Districts work based on the findings of the monitoring data is recommended.

8. Monitoring and research data are difficult for the public to access and understand

Goals: Make monitoring data available and easy to understand for a broad audience, serve as a clearinghouse, and establish partnerships.

Initiatives that helped address Issue 8: Internal Mapping System District BMP Database


Stormwater Quality Monitoring

Monitoring Database

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals The District has expended some effort in making monitoring and research data more accessible to the public but additional work remains to be done in this area. In 2014, the District began implementation of a new monitoring database to more effectively and efficiently manage, analyze, and report data. The framework is in place to more effectively deliver this type of information to the public so staff is confident that this goal will be achieved in the next 5 years.


9. Future watershed management strategies need to be responsive to emerging issues resulting from climate change and technological advances

Goals: Develop better understanding of climate change impacts, conduct research on stormwater management technologies, and promote use of emerging technologies and innovative management techniques.



Real‐Time Automated BMP Controls

Stormwater Reuse Projects


Tour of green roof projects

Presented to attendees of the Minnesota Green Roof Symposium

Clean water interpretive signage at the new Lowertown baseball park, ‐ CHS Field Hosted the 2013 Clean Water Summit conference

2013 International Low Impact Development Symposium Presentations



Stewardship and Partner Grant Program Data Acquisition

GIS Program Development

Impervious Surfaces Data Set

Internal Mapping System District BMP Database


Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals The District has become a leader in conducting research on stormwater management technologies (Arlington Pascal) and has been active in promoting emerging technologies through its rules and involvement with the Green Line. More attention could be paid on the impact climate change will have on watershed management. The District needs to determine where the balance lies between an incentive‐based vs regulatory approach to ‘promoting’ innovative watershed management techniques. The District has received several awards and had several presentations selected to be presented at national conferences which demonstrate innovative work and leadership in the watershed/water quality field.


10. Many District partners and residents are willing to help the District accomplish its mission if assistance is made available

Goal: Encourage partners and residents to implement projects

Initiatives that helped address Issue 10: Center St/Rice St Subwatershed Analysis Como 7 Subwatershed ‐ Curtis Field Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Green Infrastructure on the Green Line Inspiring Communities Program Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Well Sealing Feasibility Studies: Wetland Reestablishment, Victoria Park TBI, Farrington & Eustis Street Stormwater District 6 Natural Resource Inventory East Kittsondale Subwatershed Analysis Stop the Rain Drain (SRD) gutter downspout redirection program Lake Study Event Illicit discharge and winter maintenance trainings Hosting a Minnesota GreenCorps Member Participation in Blue Thumb Water quality education field trips Co‐sponsored storm drain stenciling and trash cleanup Supported Children’s Water Fest Chloride education workshops Workshop about maintaining turf in a way that causes minimal impact to water quality. Workshop on landscaping for clean water Tour of: green roof projects, Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary, & of stormwater BMPs along the Green Line Sponsored Blooming Saint Paul Award program. Coordinated publicity for the Blue Thumb native plant sale Education displays targeted at adults Held a summer macroinvertebrate study Conducted fishing lessons, Neighborhood water festival Clean water interpretive signage at the new Lowertown baseball park,

‐ CHS Field Education displays at community events Sponsored Winter Maintenance training Hosted the 2013 Clean Water Summit conference Updated District Education Plan Interpretive signage Hamline Midway boulevard rain garden planting event Sponsor a natural resource intern Membership in Watershed Partners (WSP) Rain barrel construction workshop grants Stewardship Grants for: Raingarden, Green Roof, Pervious Paver, Erosion Control, Rain Barrel,

Storm Drain Stenciling, Watershed Artist in Residence, and Como Lake

Knowledge Attitudes and Practices Study Water Quality Event designed for Latino Youth East Side youth environment education internship Support for Friends of Mississippi River volunteers Stop the Rain Drain (SRD) gutter downspout redirection program Rain barrel construction workshop grants Native Plant Education Expo and Market Community organizing project focused on supporting water quality projects of faith communities Support of a street sweeping study Stipends for environmental education internships for East Side youth

Support of Friends of the Mississippi River’s river stewardship and habitat restoration programs


Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals This is a high priority issue for the District. The District provides financial and technical assistance through its grant program to encourage partners to implement water quality improvement projects.

11. The District is uniquely positioned to be able to identify and support collaborations between

various partners/stakeholders with compatible projects and programs

Goal: Coordinate efforts with partners to ensure cost effective use of funds for water resource management.

Initiatives that helped address Issue 11: Center St/Rice St Subwatershed Analysis Como 7 Subwatershed ‐ Curtis Field Crosby Lake Management Plan Curtiss Pond Improvement Project Gottfried's Pit Improvements Green Infrastructure on the Green Line Inspiring Communities Program Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Feasibility Studies: Wetland Reestablishment, Victoria Park TBI, Farrington & Eustis Street Stormwater District 6 Natural Resource Inventory East Kittsondale Subwatershed Analysis Stop the Rain Drain (SRD) gutter downspout redirection program Lake Study Event Illicit discharge and winter maintenance trainings Hosting a Minnesota GreenCorps Member Participation in Blue Thumb Water quality education field trips Co‐sponsored storm drain stenciling and trash cleanup Supported Children’s Water Fest Chloride education workshops Workshop about maintaining turf in a way that causes minimal impact to water quality. Workshop on landscaping for clean water Tour of green roof projects Supported Children’s Water Fest Led a stormwater BMP tour along the Green Line Sponsored Blooming Saint Paul Award program. Coordinated publicity for the Blue Thumb native plant sale Education displays targeted at adults Held a summer macroinvertebrate study Conducted fishing lessons Neighborhood water festival Led a tour of Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Clean water interpretive signage at the new Lowertown baseball park,

