Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-19-1998 - 9hORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: Action Agenda Item # ~~ SUBJECT: Upper Neuse River Basin Association funding DEPARTMENT: County Manager ATTACHMENT(S): Letter (with attachments) from Tom Fetzer, Mayor of Raleigh, to Margaret Brown, Chair Orange County BOCC PUBLIC HEARING: Yes No BUDGET AMENDMENT: Yes No INFORMATION CONTACT: County Engineer Extension 2303 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough - 732-8181 Durham - 688-7331 Mebane - 227-2031 Chapel Hill - 967-9251/968-4501 PURPOSE: To present to the BOCC a request to provide $7,609 in support of Upper Neuse River Basin Association activities (hiring a full time staff support position and miscellaneous activities) for Fiscal Year 1998-99. BACKGROUND: In March 1996, fourteen of the municipalities and counties having planning and zoning jurisdiction in the upper Neuse River basin (the area upstream of the Falls Lake Dam) formed the Upper Neuse River Basin Association (UNRBA). The purpose of the URNBA has been and remains to represent the interests of this area's local governments in the legislative and regulatory process of establishing the statutory rules, standards, strategies and goals intended to improve instream water quality (nutrient management/reduction) in both the estuarine and upstream areas of the Neuse River. To date, the UNRBA has provided: 1) extensive comments to the state in conjunction with the nutrient reduction program rule making process; 2) a review and evaluation of local and state sedimentation and erosion control procedures; 3) assistance with the process of acquiring NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund grants for purchase and creation of riparian buffer areas; and 4) a medium for the acquisition, evaluation and dissemination of water resources information and for the coordination of water resource protection activities. Much of the past and projected activities of the UNRBA are not and will not be applicable or of assistance to Orange County. That is, Orange County is not directly concerned with the rules or cost of implementing those rules severely limiting the nitrogen (nutrient) discharges of wastewater treatment facilities. Likewise, the 2 County's riparian buffer and sedimentation/erosion control regulations are generally more stringent that those required to meet the criteria of the new and proposed state nutrient management/reduction rules. However, in the interest of maintaining a strong posture in the process of regional cooperation for environmental protection and of remaining abreast of developments in the effort to protect the water quality of the Neuse basin, the BOCC may wish to provide the financial support requested. RECOMMENDATION: As the Board decides. O W o r l d C l a s s R e g i o n DISTRIBUTED s ~/~ ,~'~.~(- April 24, 1998 Ms. Margaret Brown Chair, Board of Commissioners Orange County P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Ms. Brown: 100 Park give, P.O. Box 12276 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 919.549.0551 Fnx:919.549.9390 The Board of Directors of the Upper Neuse River Basin Association hereby requests the Orange County Board of Commissioners' approval of $7,609 of financial support for the Association for Fiscal Year 1999. The requested funding will be used to hire a staff person and carry out projects to assist the Association in accomplishing its established goals and objectives. The following information is provided in support of this request. In March, 1996 Orange County and several other local governments with planning and zoning jurisdiction in the 770-square mile Upper Neuse River Basin formed the Upper Neuse River Basin Association. Since its inception, the Association's Board of Directors has met on a regular basis to address water resources planning, management, and protection issues of mutual concern. The Association is being cited by the State as an innovative model approach to cooperative watershed management and protection. In addition to providing an important ongoing forum for local governments to work together, the Association has achieved several accomplishments. These include: (a) development of legislation that was subsequently enacted by the State, establishing a framework for cooperative local and state water resources planning and management in river basins and sub-basins; (b) development of extensive technical comments on the Neuse River Basin Nutrient Management Strategy rules; (c) receipt of a grant from the North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund to develop a riparian buffer protection plan for the Upper Neuse River Basin; and (d) evaluation of state and local sediment and erosion control programs in the watershed. Attachment #1 summarizes the goals and objectives, accomplishments to date, and examples of expected