~ Minnesota Pollution ~ Control Agency

January 25, 2013

Rw = .....-..... 50T DEP RT ENT Water Resources Center Minnesota

'-._ ' MINNE ,A A M - -- ----- Boardof .............. o AGRICULTURE UN IVERSITY OF MINNESOTA :=~~~~

Oriv•n to Oisc:ov• ,.,..

To: Minnesota State Agency Leadership

METROPOLITAN COU N CIL

Re: Response to your letter, dated November 26, 2012, regarding Long-term Clean Water Fund Vision Effort

The Clean Water Fund (CWF) Interagency Coordination Team welcomes the opportunity to recognize the many

accomplishments in meeting the goals identified in the 2003-2004 Impaired Waters stakeholder process and looks

forward to participating, along with stakeholders, in a process to revisit and refresh the vision for clean water in

Minnesota. This renewed vision will help guide how CWF dollars are spent.

In response to t hese goals, a 10-year cycle for addressing waters of the state on the level of Minnesota's major

watersheds has been implemented. Much work has been completed, and success realized, since the original goals

were established. Federal, state and local partnerships are actively implementing this approach in collaboration with

the Clean Water Council and as directed by the Minnesota Legislature. We are midway towards completing the first

cycle of the process targeted for completion in 2017, therefore, the timing is appropriate to reaffirm our vision for

clean water.

Representatives from the CWF Interagency Coordination Team met with Mike Harley, Executive Director of

Environmental Initiative (EI), to design the scope of work needed for convening the stakeholder engagement process

for the vision effort. Ultimately, the main project deliverables are:

• A final report that presents the Work Group's recommendations, including a refreshed vision for clean water

in Minnesota, consensus on indicators of progress and alignment around CWF priorities for ach ieving the

vision, and

• Feedback, buy-in and ownership from a spectrum of stakeholders on the recommendations.

As requested, attached please find a draft proposal that is the concept that will be used to develop our process and

includes suggest ions for staffing and financial resources needed for a successful stakeholder engagement process. We

hope this process meets your expectations. Please contact us with any questions or revisions.

Your Coordination Team member will be talking to you about your Agency's contribution to this effort. Once t hat is

finalized, we will proceed with our objective to get El under contract by March 1, 2013. We look forward to working

with you, El and stakeholders over the next twelve months.

Sincerely,

CWF Interagency Coordination Team

------------------------

3

Clean Water Visioning Project El Draft Work Plan

Summary of Estimated Costs Project Task Cost Estimate Set Up & Stakeholder Analysis Total Hours= 270 Total Cost= $17,500 Core Team Meetings (12) Total Hours= 195 Total Cost= $13,000

Work Group Meetings (10) Total Hours= 905 Total Cost= $56,500

Partners Group Meetings (2) Total Hours= 250 Total Cost= $18,000 Prepare & Present Final Report Total Hours= 160 Total Cost= $8,700

Communications Total Hours= 135 Total Cost = $6,500

Total Total Hours = 1915 Total Cost= $120,200

Task Cost Basis

Set Up & Stakeholder Education Total Hours= 270 Total Cost= $17,500 Seeping '·

Compile information on work done to date, read background documents,

Background research monitor relevant news Concept refinement Meet with project team and advisors regarding project approach and outcomes

Develop detailed written plan for the remainder of the project based on Deta iled project workplan stakeholder analysis and other research

Email, call and/or meet with agency staff to ensure agreement on roles, Core Team set-up responsibilities and expectations for Core Team participants and select team Stakeholder Analysis & Work Group Set-Up Conduct stakeholder analysis and Research stakeholder groups, internal meeting to finalize draft Work Group &

develop Work Group invite list Partners Group invite lists Phone and/or in-person mtg with each of the G16 & other Work Group

Work Group set-up members. Assume 2 hr minimum for each. Additional stakeholder Additional work with stakeholders to build alignment/buy-in and develop conversations concept Project Management Project management and project team coordination

Core Team Meetings (12) Total Hours = 195 Total Cost = $13,000 Planning Schedule meeting, prepare agenda ...

