Citizen's Environmental Quality Committee

Dec. 29, 2023 Citizens Environmental Quality Committee Winona, Minnesota 55987 Dear Committee Members: The next meeting of the Citizens Environmental Quality Committee meeting will be held on Thursday, Jan. 4th, 2024 at 4:30 p.m. in the Misato Room at City Hall. 1. Call to Order 2. Review of Dec. Meeting Minutes 3. Bluffland, Natural State Area, and Shoreland Code Amendment update (5 minutes) 4. Clean Water Act Petition for SE MN (2 minutes) 5. EPA Rural Environmental Public Health Needs Prize Competition (30 minutes) 6. CEQC Goal setting (20 minutes) 7. Other Business 8. Adjournment Sincerely, John Howard Natural Resources Sustainability Coordinator CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DATE: Thursday Dec. 14, 2023 TIME: Scheduled for 4:30 pm in the City Hall Misato Room PRESENT: Sadie Neuman, Paul Schmitt, Dan Hall, and Madalyn Bollig GUESTS: Eric Wright STAFF: John Howard, Abby Wickboldt 1. Call to Order: Call to order at 4:32 PM by Sadie Neuman 2. Review and Approval of Nov. 2023 Meeting Minutes: Minutes circulated in paper form. Motion by Paul, second by Dan. Approved unanimously. 3. Xcel Energy Community Solar Proposal: John provided some background on community solar gardens. Xcel Energy is proposing changing bill credits for solar bills, which will greatly reduce the money paid out to community solar subscribers. In the City’s case, it will cost the City around $2 million over the next 20 years. Many other public institutions, such as Winona County and the school district, are in a similar position. The City Council reviewed the attached letter and submitted it to the Public Utilities Commission. The City is also exploring the potential for a contested case on the matter. John expects many other cities will be filing comments. It was through contacts at other cities that Winona was made aware of the proposal – no notice was given by the utility. Dan asked for clarification about Xcel Energy changing contracts mid-term. John explained that solar subscribers don’t have a contract with Xcel, but with a third party, so what is changing is what Xcel pays back for solar credits. In the City’s case, the crediting is based on the applicable retail rate of electricity and the size class of the meter. Under the new proposal, the variation in rate for size class will go away and payments will be a standardized value of solar rate. Sadie asked about the contested case, and who that would be against. John said it would be filed with the PUC against Xcel Energy, as best as he knows. Sadie shared the community solar proposal with colleagues and friends as this seems like a major development. This information is not very accessible, so Sadie wonders about the City providing notice to the public. Members and guests discussed their own connection to community solar gardens. Madalyn asked about legal notification requirements of the utility, and whether the City has any requirement to notification. John and Dan believe Xcel is following the law, but John would likely include a concern about the lack of notice in a contested case. Sadie suggested the City provide an announcement. Madalyn made a motion to approve the City providing a notification to the public, seconded by Paul. All were in favor. Dan wondered why community solar companies aren’t being more active in notifying their subscribers. Seems they have a lot to lose. Sadie thinks the companies feel they would be fine if the proposal gets approved. Paul expressed that as long as people are breaking even, people are likely to still subscribe. 4. Aquatic Invasive Species Plan: John shared that the Winona County Soil and Water Conservation district prepared an aquatic species management plan, which the County board approved two days ago. The good news is Winona will be getting $30,000 for a carp study, and no new invasive species were found in City of Winona waterbodies. However, rusty crawfish were discovered near Pickwick. Sadie asked how people are informed about water quality issues in the area. Dan said Lake Winona has been impaired as long as he has lived here. He described the rotenone poisoning for carp in the 1970s. This did not prove to be very effective long term with other ecological impacts. Abby agreed. News, college courses, word of mouth were all stated as means of learning about lake quality. Dan is interested in learning what the average resident knows about Lake Winona. Abby volunteered to go to Midtown Foods and ask shoppers what they know, and report back. She would like a list of questions to ask. Sadie asked about whether the City can take actions beyond those listed in the plan. Yes, the City can be more involved and do more work than listed in the plan. Sadie asked members to brainstorm ways to encourage public education for the next meeting. 5. McKinstry Energy Performance Contracting: John said that the City is working with McKinstry to plan out energy conservation and efficiency measures. Dan asked if low hanging fruit for energy efficiency is still out there. John said there is lighting and some boiler measures that will have a very quick payback. The CEQC is invited to be engaged in this project, and John will provide information as it becomes available. Sadie requested light pollution should be factored into lighting design. Abby agrees. Sadie worked with Jim Berglund on a light pollution survey. Dan said there is progress on better lighting design to reduce light pollution. 6. Lake Winona Updates: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has tested Lake Winona fish for mercury, and found they have high enough levels to count as impaired. Dan wondered if smaller fish are lesser risk, and John believes that is the case. The CEQC discussed whether a fish advisory is species specific. John said that only Lake Winona was tested locally, but results likely apply to other area water bodies. Sadie wondered where the nearest coal plant is that would contribute mercury. Seems to be Alma, WI. Sadie also asked what prompted the testing, but this is unknown. Sadie asked how the City would notify fisher people about the new mercury results. Sadie suggests publishing any notice in multiple languages. 