benefits to the Association's member governments. In January, 1998 the Board of Directors considered the need for ongoing staff support for the Association, and concluded that such support was necessary if substantial and meaningful progress is to be made in accomplishing the Association's goals and objectives, including development of a detailed watershed management plan. The Association's Board of Directors agreed to pursue local funding support from member governments in amounts shown on APR ~ ? ~Q9% 3 TRIANGLE J COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS ~2~9 4 Ms. Margaret Brown Apri124, 1998 Page Two Attachment #2, and unanimously agreed that Directors should request their respective member governments to consider providing financial support to the Association in the amounts shown in that table. For Orange County, the requested funding amount is $7,609. The Association also decided to pursue (a) an appropriation from the General Assembly during the 1998 Short Session, and (b) grant funding support from state and federal agencies and the private sector. I am very pleased to report that to date, 12 of the 141oca1 governments with planning and zoning jurisdiction in the Upper Neuse River Basin have already committed $66,350 to fund the Association's efforts during Fiscal Year 1999. Eleven of those 12 jurisdictions agreed to provide the full amount requested. Additionally, it is expected that Franklin County will act on this request in the near future. These local governments have concluded that participation in the Association's efforts can result in important benefits, including but not limited to: (a) promoting sustainable management of our water resources to protect public health, environmental quality, and economic vitality; (b) increasing cost-effectiveness in developing and implementing solutions for addressing water resoures objectives; (c) developing a true local-state partnership to resource protection, as an alternative to the traditional top-down approach driven by federal or state mandates; (d) improving the information base for decision-making; (e) building stronger working partnerships at the local level; (f) gaining stronger public support for water resource protection efforts; and (g) obtaining supplemental resources to accomplish local goals and objectives. The Upper Neuse River Basin Association Board of Directors hopes that the Orange County Board of Commissioners will join other local governments in recognizing and supporting the potential benefits of the Association's efforts. It is requested that the Board of Commissioners consider and approve local funding support in the amount of $7,609 for the ongoing efforts of the Association. It is understood that if the Association does not demonstrate continuing benefits for member governments, then Orange County and other participating local governments may decide to discontinue funding support for the Association in future years. The Board of Directors of the Upper Neuse River Basin Association sincerely appreciates the Orange County Board of Commissioners' consideration of this request. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 890-3050 if I can answer any questions you or your fellow Board members, or the County staff, may have about the Association's efforts and this request for Orange County's funding support. Sincerely, ~) Tom Fetzer, Chair Upper Neuse River Basin Association cc: John Link, Orange County Manager UPPER NEUSE RIVER BASIN ASSOCIATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS TO DATE AND EXAMPLES OF EXPECTED BENEFITS TO THE ASSOCIATION'S MEMBERS (February, 1998) BACKGROUND FACTS ABOUT THE UPPER NEUSE RIVER BASINA_SSOCIATION Date Established: March 22, 1996 (By-laws approved) Geographical Area: 770-square mile watershed above the Falls Lake Dam (Figure 1) Organizational Partners: 14 Local Governments With Local Planning and Zoning Control County Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD) (Table 1) Board of Directors: 14 Directors appointed to represent each organization partner with planning and zoning control; 1 Director appointed to represent all six SWCDs; Each partner also appoints one Alternate Director. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSOCIATION The mission of the Upper Neuse River Basin Association is to preserve the water quality of the Upper Neuse River Basin through innovative and cost-effective strategies, and to constitute a forum to cooperate on water supply issues within the Upper Neuse River Basin by: 1. Forming a coalition of units of local government, public and private agencies, and other interested and affected communities, organizations, businesses, and individuals to secure and pool financial resources and expertise; 2. Collecting and analyzing information and data and developing, evaluating and implementing strategies to reduce, control and manage pollutant discharge and to manage water resources; and 3. Providing accurate technical, management, regulatory and legal recommendations regarding the implementation of strategies and appropriate effluent limitations on discharges into the upper portion of the Neuse River. SOlyIE ACCOitiIPLISHtii LENTS TO DATE 1. Building Strong Workin; Relationships/Developiny aTrue Local-State Partnership. The Association has evaluated the current framework under which the State makes water resources management decisions, and concluded that a stronger local and state partnership is needed to protect water resources. Following this evaluation, the Association developed a legislative proposal to establish a framework for cooperative local and state water resources planning and management in river basins and sub-basins. This proposal was introduced by local legislative delegates representing the Upper Neuse River Basin area, and was subsequently passed by the General Assembly and signed into law in September of 1997 (Senate Bill 114). Under the new law, a coalition of local governments may develop and implement coordinated water resources management plans as an alternative means of accomplishing water resource goals and objectives in a more cost-effective and environmentally-effective manner. The State Environmental Management Commission would have to approve the coalition's proposed management plan. LTNRBA Executive Summary (r98) 6 2. Improving Information Base for Decision-Making/Building Strong Working Relationships. The Association completed a detailed evaluation of the Environmental Management Commission's draft rules for implementing the Neuse River Basin Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy and submitted extensive written comments to the State during the rulemaking process. Several major concerns were expressed regarding the draft rules: (a) they do not adequately take into account a party's relative contribution to the nitrogen loading problem; (b) they are inequitable; (c) they will not result in cost-effective solutions to the nitrogen loading problem in the Neuse River Estuary; (d) they represent another major unfunded mandate, and will require that local governments incur substantial costs to comply with the rules; and (e) it is very unclear how the State will implement and enforce the proposed rules. 3. Increasing Cost-Effectiveness/Developing Integrated Solutions. In partnership with Triangle J Council of Governments (TJCOG), the Association requested grant funding from the North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund for development of a comprehensive strategy for protecting and restoring riparian buffer areas and streambanks in the Upper Neuse River Basin. The grant was approved by the Trust Fund, and the project is now underway through TJCOG. The study is expected to (a) assist local governments, land trusts and others in developing grant proposals for riparian buffer protection efforts, and (b) help funding agencies target the use of funds that may be available for riparian buffer protection efforts. 4. Improving Information Base for Decision-Making/Developing a True Local-State Partnership. The Association has undertaken an evaluation of local and state sediment and erosion control programs, and is now studying recent proposals for strengthening the State's sedimentation pollution control program. The Association's Technical Advisory Committee is currently preparing a draft position statement on these proposals. 5. Increasing Cost-Effectiveness. The Association, in cooperation with Triangle J Council of Governments, has provided local governments with information and assistance concerning the development of grant proposals to the North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund. One Association member, the Town of Hillsborough, has received tentative approval for a $254,000 grant from the Trust Fund for acquisition of riparian lands along the Eno River. THE ASSOCIA.TION'S PLANNED FUTURE ACTIVITIES The Association's Board of Directors has concluded that the Association should develop a comprehensive, integrated watershed management plan for the Upper Neuse River Basin. The proposed plan would be developed in partnership with the State, and would support and build upon existing local and state government water resource management efforts. In accord with the provisions of Senate Bill 114, the plan would include: (a) an assessment of water quality and related water quantity management in the Upper Neuse River Basin; (b) a description of the goals and objectives for protection and improvement of water quality and related water quantity management in the basin; (c) a workplan that describes proposed water quality protection strategies, including point and nonpoint source programs, for achieving the specified goals and objectives; and implementation strategy including the specified tasks, timetables for action, and implementation responsibilities of State and local agencies; and sources of funding, where applicable; and LTNR.BA Executive Summary (2/98) 7 (d) a description of the performance indicators and benchmarks that will be used to measure progress in achieving the specified goals and objectives, and an associated monitoring framework. 