[0:03] Scott County providing safe, healthy, [0:06] and livable communities. [0:12] >> We're going to move to item 7.1 to [0:14] receive information on the Scott County [0:16] delivers topic, natural resources and [0:18] water quality. Welcome this fine [0:21] afternoon. [0:22] >> Yes. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair and [0:24] commissioners. As you said, today we'll [0:26] be discussing natural resources and [0:28] water quality. This topic connects [0:30] directly with the current Scott County [0:31] strategic plan through the community [0:33] design objective. Um there is a [0:35] responsibility to balance the needs of [0:37] protecting our natural resources for [0:38] recreational uses but also to ensure [0:41] safety through the protection of those [0:42] resources and connected infrastructure [0:44] as well. Scott County is home to many [0:46] important natural resources. The [0:48] Minnesota River, Sand Creek Wershed, [0:50] Credit River, just to start naming a [0:51] few. It's important to note that this is [0:54] a new topic for Scott County delivers [0:56] and due to its importance and broad [0:58] nature will be discussed further in [1:00] upcoming Scott County discussions. With [1:02] that, I will ask my co-f facilitators [1:04] and then panelists to please introduce [1:06] themselves and state uh where they work [1:07] and what they do. [1:09] >> Good afternoon. Julie Hansen, community [1:12] services. I'm the property and customer [1:13] service manager. [1:15] >> Good afternoon. Barb, health and human [1:17] services director. [1:19] I'm Jamie Marshall, income maintenance [1:22] manager. [1:26] >> Hi, Kay Logic, environmental services [1:28] manager. [1:29] >> I'm Vanessa Strong. I'm the water [1:31] resources supervisor. [1:33] >> Megan Taska. I'm the county's water [1:34] resources engineer. [1:36] >> Uh Ryan Hoser, I'm the water resources [1:38] scientist. [1:39] >> Melissa Bachmann, senior water resources [1:41] planner. [1:42] >> Perfect. Thank you all so much and thank [1:44] you for all of the work and effort that [1:45] you've put towards this packet. Before [1:47] we begin with our conversation, I would [1:49] like to ask Mr. Chair and the [1:50] commissioners if they have any beginning [1:51] questions they would like to ask. [1:55] >> Any burning questions? Otherwise, we [1:57] will let you fire away and I'm sure [1:59] we'll pepper you as as either as we go [2:00] or at the end. [2:02] >> Perfect. Thank you so much. All right, [2:03] Julie, with our first question. [2:05] >> Wonderful. Thank you. Um, this is an [2:07] area that most people I would wager to [2:10] say are likely unfamiliar with. um as I [2:15] am even as a longtime county employee, [2:17] if you had just a couple of minutes to [2:20] tell a lay person about what you do and [2:23] who the WMO is, what would you say? [2:34] >> Um I would say that we [2:37] do lots of many things. We have [2:39] programs. We monitor our water resources [2:41] to determine whether we uh I would say [2:45] the health of our waters, whether [2:47] they're degrading or improving. We um do [2:50] studies and assessments to be able to [2:52] prepare ourselves to do projects on the [2:54] land. Um we share with land owners and [2:58] other entities to be able to do [3:00] projects. Uh we do a lot of partnership [3:04] and collaboration with other [3:05] organizations and land owners. Um, [3:12] oh, we provide education and outreach to [3:14] our land owners as well. [3:16] >> We also leverage a lot of grant funds uh [3:20] to basically stretch our local dollars [3:22] further that would relate to our cost [3:24] share program, some of the CIPs that [3:25] we're going to talk about here today. [3:27] Um, just to kind of help that that local [3:30] burden. Um, as well, [3:33] >> uh, I am the technical person. So, I do [3:38] design reviews and permitting for the [3:40] county to ensure compliance with those [3:42] management ordinances. [3:45] >> You know, I always like to say if you [3:47] drink it or you flush it, it's probably [3:49] somebody else's. But if it falls from [3:51] the sky or it's on the ground, that's [3:53] pretty much what we take care of. So, [3:55] we're responsible for your lakes, your [3:57] rivers, your wetlands, the snow that [3:59] melts, the rain that falls. And why a [4:02] watershed? Because water follows [4:05] topography. it runs downhill. So [4:07] waterershed is kind of like a bathtub. [4:08] The outer boundary of the wershed is the [4:10] outside of that bathtub and then the [4:12] drain is kind of the end result which is [4:14] usually a lake or a large river. And [4:16] that's why wersheds are managed on [4:18] wershed boundaries and not political [4:20] boundaries because water doesn't care [4:21] about city township boundaries. That's [4:23] just a human line. It likes to follow [4:26] those. So that's why we do it at that [4:27] watershed boundary. And we take care of [4:30] those, you know, lakes, rivers, and [4:32] wetlands through a lot of different [4:34] programs and activities to help keep [4:36] them clean and help work with our [4:38] citizens to make their lives better. [4:40] >> Great. Thank you. [4:44] >> I believe you've said that before. [4:47] >> That's great. [4:48] >> No, that's very helpful. Thank you, [4:49] Vanessa. [4:55] >> Well, so maybe you could tell us a [4:57] little bit. I [4:58] Going on to page three, I've got a [5:00] couple questions related to the capital [5:02] improvement projects or your SIP. And [5:05] so, how do you go about selecting which [5:08] projects you [5:10] decide to [5:12] include here? [5:13] >> Yeah, it's a great question. So, like [5:16] Melissa had mentioned, um, you know, we [5:19] we know we have problems in our waters [5:21] for monitoring. Um we're driven by our [5:25] watershed comprehensive uh plan which [5:28] stakeholders [5:29] um partners residents all have an [5:32] opportunity to kind of guide