7. EPA Rural Environmental Public Health Needs Prize Competition: Sadie invited Eric to attend, who is the computer science lab director at WSU. He has experience doing Hack-a-thons with WSU students. Hack-a- thons are sessions where people work through a problem and develop solutions. A hack-a-thon potentially could be an engagement tool to submit for the prize. Dan sought clarification of how that would work – seems John would need to submit since employees need to do the work.  Paul did not have any other immediate ideas to submit for the competition, but likes the idea of a hack-a- thon. Sadie asked if the CEQC would support the City’s proposal, and consider how this project fits with their work. The CEQC will discuss further in January. Abby raised a question about how to get a good mix to participate to better reflect local issues. That is something to work out, and getting a diverse group would be helpful. 8. Other Business: John mentioned that the City Council will have a public hearing regarding the bluffland, natural state area and shoreland invasive species removal code amendments this upcoming Monday. Dan mentioned that there will be a meeting about the comprehensive plan at the next Planning Commission meeting. 9. Adjournment: Adjournment motion by Paul, second by Madalyn. Unanimous, Adjourn at 5:56 pm. Notes prepared by John Howard.  CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 3. Blufflands, Natural State Area and Shorelands Code updates PREPARED BY: John Howard DATE: Jan. 4, 24 At the Dec. 18th City Council meeting, the bluffland, natural state area and shoreland non- native species removal aspects of City code were opened to public hearing. No members of the public participated. The City Council heavily discussed the fee price for a non-native species management permit, and settled on a flat $10 fee. Staff had proposed a $50-100 fee depending on size. The code amendments for Bluffland and Natural State Areas is slated to be in effect by Jan. 2nd. The Shoreland will be in effect following DNR approval, which staff anticipates will be by Feb.  CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 4. Clean Water Act Petition for SE MN PREPARED BY: John Howard DATE: Jan. 4, 2024 In November of 2023, the EPA sent official notice to the state of Minnesota requesting a work plan to address nitrate contamination in groundwater. A coaltion of groups in Southeastern Minnesota petitioned that the EPA intervene under the Clean Water Act earlier in the spring. The Minnesota department of Health, Pollution Control and Agriculture prepared a joint letter responding to EPA’s request. That letter is included in the packet for CEQC information. The majority of Winona residents receive drinking water from the municipal system, which tests for nitrates and other contaminants. Additional information on the topic is available here: https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/water/wells/waterquality/nitratesemn. html December 1, 2023 Debra Shore Regional Administrator and Great Lakes National Program Manager U.S. EPA Region 5 77 West Jackson Boulevard Chicago, IL 60604 Dear Ms. Shore: Safe drinking water is essential for the health and well-being of all Minnesotans, and while we have made great strides in recent decades to ensure the safety of drinking water in our state, there are a variety of threats that must be acknowledged and addressed by all levels of government. With that in mind, we thank you for your letter dated November 3, 2023. In this response, we outline Minnesota’s collaborative plan to address nitrate contamination in aquifers in southeast Minnesota that serve as sources of drinking water and identify opportunities for federal-state partnership to accelerate that work. In Minnesota, authorities and responsibilities for water are shared across several agencies in the Executive branch. The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is the lead public health agency and holds primacy for the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. Implementation of the Clean Water Act is the shared work of the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Together with other state agencies and boards, these three agencies work in close collaboration to ensure actions are based on a deep understanding of water-related sciences and available data to ensure maximum effectiveness and efficiency. This collaboration has increased substantially since the advent of the Clean Water Fund in 2008, which enables the agencies to go above and beyond previous efforts to protect and restore Minnesota’s waters for future generations. We appreciate the work your agency has done to understand current state efforts to reduce inputs to, and concentrations of nitrate in, drinking water aquifers in southeast Minnesota. In discussions with your staff and in reading your letter, we understand that you are affirming the actions and programs currently in place, while directing the agencies to accelerate and expand the set of tools used to reduce nitrate inputs to groundwater. An equal opportunity employer. We agree that nitrate in drinking water is an acute health risk for some Minnesotans. The majority of Minnesotans get their drinking water from community drinking water systems, and the news on this front is encouraging. Our implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act with regard to public water systems focuses on going beyond compliance through education and technical support to prevent nitrate concentrations from reaching the level of a violation. In cases where this was not possible, the system notifies the public, and the MDH works with the system to return to compliance. However, there is ongoing concern about the 1.1 million Minnesotans who get their drinking water from private wells. As you are aware, aside from the Minnesota Well Code, which regulates the construction and sealing of wells, there are fewer statutory protections for Minnesotans who depend on these private wells. As outlined in your letter, we intend to address nitrate contamination in three phases: 1. An immediate outreach program to again notify affected residents using private wells with known nitrate concentrations above the Maximum Contaminant Level and to provide alternate water to vulnerable populations, 2. A public health intervention to ensure safe drinking water for