2. The Association's Board of Directors has also concluded that if substantial and meaningful progress is to be made in accomplishing the Association's goals and objectives (including development of the above-referenced watershed management plan), there should be a staff person working specif cally on these efforts. It is estimated that approximately $70,000 to $90,000 per yeaz would be needed to provide basic operating level support to the Association. The Association's Boazd of Directors has agreed to pursue: (a) local funding support from member governments; (b) an appropriation from the North Carolina General Assembly during the 1998 Short Session; and (c) grant funding support. A "Watershed Program Manager" could provide the Association's member governments with assistance in a number of areas, including but not limited to: (a) technical support relating to watershed protection ordinances, best management practice design and effectiveness, and similaz issues; (b) consolidation, analysis, and reporting of water quality monitoring data; (c) consolidation, analysis and reporting of land use, water supply, and wastewater discharge information; (d) prepazation of local water supply plans; (e) development of grant funding proposals; and (f) public education and awazeness. EXPECTED BENEFITS TO THE ASSOCIATION'S MEMBER GOVERNMENTS Local governments participating in the LTNRBA can expect a number of benefits as a result of continued participation in the Association. These benefits include, but are not limited to: 1. Focusing on Resource Protection: A myriad of water-related legislation, regulations, and programs affect the Upper Neuse River Basin. This has resulted in many discrete activities such as standard setting, permitting, monitoring, enforcement, management of wastewater treatment and water treatment facilities, urban nonpoint source control, and agricultural nonpoint source control. These activities are carried out by numerous agencies at the federal, state, and local level, but are oftentimes not coordinated or integrated to achieve cost-effective solutions to our water resources goals and objectives (See Table 2). The Association will encourage stakeholders to focus on a common goal: sustainable management of our water resources to protect the public health, environmental quality, and economic vitality of the region. 2. Increasing Cost-Effectiveness: The Association will continue to examine how the Association's member governments can work together to: (a) target staff and funding resources to address the highest priority watershed management concerns; (b) pool information, expertise and resources; and (c) reduce duplication of efforts. Experience has shown that integrated assessment and management approaches foster more innovative, cost-effective solutions to addressing water quality objectives than traditional management efforts. UNRBA Executive Summary (2/98) 8 3. Developing Integrated Solutions: Water resources management and protection issues cross local government and program boundaries. Individual jurisdictions and agencies often lack the capability to fully address water resources problems. The Association's watershed management approach will make it easier for member governments and stakeholders to work together to address complex water resource issues in the Upper Neuse River Basin. 4. Developing a True Local-State Partnership: Many existing water resource management programs use atop-down approach driven by federal or state mandates to solve specific problems. This approach is appropriate in certain instances; however, cost-effective and environmentally-effective solutions to many of today's problems will require innovative approaches that proactively involve local governments, key stakeholders and voluntary action. The role of Local government in watershed management efforts cannot be over-emphasized because local governments make major land use planning and zoning decisions that affect water supply and demands, point and nonpoint source toads, water quality, and water resource conditions. 5. Improving the Information Base for Decision-Making: Through cooperative and targeted data collection, interpretation and trends analysis, and information sharing, the Association's comprehensive integrated watershed management efforts can result in a stronger base of information upon which to base Local and state decision-making. 