that that [5:34] plan for us. So we get input from other [5:38] places right that that kind of help [5:41] guide us. Um and once we kind of narrow [5:44] down the areas that we want to focus on [5:46] monitoring can help us. So, in one [5:48] instance, you know, a lot of these CIPs [5:50] that we installed came from we monitored [5:53] in what's called the middle Sand Creek [5:55] wershed. Um, it's basically just the [5:57] middle part of that that wershed. Um, [6:00] runs from like city of Jordan to New [6:02] Prague roughly and did a study there [6:05] because we knew from monitoring that [6:07] that section was 10 to 15 times the [6:09] amount of total suspended solids uh than [6:12] any other wershed in S Creek. So we knew [6:14] that there was a lot of sediment coming [6:16] from that wershed and sediment being an [6:19] impairment to Sand Creek. So if you know [6:21] that sediment's an issue and then you [6:24] identify exactly where you know a large [6:27] concentration of that issue is, then you [6:28] can kind of narrow down and focus your [6:31] your area that you're going to do a [6:32] study. And so in 2015, we did a [6:35] feasibility study knowing that that area [6:38] um produces so much sediment and we had [6:41] an idea, right? The Sand Creek goes [6:43] through a bluff um through there. So [6:45] it's real steep gradient to the stream. [6:48] Um so it's not really a surprise that [6:50] it's generating that much sediment, but [6:52] we basically, you know, hired a [6:54] consultant to help us then narrow down [6:57] what are the biggest then sediment [6:59] contributors within that watershed. [7:02] and basically develop a list. Then you [7:05] work through that list. Um so we work on [7:07] a voluntary basis with land owners and [7:10] you know just kind of going through [7:12] where we prioritize sediment savings was [7:14] our biggest thing and so basically [7:17] working down that list from the highest [7:18] sediment contributors to we kind of got [7:21] through the whole list. Um and I can go [7:23] into more detail of that but that kind [7:26] of helps you know frame up or drive [7:29] where we can kind of go with things. So [7:31] you know we identify the problem we then [7:34] work to find that solution and then we [7:36] actually go out and implement it. You [7:38] know we we put them on the ground to [7:40] make a difference to actually reduce [7:41] sediment and by some of the graphs you [7:44] can see it it is working. You know some [7:46] of the things that we're doing are [7:48] actually making an impact. So I feel [7:50] pretty confident in that. [7:53] >> It looks like that. So does the if I [7:56] were to so I I will say like I asked [7:58] this question knowing that like in my [7:59] world nothing is linear in health and [8:01] human services. So like as I look at a [8:03] as a chart here like I I'm just curious [8:06] at like I look at the cost and then I [8:07] look at the sediment like removed per [8:09] ton and it looks like it varies based on [8:12] so like what what's behind that [8:13] variation? [8:15] >> Yeah, good question. Um so a couple of [8:18] the projects so the first two projects [8:20] that are listed there um there's a road [8:23] component to those. So um there was the [8:26] sentiment savings but there's also you [8:28] know a transportation uh trying to save [8:31] you know county road 60 um also county [8:34] road six was plugging up with sediment. [8:36] So, there's that component, too. But [8:38] then when you actually look at some of [8:40] like the phase one, two, and I'll [8:42] explain why we don't have a three, uh, [8:44] four, five, and six, you kind of notice [8:46] that it went from a little bit on the [8:48] higher end to the lower end as we were [8:50] working through them. So, we started off [8:52] with some of the higher sediment [8:54] contributors. The reason why Sand Creek [8:57] phase 5 is kind of um down the list is [9:00] we knew that one was going to be [9:01] expensive. um you know it came in at [9:04] close to threequarters of a million [9:06] dollars and it's the last one we just [9:07] did. So we had to actually generate [9:10] funds and leverage grants to actually [9:12] make that project possible. Some of the [9:14] other ones came in less and so we had [9:16] the funds available to do them. Um but [9:19] yeah, I mean we we tried to start with [9:21] the highest ones first and then work our [9:24] way down um you know that that list [9:26] there. If I could just add to that that [9:29] um oh [9:31] so in addition to that the the degree of [9:33] the erosion and the actual situation um [9:37] really determines how much sediment is [9:41] you know proposed to be reduced. So it [9:43] if it's a 80 foot high bluff and it's [9:47] has mass wasting which we have a lot of [9:49] areas of that along the Minnesota River [9:51] you know those types of projects are um [9:56] you know contributing a lot more [9:58] sediment into the Minnesota River. So, [10:00] some of those projects just have a [10:02] higher load um after the assessment and [10:04] the study has been done that that's why [10:06] you're seeing differences in the [10:08] amounts. [10:09] >> Yeah, thank you, Melissa. And and that's [10:11] why uh Sand Creek phase 4 and phase six [10:14] are a little bit lower. As we worked [10:16] through that list, the bluffs that we [10:18] were working on just weren't as tall. Um [10:20] phase two was probably, you know, 80 [10:22] plus feet tall as the bluff. Phase one [10:25] was three separate projects, so it just [10:27] accumulated to being a lot more [10:28] sediment. And then the other ones um [10:31] were just smaller. The the bluff itself [10:33] wasn't as big. [10:35] >> Good. [10:42] >> I guess along those same lines, I was [10:44] wondering um you know, you mentioned the [10:47] sediment is being reduced significantly. [10:51] Um [10:53] could you explain a little bit how that [10:54] happens