Meeting 2 hr mtg at Agency w/ travel Follow-up Compile notes, respond to action items Project Management Project management and project team coordination

Work Group Meetings (10) Total Hours = 905 Total Cost = $56,500 Planning/logistics Secure room & food, prepare agenda, field questions, track attendance Materials preparation Research and prepare materials for discussion Attend meetings .. · 4 hr meeting+ 2 hr t ravel/set-up - Metro locations Meeting follow-up " Prepa re minutes, debrief members not in attendance, respond to action items Stakeholder ' Brief and debrief stakeholders about meetings, solicit formal & informal .Coordination/Conversation feedback on process from members Project Management Project management and project team coordination

Clean Water Visioning Project El Draft Work Plan

Partners Group Meetings (2) Total Hours = 250 Total Cost= $18,000 Partners Group Meeting 1 Meeting logistics Schedule meeting, secure facility, catering

Develop agenda, develop presentations (or work with agencies and

Prepare content and materials stakeholders on presentations), design and print Manage registration Set up and manage meeting registration Stakeholder outreach (G40) Personalized outreach to key stakeholders, meeting notice and mass marketing Attend meeting 4 hr mtg plus travel and set-up

Follow-up Prepare minutes, follow up with participants (email), manage OIP list Partners Group Meeting 2 Meeting logistics Schedule meeting, secure facility, catering

Develop agenda, develop presentations (or work w it h agencies and

Prepare content and materials stakeholders on presentations), design and print Manage registration Set up and manage meeting registration Stakeholder outreach (G40) Personalized outreach to key stakeholders, meeting notice and mass marketing Attend meeting 4 hr mtg plus travel and set-up Follow-up Prepare minutes, follow up with participants (email), manage OIP list Project Management Project management and project team coordination

Prepare & Present Final Report Total Hours =160 Total Cost= $8,700 Develop report One working draft, fina l report '\. \.\.

Present report to CWC & ....

Legislature Prepare comments, schedule presentation, deliver presentation Project Management Project management and project team coordination

Communications Total Hours= 135 Total Cost= $6,500 Develop in itial communications

....

materials Write, sol icit comments, finalize communications materials Web updates before and after Work Group meetings, work products posted,

Ongoing project communications Work Group emails (2 hrs before and 4 after each meet ing) Publicize project outcomes Develop messaging, press relations, social media Project Management Project management and project team coordination

Optional Add-On Report Release Event (Clean Water Summit) Total Hours= 200 Total Cost= $16,500 Event logistics Sched ule event, secure facil ity, catering

Develop agenda, work with agencies and stakeholders on presentations, design Prepare content and materials and print

Develop web page and marketing emails, personalized outreach to key Marketing & outreach stakeholders Manage registration Set up and manage event registration Attend event 4 hr event plus event prep, travel and set-up Follow-up Prepare recap, follow up with part icipants (email), create web archive, debrief Project Management Project management and project team coordination

Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Clean Water Visioning Project Concept january 25, 2013

Context At the request of state agency leadership, Environmental Initiative proposes to convene a dialogue among clean water stakeholders to revisit and refresh the vision for clean water in Minnesota, and to align future efforts with that vision.

A broadly supported vision for clean water emerged from the original work of the G 16 and G40 in the Impaired Water Stakeholder Process that began in 2003. This vision shaped the Clean Water Legacy Act and later provided momentum for the passage of the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment. The Clean Water Council (CWC), state agencies and other stakeholders have carried this vision forward into the state's impaired waters program and other clean water rmplementation activities.

Much has changed since 2003, including the passage of the Legacy Amendment, significant progress on assessment and completion of TMDLs and changes in the makeup and focus of the CWC. The time is right for clean water stakeholders to reconnect to the original vision for clean water, to assess progress and realign efforts toward the vision and to renew the broad consensus on priorities for expenditures from the Clean Water Fund (CWF).

Purpose and Goals • To revisit and refresh Minnesota's vision for clean water • To renew the commitment of a broad range of stakeholders to work together toward

Minnesota' s vision for clean water • To establish a shared understanding of clean water efforts currently underway and those

efforts planned for the future •

•

To assess progress to date toward Minnesota's vision for clean water and to build consensus on indicators for mid- and long-term success, as well as how to confront challenges we may face in meeting long-term goals (e.g. stressors brought on by a changing climate) To align stakeholders around CWF priorities to ensure continued and accelerated progress toward Minnesota's clean water vision

Approach Set.;.up: Scoping, Work Group Set-up and Stakeholder Engagement March 2013- May 2013

• Guidance for decisions during set-up (and throughout the process) would come from a Core Team, made up of no more than eight members, drawn primarily from state agencies. The purpose of the core team is to provide strategic insight and input on the dialogue process, including the development of agendas and goals for individual meetings and events.