private wells users in the mid-term in which well owner participation is voluntary; and 3. Enhanced long-term environmental and conservation strategies to reduce nitrate concentrations in the aquifers that provide drinking water. It should be noted that this increased level of activities will require redirection of current, limited resources and significant additional resources in the coming years. In the coming weeks, we will be reaching out to U.S. EPA Region 5 to discuss potential federal resources that can be provided to the State of Minnesota to support these efforts. For the immediate response, MDH is working in partnership with MDA, MPCA, and local government partners to craft an outreach and public education program with consistent messaging, multiple delivery channels, and trustworthy messengers, all based on risk communication science. The communication program will include social media; news releases; paid advertisements; and brochures at childcare facilities, clinics, and Women Infants and Children program offices. Through a Clean Water Fund pilot grant to Olmsted County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD), a “Tap-in” collaborative of SWCDs and local public health agencies was developed in six of the eight counties included in the petition. We will work through this established local network to include the additional counties and strengthen their outreach and testing activities. In addition, the agencies will use existing data from MDA’s Township Testing results, the initial water quality post-construction sample, and/or a local public health laboratory to identify private wells that exceed the health risk limit to notify affected residents and provide guidance 2 on appropriate treatment options. For vulnerable populations, pregnant people and infants under 1 year of age, we will provide vouchers for bottled water through clinics, faith communities, and other local partners as appropriate. The details of the public health intervention are currently in discussion with the agencies, the Tap-in Collaborative, and other local partners. We expect to have a complete plan by January 15, 2024. The plan will include strategies to address the seven components outlined in your letter: coordination of government partners; identification of private wells; free testing, alternate water, and remediation where needed; robust communication and outreach; public access to data and plan progress; and quarterly reporting to U.S. EPA Region 5. As EPA notes, Minnesota needs a long-term solution for reducing nitrate in our surface water and groundwater. We do have important elements of this solution in place. • Minnesota manages surface waters through a robust watershed framework that has been in place since 2008. As of 2023, each watershed in the eight-county area covered by the petition has an approved comprehensive watershed management plan and will receive $9.5 million from July 2023 and through June 2025 to implement local actions to improve water quality. Pending future legislative appropriations, continuing funding may be available to them for several more years. Local government and landowners can apply for millions more in grants and loans to achieve nutrient reductions. • Minnesota’s Nutrient Reduction Strategy (NRS) was released in 2014 as a long-term framework to specifically address nitrate pollution affecting Minnesota water resources. The NRS includes: the state of nutrients in Minnesota; sources of nutrients in state waters; goals for reducing nutrients; specific strategies to promote and advance; and ways to track progress along the way to reaching the goals. The NRS is being updated based on new information, the latest science, and changing climate and land use. The revised NRS will be available in 2025 and will include additional approaches to scale up adoption of key practices for success, many of which are beneficial for reducing groundwater nitrate in geologically vulnerable areas. The NRS has spurred program advancements and investments on many fronts. • MDA has developed the Nitrogen Fertilizer Management Plan to reduce nitrate levels in areas with vulnerable groundwater. The goal is to work with local farmers, at the township scale, to promote and adopt recommended practices to address local groundwater problems. MDA supports research and demonstration projects to inform the development of fertilizer best management practices (BMPs) and works directly with the agricultural community to adopt these practices. 3  • MPCA operates feedlot and wastewater permitting programs that regulate water discharges. Each program has recently incorporated permit requirements to address nitrate. The current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) feedlot general permit (issued on February 1, 2021, and expires on January 31, 2026) includes two requirements that reduce nitrogen loss from soil to water. We are reviewing suggestions made by EPA and petitioners for inclusion in future feedlot permits. Where necessary, for many years wastewater permits have contained nitrogen discharge limits to protect drinking water. In 2024, the wastewater program will implement the Wastewater Nitrogen Reduction Strategy they developed with stakeholders this past year that includes specific action steps to achieve nitrogen reductions from wastewater facilities. • In 2019, MDA began implementing the Groundwater Protection Rule, prohibiting fall application of commercial fertilizer on 71% of cropland (approximately 1.1 million acres) in southeast Minnesota in response to community water supplies with elevated nitrate. MDA is using state-of-the-art computer modeling tools to evaluate the environmental effects of different agricultural practices in different settings, including for the karst areas of southeast Minnesota. Computer modeling tools are helping to evaluate and select practices most protective of groundwater. MDA has convened local advisory teams and is working with farmers to adopt practices which will positively impact groundwater and drinking water in the region. If this is not successful, MDA could then move to further regulation. While all these elements are important pieces of the long-term solution, we recognize the need to continue to advance nitrate reduction work. The broad patterns