and why it's important? [10:58] >> Yeah, absolutely. Um so each of these [11:00] situations varies a little bit. Um so a [11:03] lot of the times [11:05] a ravine, so the Blakeley Trail Ravine, [11:07] Corey Creek, um part of phase one and [11:10] phase 5 were all a ravine setting. So, [11:15] um, basically what we've got is a a [11:17] younger landscape. Um, you know, dating [11:20] back 10,000 years. You've got the [11:21] draining of Lake Agassi, um, through [11:24] what we now know as the Minnesota River [11:26] Valley. Um, and as [11:29] um, so it was actually Glacial River [11:31] Warren drained that lake, Lake Agassi, [11:33] and then started to recede and all its [11:36] tributaries started to do the same [11:38] thing. And so even though it's 10,000 [11:41] years ago, it's still in geological time [11:43] us youngish, you know. So it's still [11:46] trying to find its its exact, you know, [11:48] angles of where it's supposed to be. So [11:50] you've got these ravines that have been [11:52] constantly insizing. And what that means [11:54] is you've got your, you know, V-shaped [11:56] ravine. It's cutting downward. And what [11:59] ends up happening is when it cuts [12:00] downward, your side slopes um start to [12:03] fall away, right? So they're starting to [12:05] lay themselves back. and they call it a [12:08] angle of repose to where eventually [12:10] it'll fall back far enough to where it [12:12] actually will stabilize and vegetation [12:13] will grow. Well, on a vertical setting [12:16] or near vegetation doesn't grow on that. [12:19] Um, so in those cases, you know, it's [12:21] that ravine cutting down and then the [12:24] side slopes caving in and that's where [12:25] it's generating that sediment and then [12:28] phosphorus is, you know, binding to the [12:30] sediment as well and it just gets [12:32] released. Um the streams it's actually [12:35] these projects were all basically [12:38] identified where a stream it normally [12:41] does generate sediment and that's what a [12:43] stream is supposed to do. It has outside [12:44] bends inside bends. It'll deposit it [12:47] sediment on the inside bend and it cuts [12:48] the outside bend. As long as it stays in [12:51] the flood plane, you know, it's just [12:52] generating kind of sediment within its [12:54] natural kind of place. Um what's [12:58] happening with these is it actually cuts [13:00] outside of its flood plane and hits [13:01] these giant bluffs, you know, upwards of [13:04] a hundred feet tall, hundreds of feet [13:06] long. So you can just imagine when [13:08] you've got water constantly hitting that [13:11] toe that basically that's the land and [13:13] the water meeting um you're just getting [13:17] that that erosion that's happening along [13:19] the stream bank. And so when you have an [13:22] unstable toe, um it just leads to [13:24] basically that whole upper bluff just [13:26] kind of falling in. Um and so a lot of [13:29] these projects you'll see there's a [13:31] shelf that's built right at the base of [13:34] that bluff. What that's intended to do [13:36] is unless it's a really heavy rain and [13:39] it's flooded, it's keeping flow away [13:42] from that bluff toe. It so it doesn't [13:44] have pressure up against it. Yeah. Evan, [13:46] can I see? So the picture on top, you [13:49] can see if sediment, dirt wants to just [13:53] erode off of that bluff, it's going [13:55] directly into the stream. But the after [13:58] photo on the bottom, there's a shelf [14:00] that's built where basically it it [14:02] relieves that pressure of that water [14:05] constantly hitting the bluff. And it [14:07] also allows for deposition of that upper [14:10] bluff onto that shelf. So eventually you [14:13] you actually kind of want it to lay [14:14] itself back because that's how it's [14:16] going to stabilize itself long term. [14:20] >> I I like to use what's called the ice [14:22] cream model. So in a natural [14:24] environment, um a cup of ice cream is [14:28] great. Like one ice cream cone sounds [14:29] really delicious. And that's like a [14:31] healthy stream or a healthy lake gets [14:34] its healthy dose of ice cream. It gets [14:36] the leaves and the natural sediment that [14:37] should normally fall into it. It's [14:40] coming off of a nicely vegetated [14:41] landscape and so a lot of that stuff is [14:44] really just not actually ending up in [14:45] the lake or the river. So it's getting [14:46] its like happy healthy dose of ice [14:48] cream. But what we get are bathtubs full [14:52] of ice cream. Back to the bathtub thing, [14:53] right? Like so one ice cream cones [14:55] great. A bathtub full of ice cream, not [14:57] so good. And so that's what's happening [14:58] to a lot of our streams and lakes is [15:00] they're getting bathtub levels of ice [15:02] cream and bathtub levels of sediment, [15:04] which makes them very unhappy and [15:06] doesn't make them very healthy. So [15:08] through the work that you know Ryan [15:10] leads and that we do, it's helping to [15:12] bring that dose of ice cream down to [15:15] something healthier. [15:17] >> Interesting. [15:18] >> Yeah. [15:19] >> Great analogies. [15:20] >> Did that answer your question though? [15:21] Which I thought your question was a [15:23] little bit different. [15:24] >> Um I think that answers um [15:28] why it's important um [15:31] and how how it's done. [15:40] Well, I just if Ryan, if you could just [15:42] quickly explain um so you did a little [15:44] bit of the how, but I always find it [15:46] really interesting when you explain like [15:47] how the pylons are put in, how you have [15:50] to dam it up to stop the water. Can you [15:52] go over that a little bit? I I would [15:54] explain it, but I won't do it any [15:57] He does it better. [15:58] >> Yeah, happy to do so. Um so, a lot of [16:01] these projects were all designed by the [16:03] same consulting firm. It's it's kind of [16:05] their niche. It's