• Environmental Initiative would analyze stakeholders in order to set up a Work Group of approximately 20 representative organizations (including members of the G 16 and members of the CWC) and to identify a broader set of stakeholders. The Work Group is to be the body that debates the issues at hand and amongst whom consensus recommendations are developed. The Work Group should represent the full range of opinions and viewpoints around the topic and be fair and balanced for all perspectives.

s

~Environmental ~INITIATIVE

Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

• Environmental Initiative would work with state agency staff and members of the CWC and G 16 to shape the scope for work group meetings and to flesh out the details of the remainder of the process.

Stakeholder Education May 2013 -July 2013

• Environmental Initiative would plan and execute a Clean Water Partners Meeting before the formal start of the Dialogue. The purpose would be to reconnect stakeholders and policy makers with Minnesota's clean water vision, to review the current state of Minnesota's waters and to identify points of progress toward clean water goals and areas needing additional attention. This event would be open to the public, but invitations and outreach would focus on groups that were original members of the G 16 and G40, new Work Group members, members of the CWC, and state agency leadership. Additional stakeholders could be included, such as members of the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council. Stakeholders would emerge from this meeting with a common base of information regarding clean water vision, activities and progress toward goals.

• The Work Group would begin meeting in June, and initial meetings would likely focus on further stakeholder education and alignment around project context.

Work Group Dialogue and Recommendations June 2013 -February 2014

• The Work Group would serve as the primary platform for in-depth stakeholder dialogue. The Work Group would be responsible for developing the project's recommendations and outcomes, and would meet 10 times during this process.

• A second Clean Water Partners Meeting would be held towards the end of the dialogue (likely mid-December) to bring together the Work Group, members of the G 16 and G40, members of the ewe, and state agency leadership for the purpose of vetting draft work Group recommendations, taking input, and building ownership and buy-in amongst the wider group of stakeholders necessary for successful implementation.

• There will be the option ofholding a Clean Water Summit at the end of the process to present the recommendations of the Work Group to the wide community of water stakeholders and other key interests, and to hear from policy makers and agency leadership on next steps and opportunities for implementation. This would be open to any interested party, including stakeholders, policy makers and members of the public. This would not be included in the original contract.

• A fmal report would be produced for the state agency commissioners that presents the project's recommendations. The report would also be shared with key legislators and other key stakeholders in the community.

Project Deliverables • A final report that presents the Work Group's recommendations, including a refreshed

vision for clean water in Minnesota, consensus on indicators of progress, and alignment around CWF priorities for achieving the vision.

• Feedback, buy-in and ownership from a spectrum of stakeholders on the recommendations.

Deborah L. Swackhamer University of Minnesota

Water Resources Center wrc.umn.edu

What is the Framework? ó Inspired by the Clean Water, Land, & Legacy

Amendment

ó A 25-year plan to protect, conserve, and enhance the quantity and quality of the state's groundwater and surface water

ó An approach to manage the state’s water resources that is ó Sustainable ó Comprehensive ó Integrated

2

Sustainability Sustainable water use does not harm ecosystems, degrade water quality, or compromise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. 2009 Minn. Laws. Ch. 172, Art. 2 § 30 at 45-46

3

Mandate – we addressed needs related to:

ó Drinking water ó Stormwater ó Agricultural use ó Industrial use ó Surface and groundwater interactions ó Infrastructure ó Interface of water resources with climate

change, land use, development, demographics

4

A Collaborative Approach

óDNR óMDA óMDH óMPCA óEQB óBWSR

óWDs óWMOs óSWCDs óNGOs óCounties & Cities

5

Approach

Water Resources Center

Headwaters Council

Citizen & Stakeholder

Advisory Group

Agricultural

Use

Policies

Domestic

Use

Recreation, Spiritual,

Cultural uses

Education

Energy &

Industrial Use

Ecosystem Services

Valuation

Synthesis

Team

6

Technical Team White Papers

ó Policy ó Education óValuation óAgriculture

ó Ecosystem Services óDomestic ó Energy/Manufacturing óRec/Cultural/Spiritual

All background info available at wrc.umn.edu 7

• Water Use in Minnesota • Water Supply in Minnesota • Water Quality in Minnesota

Framework ó Framed 90 specific needs óCollected under 10 “Big” Issues óContained in 3 categories of sustainability Correspond to National Issues

8

Environmental • Sustainable water supply • Excess nutrients & conventional pollutants • Contaminants of emerging concern • Land-water connection • Ecological & hydrologic integrity • Water-energy “nexus”

