(To download PDF AWSMP Mtg 12/09 click this link)
|
Chris Baltz
|
Broadstreet Hollow Landowner |
|
Mike Flaherty
|
NYS DEC |
|
Walt Keller
|
CCE |
|
Gary Capella
|
UC SWCD |
|
Amanda Lavalle
|
Ulster Cnty DOE |
|
Michelle Yost
|
Greene County SWCD |
|
Bobby Taylor
|
CCE |
|
Virginia Craft
|
Ulster Cnty Planning |
|
Michelle Spark
|
Woodland Landowner |
|
Beth Reichheld
|
NYC DEP |
|
Peter Manning
|
The Catskill Center |
|
Dan Davis
|
NYC DEP |
|
Jim Fugel
|
Town of Olive |
|
Bruce Duffy
|
Landowner / TU |
|
Lee Reidy
|
CCE |
|
Vince Bernstein
|
Shandaken Town Board |
|
Cory Ritz
|
UC SWCD |
|
Chet Karwatowski
|
TU |
|
Jack Isaacs
|
NYS DEC |
|
Art Snyder
|
Ulster Cnty Emergency Management |
|
Elizabeth Higgins
|
CCE |
|
Colleen Griffith
|
CCE |
|
Adam Doan
|
UC SWCD |
|
|
|
I.
Updates and Information Sharing
Cory Ritz and Liz Higgins proposed to the AWAC that they would try to have a monthly e-mail update for the advisory council with program accomplishments, updates, and upcoming topics for consideration and input. This is intended to help the Advisory Council keep abreast of the project activities and to be able to focus the meetings on items that need discussion from the group.
The Program Team will be preparing an Annual AWSMP Report for the Council covering the period June 2009 to May 2010. A draft will be available for feedback at the March Council meeting.
Bobby Taylor informed the Council that he had accepted a position with the Sullivan County Soil and Water Conservation District as Catskill Streams Buffer Initiative Coordinator for their stream management program. His last day with the Ashokan Watershed will be December 18th.
Cory Ritz updated the Council regarding the recent Ulster County Soil and Water Conservation District filling of the CSBI Coordinator position and introduced Adam Doan. Adam was formerly employed by the Brooklyn Botanical Garden as an Aquatic Ecologist.
II.
Review of CCE Implementation Fund Policy and Review of
Pilot Mini-Grant Requests
Liz Higgins distributed to the Council a revised and updated FY 2010 Mini Grant Program overview and application format. The maximum funding for each grant is $5000 with a maximum grant period of one year. The mini-grants are intended to be a funding source for education, training and small projects and events that will promote stream and riparian corridor best management practices (BMP’s). Liz sought clarification from the Council on two issues
(1) Whether or not applicants for mini-grants could include indirect or administrative overhead expenses?
It was the consensus of the group that
administration fees or indirect expenses not be applicable to the funding
because the grants are so small. They
could be included in the grant proposal as an in-kind match.
(2) Can individuals or for-profit entities receive mini-grants?
This was discussed and it was recommended that individuals and organizations that did not have not-for-profit status would be eligible, as the projects should be evaluated on their own merit and requiring individuals in the community to find not for profit and agency partners added an unnecessary burden given the low level of funding. This was particularly true for the arts community.
There was the suggestion that final payment for the completed mini-grant projects should be made upon completion of the project and after submission of a final project report, following the award scope of work.
The DEP contract requires that all sub-contracts (e.g. grant contracts) meet the insurance requirements of the DEP-CCE contract. However, for mini-grant, non-construction related contracts CCE can seek a blanket waiver. Lee Reidy noted that any organization that applies for CCE funding must have a non-discrimination and civil rights statement.
Pilot mini-grant funding
applications for review
In order to have a sense of what is an appropriate use of the mini grant funds, Higgins brought four grant requests to the group to discuss.