their specialty. This [16:06] is what they do and they do it really [16:08] well. Um they've had a lot of success [16:10] and our projects with them have [16:12] performed really well as well. Um but [16:15] what we're looking at here, it's it's I [16:19] the the easiest way to describe it to [16:21] somebody that is just looking at that [16:23] picture is if you remember Lincoln logs, [16:26] Lincoln logs get stacked on top of each [16:28] other and just keep building upwards. So [16:31] these are a series of of log jams and a [16:34] lot of the times we'll harvest the wood [16:36] on site. So the land owners as part of [16:38] their contribution to the project is [16:40] we're going to take some of the trees [16:42] that are on your property could be in [16:44] the hundreds of trees um and we're going [16:47] to harvest them and use them towards [16:48] this project and that saves us some [16:50] money. Um in other instances if we don't [16:52] have the trees on site can haul them in. [16:54] Um, but basically what they do, they're [16:57] they're moving the stream away from the [17:00] bluff. Um, and so you still have to keep [17:03] the same profile of the stream. So if [17:05] you move out from that bluff, you don't [17:07] want to constrict the stream itself. So [17:09] you're going to actually excavate on the [17:11] inside portion of that stream. So the [17:12] stream that was 20 ft wide before, it'll [17:15] still be 20 ft wide afterwards. Um, but [17:18] how they actually do it, we most of the [17:20] time we'll do this in the winter because [17:21] it's easier. Flows are lower. [17:24] They'll um build a a burm basically [17:28] around this structure [17:31] and um they have to get it kind of as [17:34] watertight as possible. Um that's [17:37] impossible to get all the water out. So [17:39] then they pump the water out. Uh so [17:41] basically you get down below water level [17:44] and they'll take um a vibratory hammer [17:48] on an excavator. So this you know big [17:50] giant excavator and they'll take the [17:52] logs. So, you'll notice some of them are [17:54] vertical. They'll take that hammer and [17:56] they'll just vibrate it until it gets [17:58] down several feet. Um, you know, could [18:00] be four feet that it has to actually [18:02] embed itself into the stream. They'll do [18:06] a pull out test where they'll actually [18:07] attach to it and make sure that it won't [18:09] pop back out. Um, so that builds the [18:12] base of this structure. [18:14] So, now you've got these, let's say it's [18:17] four structures to make a square. Um, [18:19] four logs. And now what you do is with [18:21] those Lincoln logs I was describing, you [18:23] attach those to each other. You attach [18:26] those to that vertical log that's um [18:29] embedded in the ground. Wood floats, so [18:32] we have to counteract its buoyancy. And [18:35] so that's what we're doing is you're [18:36] attaching it to something that's [18:38] embedded and can't float. Um they'll [18:41] also put boulders. So, we've done it [18:43] before where you'll cable boulders um to [18:47] these logs and it looks kind of weird [18:49] because they'll to make sure that [18:51] they're actually attached. They'll lift [18:53] them up. So, you've got this log and [18:54] these boulders attached and uh anyways, [18:57] you wouldn't think a little hole like [18:59] that, you know, with some epoxy and it [19:01] can hold a giant boulder in place. But [19:04] all that is basically just meant to [19:05] counteract the buoyancy. You keep [19:07] building these logs up until basic [19:10] they're at an elevation that is going to [19:12] take care of most of the flow that um [19:14] that erosion is going to be reduced. But [19:17] the key to it is the vegetation on top. [19:20] So you know logs are only going to last [19:22] for so long before they're going to [19:24] break down and especially when you got [19:26] water, wind, sun, all that. So the idea [19:29] is you build these structures, they [19:31] should last at least 25 years. But then [19:33] we're planting trees on top of them. um [19:36] planting native grasses in hopes that [19:38] that vegetation will actually take hold [19:41] and grow long term and and basically [19:44] keep that in place. Um it helps with the [19:47] exposure of those logs too to have that [19:49] vegetation there and that component cut [19:51] down on sun on them as well a little [19:53] bit. Um so yeah, does that kind of [19:56] explain? [19:57] >> Yes. [19:57] >> It's it's I kind of get sciency nerdy at [20:00] times with some of this stuff. So, if [20:03] I'm going way too far over heads, let me [20:06] know. But it's I really enjoy doing [20:08] them. So, [20:10] >> Ryan, is there is I'm sorry. Is there a [20:12] material that um could be used or you [20:16] think could be used in the future other [20:17] than logs or boulders that maybe would [20:20] last longer? [20:20] >> Yeah. So, you probably could you you [20:24] could do um there there is more [20:26] expensive um material out there that you [20:28] could use. I've seen other structures [20:31] where they could use steel or something [20:33] along those lines. You could use rock, [20:35] you know, like a granite type of rock. [20:37] Um, we've chosen to go a little bit more [20:38] natural. So, there are voids within [20:42] those logs and what it's providing is [20:44] actually some fish habitat or other [20:46] aquatic organisms can actually make [20:48] their way inside there and avoid [20:50] predation. You know, a bigger fish [20:52] trying to eat it. Um, so we've gone the [20:55] route of a more natural looking um [20:58] project. If if you did rip wrap, it [21:01] probably would be a little bit cheaper. [21:04] Um, and but it depends on what kind of [21:06] rock you want to use. Some of them break [21:08] down a lot sooner than others. And so I [21:11] think we've kind of found this is a good [21:14] happy