‐ CHS Field Education displays at community events Sponsored Winter Maintenance training Updated District Education Plan Interpretive signage Hamline Midway boulevard rain garden planting event Sponsor a natural resource intern Membership in Watershed Partners (WSP) Rain barrel construction workshop grants Raingarden Stewardship Grant Green Roof Stewardship Grant Pervious Paver Stewardship Grant Erosion Control Stewardship Grant Rain Barrel Stewardship Grant Watershed Artist in Residence Stewardship Grant Community Clean up Como Lake Stewardship Grant Knowledge Attitudes and Practices Study


Water Quality Event designed for Latino Youth East Side youth environment education internship Support for Friends of Mississippi River volunteers Stop the Rain Drain (SRD) gutter downspout redirection program Rain barrel construction workshop grants Storm drain stenciling Stewardship Grant Native Plant Education Expo and Market Community organizing project focused on supporting water quality projects of faith communities Support of a street sweeping study Water quality education event for Latino youth Stipends for environmental education internships for East Side youth Support of Friends of the Mississippi River’s river stewardship and habitat restoration programs Stewardship and Partner Grant Program

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals Coordinating efforts with partners is an overarching principle of the District and is the approach used in all aspects of watershed management: District rules, CIPs and programs.

12. Multiple funding mechanisms and outside funding sources are available for the District to pursue

to offset financial needs

Goal: Increase the funds available to meet the goals and objectives of the District.

Initiatives that helped address Issue 12: Green Infrastructure on the Green Line Inspiring Communities Program Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Trout Brook Storm Sewer Interceptor Villa Park Subwatershed Plan and BMP Design Villa Park Wetland Restoration Project William Street Pond East Kittsondale Subwatershed Analysis

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals The District has been very successful pursuing and obtaining grant money from sources that are typically available for watershed management activities. Additional effort could be spent investigating additional, non‐traditional sources.

13. The District must prioritize programs and projects to ensure that goals are met in the most

efficient, and cost effective manner

Goal: Utilize long‐term planning and pursue cost effective solutions

Initiatives that helped address Issue 13: Data Acquisition Subwatershed Analysis GIS Program Development Impervious Surfaces Data Set Internal Mapping System District BMP Database

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals The District conducts a periodic review of its programs, sets priorities and evaluates cost/benefits. The annual work plan and budgeting process is also used to evaluate priorities and ensure that goals are being met in a cost effective manner.


14. An effective watershed organization needs to plan for change, growth, and development

Goals: (from the 2008 Strategic Plan) Strengthen the District’s capacity to accomplish its mission, Strive for excellence, with competent, knowledgeable, committed, and innovative Board members, advisory committees, and staff, Provide research‐based, informed, mission‐driven decision making, Be an open, approachable, facilitator of partnerships to enhance the District’s capacity to protect, maintain and improve water resources

Initiatives that helped address Issue 14: Data Acquisition GIS Program Development Impervious Surfaces Data Set Internal Mapping System District BMP Database BMP Maintenance and Monitoring CSE Equipment Safety Program Updates/Audits Stormwater Quality Monitoring

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals The District strives to accomplish all of the stated goals for this issue.

15. The District needs to maintain clear and effective Rules utilizing the most current research and

science available

Goals: Review and update the rules regularly

Initiatives that helped address Issue 15: Permitting Program Review Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Watershed Rule Adoption

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals The District has annual TAC meetings to review the rules and has had 2 rule revisions in the last 5 yrs.

Swede Hollow Park


16. Coordination with District partners on regulatory issues is needed for more efficient and effective stormwater regulation across all jurisdictions

Goals: Work with partners to improve rules and ordinances, collaborate to ensure proper BMP construction and erosion & sediment control techniques are implemented, work with neighboring WMOs and state agencies on consistency, comply with applicable local, state, federal regulations.

Initiatives that helped address Issue 16: Illicit discharge and winter maintenance trainings Chloride education workshops Sponsored Winter Maintenance training Interpretive signage Permitting Program Review Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Watershed Rule Adoption

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals The Districts rules and permitting program has evolved significantly from the time the Plan was written. Most of the goals for the issue were addressed in the rule development process and now are largely accomplished. In the context of overall Plan the goals under this issue may appear to be overly emphasized based on how the District relationships have evolved since the writing of the plan. Some outstanding issues exist such as maintaining consistency with neighboring entities and achieving volume reduction on sites less than 1 acre.

17. The ecological integrity of many District lakes, wetlands, and the Mississippi River has degraded to a point where the resources are not providing their original level of function or value

Goal: Improve ecological integrity of District lakes, wetlands and Mississippi River

Initiatives that helped address Issue 17: Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Wetland Reestablishment Feasibility Study — Victoria Park District 6 Natural Resource Inventory Lake Study Event Sponsored Education Outreach Intern Held a summer macroinvertebrate study Sponsor a natural

resource intern Support of Friends of the Mississippi River’s river stewardship and habitat restoration programs St. Paul

Parks and Recreation: Swede‐Hollow Stream Analysis Restoration Feasibility Study Design


Although not a primary area of focus for the District some work towards realizing this goal has been completed. When ecological improvement can be achieved along with the primary focus of a project it is included. The upcoming Willow Reserve Restoration project may be the first project that has ecological integrity as its primary focus.


18. The loss of natural areas has decreased the ability of the watershed to capture, filter and infiltrate rainwater prior to discharging to District lakes, wetlands, and the Mississippi River

Goals: Support increasing open space, mitigate loss of pervious areas by incorporating green infrastructure.