6. Building Strong Working Relationships: Through participation in the Association, local governments will strengthen and build upon their working relationships, and work together to achieve mutually beneficial goals and objectives. The Association will continue to provide a forum to bring together multiple interests, perspectives, and disciplines to f nd common ground and balance multiple objectives over time. 7. Gaining Public Support: The Association's Board of Directors has determined that a targeted and coordinated water resources public education and awareness program is needed in the Upper Neuse River Basin, and plans to work with appropriate agencies and stakeholders in developing and implementing such a program. It is expected that awell-informed general public will provide stronger support for coordinated watershed protection efforts. 8. Obtain Supplemental Resources to Accomplish Local Goals and Objectives. The Association will continue to assist member governments in efforts to identify and obtain outside funding and technical assistance to accomplish water resources management goals and objectives of the Association and its member governments. 9 TABLE 1. MEMBER GOVERNMENTS OF TFiE UPPER NEUSE RIVER BASIN ASSOCIATION COUNTIES Durham Franklin Granville Orange Person Wake MUNICIPALITIES Butner Creedmoor Durham Hillsborough Raleigh Roxboro Stem Wake Forest SOIL AND WATER DISTRICTS I~'ote: Six Local Soil and Water Conservation Districts Are jointly Represented By One Director And One Alternate Director T*~iDR ~ C~.,,_.,.;,~.~ C~~.,, ..,ter., i'1 /QRl S :EGEND ..ake sled poundary y Bo4indaries ~orued City atersl-ed 13ounduries rids Roadways gh Water Supply LIN CO. r O r;n»r~ Y_ I+alls Lake Watershed UPPER NEUSE RIVER BASIN ASSOCIATION APPROACHES FOR FUNDING BASIC OPERATING SUPPORT POSSIBLE FUNDING OPTION 2 Cost Allocation: 10% Allocated By Uniform Participation; 50% Allocated Based on Water Demands; and 40% Based on Local Area in Upper Neuse River Basin NOTE: THIS IS ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF INITIATING DISCUSSION. THIS IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION OF THE ASSOCIATION'S BOARD OF DIRECTORS OR TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. Assumed Annual Funding Lavel For Basic Operating Support: $72,500 Funding Factor BASIC PARTICIPATION RATE 10.0% WATER DEMANDS 50.0% JURISDICTION'S LAND AREA tN UPPER NEUSE RIVER BASIN 40.0% I Share of Funding: $7,250 Share of Funding: $36,250 Share of Funding: $29,000 Local Government Jurisdiction's Owned Water Systems Cal. Year 1996 Proportionate Share of Jurisdiction's Jurisdiction's Acreage Proportionate Share of Jurisdiction's JURISDICTIONAL COSTS Jurisdiction's Share Sub-Share o! Cost Average Day Water Demands in MGD Demands and Costs Sub-Share of Cost Within Watershed Watershed Acrea a Sub-Share of Cost Jurisdiction's Total Costs % of Total Cost Butner 7.14% $518 2.19 3.22% $1,168 16,000 3.11°k $901 $2,587 3.57% Creedmoor 7.14% $518 0.278 0.41`Y° $148 1,$10 0.25% $74 $740 1.02% Durham Cit 7.14% $518 27.26 40.11% $14,541 18,890 3.28% $951 $16,010 22.08% Durham Count 7.14% $518 N/A 131,600 25.55% $7 409 $7,927 10.93° Franklin Count 7.14% $518 NJA 5,315 1.03% $299 $817 1.13% Granville Count 7.14% $518 N/A 68,575 13.31% $3,861 $4,379 6.04% Hlllsborou h 7.14% $518 1.63 2.40% $869 1,290 0.25% $73 $1,460 2.01% Oran a Count 7.14% $518 N/A 125,950 24..45% $7,091 $7,609 10.50% Person Count 7.14% $518 N/A 83,130 16.14% $4,680 $5,198 7.17% Ralei h 7.14% $518 36.6 53.86% $19,523 95 0.02% $5 $20,046 27.65% Roxboro 7.14% $518 N/A 375 0.07% $21 $539 0.74% S & W Districts' N/A NIA N/A $0 0.00% Stem 7.14% $518 N/A 510 0.10% $29 $547 0.75% Wake Count 7.14% $518 WA 64,030 12.43% $3,605 $4,123 5.69% Wake Forest 7.14% $518 N/A 20 0.00% $i S519 0.72% TOTAL: 100% $7,250 67.956 100% $36,250 515,090 100% $29,000 $72,500 100% (TAC: 2/12198) `NOTE: S & W Districts receive funding from Counties. UPPER NEUSE RIVER BASIN ASSOCIATION STATUS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING COMMITMENTS Proportionate % of Local Government Commitments Jurisdiction Share Total Costs Fiscal Year 1999 FY 98 Butner $2,587 3.6% $2,587 Creedmoor $740 1.0% $740 Durham Cit $16,010 22.1% $16,010 $3,500 Durham Count $7,927 10.9% $7,927 Franklin Count $817 1.1% *** Pendin *** Granville Count $4,379 6.0% $1,500 Hillsborou h ~ $1,460 2.0% $1,460 Oran e Count $7,609 10.5% *** Pendin *** Person Count $5,198 7.2% $5,198 $1,700 Raleigh $20,045 27.6% $20,000 Roxboro $539 0.7% $539 S & W Districts N/A Stem $547 0.8% $547 Wake Count $4,123 5.7% $4,123 Wake Forest $519 0.7% $519 TOTAL: $72,500 100% $61,150 $5,200 84% Of Total Status as of 4/27/98 See Note A t See Note B See Note C Based on Information Provided to TJCOG NOTE A: Butner's funding commitment is based on verbal report by Butner Town Manager. NOTE B: Durham's FY 98 commitment is conditioned upon same commitment being made by Raleigh. NOTE C: S & W Districts receive funding support from their respective counties. rr N