medium of like there are some rock [21:17] in there's some rock in there to cut [21:19] down on cost, but it's like a balancing [21:21] act. kind of make it a little bit [21:23] bio-engineered, [21:24] little bit of the rock to save on cost, [21:26] too. [21:30] >> I just was just going to add that, you [21:31] know, there's so many areas um in that [21:35] middle creek and along the block that [21:38] there's such high erosion going on. We [21:40] have a very erosive um geologic setting [21:44] here that it was quite a few years ago [21:46] when we got done with the Sand Creek [21:48] study that it was decided to just [21:50] address the toe and build those [21:53] structures instead of trying to lay back [21:56] all of these, you know, almost vertical [21:58] slopes that would be way too cost [22:00] prohibitive. So, we're going with a more [22:02] natural solution. [22:04] >> Yeah. That way we can do more of them. [22:06] If we wanted to do Melissa's approach of [22:08] lay that soul back. [22:09] >> That's not my approach. [22:10] >> Well, the approach Melissa's saying, I [22:13] should say there would be like one on [22:15] this list, you know, that because it [22:17] would be that expensive to do that much [22:18] earth moving material and all that. So, [22:21] >> sure. [22:25] >> Uh, since we're on page three under [22:27] development and permitting, it talks [22:28] about the WMO in the process of updating [22:31] the plan within the next year. Can you [22:33] talk about how you'll use data to inform [22:35] your decisions and what are some main [22:37] considerations of that? [22:44] >> Um, well, we gather lots of different [22:45] types of data in order to inform the [22:47] next plan. So, we look at water quality [22:50] trends, which we put a um [22:53] a table in here, too, where we're [22:55] looking at are certain pollutants [22:57] improving or are they getting worse? And [22:59] so we need to think about how to change [23:01] the plan or programs in order to um [23:05] reduce those pollutants coming into our [23:07] water bodies. Uh another thing that we [23:10] started uh many years ago back in 2011 [23:14] is um looking at the the social side of [23:20] um wershed management. you know, it's [23:23] really our our water resources are a [23:26] reflection of our land users and so what [23:29] they do on the on the landscape really [23:32] impacts our water resources. So, um you [23:35] know, surveying uh our residents to find [23:38] out what what motivates them to maybe [23:41] want to do stewardship, what uh what are [23:44] their beliefs, what are their values. Uh [23:47] we need to really integrate um that [23:50] social side of um [23:55] of what our residents do and what they [23:57] believe and and to help us achieve some [24:01] of our water quality goals because [24:03] trying to fix everything in our wershed [24:05] with the limited amount of staff and the [24:08] limited amount of financial resources we [24:10] have, it's just never going to happen um [24:13] you know through levy or even through [24:14] grants. So, we're um in this current [24:17] plan, we've developed a system to help [24:20] um enable more land owners and [24:22] businesses and communities to try to [24:24] help us reach our goals, you know, in [24:28] improving water bodies. But we use [24:30] studies. [24:32] Um right now we've done um several [24:36] subwaterershed assessments to figure out [24:38] which projects on in certain wersheds [24:42] will help improve water quality. kind of [24:44] like CIPs, but they're more of on a uh [24:46] agricultural conservation practice [24:49] level. Um [24:53] what other studies have we done? [24:55] >> We might add that the studies that we do [24:57] are also often on behalf of a lot of the [24:59] LGUs in the county. It's not just us. So [25:02] it prevents the cities or the townships [25:05] or from having to undertake these really [25:07] expensive studies themselves. we do that [25:09] heavy lift and then they can use that [25:11] data to help them determine where is [25:13] maybe best to develop, what's best to [25:15] preserve, you know, help them with their [25:18] decisions locally. So, um you could talk [25:21] I mean that's a lot of what we do. [25:25] >> Yeah. So, right now we're in the middle [25:27] of uh working on a study on um county [25:30] ditch 4 to determine, you know, in the [25:33] future if the city of Credit River would [25:36] help us protect that river because right [25:37] now that river has a state and EPA proof [25:41] protection plan over it. Um and we want [25:44] to keep the river that way. So, we're [25:46] doing a study to determine moving into [25:48] the future in um where in that landscape [25:53] would be best to place certain best [25:55] management practices to protect the [25:56] water quality and then the city can use [25:58] that in their local water plans and then [26:01] we can help them get funding for those [26:03] projects. Yeah, a lot of our studies uh [26:05] also enable like aside funding. So, if a [26:08] city wants to do a project, it usually [26:10] needs some sort of study to back it up [26:11] to get that grant funding. So they can [26:13] use our studies to get themselves [26:15] funding to get their projects in the [26:17] ground, which is really helpful. A few [26:19] of the studies we're currently doing [26:20] right now is we're having a consultant [26:22] update our Cedar Lake total maximum [26:25] daily load model which tells us how much [26:28] phosphorus we need, how much phosphorus [26:30] load we need to reduce into Cedar Lake, [26:32] and updating a whole Sand Creek wershed [26:35] model to determine what BMPs would be [26:38] best to place and where on the landscape [26:40] and how much that would reduce sediment [26:42] and phosphorus so that we can help [26:44] improve Sand Creek and the Minnesota [26:45] River. So, [26:47] >> and some of our existing data too, just [26:49] like