1. USGS – $8,500 to purchase of telemetry equipment necessary to continue to collect data for a collaborative research project initiated with DEC, DEP, and TU in 2009 on trout migration. The telemetry equipment would stay with the Ashokan Watershed Program and could be used by other research projects. It was agreed that the request was worth funding, particularly because the equipment would stay with the watershed for other research, and the research that the equipment would be used for does come directly out of the recommendations in the Esopus Creek SMP. However, it was agreed that the mini-grant program should stay within the $5000 cap, and, as this project request would support a larger grant, using Matching Grant Program Funds would be a more appropriate way to fund this project – Recommended for funding
2. Town of Shandaken/CCE Ulster – $2,500 for local training provided by Pace University Land Law Center to look at town floodplain policies and on land use law and policy. Discussion included requiring (1) specific deliverables be added to this proposal; (2) clarification of proposed providers of this training, and (3) would it be available to other people in the watershed in addition to the Town of Shandaken. – Needs more information to go further
3. Catskill Center for Conservation and Development –$5,000 to support the construction of a kiosk and development of information panels for an interpretive kiosk to be located at future site of the Watershed Interpretive Center. The kiosk will include information about the entire Catskill region and not only focus on streams, although the Catskill Watershed as New York City’s drinking source would be a prominent feature of the panel. The potential topics of the panels and the content review process was discussed, and the need for some content to include water/ water quality. Peter Manning informed the Council that the kiosk content is going to be reviewed by a committee. The Council advised that if we are to fund this request then someone on the Program Team should be on the review committee If this project was a cost share then all funders/ organizations and amounts should be included in the proposal. Peter also noted that the kiosk can include reference to the AWSMP and the office (advertising). Maintenance of such a structure was noted and identified in the proposal as also noted by NYS DEC. – Needs more information to go further, but general support for concept.
4. Mark Loete Photography – $5000 to do photo documentation of research projects in the watershed. The Council discussed the applicability of this project for grant application rather than as a consultant for the research, or for another organization like Trout Unlimited to submit the proposal. This project needs additional clarification and more precise deliverables.
Liz distributed FY2009 Matching Grant Program application and scoring sheet. Two applications are currently under review by CCE:
1. Ulster County Department of the Environment – a matching proposal for CWC and DOS grants for ditch management training and demonstration projects, assessment of contribution of driveways and private road to sedimentation and stormwater management problems where they connect to a public road and assess and improvement to public stream access points.
2. Hudsonia/Town of Woodstock – Request for $30K to complete funding package (total $140K) for habitat/ecosystem mapping project by Hudsonia for the Town of Woodstock.
III.
Project Management Process
Cory Ritz distributed a proposed “model” for AWSMP to track and process information “Inputs” and associated “Outputs”. He reviewed the model with the Council and outlined the processes identified, and how the development of a robust database would service this approach to project management
He also discussed a plan to manage information and requests for assistance developed into a Tier System and the staff are continuing to work to hire a consultant to help with the development, design and implementation of a software program. Tier descriptions include:
Tier 1 is the initial landowner contact and preliminary assessment the provision of basic stream education and information resources would occur at this time.
Tier 2 is for simple design remediation/ buffer restorations, etc. This tier is associated with less engineering support and lower costs <$20k
Tier 3 for larger projects requiring engineering support and higher costs ($20k to $250k), these projects would be vetted by a technical subcommittee
Tier 4 would be primarily used for projects that would require major stream remediation/restoration such as Chichester reach of Stony Clove. These projects would require significant consultant and in-house engineering and much higher costs (>$250k).
Tier 5 is focused on field training programs and research/demonstration projects.
IV.
Project Working Group Updates
a. Ecosystem Working Group: Met in August, next meeting will be in January or early February. Review of Action Plan recommendations and prioritization of funding.
b. Highway Managers Working Group – this group has met twice with excellent attendance from all municipalities in the watershed. The commitment of the working group is very strong to work together and with us to facilitate the best use of technology and funding to implement the best practices for protection of municipal infrastructure while providing for channel design and water quality. So far, possible stream project work in the towns of Shandaken and Woodstock have been identified through these meetings.
c. Education Outreach Working Group – will meet in the winter.
d. Project Advisory Working Group – The Program Team has proposed a new working group to help prioritize proposed stream corridor projects and review the conceptual design phase for each project funded by AWSMP funds. It was also suggested that this group will help the Program Team allocate budgets for the different Tiers using the total AWSMP funds in order to ensure that the entire budget is not used on Tier 4 type projects. Dan reminded the Council one major restoration must take place by 2011, however it is very important that we begin some smaller stream projects shortly.
V. Plan for next meeting (March) and Adjourn
Liz informed the Council that they can expect to receive the “Draft” Annual Report prior to the next meeting.
Peter Manning- inquired about the towns of Olive and Hurley’s adoption of the Stream Management Plan resolution. Liz indicated that she will be working closely to try to achieve their board adoptions in the immediate future.
Dan Davis – Thanked Bobby Taylor for his three years of service to this program through his internships, and wished him the best.
Lydia Riedy – Acknowledged Chet Karwatowski as a recipient of the “Friends of Extension” award presented at the Cornell Cooperative Extension Annual Dinner on November 13th.
Michelle Yost – Statement on press releases for grant funding availability and commented on the evaluation and scoring criteria that they have developed, and that there program does fund individual landowners.