Cayuga Lake Watershed Management Plan
Intermunicipal Organization (IO) Meeting
3/24/99, 7:00 9:00 P.M.
Seneca Falls Town Hall
|Dan Winch (Tompkins County)
Tom Vawter (Wells College)
Janette Pfeiff (Town of Seneca Falls)
John Sipos (Towns of Varick and Covert)
Patrick Morrell (Town of Fayette)
Sharon Anderson (Tompkins County)
Bruce Johnson (Village of Freeville)
Carolyn Grigorov (Town of Ithaca)
Linda Wagenet (Cornell Center For The Envir.)
Barbara Steward (Village of Interlaken)
Gary Gleason (City of Ithaca)
Steven Eidt (NYS DEC Region 7)
Teresa Robinson (Town of Groton)
Jack Rejman (Town of Venice)
John Zmarthie (Canal Corporation)
Myriam Contiguglia (Senator Nozzolios Ofc.)
Ron Stewart (Assemblyman Oaks Ofc.)
Susan Boutros (Environ. Associates Ltd.)
Dale Mangan (Lansing Community News)
Pat McNally (Cornell Univ. Env. Compl. Ofc.)
James Young (Town of Fleming)
Liz Moran (EcoLogic)
David Zorn (Genesee/Finger Lakes RPC)
|Ken Zabriskie (Village of Aurora)
Deb Grantham (Town of Dryden)
Fern deLise (Town of Caroline)
David Morehouse (Town of Ledyard)
Sylvia Hurlbut (Town of Ledyard)
Craig Schutt (Tompkins Co. SWCD)
Jerry Codner (Town of Lansing)
Jeff Warrick (Town of Seneca Falls)
Mark Croft (Cayuga Lake Defense Fund)
Edward Ide (Town of Aurelius)
Jeff Soule (City of Ithaca)
Tom Pearson (NYS DEC Region 8)
Dominic Christopher (Chamber Sen. Falls)
John Dellonte (Village of Union Springs)
Peter Shuster (Seneca Co. Farm Bureau)
Bob Bower (Town of Springport)
Jim Malyj (Seneca Co. SWCD)
Osivis Boutros (Environ. Associates Ltd.)
Lori Marie Thillman (Finger Lakes Times)
Tee-Ann Hunter (Town of Ledyard)
Pam OMalley (Central NY RPDB)
John Roebig (EcoLogic)
Upon entering the room, attendees were asked to locate on a watershed map (with a sticker) where they were from. They were asked to sit at one of four tables depending on where they were from South Basin/Southern Lake, Mid-Basin/Mid-Lake, North-Basin/Northern Lake, or Watershed-Wide/Lakewide. Maps were provided at each table showing the relevant section of the watershed.
I. Welcome, Meeting Purpose and Outcome: Meeting began at 7:00. Sylvia Hurlbut welcomed everyone and stated the meeting purpose and desired outcome as: Collection of input from meeting participants about visions and water quality issues in the watershed.
II. Introductions: Introductions were made of all attendees.
III. Approval of Minutes: Acceptance of minutes moved by S. Hurlbut. Seconded by John Sipos. All voted in favor. Motion carried.
IV. Project Status and Description: Pam OMalley stated that this is a 3-year project to develop a watershed management plan for the Cayuga Lake Watershed. The effort is currently half way through the first year workplan. It is funded primarily through NYS Department of State (DOS). Major components include:
V. Visioning for the Watershed: John Roebig of EcoLogic, a technical consulting group to the project assisting in preparation of the limnology (lake) assessment for the Preliminary Watershed Characterization, led a facilitated visioning session. Meeting participants were asked write down (on post-its) their top 3 visions in response to the following statement: "Return to the watershed in 20 years after the management plan is in place and successful, and describe what you want to see as the water-quality related attributes of the lake and watershed." Going around the room, attendees were asked to read aloud their 1st priority visions. When all 1st priority visions had been read, all were asked to read their 2nd and 3rd visions. All visions were posted on flip charts in the front of the room according to the following categories: Human Use, Ecology, Control of Inputs, Tools. The visions collected would be summarized in the wrap-up session at the end of the meeting.
VI. Existing Water Quality Issues in the Watershed: Each table was asked to identify existing water quality issues in the portion of the watershed where they were sitting. Facilitators were present at each table. They were asked to identify the location of a problem, its source, the type of pollutant causing the problem, the associated water quality issue, the use affected, and any data that they knew of about the problem. During the wrap-up session, each table would be asked to summarize its findings, particularly recurrent issues, for the full group.
VII. Wrap Up:
Visioning Summary: Liz Moran, also of EcoLogic, summarized the visioning exercise. She clustered visions within each of the 4 categories provided as follows:
Human Uses This was the largest response category. Clusters within this category were:
Ecology Clusters within the category were:
Control of Inputs Clusters included:
Tools Clusters included:
Water Quality Issues Summary (by table):
All of the information collected at this meeting will be very helpful in identifying the issues that need to be looked into for the watershed characterization and the issues that the IO will follow-up on. EcoLogic will synthesize all of the input collected and prepare a detailed summary.
VIII. Set Date and Agenda for Next and Future IO Meetings: The next IO meeting will be held on Wednesday, April 28, 1999 at 7:00 P.M. at the Ledyard Town Hall. Refreshments will start at 6:30. Agenda items will include development of an interim list of recommendations (preparatory information will be provided in a mailing in advance of the meeting) and a financial update of the grant and expenditures.
S. Hurlbut also stated that the Education/Outreach/Public Participation Committee is being formed. She requested that anyone willing to serve on it stay after the meeting to sign up. S. Anderson, who is organizing the Committee, added that the first charge of the Committee will be to help plan the 2nd public participation meeting.
Deb Grantham provided a summary of Membership Committee activities. She was unable to recruit any additional members since the last meeting. However, Carolyn Grigorov did have some success.
It was pointed out that there is still some confusion over the difference between the IO and the Network. People dont want to join both because of time constraints, but dont understand the difference, so it has been difficult to get more people bought into the IO.
Bruce Johnson expressed interest in having someone come and speak with the Freeville Village Board about the IO, and also to make a presentation to the Tompkins Co. Environmental Management Council. Others in the room felt that he, as a member of the IO, could fill that role of communicating to the Village and EMC what the IO is.
In closing the meeting, S. Hurlbut pointed out that the a major incentive for preparing a watershed management plan is to make the watershed more competitive to receive water quality funding. She also pointed out that the IO, while created for the management plan project, is expected to outlive the actual planning process and would see to plan implementation and revision over time. She envisions it will be an ongoing vehicle for intermunicipal cooperation in the watershed about many issues, not just water quality.
J. Sipos moved to adjourn. Seconded. Meeting adjourned at 8:55 P.M.
To contact the
Cayuga Lake Watershed
or email email@example.com
CLW IO 2002