the graph that's up there for Cedar [26:51] Lake, you know, you got your phosphorus [26:52] is is trending downward. [26:54] >> Um, stuff like that is helpful when [26:58] going through the new planning cycle, [26:59] right? If if it was trending the [27:01] opposite way and it was increasing, we [27:02] would have to adapt, adjust, right? Um, [27:06] same thing with some of the water [27:07] quality monitoring you're seeing in [27:08] here. You know, those are the [27:10] improvements are um it's getting better. [27:12] And so some of these methods we're [27:14] using, we're finding are working. So, [27:16] but we're always still wanting to adapt [27:18] and adjust as well, right? Because [27:20] what's working today might not be [27:22] working, you know, in the future. [27:25] >> Maybe related to that, but kind of [27:28] switching to groundwater quality a [27:31] little bit on um pages 17 and 18. Uh we [27:35] maybe tell us a little bit about um [27:37] those those watching at home like how [27:40] how does the water kit um how does that [27:42] work? How what's our role with that? And [27:44] then um what do as we're looking at like [27:47] maybe the lead and the arsenic levels [27:49] like what do we as we see those come up [27:51] like what do we do to help support the [27:53] community or educate around that? [27:58] >> Well, why don't I take this one? I'll [27:59] kind of get it kicked off. What what we [28:01] do here at the county. So, what we do is [28:04] um at the county we offer uh well test [28:08] kits where homeowners can um purchase a [28:12] kit at the county, go home, grab the [28:13] sample, come back um and then there's um [28:18] you can see here a variety of things [28:19] they can test for arsenic, nitrate, [28:21] fluoride, maganesees, etc. They then [28:24] test for that and then uh the lab will [28:26] send the results to the county and then [28:29] we will then send those results to the [28:32] homeowner. But there's a couple other [28:34] things that are happening. Those that [28:35] information we then collect it and since [28:38] surface water and groundwater are [28:39] connected. We share that information [28:41] with this group so that they have that [28:43] and they can see okay what's going on um [28:45] in the groundwater and they can be [28:47] sharing that with um interest interested [28:49] folks as they're going through their [28:50] plan update. We also once we get that [28:53] data and we see or we get the results, [28:56] excuse me, we see the results and if [28:58] there's something that is concerning, we [29:00] then let the homeowner know um because [29:03] they get the results and it's they [29:06] they're like, I don't I don't know [29:07] what's the limit for arsenic. [29:10] >> So, we would then call them and say, oh, [29:12] you exceeded and here's what you can do. [29:15] You can get a treatment unit to to help [29:19] bring that down. And then we'd also um [29:21] refer them to the department of health [29:22] and talk to them about retesting and so [29:24] on. But this information that the county [29:27] collects um [29:29] very helpful and then used this group [29:32] will then use that in helping them [29:34] inform those that they're working with [29:36] in their plan update or just what's [29:38] going on in groundwater. [29:40] We're very fortunate. We are um in most [29:42] of our areas low in nitrate, but if we [29:45] were high in nitrate, um [29:48] this group would be very interested in [29:50] to know where that nitrate is coming [29:52] from. Is that coming from septic [29:54] systems? Is that coming from fertilizer? [29:57] Where is that coming from? Um and those [30:00] um [30:02] um practices that they're putting on the [30:05] land are helping prevent your surface [30:09] water like your nitrates from getting in [30:11] into wells and then into groundwater. So [30:14] that's how that surface water [30:15] groundwater connection is and what we're [30:18] doing here at the county on that [30:20] groundwater level. [30:21] >> Yeah. Megan, maybe you can talk about [30:23] how when you get a development plan in [30:24] that has a lot of storm water basins, [30:27] how you review it, how that interacts [30:29] with groundwater. [30:31] >> Um, so I deal with our storm water [30:34] ordinance here at the county mainly. And [30:36] part of our ordinance requires [30:38] infiltration for large developments, [30:40] which means storm water that hits the [30:42] ground or runs off is collected in a [30:44] holding pond and is allowed to [30:46] infiltrate into the ground and [30:48] eventually recharge the groundwater. Um [30:51] so part of that is reviewing areas of [30:53] high sensitivity um with drinking water [30:56] supply areas. We have some down in [30:59] Jordan and Shakabe I believe rightas. [31:03] Um making sure that we're not in areas [31:05] that actually infiltrate too fast [31:07] actually. Um super you know we have a [31:09] lot of areas with a lot of sand. Um too [31:12] fast is not too slow is not good and too [31:14] fast is not good. Um you want to slow it [31:16] down to the point where it does get a [31:18] chance to filter. where there is a [31:19] chance if something got into there that [31:21] wasn't in there, you could stop it [31:22] before it gets into the groundwater. So, [31:25] those are all things that we look at [31:26] when we're reviewing developments within [31:28] the county to protect groundwater. [31:33] >> Kind of related to that on page 17, um [31:36] it does talk about the water test [31:37] totals. Um, and as someone just looking [31:42] at this chart, um, and reading the [31:44] details about it, 2019 saw a huge, [31:50] um, jump, I guess, in test kits. And can [31:54] you tell us what that means? [31:57] >> I'm glad you brought that up because [31:59] that was a a lesson that we learned that [32:01] year. So, um, in 2018 2019, um, [32:05] Department of Health, um, was reaching [32:08] out to the counties that arsenic was, [32:10] um, contaminant of concern. Now, it's [32:12] naturally occurring, but they were like, [32:14] it might be, um, more prevalent in [32:17] groundwater and in in folks drinking [32:19] water than we think. So, um, two things [32:23] happened that year. We we thought, okay, [32:25] well, this is this is good to know and [32:27] we should reach out to our um homeowners [32:29] on wells and let them know and and we [32:31] should see if this is an issue in Scott [32:32] County. [32:34] So, we um sent out a postcard to all the [32:37] homes on wells. And that was the first [32:39] time we sent a postcard, a d a targeted [32:43] um request to homeowners. Normally, we [32:46] had just done seen articles like if [32:48] you're on a well, you should be testing [32:50] um once a year. just just a very light [32:55] reminder to folks when we did that [32:57] targeted directly to homes. [33:00] Well, they responded and then the other [33:03] other thing that we were like, okay, we [33:04] need to make sure how we phrase this. We [33:06] said arsenic might be a concern in your [33:10] well. We know it was naturally [33:12] occurring. [33:15] Folks know what arsenic is and they were [33:17] just they responded, I don't want to [33:19] drink arsenic. So that year we got a [33:22] a a a very good response and people [33:25] wanting to test their well and what we [33:27] learned from that is one the mailers the [33:30] postcards work but we can't just send [33:32] them all at out at one time. I think [33:35] maybe customer service was inundated [33:37] with people that you're trying to drop [33:38] off. So we don't do it all at once [33:40] anymore. We now um send those postcards [33:43] staggered throughout the year and then [33:45] we make sure um how we phrase things so [33:48] that we don't alarm people that some [33:50] they might be drinking something scary [33:52] in their their water. We say natural [33:54] occurring arsenic and there's treatment [33:56] and we've rephrased that. So I'm glad [34:00] you pointed out to 2019. [34:02] >> If I could just piggyback on that. So [34:03] how that came about was when the WL was [34:06] updating its current watershed plan. We [34:09] were meeting with different departments [34:10] in our technical advisory committee. We [34:12] met with the department of health and we [34:13] were trying to figure out what [34:15] groundwater activities we can put in our [34:17] current plan and through that the [34:20] department of health recommended that we [34:22] start um monitoring for arsenic. So I [34:26] actually one of my projects was to [34:29] randomly select um multiple land owners [34:32] in the WMO. I went out to their house, [34:35] took a water sample, and then we got the [34:37] results of arsenic. Um, and then we [34:39] worked with environmental health to [34:42] have them do that postcard and stuff. [34:44] So, it was really trying to bring [34:46] awareness to everyone that there is [34:48] something in our groundwater that we [34:50] never really sampled before. [34:51] >> And I want to jump in on that because I [34:52] wrote something down there, too, for [34:53] that 19. Was it just messaging or was [34:57] there I'm trying to remember. Was that a [34:59] wetter year? Did that [35:01] was it strictly that we mailed a bunch [35:03] of postcards and they hit and they were [35:05] on point? Um wasn't wet, wasn't dry? I [35:11] >> I mean 2019 is one of the wetest years [35:13] on record in recent history. But I don't [35:15] know if that [35:16] >> both both are true but not connected. [35:20] >> I I'm just it be I mean is this [35:22] something where you almost need to put a [35:24] little asterisk in there for future? [35:26] >> Yeah, we do in our notes. of like what [35:29] what happened in 2019 and it it yes that [35:32] happened to be 2020 was is it 19 and 20 [35:35] that was one of the wetest years. [35:36] >> Well that that that's where I'm [35:38] >> but it was both things happened. [35:39] >> Yes. Um, but the the response was mostly [35:44] the messaging. [35:48] >> And again, maybe it's major, maybe it's [35:50] minor, but if it were a dry year, [35:51] because that's in my mind, I thought it [35:53] was I don't remember was the 1920 20, [35:55] you know, um, had it been a dry year [35:58] >> and you sent those postcards, [36:02] >> maybe. [36:02] >> And it's naturally occurring, right? [36:03] Maybe. [36:04] >> Right. Maybe I I I think really what [36:08] caught them was just [36:10] how that was we didn't give them enough [36:13] information that it's naturally [36:14] occurring and we it just came out [36:19] there might be arsenic in your water and [36:22] that just everyone's concerned about [36:24] what's in their drinking water and I [36:25] think that alone [36:27] >> um [36:28] kind of created a little bit sense of [36:30] >> and it was sincere. It wasn't just [36:32] clickbait. It was sincere. [36:34] And I guess I would add and you know we [36:37] had 25% of testers who their results [36:42] exceeded drinking water, you know, the [36:44] the levels. So it it was it right? Is [36:47] that correct or am I reading that wrong? [36:49] >> That's correct. We have high arsenic in [36:51] Scott County. So, that's the good thing [36:53] that came out of it is that we we heeded [36:56] the the warning that Melissa and the [36:58] Department of Health were letting us [37:00] know, put that information out on the [37:02] flyer and we Scott County as we are [37:04] learning is is high in arsenic and we [37:06] are starting to learn. We thought it was [37:08] going to be just like a certain uh [37:10] certain area and we're finding it [37:11] throughout the whole county [37:13] >> um all depths of wells. So, we strongly [37:16] encourage people to test for arsenic and [37:19] now arsenic is one of the items that [37:22] must be tested when a new well is [37:24] drilled. So, it's