of nitrate that we see in our surface waters and groundwater are caused by a combination of point and nonpoint source pollution. Reducing nitrate contamination of drinking water wells will require overlapping approaches that include both regulatory and voluntary actions that are science-based and will reduce all sources of nitrogen to our waters, and work at both the state and local levels. This is long-term, adaptive management work that is already in progress, and will operate while more immediate assistance is provided to southeastern Minnesota residents. MDA, MDH, and MPCA are discussing how to conduct stakeholder engagement with an array of partners to explore the petitioners’ recommendations, consider suggestions made by EPA, as well as investigate other options. We anticipate these meetings beginning this winter. Timely and effective actions by state agencies in concert with local partners and the voluntary engagement of private well owners are essential to protect the health of those who depend on groundwater for drinking water. Interventions to provide safe drinking water in the near term and accelerated progress to reduce nitrogen in groundwater both depend on additional 4 financial resources. We look forward to advancing this work in partnership with EPA, tribal partners, other state and local partners, with stakeholders and the petitioners. Sincerely, Brooke Cunningham, MD, PhD Commissioner Minnesota Department of Health P.O. Box 64975 St. Paul, MN 55164-0975 Thom Petersen Commissioner Minnesota Department of Agriculture 625 Robert Street North St. Paul, MN 55155-2474 Katrina Kessler, PE Commissioner Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 5  CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 5. EPA Rural Environmental Public Health Needs Prize Competition PREPARED BY: John Howard DATE: Jan. 4, 2024 We will continue the discussion of ideas for the EPA Contest. A PDF of the competition details is included again for reference. The full information is available at this website: https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small- communities-big-challenges 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA An official website of the United States government MENU Innovation CONTACT US <https://epa.gov/innovation/forms/contact-us-about-innovation-epa> Small Communities, Big Challenges Rural Environmental Public Health Needs Prize Competition On this page: Overview Timeline Prizes Rules Judging How to Enter Submitting Your Entry Resources Frequently Asked Questions Contact Overview Local governments are on the frontlines for working with rural communities on environmental public health issues. Rural communities across America have unique perspectives on pressing environmental and public health issues their https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 1/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA community faces, particularly on issues that are not well understood, challenging to address, and need additional scientific understanding. This Competition seeks to identify innovative and inclusive approaches local governments have developed for working with citizens, community groups, and other interested parties in rural communities to identify and address environmental public health concerns facing their people. This Competition also seeks to better understand what barriers these communities have associated with these public health concerns. To gain a better understanding of environmental and public health challenges facing rural communities, EPA and our partners are launching the “Small Communities, Big Challenges” Competition. The goal of this Competition is for local governments to identify innovative and effective ways to holistically engage rural communities around environmental health issues and to identify any associated barriers to better protecting human health. Through increased engagement, this Competition would ideally help local governments and communities better identify and understand rural community- based environmental public health issues, which may help in the protection of the community’s environmental public health. EPA and our partners will use the solutions from this Competition to learn of unique or innovative strategies for engaging with rural communities and of the environmental public health issues that rural communities are faced with. Local governments that participate in the Competition will demonstrate their innovative strategies for engaging rural communities and present collaboratively identified findings from these engagements through a brief engagement strategy report and a short video. Partners U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA) Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO) National Environmental Health Association (NEHA) Timeline Launch Date: November 1, 2023 https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 2/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA Submission Deadline: January 31, 2024; 11:59 PM EST Informational Webinar: November 29, 2023; 2-3 PM EST (View a recording of the webinar or the SCBC Webinar Slides (pdf) <https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023- 12/scbc-competition-informational-webinar-slides-508-1.pdf> (485.3 KB) .) Judging window: February 2024 Winner announcement: February/March 2024 (Date & Time TBD) Prizes Up to ten selected winners will each receive $25,000 (totaling $250,000). Five individual Challenge winners will be given a one-year National Environmental Health Association (NEHA) membership. Rules Eligibility Requirements Solvers must be individuals or groups employed by local governments, including, but not limited to: City and county health departments Local environmental agencies Local departments of fish and wildlife Local utility providers Local waste management officials Local departments of housing Water and sewer district boards Tribal and territorial government leaders https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 3/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA City/municipality governments Mayors Village and city managers Commissioners City planners City administrators County executives Intellectual Property Winning submissions will be posted on EPA's website and announced in