Initiatives that helped address Issue 18: Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Green Line BMPs Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Wetland Reestablishment Feasibility Study — Victoria Park District 6 Natural Resource Inventory Sponsored Education Outreach Intern Sponsor a natural resource intern Support of Friends of the Mississippi River’s river stewardship and habitat restoration programs St. Paul

Parks and Recreation: Swede‐Hollow Stream Analysis Restoration Feasibility Study Design

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals The District has addressed this issue through its rules, management of the Trout Brook system and through collaborations with partners, for example the installation of green infrastructure on the Green Line.

19. Reduced connectivity of natural habitat areas in the District limit movement between the District’s resources

Goal: Coordinate with partners to improve accessibility and movement between natural areas.

Initiatives that helped address Issue 19: Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Lake McCarrons Lakeshore Restoration Wetland Reestablishment Feasibility Study — Victoria Park District 6 Natural Resource Inventory Sponsored Education Outreach Intern Conducted fishing lessons Sponsor a natural resource intern Support of Friends of the Mississippi River’s river stewardship and habitat restoration programs St. Paul Parks and Recreation: Swede‐Hollow Stream Analysis Restoration Feasibility Study Design

Progress made towards addressing Issue and meeting goals The Districts goals and objectives for this issue were deliberately written to be ‘collaborative’ in nature. The District has been supportive of the type of activities that would increase connections to the Districts nature areas.


20. The land within the District developed during a time when resource protection was not a priority. As a result, there are a number of opportunities to restore historic resources

Goals: Identify opportunities to restore historic stream and wetland resources and increase the awareness of current and historic water resources.

Initiatives that helped address Issue 20: Trout Brook Nature Sanctuary Wetland Reestablishment Feasibility Study‐Victoria Park District 6 Natural Resource Inventory St. Paul Parks and Recreation: Swede‐Hollow Stream Analysis Restoration Feasibility Study Design


The District has restored a historic portion of Trout Brook but has not restored any historic wetlands, although the upcoming Willow Reserve restoration project will accomplish this goal in part. The District has increased awareness of existing water resources but little effort has been placed in raising the awareness of historic resources. This District is currently beginning a proactive planning effort to reestablish a headwaters portion of Hidden Falls Creek on the redeveloping Ford Site.

Chatsworth Street median


Assessment of Goals Description and Purpose The following tables summarize the progress the District has made towards meeting each of the goals identified in the WMP. Each goal was reviewed and assessed as to whether it had been achieved (↑), if it had been partially achieved or was expected to be achieved in the near future (→) or whether the goal had not been achieved (↓).

Education Outreach Issues and Goals

Issue 1 Many District residents, businesses and institutions do not feel a personal connection with water and natural resources and therefore do not have a sense of responsibility or ownership which negatively impacts their ability to change behaviors and increase stewardship

Goal 1.1 Increase the awareness of water →

1.1.a Determine the baseline knowledge level regarding basic watershed and stormwater concepts →

1.1.b Increase the understanding of basic watershed, stormwater, groundwater and water pollution concepts through watershed education and outreach

↑

1.1.c Measure the change in knowledge and behavior as a result of the education and outreach efforts

→

Goal 1.2 Increase public knowledge and appreciation for local water resources in the District →

1.2.a Utilize District infrastructure to increase awareness and appreciation of water resources and watershed management

→

Goal 1.3 Raise an awareness of the District and increase the interest and public participation in its activities

↑

Issue 2 The District’s diverse community has a wide range of cultural, social and political relationships with water, community interests, priorities, and opinions of the District’s water resources

Goal 2.1 Increase communication and encourage long term involvement with groups not previously involved in District programs

→


Urban Stormwater Management Issues and Goals

Issue 3 Regular maintenance is critical to the success of stormwater BMPs and is not

consistently performed to achieve desired performance

Goal 3.1 Work to improve the short‐ and long‐term maintenance of stormwater BMPs →

3.1.a Coordinate the development and implementation of a multi‐jurisdictional BMP management plan that includes identifying responsible parties, define roles and determining maintenance schedules for all stormwater BMPs located in the District

→

Issue 4 The pollutant load of stormwater has impacted the quality of water in the District’s

lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River

Goal 4.1 Reduce the chemical pollutant load to District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River

↑

4.1.a Achieve a Phosphorous Trophic State Index (TSI‐P) of 60 for Como Lake by reducing the average annual total phosphorus load to Como Lake by 60%

→

4.1.b Achieve the summer average lake concentration of total phosphorus at 33 parts per billion (ppb) or less for Lake McCarrons

↑

4.1.c Maintain water quality of Loeb Lake at current conditions (non‐degradation) ↑

4.1.d Achieve the District’s total phosphorus loading requirements for the Lake Pepin TMDL in the Mississippi River

na

4.1.e Develop a target reduction for metals, pesticides, nutrients, chloride, organic contaminants, etc, discharged to District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River and work towards

↓

4.1.f Identify and manage the internal phosphorus load in District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River

↓

4.1.g Identify and eliminate illicit discharges into District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River →

Goal 4.2 Reduce physical pollutant load to District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River ↑

4.2.a Develop a target reduction for the amount of trash entering District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River and work towards reaching that target

↓

4.2.b Develop a target reduction for sediment entering District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River and work towards reaching that target

↓

4.2.c Achieve District load requirement established in the turbidity component of the future Lake Pepin TMDL

na

4.2.d Identify and eliminate illicit discharges into District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River →

