STC Meeting-August 4, 2005

WDFW Building

Jim Hill, Glenn Connelly Taylor Pitman, Mark Swartout, Steve Craig, Lonnie Crumley, Chanele Holbrook Shaw, Kahle Jennings, and Lee Napier were present.

Watershed Plan Implementation/Plan 2 Fund

Jim Hill introduced his workshop concept first introduced at the CBP meeting.  The Partnership would host several evening meetings.  During the meetings, the participant would breakout into one of four sessions.  The role of the work plan coordinators, discussed last month, might change from organizing the meetings to promoting the meeting.

The group talked about using the workshops to engage more community members in the watershed plan implementation.  This would be a good opportunity to educate more people regarding the work of the CBP, but how do we balance education with the need to complete our work plans within a one-year time period.

Steve Craig introduced another option.  What about four implementation work groups (water quality, water resources, habitat, and public outreach)?  Then assign team leaders for each work group who would work with Lee.

Mark Swartout summarized what he heard the group discussing as options:

• We want to engage the public at the end of the work plan
• We want to engage the CBP more in the development of the work plans
• Break the work plans down by category (four), keep the current by WMP action/objective (eighteen), or create sub-committees such as the Water Quality Committee, TAG, or STC.

The STC seemed to favor the sub-committee suggestion and then engage the CBP on a particular topic during each meeting.    This option would encompass the water quality and habitat committees, then develop a water resources/instream flows committee.  The group thought the STC could cover the water resources/instream flow group.  The outreach would be covered primarily by the proposed festival.  Outreach would also be supplemented by articles in the DOW and presentations to groups, if requested.

To engage the CBP, the committees would frame the issue for the CBP and present the work plan details during a monthly meeting.

CBP Agenda(s)

The group discussed future CBP meeting agenda topics.

• Kahle will provide each month the River Flow Report.
• It was also suggested that Chanele provide a temperature report Scatter Creek.  Centralia and the Chehalis Tribe also monitor for temperature.
• As part of the CAC report, Chanele will mention the proposed Chehalis Watershed festival each month.
• Steve suggested asking the group to consider pursuing money to develop a video and signage to identify the watershed.
• Use the November meeting as legislative caucus meeting. The CBP would need to spend time planning for this event during the August and September meetings.
• Steve asked for monthly progress reports from the Chehalis River Council (CRC).  There is concern that the CRC is not coordinating with the CBP.   This lack of coordination is creating problems internally for Ecology because they are providing grant funds with an understanding that they are sharing this information with the CBP.  The group suggested as one solution to invite CRC reps to the Water Quality Committee meeting to discuss their water quality monitoring project.  After more discussion the group suggested that Ecology should work directly with the CRC to resolve this concern.

Chehalis Legislative Caucus

Mark suggested that due to time and the nature of this topic, we should delay discussion and ask for CBP members to become part of this discussion.  At the CBP meeting, we will ask the CBP to sponsor the November meeting and then spend time in September to organize the meeting. 

Mark asked if we could have a facilitated discussion at the August CBP meeting.  Then ask for volunteers to serve on a sub-committee.  We should also develop a contact list for the legislators to contact CBP members.

The STC discussed some ground rules such as legislative issues must be related to the CBP Watershed Plan and related to implementation.

The following are possible issues:

• Line item for administration of the CBP.
• Legislative approach to deal with over 8,000 in water right claims (streamline adjudication).
• Use it or lose it aspect for agricultural water rights.
• Governance of the CBP-formalizing the organization through legislative action.
• Long term funding strategy to implement the watershed plan

The next meeting is September 1 from 9am until noon at the WDFW Engineering Building located at 600 Capital Way North, Olympia.