Meeting MINUTES
Putah discovery corridor Work Group
Meeting Purpose:Monthly PCDC Work Group MeetingDiscussion of PDC Phase 1 Project start-up
Date/Time/Place:WednesdayFriday, June 21, July 17, 2002, 10 AM; SID Board Room, Vacaville
Chair:Helen Kota, Education Outreach Coordinator, Stebbins Cold Canyon Reserve Suzanne Butterfield, Assistant Manager, Solano Irrigation District
Attendees:Cathi Bailey, Interdisciplinary. Program Coordinator, Bureau of Reclamation
Tim Wakefield, Outdoor Recreation Planner, Bureau of Reclamation
Tony Norris, Manager, Solano County Real Estate and Parks ServicesJim Ball, Yolo Parks Manager, Yolo County Parks
Duane Davis, Park Supervisor, LakeSolanoRegionalPark
Suzanne Butterfield, Assistant Manager, Solano Irrigation District HelenKota, Education Outreach Coordinator, Natural Reserve System, UCD
Joyce Gutstein, Acting Director, UC Davis Public Service Research Program
David Okita, General Manager, Solano County Water Agency
Margaret Kralovec, Project Coordinator, Putah Discovery Corridor Planning Project
Item 1:Opening
Attendees briefly introduced themselves and the agencies/entities they represent.
. The Work Group welcomed Tony Norris, the new Parks Services Manager for Solano County, who shared with the group his background in parks, planning, and property management in the cities of Vallejo and Richmond, and his current civic involvements in Napa where he resides.
Meeting Chair Helen KotaSuzanne Butterfield welcomed all, thanked SID for hosting the meeting,meeting attendees and previewed the agenda. The agenda order was altered to allow Chair Kota to participate in the Vision/Mission Statement activity before she had to depart for another engagement.
, and announced the Reclamation grant of $25K for Phase 1 of the Project. Butterfield also described SID’s role as the contractor with Reclamation, passing through planning grant funds to the Project for purchase of a project computer and software; services of the project coordinator, Margaret Kralovec; and Phase 1 administrative expenses. There was some discussion about the long-term ownership of the computer equipment, and it was agreed that while SID, as the pass-through grant recipient, is the technical owner of the project equipment, the Project team would enjoy its full use throughout the entire course of the Project.
Chair Butterfield previewed the meeting agenda.
Item 2:Bureau of Reclamation GrantMeeting Minutes
Margaret Kralovec, PCDC Project Coordinator, talked about the importance of having accurate and complete minutes, and invited members to feel free to make corrections, suggestions, or changes that would ensure their integrity as an important project tool.
Meeting minutes for 6/21/02 were approved by consensus with one modification in Item 3: Agency/Site Updates. “Natural Reserve System” was changed to the more specific site designation “Stebbins Cold Canyon Reserve,” to avoid confusing the inter-dam site with the statewide UC Natural Reserve System.
Joyce Gutstein briefly described the history of the Project and its vision for coordinated, complementary public outreach on publicly owned and managed lands along Putah Creek, initially within the inter-dam reach from Monticello Dam to the Putah Diversion Dam, and eventually along the length of the creek.
Gutstein reviewed the objectives and products of Phase 1, which include the development of an organizational management structure (product: Management Plan), the promotion of public participation (products: Public Communication Plan, Public Presentations and Stakeholders Forums, Shared Vision and Mission Statement), and the collection and analysis of resources and needs (product: Assets/Needs Report).
Gutstein suggested that the group consider adding the search for additional Project funding to the Phase 1 objectives.
IteItem 3:Project Agency/Site Updates
Margaret Kralovec provided a project update report with handout to the Work Group:
Project Administration – The project computer and software have been ordered but not yet received. The Work Group is lacking representatives from Yolo County Parks, BLM, and California Department of Fish & Game. Meeting schedules of project partners were not available for passing out at the meeting.
Project Organization and Management - Kralovec reported on background work done in areas of project organization and management, as well as information collection.
Public Communications – The group discussed an offer by Rich Marovich, Streamkeeper, to make GIS databases available for the production of a property ownership map of the inter-dam reach that would be useful to a variety of users for multiple purposes. Tony Norris suggested contacting Harry Englebright, Solano Co. Environmental Management, who may be of assistance in locating map resources for this purpose. Rob Thayer and Jake Mann were also suggested as resources for map development.
Use and Needs Assessment – Some partners have provided use information for their sites. Kralovec reviewed a site form on which she will collect physical, programmatic, and security features of each inter-dam site, and later, on other public outreach sites in the Putah Creek region. Norris suggested adding other ADA accommodations to the form (handicapped accessible parking, restrooms, picnic tables, etc.). He also indicated that Solano County Parks Services is responsible for a similar inventory of its sites as part of its Master Plan update, so the PCDC effort is timely. Norris indicated that Jack Harrison of Solano County Planning Department might be a possible resource or contact point for areas of overlap regarding site information. Kralovec reported that a more detailed inventory of outreach programs is scheduled to follow the collection of site information.