March 2024. Submissions and winners names may be used by EPA (e.g., on EPA social media accounts, webpages and at events) in connection with this Competition and the production, distribution, promotion, broadcast at public meetings/conferences, and online posting thereof. Solvers are responsible for complying with applicable copyright and intellectual property laws for any materials used in their submissions. “Fair use” rules may allow the use of copyrighted material in certain circumstances (e.g., see the fair use guidelines on YouTube). Participants should seek legal guidance if they have questions about using copyrighted materials. Solvers warrant and represent that they are the sole owner of the materials (ex. videos, images, communication campaign materials) submitted for this Competition and/or that they have the legal right to share the submitted work with EPA and grant EPA unlimited, irrevocable, world-wide and royalty-free rights to use the work for all uses and purposes described on this webpage. Solvers shall indemnify, defend and hold EPA and its agents harmless from and against any and all suits, claims, liabilities, demands, costs, expenses, or damages arising out of submitter's use of the works as provided herein or arising out of the breach of warranty or agreement made by submitter herein. Video entries may be used by EPA (e.g., on EPA social media accounts and webpages) in connection with this Competition and the production, distribution, promotion, broadcast at public meetings/conferences, and online posting thereof. https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 4/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA Use of music within each video entry must follow EPA Music Licensing Guidance (pdf) <https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-10/scbc-epa_music_licensing-guidance- 07302021.pdf> (130.1 KB) . Non-endorsement EPA and EPA officials do not endorse any product, service, or enterprise that may appear in submission materials. Furthermore, by recognizing winning submissions, EPA is not endorsing any products, services, or enterprises that may appear in those submissions. Terms and Conditions 1. Only the winners of the Competition will receive an award. 2. The prize award will be sent to the solver (individual, team, or organization) at the local government level. 3. EPA does NOT commit to resolve or conduct research to address the environmental public health challenges identified through this Competition activity. 4. EPA cannot stipulate how funds are used by winners and there is no follow-up activity necessary once prizes are awarded. 5. EPA reserves the right to cancel, suspend, and/or modify the Challenge, or any part of it, for any reason, at EPA's sole discretion. Judging Submissions will be judged by a panel of experts with familiarity in housing and urban development, conducting community research, working with city and county health officials, working with state and tribal organizations, and providing fish and wildlife services. The judges will evaluate, score, and rank submissions based on the following criteria: Pre-Screening Criteria Solver(s) must be from a local government. Solver(s) must have worked with a rural community and/or community-based organization to be considered. https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 5/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA Primary Criteria Demonstration of effective engagement and input from affected communities. Identification and characterization of environmental concerns for a given rural community. Identification/suggestion of associated gaps or barriers to address the issue. Additional Criteria Creativity and innovation. Strategies that target at-risk communities. Scoring Community Engagement (40%) – The degree to which local governments clearly engaged with the rural community members and/or community-based organizations and provided inclusive and equitable* opportunities to collaboratively identify environmental and public health issues the community faces that needs further scientific understanding. Local governments demonstrate engagement with community members and/or community-based organizations (CBO) (15%) Local governments provide inclusive and equitable* opportunities to the community/ CBOs (15%) Environmental and public health issues identified in a collaborative manner (ex. based on community surveys, townhall meetings, etc.) (10%) Creativity/Innovation (20%) – The degree to which the community engagement strategy and communication video shows an innovative approach to community engagement and collaboratively identify environmental public health issues the community faces. https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 6/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA Community Engagement Strategy (15%) - The degree to which the community engagement strategy report fulfills all the expected requirements. Description of Community (1%) Approach (4%) Environmental Health Issue (4%) Barriers (5%) Transferability (1%) Communication Product (15%) – The degree to which the communication product fulfills all the expected requirements noted above. Impacts and Solutions (10%) – The degree to which the environmental and public health issue identified has broad impacts to specific populations (i.e., at-risk, disadvantaged communities, etc.) and solutions to address the issue could be transferred to other communities. *Note: “Inclusive” and “equitable” refer to creating opportunities for as many people as possible to provide input. Examples of this could include: having meetings outside of work hours, having multiple meetings, having meetings in multiple languages, etc. How to Enter 1. Cover page providing basic information about the submission, including: Title Organization (name, contact information, web link, 9-digit zip code) Short description of environmental issue Identify other partners (if any) If you choose to create a video as your communication product, please provide a link to the 3-minute online video. 