Sept 14 2006 Minutes

Wakarusa WRAPS Stakeholder Planning Meeting September 14, 2006 * Clinton Lake Visitors Center Attendance Record: Stakeholders: Richard Morantz, Douglas County Rural Water Dist. 4; Gary Larson, Shawnee County Health Agency; Chris Stewart, Interim Director of Utilities, City of Lawrence; Lisa Pool, Planner, City of Lawrence; Robert Henderson, rancher; Patti Adams, ranch owner/watershed consultant; Martha Parker, Clinton Lake Museum; Alison Reber, Kaw Valley Heritage Alliance Implementation Support: Aimee Polson, UWW WRAPS Coordinator; Will Boyer, K-State Extension, Watershed Specialist; Christine Boller Kansas StreamLink; Technical Advisors: Deb Baker, Kansas Water Office; Paul Liechti, Kansas Biological Survey; Jaime Gaggero, KDHE; Ken Grotewiel, Kansas Water Office (Facilitator)

Agenda: 1)

Welcome and Introductions

2)

Review purpose of meeting

Ken G. states the purpose of the meeting, which can be broken down into three areas: a). Identify areas of common concern between watershed and urban decision makers b) Determine how these can be integrated into the existing Upper Wakarusa Watershed goals c) Outline options for action. 3)

Presentation of Upper Wakarusa WRAPS goals

Paul L. gave a brief overview of the Upper Wakarusa WRAPS document. He read the 13 goals and stressed that it was a dynamic document which is meant to be reviewed and revised as needed. Present Matrix of Concerns and WRAPS Goals (completed matrix included) Concerns recorded during the 2006 rural and urban stakeholder planning meetings were overlaid with the goals outlined in the 2002 WRAPS document. 4)

Review concerns expressed by group participants Comments: a) Some of the list items could be interpreted as positive or negative, e.g. development. b) List incomplete, e.g. flooding issues and flow of the river are not included in the original WRAPS document.

Kaw Valley Heritage Alliance 412 E. 9th Street Lawrence, KS

Prepared by Christine Boller 9/2006

5)

Identify areas of agreement among participants

Participants are asked to choose two points on the matrix that they feel are important. They are also given the opportunity to “pass”. Comments: a) Difficulty choosing, because most list items are interrelated. b) Inability to select because there are too many important issues/concerns. 6)

Determine links between participant concerns and WRAPS goals

Options for Actions: Each participant was asked to rate their interest in pursuing each approach with a “yes” or “no” for each of the following ratings: 1 Highly agree 2 Could go either way 3 Not at present time The first list included: 1. Being proactive: 2. Education: 3. Development pressures 4. Sedimentation 5. Agricultural Incentives 6. Outreach to elected officials 7. Adjacent county compliance

1:4 1:1 1:6 1:6 1:5 1:7 1:6

2:3 2:5 2:3 2:3 2:4 2:1 2:1

3:4 3:2 3:1 3:1 3:0 3:2 3:0

Comments: a) Difficult to focus on just one, since they are tightly interconnected. b) The importance to have community and public official support and backing regardless of which issue/concern is selected. c) Must present issue/concern to officials with a strategic solution. d) If farmers are already doing a good job with better land management practices, why give them more cash incentives if we can spend elsewhere? e) Education and being proactive are already occurring. f) Decided that a shorter second list of issues/concerns would be rated. The second list included: 1. Sedimentation/land use 2. Outreach to elected officials 3. Education

1:9 1:3 1:4

2:1 2:6 2:3

3:0 3:0 3:2

Comments: a) Sedimentation/land use are all inclusive of outreach to elected officials & education. b) Sedimentation is the only issue/concern from second list that can be quantified. c) Sedimentation/land use are to be the agreed upon starting point.

Kaw Valley Heritage Alliance 412 E. 9th Street Lawrence, KS

Prepared by Christine Boller 9/2006

7)

In a perfect world, what needs to be done to meet our concerns and goals? Comments: a) An agreement of a starting point. Sedimentation is chosen because with improvements, other concerns/goals will be address, e.g. water quality and supply.

8)

Set next meeting goal, time and place

It was decided that all who attended today’s meeting will get an invitation for the subsequent meeting. If invitee does not attend it will be assumed that that participant is no longer interested in continuing with this project.

Kaw Valley Heritage Alliance 412 E. 9th Street Lawrence, KS

Prepared by Christine Boller 9/2006