Tony Norris reported to the Work Group on Solano County’s Parks Services Master Plan update, indicating that it was not confined to county operations, but would incorporate links with other agencies for recreational opportunities. He also updated the Work Group on the development of the Trails Master Plan for the entire county. Norris expressed an enthusiasm for the PCDC planning project that shares Solano Parks Service’s interest in regional collaboration/coordination, and the project’s propitious timing, which coincides with Solano County’s efforts to update/develop these master plans.
Meeting attendees shared updates on public outreach efforts and interests.
Bureau of Reclamation (Cathi Bailey and Tim Wakefield)
Reclamation sites and lands along the inter-dam reach are managed by Solano Irrigation District, Yolo County, and Solano County. Reclamation is halfway through the development of a Visitor Services Plan (VSP) for Lake Berryessa, and envisions the inter-dam reach of the Putah Discovery Corridor as a Berryessa gateway. According to Bailey, the timeframe to develop the Putah Discovery Corridor is in synch with Reclamation’s plans for the Berryessa area. Reclamation’s draft environmental impact report on the VSP will be issued in Fall, 2002. Reclamation’s current policy does not permit long-term exclusive use agreements for concessionaires, and such current agreements will be phased out as soon as possible, but no later than 2008-9 when all current concession contracts end. The 2004 Reclamation budget envisions a remodel of the Visitor’s Center that will accommodate environmental education purposes. Reclamation also envisions a visitor center at Lake Solano Regional Park and is currently working with Lake Solano Regional Park management to consider trails, walking bridges, and other improvements.
Natural Reserve System (Helen Kota)
Stebbins Cold Canyon Reserve has initiated an educational outreach program just this past winter, and has 40 volunteers who have been undergoing training by UC faculty. Another training program is starting this July. Sunday and Wednesday hikes are available at Stebbins.
Lake Solano Regional Park (Duane Davis)
There has been a large growth in public usage at the park (60% Solano County users). Primary public attractions are the picnic facilities and the fishery. Lake Solano can be envisioned as a hub for inter-dam sites and activities. A trail connecting the park to other sites in the inter-dam reach is under consideration. Helen Kota is coordinating docents for a summer walks and talks program at the park.
Solano County Water Agency (David Okita)
SCWA has primarily a water supply interest in Putah Creek, and is involved in issues related to water quality and restoration.
Lower Putah Creek Coordinating Committee (David Okita)
LPCCC’s geographical location of interest is from the Putah Diversion Dam on down to the Putah Sinks; however, there is an interest in any upstream issues that would affect the downstream reach. The LPCCC has a responsibility for public outreach and education, but the focus of the committee to date has been on landowner involvement issues, habitat rehabilitation, and organizational issues. Much of the land below the Putah Diversion Dam is privately owned, as opposed to the inter-dam reach. Public outreach is a sensitive issue for private landowners.
Yolo County Parks (Jim Ball)
Yolo County manages three fishing access areas for the California Department of Fish and Game (DF&G) and two for Reclamation (approximately 1.5 miles along Putah Creek). Users: 50% from Yolo County, 75% are local and remaining 25% attracted from out-of-area primarily by fly-fishing. Yolo County is expecting to spend a portion of Prop 12 monies to enhance the area. Yolo County is interested in static public education opportunities at present (e.g., interpretative and informational signage) and working in collaboration.
Solano Irrigation District (Suzanne Butterfield)
SID has a water supply interest in Putah Creek, as well as responsibility for a state-fundedfederally required water conservation program, which SID manages in the city of suisun citysupplies for the Suisun community. Suisun, Fairfield, Vacaville and Dixon are coordinating their water education programsthrough a Memorandum of Understanding and a shared consultant, using Mary King, a former teacher who is a water consultant from Winters. The water education program is limited to the classroom at this time, but wantsneeds to link to outdoor sites and experiences. Cities are willing to consider putting money towards transportation to assist schools in getting students to outdoor sites. Dam tours at both dams are on hold following the September 11 attack.
Blue Ridge/Berryessa Natural Area Partnership (Cathi Bailey)
BRBNA is in the process of formalizing its partnership among member. Participants have had diverse interests. Group is working on trail building, public tours, preservation, protection, vegetation mapping.
Lake Berryessa Watershed Partnership (Cathi Bailey)
This group is involved with outreach, water quality, signage, and education at Lake Berryessa. Interests of the PDC Planning Project and the Lake Berryessa Watershed Partnership may intersect. Tim Wakefield offered to inform the Lake Berryessa Watershed Partnership about the PDC project.
California Department of Fish & Game (no representative)
No report. Jim Ball offered to contact DF&G to locate a representative for the PDC project.
Bureau of Land Management (no representative)
No representative. Cathi Bailey offered to contact Rich Burns at the Ukiah BLM field office to locate a representative for the PDC project.