2. Community Engagement Strategy Report A detailed strategy report that demonstrates effective and innovative engagement with a rural community to collaboratively identify environmental public health issues the community faces that needs further scientific understanding. This written strategy report should meet the following format and content requirements. Use this SCBC https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 7/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA Community Engagement Strategy Report Template (docx) <https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-11/scbc-community-engagement-strategy- report_template_10.18.23.docx> (57.7 KB) to format your report. Format Requirements Size 12 Calibri or Times New Roman font Single-spaced 3/4” margins on all sides No longer than 10 pages Final document in PDF format Content Requirements Description of Community: Overview of the community the Solvers engaged with (including specific individuals), including any unique, historical, or defining characteristics of the location or population. Approach: Description of the innovative strategies or approaches Solvers used to engage and work with their community to collaboratively identify the environmental public health issue. Including identifying any groups that were specifically interacted with such as at-risk populations, advocacy groups, or other Community Based Organizations (CBO)s. Description of Community Environmental Public Health Issue: Details the environmental public health issue, including: who is affected by it; if the issue is new or a long-standing/historical issue; if the issue is specific to water, air, land, a combination, or other; and if the issue has relevance or greater impact to disadvantaged (low socioeconomic status) or at-risk populations (such as people who are immunocompromised, elderly, children, or pregnant women). Gaps or Barriers: Description of the barriers or challenges in the way of addressing the issue. Please specify the type of barrier: (financial/cost, technology/science, policy/regulation, language/cultural). Transferability: description of how identified solutions, if any, could be transferred to other communities, including who and where could benefit (e.g., farming communities in the Southeast United States, mining communities in New Mexico, etc.) https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 8/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA NOTE: All strategies must be original (i.e., developed by the Solver(s) in collaboration with at least one community-based organization) and not a summary or highlight of awarded/funded contract, grant, or cooperative agreement plans. Strategies may include, but are not limited to a community needs assessment, community building, deliberative dialogue, etc. 3. Communication Product of your choice (video, infographic, etc.) Communication Product Content Requirements A product that helps to illustrate the environmental issue of concern that the highlighted community is facing. Provide details on resources or mitigation steps (if any) Solvers could take to help protect public health until the issue has further scientific understanding. See “Community Engagement Strategy Content Requirements” for more information. Submitting Your Entry Send your submission via email to SCBCCompetition@epa.gov by January 31, 2024 at 11:59 PM EST. Email Subject Line: SCBC Competition Submission – Individual Name and affiliated organization Include in the attached submission the technical point of contact (name, position, title, affiliation, contact phone number, contact email address). This is the individual who will manage communications and coordination between the Submitter(s) and EPA. Attach the PDF document(s) NOTE: Emails must be kept to under 9 megabytes to ensure your submission is not blocked by EPA servers. If you choose to create a video as your communication product, please adhere to the specifications and https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 9/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA supplementary instructions below Video Specifications Video should be a maximum of 3 minutes in length. Source video file must be one of the following formats: MPEG4, 3GPP, MOV, AVI or WMV. Aspect ratio of 16:9 At either 24 or 30 (29.9) frames per second Frame size of 1920 x 1080 Submitting your Video 1. Post your summary video to YouTube as an unlisted video. Please provide YouTube URL. 2. Upload a copy of your video file in the proper file format (see Video Specifications) to Dropbox or Google Drive. Please provide file link. 3. Attach a video transcript in English. Transcript must include names of those speaking or appearing in the video (excluding the general public in a public space). Required Additional Documentation for Video Entries You must submit the following documents as part of a video submission: SCBC Signatures Form (pdf) <https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023- 10/scbc-team-signatures-form.pdf> (518.9 KB) Written Video Transcript in English (Submit as PDF) Include first/last names of each person speaking and/or appearing in the video (excluding the general public in the background). SCBC Challenge Video-Audio-Photo License Agreement (pdf) <https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-10/scbcchallenge_video-audio- photo_licenseagreement-1.pdf> (377 KB) signed by a point of contact. Note: only one license agreement is needed per video submission. https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 10/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA EPA Multimedia Consent Form(s) for use with Video, Photo(s), or Voice Recording(s) (pdf) <https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-10/scbc-multimedia- consent-form-2021-508.pdf> (264.3 KB) for each individual appearing and/or speaking in the video. Resources Challenge.gov <https://www.challenge.gov/#active-challenges> EPA Challenges & Prizes <https://epa.gov/innovation/epa-challenges-prizes> Rural Communities Definitions US Department of Health and Human Services <https://www.hhs.gov/guidance/document/defining-rural- population#:~:text=office%20of%20management%20and%20budget%20definition&text=all%20count ies%20that%20are%20not,as%20either%20metro%20or%20micro.