Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.D.3. Support for the Clean Water Legacy Act-Res. No. 6404 S.t.S. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Ryan Hughes, Natural Resource Specialist Subject: Resolution #6404 Supporting the Clean Water Legacy Act (SF 762) Meeting Date: April. 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION The City is asked to consider adopting a resolution supporting the Clean Water Legacy Act (SF . 762). DISCUSSION The purpose of the Clean Water LegacyAct (a Minnesota initiative) is to protect, restore, and preserve the quality of Minnesota's surface waters by providing authority, direction, and resources to achieve and maintain water quality standards for surface waters as required by section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act. (The federal Clean Water Act, passed in 1972, is an unfunded federal mandate requiring each state to identify and restore waters so they meet their designated uses (i.e. fishing . and swimming) for Minnesota.) According to the Minnesota Pollution.Control Agency only 8% of Minnesota's river miles and 14% of our lakes have been tested for pollution problems. Of those tested, more than 40% are polluted with contaminants such as human and animal waste, algae from phosphorus, and mercury . Impaired waters has also affected growing communities. In recent months, an application to expand wastewater treatment facilities in the cities of Annandale and Maple Lake was denied because of its impact on phosphorus levels in Lake Pepin. This directly impacts future growth opportunities. The Clean Water Legacy Act is a comprehensive proposal to restore impaired waters and provide funding for cities that need to expand, repair, replace, or improve the performance of wastewater treatment and stormwater systems. The Act is a bill created by various environmental and state organizations including business and farm groups, watershed districts, AMM and the League of Minnesota Cities. The Governor's supplemental budget provides $20 million for the Clean Water Legacy Act. There is additional bonding being considered by the legislature. The funding that is collected would go into a designated fund and be distributed back to local governments for selected waste water and storm water treatment project. A "Clean Water Council" would determine what projects get funded. Local benefits fromthe act include: . 85% offunding goes for cleaning up impaired waters at a local level, both stormwater and wastewater. . Phosphorous and pollution reduction in waters. . Elimination oflimits on growth by cleaning up impaired waters. . Non-point source pollution elimination such as riverbank stabilization and restoration. VISIONING RELATIONSmOp This resolution will document that the City supports the Clean Water Legacy Act. With this in mind, this action appears to meet the following aspectsofthe City's vision: Goal: Active and Health Community, High Quality of Life, Great Place for Kids to Grow Up Strategies: Protect the Environment Make Downtown and Riverfront Inviting Enhance Physical, Mental, and Spiritual Health ACTION REQUESTED: If City Council concurs, move to authorize resolution #6404 in support of the Clean Water Legacy Act. " , RESOLUTION NO. 6404 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SUPPORTING THE CLEAN WATER LEGACY ACT (SF 762) WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee acknowledges lakes, rivers, and streams are tremendous local assets for swimming, fishing, drinking, tourism, and property values; and, WHEREAS, just 10% of Minnesota's rivers and streams and 16% of our lakes have been tested to determine if they meet water quality standards; and WHEREAS, thus far 40% of all waters tested violate water quality standards and therefore are classified as 'impaired'; and, WHEREAS, the federal Clean Water Act requires that we test our waters, determine the sources of pollution and enact a clean-up plan; and, WHEREAS, sound science must be used in the development of these pollution load assessments and clean-up plans; and, WHEREAS, local residents, businesses, and governments must be.inchided in building the plans for how impaired waters should be addressed in their area; and, WHEREAS, local residential and business development can be impeded if our polluted lakes and rivers are not cleaned up; and, WHEREAS, the environmental infrastructure cities need to build to address these problems are an unfunded mandate; and, WHEREAS, polluted lakes and rivers are a statewide problem that calls for statewide attention and a statewide funding source; WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee supports protecting, restoring, and preserving the quality of surface waters. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the City of Shakopee (The City) supports passing the Clean Water Legacy Act (SF 762). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City may apply and utilize future funding collected from the Clean Water Legacy Act. Adopted in adjourned regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this .18th Day of April , 2006. John J. Schmitt Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk CLEAN WATER LEGACY A partnership to restore Minnesota s . impaired waters In 2003, the state charged our diverse group of business, agriculture, environment and state and local government representatives with transforming a federal Clean Water Act mandate into an efficient, accountable path to clean water. .While the group's innovative policy proposal was widely embraced in. past legislative sessions, the proposed. fee-based funding mechanism met substantial resistance. This summer, the stakeholders agreed to set the fee proposal aside and instead, explore alternative fundipgoptions while sharing information with citizens and decision-makers about the first evidence of widespread economic restrictions resulting from impaired waters. The Problem: Why is this a big issue? Minnesota is not meeting federal water quality standards. As a result, pollution in Minnesota's rivers, lakes and streams is threatening to block economic growth and erode our quality of life. · The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency expects to identify 10,000 polluted water