• Citizen engagement & education •Governance & institutions

Social

Economic • Water pricing • Infrastructure needs

Issues/needs

9

Issue Relationships and Drivers

CLIMATE DEMOGRAPHICS LAND USE

Water Use & Supply

Water Quality

Nutrients & Impairments

CECs

Infrastructure

Soci

al

Economic

Ecological Integrity

ENERGY

10

Issue: Sustainable, Clean Water Supply

Strategy 1: Determine state water balance

• Rec: accelerate county geologic atlases and aquifer characterization mapping

• Rec: develop model of water balance

From USGS Circular 1139

11

Issue: Sustainable, Clean Water Supply Strategy 1, cont:

Revise water withdrawal permit process that accounts for surface/groundwater interactions and ecological needs

ó Rec: electronic permit screening tool; cumulative withdrawal effects; have permits with minimum base flow that is protective of ecological needs for given hydrologic regime

From USGS Circular 1139 12

Issue: Sustainable, Clean Water Supply

Strategy 2: Reduce risk from drinking private well water

ó Rec:

ó map all private wells ó test at time of sale and refinance ó offer homeowners testing clinics ó educate homeowners on effects of nitrates,

arsenic, bacteria

13

Issue: Excess Nutrients & other Conventional Pollutants

Strategy 1:

ó Develop statewide guidance for nutrient enrichment management plans that are:

ó implemented at watershed level

ó adaptive

ó address all aspects of excess nutrients from all sources

ó includes sediments, pesticides, bacteria

14

Rec: ó Require that all TMDL assessments also have

Implementation Plans for pollutant reduction, and require that these plans be implemented for all sources

ó Accelerate assessments and implementation plans ó Require compliance

Issue: Excess Nutrients & other Conventional Pollutants

15

Issue: Excess Nutrients & other Conventional Pollutants

Strategy 2:

Accelerate improvements in water quality and provide equity in solutions to meeting water quality standards – include agriculture in solution

ó Rec: Establish farmer-led, performance-based approach to meeting water quality standards in agricultural areas

16

Strategy 1: Move upstream of hundreds of potentially harmful, trace level contaminants entering from different sources

Strategy 2: Manage the CECs already in water

Issue: Contaminants of Emerging Concern

17

Issue: Land-water connection Strategy 1: Integrate water and land sustainability planning ó Rec: incorporate water sustainability in land use

permitting processes

ó Rec: Increase compliance capacity for current regulations

ó Rec: monitor for effectiveness of land practices

18

Issue: Ecological and Hydrologic Integrity

Strategy 1: Protect critical aquatic ecosystems

Healthy ecosystems Healthy

people

Healthy economy

ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY

19

Issue: Ecological and Hydrologic Integrity

Strategy 2: Prevent introductions and reduce impacts of aquatic invasive species

Strategy 3: Keep more water on the land where

it falls, and slow it down Strategy 4: maximize placement of marginal

lands in conservation protection

20

Issue: Water-Energy “Nexus” Problem: It takes energy to clean water; it takes water to make energy

Strategy 1: Quantify all water - energy relationships and

evaluate energy policy for water sustainability

21

Issue: Water pricing & Valuation Strategy 1: Incorporate the economic value of ecological

benefits provided by water in decisions and assessments

ó Rec: Incorporate value of ecological benefits

into conservation pricing structures

ó Rec: Use funds to further protect source water

22

Issue: Public Water Infrastructure

Strategy 1: Incorporate new technologies and adaptive

management into public water infrastructure ó Rec: Create standing advisory committee to

provide updates and advice on new technologies, report every two years

23

Issue: Public Water Infrastructure Strategy 2: Develop long-term strategy for funding new,

expanded, and updated infrastructure ó Rec: Determine strategic options for funding; implement

24

Issue: Citizen Engagement & Education

Strategy 1: Citizens hold a water ethic and act on it ó Rec: Educate children through K-12 education

ó Rec: Educate citizens and decision-makers

ó Rec: Engage the public, communities and businesses in water conservation and stewardship

25

Issue: Governance & Institutions

Strategy 1:

Align water, land use, energy policies to ensure water sustainability

Strategy 2:

provide more efficient cross-cutting governance

Strategy 3:

review Framework every 5 yrs and update 26

Summary: Essential Top 5 ó Protect and Restore Water Quantity and Quality ó Revise permitting, model water balance ó Require implementation of pollutant reductions and

equity in solution ó Address future contaminants

ó Address Interconnected Nature of Water ó Integrate water and land use planning ó Align water, energy, land, transportation policies for

sustainability

27

Minnesota Water Sustainability Framework

wrc.umn.edu