> US Census Bureau (pdf) <https://www.census.gov/content/dam/census/library/publications/2019/acs/acs_rural_handbook_2 019_ch01.pdf> US Department of Agriculture <https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy- population/rural-classifications/what-is-rural/> Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) EPA Tool <https://epa.gov/castnet> Frequently Asked Questions What does environmental public health mean? Environmental public health addresses aspects of health that are determined by interactions with the environment (i.e., exposures to air, water, soil, housing, chemical, or biological factors) and occurs on many scales: genetic, cellular, individual, family, community, regional, national, and global (Goldman L., 2007). https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 11/14 12/11/23, 3:38 PM Small Communities, Big Challenges | US EPA <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/nbk54245/> This Competition aims to identify environmental public health issues that are affecting a rural community, and not health care-related issues. Can an individual or team submit multiple submissions? Individuals and Teams are eligible to apply. If a team-developed solution is selected as a winning submission, any prize funds would be divided among team members. Can one person or organization win multiple awards? One person or organization could win multiple awards so long as the submissions feature different engagements with different rural communities and highlight different environmental public health issues faced by the community. Who is on the expert judging panel? The judging panel for this Challenge and Prize Competition will include individuals from EPA and the partner organizations involved (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, and National Association of County and City Health Officials). Contact If you have questions about the Small Communities, Big Challenges Competition, please email SCBCCompetition@epa.gov. To help raise awareness of the competition, please use #SCBCCompetition in your social media posts. EPA Innovation Home <https://epa.gov/innovation> Contact Us <https://epa.gov/innovation/forms/contact-us-about-innovation-epa> to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem. https://www.epa.gov/innovation/small-communities-big-challenges 12/14  CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 6. CEQC Goal Setting PREPARED BY: John Howard DATE: Jan. 4, 2024 Included for CEQC consideration are goals that the CEQC last reviewed in Oct. 2019.  CEQC Goal Setting Worksheet – adapted from the Univ. of Virginia Priority Goal: Documenting the City’s Environmental Actions and Progress 1. Specific. What will the goal accomplish? How and why will it be accomplished? Information will be compiled for the B3 energy benchmarking program and GreenStep database by City staff and CEQC members. An annual report on the City’s environmental progress should be produced utilizing the information collected. As part of this report, or possibly as a distinct report, information on local food production and evaluation should be tallied, such as the number of participants in community gardens and pounds of food grown. The information compiled will inform and guide future city actions/endeavors. 2. Measurable. How will you measure whether or not the goal has been reached? If not quantifiable, how will you determine success? Annual report completed and disseminated to the public. 3. Achievable. Is it possible? Have others done it successfully? Do you have the necessary knowledge, skills, abilities, and resources to accomplish the goal? Will meeting the goal challenge you without defeating you? Yes, other cities complete GreenStep and B3 reports, as well as broader environmental reports. 4. Relevant. Is this Committee the place to take on this goal? Does it fit with the Comprehensive Plan or other City objectives? Yes, environmental goals have a clear connection to CEQC, and Chapter 7 of the Comprehensive Plan. Documentation is a large piece of the GreenStep Cities program. 5. Time-bound. What is the established completion date and does that completion date create a practical sense of urgency? GreenStep data is due May 1st, B3 has multi-year backlog, but could be complete by May 2018. Annual report assembled by end of the summer of 2018 utilizing this data.  CEQC Goal Setting Worksheet – adapted from the Univ. of Virginia Priority Goal: Support and Work Towards Cost-Effective Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 1. Specific. What will the goal accomplish? How and why will it be accomplished? Hold additional workshops to educate the community about energy efficiency and renewable energy option. Review and select GreenStep energy efficiency goals to achieve. Utilize renewable energy for City electricity. Also implement Partners in Energy (PiE) goals. Work will be accomplished by working with Sustain Winona, the Partners in Energy Group, and the City’s Sustainability Coordinator. 2. Measurable. How will you measure whether or not the goal has been reached? If not quantifiable, how will you determine success? Number of workshops, completion of GreenStep reporting, and meeting PiE goals. Percentage of City electricity coming from renewable sources, and reduction in City electrical usage. 3. Achievable. Is it possible? Have others done it successfully? Do you have the necessary knowledge, skills, abilities, and resources to accomplish the goal? Will meeting the goal challenge you without defeating you? Yes, multiple Minnesota Cities have completed GreenStep reporting. Approximately 10 other Minnesota PiE communities. Many cities in Minnesota utilize renewable energy and have implemented energy efficiency measures. 4. Relevant. Is this Committee the place to take on this goal? Does it fit with the Comprehensive Plan or other City objectives? Clear connection to Chapter 7 of the Comprehensive Plan, specifically policy # 2. 5. Time-bound. What is the established completion date and does that completion date create a practical sense of urgency? Energy efficiency projects should be undertaken in 2018, with PiE activities underway since fall 2017. City is currently moving forward with investigating solar.  CEQC Goal Setting Worksheet – adapted from the Univ. of Virginia Priority Goal: Support Low Carbon Active Transport 1. Specific. What will the goal accomplish? How and why will it be accomplished? Coordinate with and follow progress of Active Transport committee so that the CEQC may help as needed. 