bodies in this decade. · The federal Clean Water Act requires that states study polluted water bodies to establish a sound scientific basis for clean up (TMDL). · If states fail to conduct TMDLs, the federal Clean Water Act restricts any new or expanded pollutant discharges until the studies are complete. · Minnesota already has a backlog of waters that must be tested and studied; without significant new funding, Minnesota will fall farther behind federal mandates and risk serious economic restrictions on cities and businesses in all regions of the state. New Urgency In August 2005, the Minnesota Court of Appeals cited the "impaired waters" section of the federal Clean Water Act when it blocked the permit MPCA issued for the proposed Annandale-Maple Lake wastewater facility. . Immediately following the decision, several other cities and business around the state had their permits revoked and the future of dozens of other projects around the state became uncertain. . Until Minnesota has a long-term solution to impaired waters many projects including. new ethanol facilities, electric power plants and regional airport expansions face unanticipated costs and delays. lh e Pro po s a I: Pol icy and Fun din g In 2003, an unlikely coalition of partners produced a consensus policy framework that defines the scope for Minnesota's clean water effort and outlines strategies for protecting clean waters and for testing, studying and restoring Minnesota's contaminated waters. . Key principles of the policy recommendations include: · Focus resources on cleaning up the pollution instead of expanding bureaucracy. · Provide resources to existing organizations and programs rather than creating new ones. · Encourage local leadership in implementation and accountability with state level coordination. · Protect clean waters while also restoring polluted waters. · Guarantee a diversity of perspectives are represented in the implementation of the effort by creating the Clean Water Council. After setting aside last year's fee proposal, the stakeholders are working with legislators to explore other funding options. · Following the recent Annandale-Maple court case, several House. and Senate members suggested the new urgency around the impaired waters problem createsrhe possibility of funding from the General Fund surplus. · In response, the stakeholders developed a draft "ramp-up" budget of $40 million to launch Clean Water Legacy in fiscal year 2007, combined with an ongoing, annual $80 million base appropriation. The Par t n er s hip: Who is W 0 r ki n g 0 n the sol uti 0 n? The proposal is the product of a broad partnership of over 60 organizations including state agencies, cities, counties, agriculture, business, environmental organizations and others. This collaboration is managed by the Minnesota Environmental Initiative. The core group grew from the "GI6" to the "GI8".this year to include the following orgamzatIons: Minnesota Chamber of Commerce Association of Metropolitan League of Minnesota Cities Municipalities Minnesota Farm Bureau Federation Association of Minnesota Counties Minnesota Farmers Union Minnesota Association of Watershed Builders Association of the Twin Cities Districts Minnesota Center for Environmental Minnesota Association of Soil and Advocacy Water Conservation Districts Clean Water Action Alliance Minnesota Department of Natural Rivers Council of Minnesota Resources Minnesota Lakes Association Minnesota Pollution ControlAgency Board of Water and. Soil Resources Minnesota Department of Agriculture Metropolitan Council Environmental Benefits Remove Phosphorus From Lakes and Rivers Phosphorus entering our surfacewaters is a major water quality problem for Minnesota. It turns our lakes and rivers green with algae, kills fIsh, and makes recreation undesirable. FlJNDING TO CONDUCT WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENTS Phosphorus treatment at Minnesota currently has sufficient funds to monitor only 14% of its lakes municipal wastewater and 8% of stream miles to see if they meetwaterquality standards. These treatment plants can be standards are designed to protect human heahh and allow for productive expensive but is vel)' and healthy fisheries. The Clean Water Legacy Act provides funding to effective in protecting water do a comprehensive assessment of our lakes and streams once every 10 quality during the summer years as called for by the federal Clean Water Act. low flow periods. Phosphorus from nonpoint PREP ARE CLEAN UP PlANS FOR CONTAMINATED LAKES AND RIvERs sources of runoff comes fro)n When a lake or river does not meet water quality standards it is listed as thousands of sources that are impaired. According to the. federal Clean Water Act a clean up plan individually small, but in (TMDL), that would return the water to meeting standards must be pre- aggregate have a large effect pared within 13 years. Minnesota is falling behind schedule in preparing The Clean Water Legacy Act these clean up plans, and has the funds to complete only a fraction of those required by already listed waters. provides 75% grant support for municipal phosphorus FIND AND UPGRADE FAILING SEPTIC SYSTEMS control through fIScal year \ 2009, and 50% thereafter.%. Minnesota has over a half-million septic systems, of which an estimated This is anticipated to be the 64,000 present an Imminent Threat to Public Heahh and Safety. Most of largest amount of spending these discharge directly to surface waters causing public heahh threats. from the Clean Water An additional 144,000 systems are "failing" meaning they pose a threat to Account in the flfst several groundwater supplies. The Clean Water Legacy Act provides resources years. Further, the Act for local units of government to inventory septic systems and provides leverages up to an additional additional funding to assist in upgrading those that are faulty. $40 million in federal farm bill spending forwater Environment Contact Business Contact Local Govt. Contact Farming Contact John Curry Mike Robertson CraigJohnson Chris Radatz 651-223-5969 651-731-9121 651-281-1259 651-905-2104 jcurry@mncenter.org mrobert388@aol.com cjohnson@Imnc.org cradatz@fbfs.com CLEAN WATER LEGACY: A PARTNERSHIP TO RESTORE MINNESOTA'S IMPAIRED WATERS