Goal 4.3 Reduce bacteria pollutant load to District lakes, wetlands & the Mississippi River →

4.3.a Develop a target reduction for the amount of waterfowl and pet waste entering District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River and work towards reaching that target

↓

4.3.b Identify and eliminate illicit discharges into District lakes, wetlands and the Mississippi River →

4.3.c Meet the District’s bacteria load requirement established in the future Upper Mississippi River bacteria TMDL

na


Issue 5 The quantity of runoff from a highly urbanized area increases the risk of flooding and puts added strain on the infrastructure within the District

Goal 5.1 Minimize existing and potential flooding problems ↑

5.1.a Work to identify existing and potential infrastructure capacity issues and flooding problems ↑

5.1.b Utilize structural and nonstructural flood control techniques to improve infrastructure capacity and reduce flooding problems

↑

5.1.c Evaluate the impact of climate change on infrastructure capacity in the future and identify potential flooding issues

→

5.1.d Preserve existing floodplain storage capacity and prohibit floodplain filling unless compensatory storage is provided

→

5.1.e Identify opportunities to reestablish lost floodplain areas ↓

Goal 5.2 Manage the volume of water in the Trout Brook storm sewer Interceptor to protect the integrity of District infrastructure.

Issue 6 Within an urbanized area, runoff from impervious surfaces is directed to storm sewers and discharged to surface waters rather than infiltrating into the ground resulting in reduced groundwater recharge and impacts to receiving waters

Goal 6.1 Promote groundwater recharge through increased use of infiltration techniques to manage stormwater →

6.1.a Develop incentives/regulations to promote the use of stormwater infiltration techniques ↑

6.1.b Identify those portions of the District most conducive to stormwater infiltration →

Goal 6.2 Protect the groundwater resource ↓

6.2.a Support and collaborate with Ramsey County, state and regional agencies to better understand and monitor District groundwater resources

↓

6.2.b Support and collaborate with Ramsey County, state and regional agencies on groundwater quantity and quality protection

↓

6.2.c Avoid infiltrating stormwater in areas of contaminated soils ↑

Marion Street Raingarden


Monitoring and Data Assessment Issues and Goals

Issue 7 Monitoring and research data are needed to understand the watershed, identify problems, and determine appropriate watershed management approaches within the District

Goal 7.1 Collect monitoring data and perform research to gather valuable information about the District

↑

7.1.a Collect data on selected BMPs installed in the District and evaluate performance, maintenance, and longevity

↑

7.1.b Monitor the condition of District surface waters and major subwatersheds to establish baseline conditions and determine trends

↑

7.1.c Identify and support a program to collect soil and geologic data in order to assess the infiltration potential within the District

↓

Goal 7.2 As part of the annual budgeting process, review and refine the monitoring and data assessment program to improve efficiency and utilize the best technology

↑

Goal 7.3 Utilize data as part of a regular evaluation of current water issues, performance of District programs and District rules

→

Issue 8 Monitoring and research data are difficult for the public to access and understand

Goal 8.1 Make monitoring and research data available and understandable to a broader audience

↓

Goal 8.2 Serve as a clearinghouse for water resource management information to assist District stakeholders and partners

→

Goal 8.3 Establish partnerships to improve the District’s ability to increase access and understanding of monitoring and research data

→

Future Trends Issues and Goals

Issue 9 Future watershed management strategies need to be responsive to emerging issues resulting from climate change and technological advances

Goal 9.1 Develop a better understanding of climate change, its impacts to District natural and water resources & adaptive management strategies to address this emerging issue

→

9.1.a Participate in climate change working groups/forums →

9.1.b Determine the District’s strategies in addressing climate change impacts on watershed mgmt. ↓

Goal 9.2 Be a leader in conducting original research and reviewing existing research on new stormwater management technologies to facilitate decision making by the District and its partners

↑

9.2.a The District will evaluate innovative stormwater management techniques, information mgmt. techniques, and monitoring and modeling techniques used locally, nationally, and internationally

↑

9.2.b The District will conduct research on stormwater management BMP performance, applicability in different settings, and long‐term maintenance needs.

↑

Goal 9.3 Promote the use of emerging technologies and innovative watershed management techniques

↑

9.3.a Promote Green Infrastructure initiatives. ↑

9.3.b Determine optimal balance of incentive‐based strategies and regulatory‐based watershed management strategies

↓


Funding and Organization Issues and Goals

Issue 10 Many District partners and residents are willing to help the District accomplish its mission if assistance is made available

Goal 10.1 Encourage District partners and residents to implement local water resource improvement projects ↑

10.1.a Provide financial and technical assistance for resource protection projects and efforts by District residents and partners

↑

Issue 11 The District is uniquely positioned to be able to identify and support collaborations between various partners/stakeholders with compatible projects and programs

Goal 11.1 Coordinate efforts with partners to ensure the most cost effective uses of funds for water resource management ↑

11.1.a Coordinate the water resource management efforts that the District and its partners are currently undertaking

↑

11.1.b Identify opportunities to incorporate water resource management efforts into capital improvement projects and large scale redevelopment projects of District partners

↑

11.1.c Provide support to District partners for activities with a connection to water resources ↑

11.1.d Maintain active membership in the Ramsey County Groundwater Partnership na

Issue 12 Multiple funding mechanisms and outside funding sources are available for the District to pursue to offset financial needs

Goal 12.1 Increase the funds available to the District to meet its goals and objectives ↑

12.1.a Identify new and supplemental funding sources →

12.1.b Evaluate the optimal balance of financing options or revenue sources →

Issue 13 The District must prioritize programs and projects to ensure that goals are met in the most efficient, and cost effective manner