2. Measurable. How will you measure whether or not the goal has been reached? If not quantifiable, how will you determine success? Successful implementation of Active Transport goals. 3. Achievable. Is it possible? Have others done it successfully? Do you have the necessary knowledge, skills, abilities, and resources to accomplish the goal? Will meeting the goal challenge you without defeating you? Yes. Primary responsibility will be with the Active Transport group. Other cities have successfully produced and implemented bike & ped plans. 4. Relevant. Is this Committee the place to take on this goal? Does it fit with the Comprehensive Plan or other City objectives? CEQC would be secondary to the Active Transport committee. Work fits with GreenStep Cities, and the Comprehensive Plan such as Chapter 7 goal #2 and Chapter 12. 5. Time-bound. What is the established completion date and does that completion date create a practical sense of urgency? Review status in 6 months.  CEQC Goal Setting Worksheet – adapted from the Univ. of Virginia Secondary Goal: Develop Air Quality Monitoring Proposal 1. Specific. What will the goal accomplish? How and why will it be accomplished? Propose and investigate initiatives to monitor air quality throughout the City in order to understand air conditions including impacts from silica sand activities. Review latest literature to understand what and how to monitor particulate matter. Utilize free MPCA resources. End result will be clean air that is welcoming to visitors and citizens. 2. Measurable. How will you measure whether or not the goal has been reached? If not quantifiable, how will you determine success? Begin research into monitoring this year and establish program to regularly report air quality. Develop a repository of informational resources. 3. Achievable. Is it possible? Have others done it successfully? Do you have the necessary knowledge, skills, abilities, and resources to accomplish the goal? Will meeting the goal challenge you without defeating you? Air quality monitoring does not require the invention of new technology. Resources are available and monitors are able to be put in place that will effectively measure air quality including the level of silica in the air. The assertions by some industries that such monitoring is not needed should be respected but verified. Data was recorded in past, so there is precedent. Literature is available on monitoring and health impacts of various types of air pollution. 4. Relevant. Is this Committee the place to take on this goal? Does it fit with the Comprehensive Plan or other City objectives? Yes, clearly air quality is an environmental consideration and part of GreenStep Cities. May be too technical for CEQC to review without outside assistance. 5. Time-bound. What is the established completion date and does that completion date create a practical sense of urgency? Ask MPCA for monitoring equipment and process help. Develop informational resources by March 2019.  CEQC Goal Setting Worksheet – adapted from the Univ. of Virginia Secondary Goal: Define and Inventory Green Infrastructure 1. Specific. What will the goal accomplish? How and why will it be accomplished? Develop a definition of green infrastructure, and start by seeing if GreenStep process has definition and guide to green infrastructure. Document existing infrastructure, such as rain gardens. Research and make suggestions to utilize infrastructure in less environmentally damaging ways – for example needing less de-icing salt and lawn fertilizer. 2. Measurable. How will you measure whether or not the goal has been reached? If not quantifiable, how will you determine success? Success means having a definition and inventory including location of infrastructure. The surface/coverage of rain gardens and infrastructure is measurable. 3. Achievable. Is it possible? Have others done it successfully? Do you have the necessary knowledge, skills, abilities, and resources to accomplish the goal? Will meeting the goal challenge you without defeating you? Cities commonly have repositories on infrastructure, so it is reasonable to have one on green infrastructure. The limited nature of green infrastructure makes this task feasible. 4. Relevant. Is this Committee the place to take on this goal? Does it fit with the Comprehensive Plan or other City objectives? Yes, fits with goals of Chapter 7 of the Comprehensive Plan and the City’s stormwater pollution prevention plan. 5. Time-bound. What is the established completion date and does that completion date create a practical sense of urgency? Definition within 2 months, inventory complete within 6 months.  CEQC Goal Setting Worksheet – adapted from the Univ. of Virginia Secondary Goal: Investigate Water Quality 1. Specific. What will the goal accomplish? How and why will it be accomplished? Water is an essential resource, so it is important to understand and determine steps to protect against threats to drinking water, such as contaminants of emerging concern. Improve quality of water discharged to local waterways. The CEQC will research and investigate alternatives to the currently used water treatment methods. 2. Measurable. How will you measure whether or not the goal has been reached? If not quantifiable, how will you determine success? Decisions made regarding the use of fluoride and chlorine. Establish a list of contaminants of emerging concern, and a testing protocol for possible contaminants. 3. Achievable. Is it possible? Have others done it successfully? Do you have the necessary knowledge, skills, abilities, and resources to accomplish the goal? Will meeting the goal challenge you without defeating you? Specific examples of other cities is unknown, but very likely there are models to follow. Research is ongoing on a variety of water quality topics within the scientific community. 4. Relevant. Is this Committee the place to take on this goal? Does it fit with the Comprehensive Plan or other City objectives? CEQC would be the best committee to serve in an advisory role. Water quality and monitoring would be undertaken by City staff, consultants or academic experts. 5. Time-bound. What is the established completion date and does that completion date create a practical sense of urgency? Review status in 6 months.