Finding Common Ground. Maintaining Watershed Partnerships Through Long Term Planning and Political Processes

Transcription

1 Finding Common Ground Maintaining Watershed Partnerships Through Long Term Planning and Political Processes

2 Today s O er ie Christopher Anderson Watersheds Program Manager 1. Introduction 2. Partnership Scenario 3. Analysis and Discussion of Challenges 4. Success Stories Maggie Allio Rwakazina, AICP Watershed Planner

3 1. Watershed Planning An Integrated Approach to Watershed Management Regulatory Drivers for Clean Water

4 An Integrated Approach to Watershed Management STORMWATER DRINKING WATER SUPPLY WASTEWATER SYSTEM DRINKING WATER TREATMENT CUSTOMER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

5 Clean Water Act (Amended 1972) Goals: Fishable, Swimmable, Drinkable Waterways Established: Established the basic structure for regulating pollutant discharges into the waters of the United States. Made it unlawful for any person to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained under its provisions. Recognized the need for planning to address the critical problems posed by nonpoint source pollution

6 Safe Drinking Water Act (1974) Goals: Protect public health by regulating the atio s pu li dri ki g water suppl. Established: Established national standards to ensure consistent quality for public drinking water. Public notification and education of water quality and chemistry

7 National Pollution Discharge Elimination System NPDES (1972) Goals: 1972 Amendments to the CWA included a permitting program to protect public health and aquatic life and assure that every facility treats wastewater. Established: Permits setting pollution limits for dischargers Specifies monitoring and reporting requirements for each discharger Enforcement action for non-compliant dischargers

8 O e-water Approa h & Sour e Water Prote tio Clean Water Act Erosion and Sediment Control Clean Water Act Ambient WQ Standards Clean Water Act MS4 Discharges Clean Water Act CSO Policy Clean Water Act Permitted Discharges WASTEWATER SYSTEM STORMWATER DRINKING WATER SUPPLY DRINKING WATER TREATMENT Other Allocation Other Flow Policy CUSTOMER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM Safe Drinking Water Act Treated WQ Standards and Guidelines Other Customer Communications Safe Drinking Water Act Corrosion Control, Pathogens

9 Who Are Watershed Stakeholders? Municipalities Utilities Counties Watershed Water Users Regulators Watershed Organizations

10 2. Creating a Partnership Lenapehoking River Watershed Scenario

11 Scenario Setting You are all stakeholders living or working in the Lenapehoking River Watershed. Please divide into groups and select a stakeholder profile sheet. The profiles include details on county, city, borough, business and nonprofit partners. Please read your profile carefully and prepare answers to the questions provided. Select a speaker for your group to participate in the guided discussion.

12 Discussion Questions 1. Would you be willing to contribute resources (funding, in-kind services or volunteers) to a regional watershed partnership effort? (Yes or No) a. If yes, you are a voting member and will have a voice in drafting policy for this initiative. b. If no, you may still attend meetings, but will not be able to vote on decision making. 2. What resources to you have to contribute to the partnership? 3. What are you looking to gain through participation? 4. What are the top three goals that you think the partnership should work towards?

13 2. Discussion and Analysis Partnership Challenges Tools for Success Implementation Planning & Metrics

14 Partner Profiles Keystone County Conservation District Pocono Forge Borough City of Pennsport Lenapehoking River Heritage Area Youse Brewery Le apehoki g Ka aker s U io

15 What challenges do you foresee this and other watershed partnerships may face?

16 Challenges facing watershed partnerships Watersheds do not align with political boundaries PA s ho e rule harter Water Quality improvements are expensive CWA is now mostly regulated through unfunded mandates Long-term and slow progress: hard to see results Not often at the top of political or citizen priorities Diffuse and difficult to understand without expertise and experience managing water resources

17 What are the advantages of bringing together a watershed partnership?

18 Mandates vs. Vision National CSO policy MS4 Stormwater Regulations Act 167 Sense of Place Shared Problems Recreational Opportunities

19 What results do you think are necessary to keep the partnership engaged over time?

20 Water Quality improvement take decades, so celebrate the small successes: Demonstration projects Outreach events A shared watershed identity Passing and enforcement of local ordinances

21 What are the key ingredients for a successful partnership?

22 DIAD Partnership Model Diversity (of Stakeholders) + Interdependence (of Interests) + Authentic Dialogue = Reciprocity/Relationships/Creativity/Learning Innes and Booher 2010

23 What tools may be valuable for keeping a long-term watershed partnership engaged?

24 Tools for finding common ground Wondollock and Yaffee (2000) suggest several tools to promote collaboration: Non-governmental organizations A paid coordinator Joint Fact Finding Memorandums of Understanding

25 How do you measure success of a watershed partnership when applying for grants or other funding?

26 Framework for evaluating collaborative approaches Evaluation Approach Example Metrics Inputs Process Outputs Improved Information Quality of the process Results of the plan Citizen awareness MS4 permit requirements Self-assessments Partner-derived objectives Adoption rate Response in press/ social media Performance Plans and policies Miles of stream restored Directly connected impervious area Outcome Environmental Indicators LBS of Sediment reduced Based on Margerum 2011 Average daily D.O.

27 4. Successful Case Studies Examples of collaboration in the greater Philadelphia watersheds.

28 Schuylkill Action Network Founded in 2003 to support an EPA Source Water Protection grant Highly engaged partners, ranging from regulators, municipalities, non-profits, County Conservation Districts All workgroups support the strategic plan through the development of their own annual work plan Success is tracked and reported to partners on an annual basis

29 Schuylkill Action Network

30 Delaware Valley Early Warning System 115 intake sites 28 water suppliers 29 industrial user Exelon, Sunoco, Valero, PP&L

31 3. The long game Thinking through how to maintain engagement over time

32 Scenario Part 2 Congratulations on 10 successful years of partnership in the Lenapehoking Watershed! Here s the current state: Despite rapid development in parts of the watershed and many successful restoration projects, Water Quality in the Lenapehoking has remained the roughly the same. Despite your best efforts at collaboration, the number of highly engaged stakeholders has dwindled and the partnership is beginning to wonder what s e t? A new Governor is in Harrisburg and the state house majority party has changed hands. This is causing uncertainty on how environmental programs will be enforced. A Total Daily Maximum Load (TMDL) for trash may be developed for this watershed which would regulate the amount of trash in the Lenapehoking and its tributaries.

33 How do you think the partnership will have changed and what is necessary to continue to succeed?

34 Maggie Allio Rwakazina, AICP Watersheds Planner Trans-Pacific Engineering Corporation Christopher Anderson Watersheds Program Manager Public Affairs Division REFERENCES Allio, M. (2013) Darby-Cobbs Watershed Case Study. Community and Regional Planning, Temple University Barletta, M., Dahme, J., and Maimone, M. (2007). Lessons Learned in Multi-municipal Watershed-based Planning and Partnership Formation. Pennsylvania Stormwater Management Symposium Villanova University. Innes, J. and Booher, D. (1999). Consensus Building and Complex Adaptive Systems: A Framework for Evaluating Collaborative Planning. APA Journal. 65(4), Innes, J. and Booher, D (2010). Chapter 2: How Can Theory Improve Practice? Planning With Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. New York: Routeledge. Margerum, R. (2011). Beyond Consensus: Improving Collaboration to Solve Complex Public Problems Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press. Wondollock, J. and Yaffee, S. (2000). Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resource Management. Washington, DC: Island Press.