Goal 13.1 Utilizes long‐term planning and pursue the most cost effective solutions when carrying out resource protection programs and projects

↑

13.1.a Evaluate the results and costs for programs and projects to demonstrate their effectiveness ↑

13.1.b Consider initial and life‐cycle costs associated with programs and projects when evaluating their effectiveness

↑

Issue 14 An effective watershed organization needs to plan for change, growth, & development

Goal 14.1 Strengthen the District’s capacity to accomplish its mission ↑

Goal 14.2 Strive for excellence, with competent, knowledgeable, committed, and innovative Board members, advisory committees, and staff

↑

Goal 14.3 Provide research‐based, informed, mission‐driven decision making ↑

Goal 14.4 Be an open, approachable, facilitator of partnerships to enhance the District’s capacity to protect, maintain and improve water resources

↑


Regulations and Enforcement Issues and Goals

Issue 15 The District needs to maintain clear and effective Rules utilizing the most current research and science available

Goal 15.1 Ensure that the rules are regularly reviewed, updated and readily understood by the regulated community.

↑

15.1.a Ensure effective Rules in meeting the District’s goals while allowing some flexibility ↑

Issue 16 Coordination with District partners on regulatory issues is needed for more efficient and effective stormwater regulation across all jurisdictions

Goal 16.1 Work with District partners to improve the District Rules and other municipal/agency stormwater ordinances ↑

16.1.a Work with District partners to make ordinances compatible with stormwater management goals and objectives

↑

16.1.b Work with District partners to coordinate permit applications early in the design stage →

16.1.c Work with District partners to achieve volume reduction on small sites (disturbing less than one acre) through District Rules or municipal ordinances

↓

Goal 16.2 Collaborate with partners to ensure that proper BMP construction, and erosion and sediment control techniques are being implemented throughout the District

↑

16.2.a Ensure that effective routine inspections are conducted on all construction in the District ↑

16.2.b Ensure that appropriate long‐term maintenance is being performed on stormwater management practices in the District

→

Goal 16.3 Continue to work with surrounding watershed management organizations and state agencies to develop rule language that maximizes effectiveness while ensuring their consistency and ease of use throughout the region/metro area.

↑

16.3.a Compare District Rule language with that of surrounding watershed management organizations to identify consistencies and inconsistencies

↑

16.3.b Evaluate the feasibility of addressing inconsistencies in watershed management organization rules in consultation with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)

↑

Goal 16.4 Comply with applicable local, state, and federal watershed regulations ↑

16.4.a Comply with the provisions of the District MS4 permit. ↑

16.4.b Collaborate with all permitted MS4s within with District on TMDL load reduction efforts ↑

Stormwater Protection


Ecosystem Health Issues and Goals

Issue 17 The ecological integrity of many District lakes, wetlands, and the Mississippi River has degraded to a point where the resources are not providing their original level of function or value

Goal 17.1 Improve the ecological integrity of District lakes, wetlands, and the Mississippi River →

17.1.a Restore native plant communities and increase wildlife diversity and habitat in and around District lakes, wetlands, and the Mississippi River

→

Issue 18 The loss of natural areas has decreased the ability of the watershed to capture, filter and infiltrate rainwater prior to discharging to District lakes, wetlands, and the Mississippi River

Goal 18.1 Support increasing the amount and quality of open space as a means to restore habitat, and protect surface water and groundwater quality

↑

Goal 18.2 Mitigate the loss of pervious areas by incorporating green infrastructure into the built environment of the District

→

Issue 19 Reduced connectivity of natural habitat areas in the District limit movement between the District’s resources

Goal 19.1 Coordinate with District partners to improve accessibility to and movement between natural habitat areas within the District

↑

19.1.a Support the creation of travel corridors between natural areas for wildlife ↑

19.1.b Support the creation of access points for people to better connect with the water resource of the District

↑

Issue 20 The land within the District developed during a time when resource protection was not a priority. As a result, there are a number of opportunities to restore historic resources

Goal 20.1 “Bring water back to St. Paul” ↑

20.1.a Increase awareness of current and historical water resources of the District ↑

20.1.b Identify and restore historic wetland resources of the District ↓

20.1.c Identify opportunities to restore portions of historic streams of the District by providing surface flow where water is currently conveyed through an underground pipe

↑

Sarita Wetland


Financial Evaluation The 2010 Watershed Management Plan includes an annual budget for all District programs and projects as well as administrative functions. The budget indicates the proposed level of expenditure for each of 33 specific watershed initiatives on an annual basis throughout the 10 year period of the plan. As a final measure of the progress the District has made in meeting the intent of its 2010 Plan, a comparison of the proposed expenditures against actual spending for the 2011‐2014 period was conducted. The information is shown by District accounting code in the table on the following page. In comparing the planned to actual expenditure table it is clear that most areas have at least a minor variation in expenditure and some have fairly significant variation. Some of the minor variation in administrative and routine iniatives can be attributed to the general level of cost estimation that was done for the watershed planning process. Most of the larger variations were a result of a change in timing for a given project. Some of the reasons that the District changed the timing for projects includes:

Reevaluation of Timing – some of the projects that had originally been slated for later in the Plan period were completed earlier to take advantage of momentum gained by certain programs. An example of this is the very effective Stewardship Grant Program.

Opportunities to Collaborate – Several opportunities were presented to the District to colloborate with partners on projects being constructed in the District. Examples include the Metro Transit Green Line which resulted in a greater level of spending in those areas than had been proposed.