Item 4:11:00-11:20Establishing Vision/Mission StatementsFirst Questions Joyce Gutstein
Margaret Kralovec led a V/M statements development session using the VMOSA model (acknowledgements to The Community Tool Box website, ctb.ukans.edu): Vision Statement, Mission Statement, Objectives, Strategies, Action Plan. After reviewing specific features of vision and mission statements, the Work Group participated in a lively vision statement brainstorming session, focusing on the dream of the PCDC effort. Ideas included “Nature Discovery,” “Partnership and Stewardship,” “Putah Creek – A Human Story,” “Nature Experiences for All,” “Tri-County Mosaic,” along with many more. Work Group members were particularly taken with idea “Coming Together for Discovery,” but the activity concluded with a consensual decision to revisit the suggestions at the next monthly meeting, and obtain input from those not in attendance at this meeting. The goal of the next Work Group meeting is to finish up vision statement development, then tackle the mission statement, objectives, and strategies as time allows.
Are agencies present still committed to participating in this project?
Yes
What agencies/organizations should be represented in the Work Group?
BLM and DF&G should be added to the work group, along with Mary King, Water Education consultant to Solano citiesor. The Project should maintain a contact list for non-work-group PDC resources (e.g., Andrew Faulks, Manager, UC Davis Riparian Reserves, inter-dam reach land owners John Segars and Tom Cahill, CALTRANS )
Have we overlooked anything in the Phase I proposal?
Funding search for project continuation
Do we need WG committees for Phase I responsibilities?
The Work Group feels that it can handle the various responsibilities as a group rather than dividing members into committees.
Do we want to retain the name “Putah Discovery Corridor?” Putah Creek Discovery Corridor? Other?
How do we establish an organizational identity (logo, stationery, public presence)?
These questions will be taken up at the next meeting.
Item 5:11:20-11:40First DecisionsOrganizational Considerations
Margaret Kralovec introduced a high-level schematic of the current project, showing the Work Group as a functional steering committee, Reclamation as the current grantmaker, and SID as the current pass-through agency. In discussions relating to how the project organization might look in the future, it was agreed that the Work Group needed to get farther along in the VMOSA process in order to anticipate future directions/structures, and an attempt to graphically present it was abandoned. Tim Wakefield thought that it might be helpful to consider where the group wanted to be in five years, working backward from there. Tony Norris added that a five-year increment is an established planning strategy, and agreed that such a timeframe might be helpful. Norris also indicated the importance of understanding organizational structure from a functional perspective. Joyce Gutstein agreed, and expressed that such a functional analysis could not begin without having a compendium of information on other regional programs, sites, resources, agencies, and organizations so as to understand how they might best relate to the project. The group asked Kralovec to proceed with information collection that will aid the Work Group in that effort. Organizational structure will be taken up again after VMOSA processes have been completed and supporting information is available.
In a brief discussion about agreement vehicles among partners, Suzanne Butterfield expressed that it was vital that the PCDC project be viewed by project partners and others as the approved way to proceed with public outreach projects within the project’s geographic scope, and that perhaps some sort of agreement between entities could express that commitment. Butterfield noted that LPCCC went through a long process to ascertain the benefits/deficits of establishing itself with independent corporate status, and had decided upon a more informal representative approach. Kralovec added that LPCCC has joined in collaborative efforts to date through informal, non-written agreements. Tony Norris reported a local example of a tri-city/county joint powers agreement (JPA) between Solano County and cities of Fairfield, Benicia, and Vallejo for management of open space. Jack Harrison, Solano County, is closely involved in the administration of that agreement. Butterfield added that a joint exercise of powers agreement (JEPA – less formal than a JPA) exists between SID and the city of Dixon, recognizing the decision-making autonomy of each entity but delineating their partnership in a single, limited effort. Group members expressed that the least restrictive and most informal agreement structure might be appropriate for much of the PCDC Planning Project, but that limited, specific situations may require a written agreement among partners. The discussion of this topic ended without any decision regarding the nature and formality of agreements PCDC may want to consider.
The Work Group did not address private landowner (inter-dam) participation; however, Duane Davis supplied contact information for one of the private property owners. Project identity (project name, logo, letterhead, etc.) was touched on as being important in terms of representing PCDC interests and in support for other regional projects, but will await fuller exploration once the VMOSA process is complete. The Work Group agreed that the project name should include the word “Creek,” and will hereafter be known as the Putah Creek Discovery Corridor (PCDC) Planning Project.
Item 6:Planning v. Action Projects
Joyce Gutstein introduced the topic of developing a strategy for handling current and future action projects while the Work Group continues to establish the PCDC project structure and methodology. Gutstein provided three examples of projects that are underway: planning for a visitor center at Lake Solano, parking and access improvements at Stebbins Cold Canyon Reserve, and a grant proposal to the National Science Foundation that would fund informal science programs at Stebbins and at other PCDC sites.