Grant/Partner Funding – The District was successful in securing grant/partner funding for some projects that would not have otherwise been completed. An example is the Trout Brook Storm Sewer work.


2011‐2014 Planned Budget

2011‐2014 Actual Budget

Budget Difference

% Spent

TOTAL COST 18,217,000 18,094,064 ‐122,936.27 99.3

Code Administration 1,640,000 1,769,180 129,180 107.9

101 Administration 1,640,000.00 1,769,180 129,180 107.9

Code Programs 5,237,000 4,203,856 ‐1,033,144 80.3

201 Groundwater 218,000 29,250 ‐188,750 13.4

207 Rulemaking/Rule Revisions 116,000 41,646 ‐74,354 35.9

208 Permitting 622,000 787,429 $165,429 126.6

210 Stewardship Grants 469,000 840,103 $371,103 179.1

211 Monitoring and Data Collection 1,277,000 1,711,520 $434,520 134.0

220 Education/Outreach 862,000 551,541 ‐310,459 64.0

225 Technical Resources & Information Sharing

657,000 110,133 ‐546,867 16.8

228 Future Trends: Research & Positioning 575,000 15,830 ‐559,170 2.8

230 Geographic Information Systems (GIS) 366,000 61,822 ‐ 304,178 16.9

240 Safety Program 75,000 54,583 ‐20,417 72.8

Code Projects 3,082,000 1,608,463 ‐1,473,537 52.2

301 Shoreline & Streambank Maintenance 152,000 33,703 ‐118,297 22.2

305 Como Lake Subwatershed 508,000 410,927 ‐97,073 80.9

313 Lake McCarron's Subwatershed 134,000 35,015 ‐98,985 26.1

315 Loeb Lake Subwatershed 64,000 402 ‐63,598 0.6

317 Crosby Lake Subwatershed 100,000 60,344 ‐39,656 60.3

320 Trout Brook Subwatershed 872,000 545,980 ‐326,020 62.6

325 Wetland, Stream and Ecosystem Restoration‐Planning

515,000 309,250 ‐205,750 60.0

330 Mississippi River Subwatershed 670,000 197,383 ‐472,617 29.5

370 Watershed Management Planning ‐ 11,924 11,924 NA

390 Special Projects & Grants 67,000 3,536 ‐63,464 5.3

Code Capital Improvement Projects 8,258,000 10,512,564 2,254,564 127.3

401 Shoreline Restoration Fund 302,000 25,789 ‐276,211 8.5

405 Como BMP Fund 1,924,000 731,884 ‐1,192,116 38.0

413 Lake McCarron's Subwatershed BMPs 780,000 1,872,198 1,092,198 240.0

415 Loeb Lake Subwatershed BMPs 150,000 ‐ ‐150,000 0.0

417 Crosby Lake Subwatershed BMPs 38,000 544,327 506,327 1432.4

420 Trout Brook Subwatershed BMPs 790,000 5,040,248 $4,250,248 638.0

425 Wetland, Stream and Ecosystem Restoration‐Implementation

793,000 253,959 ‐539,041 32.0

430 Mississippi River Subwatersheds BMP's 575,000 772,102 197,102 134.3

435 Stormwater Impact Fund Implementation 53,000 ‐ ‐53,000 0.0

440 Special Projects and Grants 1,162,000 600,871 ‐561,129 51.7

450 Future Trends: Implementation 949,000 ‐ ‐949,000 0.0

490 Debt Services 742,000 671,188 ‐70,813 90.5


Recommendations Purpose of Recommendations After reviewing the work that has been conducted during the first portion of the 2010 WMP it is clear that CRWD is meeting its mission. Since 2010, CRWD has committed financial resources equal to the projected plan dollars, hired four additional staff, completed numerous capital improvement projects, partnered with its cities to complete water quality practices, won several awards and was awarded nearly a million dollars in Clean Land and Water Legacy Grant dollars. Staff are regularly presenting at national conferences and participate in local, state and national advisory panels. The Citizen Advisory Committee continues to be one of the most active in the state.

While CRWD has achieved many of its goals and made significant progress towards others, water resource issues still exist. Como Lake is still listed as impaired, widespread behavior change and voluntary adoption of clean water practices can improve, and protection of Lake McCarrons water quality remains a concern. Discharges from the District into the Mississippi River still are contributing to impairments. Most wetlands are degraded and few surface waters exist in the District. To better position itself in the next five years, CRWD have set out to evaluate progress towards implementing its watershed management plan and achieving it goals. The Board of Managers also wished to make budget decisions based on priority and focus. To do this the CRWD Watershed Management Plan Mid‐Term Review was initiated. The following are draft recommendations for how the District could modify its focus moving forward. No changes to the Issues and Goals identified in the WMP are proposed, rather, the recommendations are adjustments/ modifications to the level of focus for the remainder of the planning period. There are many high priority issues and goals that will maintain their current level of focus and thus are not addressed in the following recommendations.

Curtis Pond


Programs and Planning Efforts

220—Education/Outreach: General

Review Summary: While the District has dedicated significant financial and staff resource to education and outreach activities it is clear that additional work could be done. The Board of Managers recognizes the importance of education and outreach and commonly expresses the desire to do more in this area.

Recommendation #1: The District should allocate additional resources, staffing and/or outside assistance to education and outreach activities.

220—Education/Outreach: General

Review Summary: There has not been an adequate amount of effort spent addressing the need to engage the diverse groups present in the District.

Recommendation #2: Additional focus should be placed in meeting the goal of increasing communication and encouraging long term commitment with groups not previously involved in District programs.

208, 305, 313, 317, 320, 330—BMP Maintenance

Review Summary: While the District does a thorough job of maintaining its own BMPs, additional work could be done assisting District partners with maintenance of their BMPs. Also, greater emphasis could be placed on enforcing maintenance of BMPs that are constructed to meet the District rules, i.e. permit‐related BMPs.

Recommendation #3: The District should develop a comprehensive BMP Maintenance approach and program that can more efficiently and effectively ensure BMP’s are functioning as planned and designed on all BMPs within the District. The District’s approach should draw upon all of the tools available such as education, collaborations with partners and permit enforcement.

201--Groundwater

Review Summary: The District does not currently have a well‐defined role in groundwater management nor is there an agreed‐upon approach for groundwater management in Ramsey County.

Recommendation #4: Determine what, if any, role the District should have in groundwater management. This effort will need to be coordinated with other state agencies, and the Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts.

Recommendation#5: In the short‐term, the District should increase its knowledge of the local groundwater system and how it interacts with District surface water resources and stormwater management practices (infiltration areas).


211--Monitoring

Review Summary: While the monitoring program has grown considerably over the past few years, it is NOT expected to expand any further.

Recommendation#6: The District should focus on increased efficiency with the current level of resources allocated to the Monitoring Program.

Recommendation#7: The District should focus on its goal to make monitoring and research data easily understood and accessible to the public. Specific focus should be on illustrations that depict water quality data.

228—Future Trends: Research and Positioning

Review Summary: To date, the District has incorporated its research largely into the monitoring program. There have been on‐going external requests for research partnerships and internal needs for research and analysis.

Recommendation #8: The District should develop a research approach and program that can more efficiently and effectively ensure appropriate research is conducted for specific District needs as well as the needs of the larger stormwater community both regionally and nationally. This program could be modeled after the Special Grants process.

Recommendation #9: The District should determine the impact climate change may have on the way water resources and storm sewer infrastructure are managed and incorporate climate adaptation into its programs and projects.

305, 405—Como Lake Subwatershed

Review Summary: Throughout the existence of the District and during the first half of the current Plan period the focus on Como Lake water quality improvement has been on reducing watershed loading to the lake.

Recommendation #10: The primary focus for management of Como Lake should remain on reducing watershed loading but a greater emphasis should be placed on in‐lake management practices/techniques.

325, 425—Wetland, Stream, and Ecosystem Restoration

Review Summary: To date, the District has accomplished ecosystem restoration as a secondary objective in conjunction with its water resource focused projects.

Recommendation #11: Additional emphasis should be placed on better protecting and improving wetland, stream and lake ecosystem health within the District.

Recommendation #12: Additional emphasis should be made to establish greenways and wildlife corridor connections.

Recommendation #13: Ecological restoration of wetlands within the District should be emphasized. The District should develop a specific plan that identifies wetland restoration opportunities along with an implementation schedule and budget.


District Operations 450—Future Trends: Implementation

Review Summary: During the first half of the WMP planning term, some advance work on a new District facility location has been completed.

Recommendation #14: The District should move into a new facility that can better achieve its mission and accommodate its various programs.

200—Multiple Plan Categories

Review Summary: The District has made incremental improvements in all of its programs. Some of the programs have had formal program reviews while others have not. The District has been successful in determining which projects to pursue through Subwatershed Analysis. The District has been able to include public art and historical references in some projects.

Recommendation #15: The District should develop a more formal process/schedule to review its programs.

Recommendation #16: The District should use the “Prioritize Target Measure” focus for its programs and projects (while this is currently accomplished through the District’s Subwatershed Analysis approach there may be value in adopting the PTM terminology to be consistent with statewide efforts). The District should consider incorporating this approach into existing District programs.

Recommendation #17: Additional emphasis should be placed on incorporating art and historical context into the projects and programs of the District.

Public Art Designating a Trout Stream Road Crossing


Capital Improvement Projects 405—Como Lake Subwatershed BMPs

Review Summary: It is evident that greater emphasis has been placed in the McCarrons Subwatershed during the early phase of the 2010 WMP Plan and less emphasis was placed on the Como Subwatershed (emphasis had been on Como lake pre‐2010) than had been contemplated. This is mainly due to two large projects being implemented in the Lake McCarron’s Subwatershed.

Recommendation #18: For the remainder of the Plan period, the District should attempt to balance its capital improvement projects by moving its focus to Como Lake Subwatershed BMPs. Further balance can be achieved by focusing on Como Lake subwatershed areas outside of Como Subwatershed 7.

413—Lake McCarrons Subwatershed BMPs

Review Summary: It is evident that greater emphasis has been placed in the McCarrons Subwatershed during the early phase of the 2010 WMP Plan and less emphasis was placed on the Como Subwatershed (emphasis had been on Como lake pre‐2010) than had been contemplated. This is mainly due to two large projects being implemented.

Recommendation #19: For the remainder of the Plan period, the District should balance its capital improvement projects by reducing its focus on McCarrons Subwatershed BMPs.

420—Trout Brook Subwatershed BMPS

Review Summary: Throughout the existence of the District and during the first half of the current Plan period the focus on Trout Brook has been maintanence and improvements to critical sections of the Trout Brook Interceptor. Lesser focus has been on reducing watershed loading to the Mississippi River.

Recommendation #20: The District should continue to focus infrastructure management of the Trout Brook Interceptor but a greater emphasis should be placed on subwatershed BMPs to reduce loading to the Mississippi River.

Additional Recommendations The following items were noted as being areas of emphasis for the District. The District should continue to advance the staffing/organization plan to achieve its mission.

The District should continue to use grants and other funding mechanisms to more effectively address mission.

The District should continue to be a leader nationally in urban stormwater management

The District should continue to conduct cutting edge research and approach stormwater management in an innovative manner.

The District should continue to invest strategically by weighing alternatives to effectively use public money to best address water resource issues.


DATE: November 3, 2015 TO: Board of Managers FROM: Mark Doneux RE: 2016 Employee Benefit Program Background The District has purchased a health benefit package from Health Partners through Bearance since 2012. Issues Staff has obtained benefit quotes from Bearance for health and dental coverage. Bearance obtains quotes from at least three vendors when soliciting benefit quotes. The action requested by the Board of Managers is to set the employee contribution rates for 2016. Table 1 and 2 below summarizes the proposed employee contribution rates for 2016. Table 1- Current 2015 and Proposed 2016 Monthly Health Insurance Employee Contributions Employee Contribution

2015 2016 2016 Existing Renewal Alternative 2 Single $ 42.00 $ 50.00 $ 35.00 Single +1 $ 87.00 $ 100.00 $ 75.00 Family $ 130.00 $ 150.00 $ 110.00

Table 2 - Current 2015 and Proposed 2016 Monthly Dental Insurance Employee Contributions 2015 2016

Existing Renewal

Single $10 $10

Single + 1 $20 $20

Family $40 $40

November 4, 2015 V. Action Items D) Approve 2016

Employee Benefit Program (Doneux)

2

Requested Action Approve the 2016 Employee Benefit Program as follows: 1) The District requires a monthly employee contribution of $50.00 and $35.00 for single, $100.00 and

$75.00 for single plus one and $150.00 and $110.00 for Family health insurance for the renewal plan and Alternate 2 respectively. Rates effective January 1, 2016.

2) The District requires 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, 2016.

3) 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 2015. The District will continue to provide Life Insurance and Long Term Disability coverage consistent with the CRWD 2015 Program and allow employees to purchase additional coverage at their cost. The District’s monthly costs for these benefits are as follows: Coverage Current (2015) Rates Renewal (2016) Rates Rate Basis Core Life $0.112 $0.112 Per $1,000 of Insurance Core AD & D $0.034 $0.034 Per $1,000 of Insurance Long Term Dis. $0.189 $.0.225 Per $100 of Covered Payroll

The rates for all employee voluntary coverages are unchanged from 2015. 4) The District will contribute in 2016 to a HSA plan for employees that select Alternative 2 at the rates

of $1,000 for single, $2,000 for single plus one and $2,000 for family. Contributions will be paid out at ½ by January 1, 2016 and ½ paid out by June 30, 2016. The District will also make a contribution for those staying in the HSA plan in 2017. The 2017 contribution will equal 50% of the 2016 contribution and be paid by February 1, 2017.

5) The District provide payroll deductions and employee contributions to Health Care Flexible Spending Accounts, Health Savings Accounts, and Dependent Care Spending Accounts.

enc: Bearance Insurance Summary - Proposed 2016 CRWD Benefit Plan and Employee Contribution Rates

W:\03 Human Resources\Benefits\2016 Benefits\V2_Board Memo- 2016 Employee Benefit Program 11-4-15.docx



TO: CRWD Board of Managers and Staff

FROM: Mark Doneux, Administrator

RE: November 4, 2015 Administrator’s Report

1) Administrator Approved or Executed Agreements

a) Stewardship Grant Agreement for a curb cut rain garden at 97 Langford Park, Saint Paul not to exceed

$8,490.23. Renewal Quotation with ESRI, Inc. for GIS program and software services not to exceed

$1,435.75.

b) Stewardship Grant Agreement for a rain garden at 1462 Charles Ave, Saint Paul not to exceed

$317.Stewardship Grant Agreement with Saint Anthony Greens HOA / Omega Management for cost

associated with the installation of a rain garden at 814 Seal Street in St. Paul not to exceed $11,263.

c) Amend. No. 1 to Consultant Services Agreement with Houston Engineering for the Como Regional

Park Stormwater Inventory for additional scope of work for $34,000 with a total not to exceed $55,100.

d) Stewardship Grant Agreement for costs associated with the design and construction of five rain gardens

at the Boys and Girls Club not to exceed $27,124.43.

e) Stewardship Grant Agreement for costs associated with the construction of a rain garden at 2320 Capp

Road, St. Paul 55114 not to exceed $6458.86.

2) Board Approved or Executed Agreements

3) General updates including recent and upcoming meetings and events

Moos Family Lecture Series with Freshwater Society

Protecting Surface Waters in Agricultural Watersheds

Bill Stowe, CEO and General Manager, Des Moines Water Works

November 3, 2015

University of Minnesota St. Paul Student Center

5:30 pm Reception in Larson Art Gallery

7:00 pm Lecture in the Auditorium

4) CRWD events and meetings

a) Awards Committee, Mary Texer & Joe Collins, Monday, November 2nd, 4:30 p.m.

b) Moos Family Speaker Series, Bill Stowe, Tuesday, November 3rd, Reception starts at 5:30 with the

speaker starting at 7:00, U of M, St. Paul Student Center Auditorium.

c) Office Closed, Wednesday, November 11th – Veteran’s Day Holiday.

d) Next CAC meeting is Thursday, November 12, 2015 from 7:00 – 9:00 p.m.

e) Next Board meeting is Wednesday, November 18, 2015 from 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.

W:\04 Board of Managers\Correspondence\Administrator's Report 2015\Administrator's Report 11-4-15.docx

Documents

November 4, 2015 board packet updated