prevalent throughout [37:28] Minnesota. [37:30] >> I live in New Market Township and I [37:31] tested our well and we have arsenic. [37:33] >> It some [37:38] I have a follow-up question if you don't [37:40] mind. What do what do you do then? So, [37:42] you have high levels of arsenic in your [37:44] water. What's the response? What does [37:46] the homeowner do? there's a treatment [37:48] unit that they can put on that will [37:50] lower the levels of arsenic to a to a [37:53] safe safe amount. And um [37:56] we're finding that the treatment units [37:58] um can help with a variety of things. So [38:01] just um back to um the nitrate as an [38:05] indicator of um fertilizer. We were just [38:08] contacted by Department of Agriculture [38:11] that there's areas in Scott County, [38:14] Jackson, is it Jackson lever or just [38:16] Jackson that have um high [38:19] >> cyanazine [38:19] >> cyanazine [38:20] >> shaky [38:21] >> shakapi and so um department of a [38:24] reached out to those folks said can we [38:26] test for cyanazine they did and they [38:29] came up high and now we're doing the [38:32] mitigation where department of a is [38:34] reaching out and offering treatment [38:36] units that can treat cyanazine. So, [38:39] there's treatment units out there that [38:40] can help with a variety of contaminants [38:42] that might be in the water. [38:44] >> Yeah. So, we have a joint grant with [38:47] Dakota and Washington County that is [38:49] mostly it's it's 100% funded and [38:51] sponsored by the Department of A, but we [38:54] help facilitate it and get it to those [38:56] residents. So, it's like about on [38:58] average $2,500 for an RO system for your [39:02] primary drinking faucet. Uh, and then [39:05] that covers, you know, their ability to [39:08] treat their drinking water for that. Um, [39:12] >> I don't want anybody to watch this later [39:14] and panic. [39:15] >> Yeah. [39:17] >> So, is that that is that So, I on in the [39:20] middle of like page four, it talks about [39:23] um residents being very concerned about [39:26] their their drinking water and [39:27] protecting and restoring it with 84% I [39:30] think being very concerned. So, is that [39:33] it? Is that the outreach and kind of the [39:35] communication, the education? Is that [39:37] what's behind this number or would you [39:39] say there's other things behind this [39:41] 84%. [39:45] So this these numbers came from our uh [39:48] phase one outreach to for our watershed [39:52] plan update that we're still in the [39:53] process of full. So these percentages [39:55] came out of questions that we were [39:57] asking the public during that input [39:59] phase. [40:02] Yes. So, it's more generalized, not [40:04] quite that targeted. [40:06] >> Okay. [40:07] >> And we also do offer for our cost share [40:09] program um well decommissions. So, you [40:12] know, any wells that are not being used, [40:15] you can decommission them so that [40:17] they're no longer a conduit, you know, [40:19] to groundwater. So, that that is [40:21] something to play back to our caution [40:23] program that we also address some [40:25] groundwater as well. [40:36] On page three towards the bottom, sorry [40:38] this is a busy page. It talks about the [40:41] development review starts with an [40:42] optional development review. Can you [40:44] talk more like explain what this is and [40:46] talk more about this process improvement [40:48] and outcomes connected to it? [40:50] >> Sure. [40:51] >> That's that's me. Um, so when somebody [40:55] is wants to develop in Scott County, [40:57] they want to they want to plant, they [40:59] want to split a piece of land, they want [41:00] to build an industrial park, they want [41:02] to do something big, they have the [41:04] option to do what we call a development [41:06] review team meeting, a dirt meeting, and [41:08] it's a chance to get all the departments [41:11] of the county that are going to review, [41:13] comment, approve a development in a room [41:17] together with the applicant. Um, we [41:19] invite the townships, we invite Mindot, [41:22] we invite other water um, organizations [41:24] that are involved, the DNR. Um, it's a [41:27] really good chance to have somebody [41:29] present to like, hey, this is what I'm [41:30] thinking of doing. What do you see here [41:33] that might be an issue or does this look [41:35] good? Should I keep going? Um, so it's a [41:38] really good chance before an official [41:40] application is made and that timeline [41:42] starts ticking and people have spent a [41:44] lot of money on a design to get [41:46] feedback. um be aware of issues, know [41:50] what our county standards are um and [41:53] stuff like that. So, it's been a very um [41:56] you know, developers really appreciate [41:57] it, landowners like it. It's a good [41:59] chance to really get feedback before [42:01] people get too far down a process that [42:03] can't it's hard to turn around. [42:06] >> You don't charge for those. [42:08] >> There's a small fee, but compared to [42:10] like the full development review [42:11] process. [42:12] So, um, it's it's well worth the the few [42:16] hundred it costs to to have one of these [42:18] meetings and very few things will slow [42:20] down a project more than something wet [42:23] on your property that you weren't [42:24] expecting to be there. And there are a [42:26] lot more wetlands and ravines and things [42:28] out there that people probably didn't [42:30] realize I mean were there. So, um, it [42:34] can really really slow down a process if [42:37] we don't get ahead of it. So, really [42:39] helps. [42:41] Thank you. [42:48] >> You referred to um LGUs earlier [42:53] and um one of the things that I'm most [42:57] proud of in my role is the partnerships [42:59] with my local partners. Um so on page [43:02] six also it speaks to your [43:04] relationships. So, can you tell us about [43:07] some of the partnerships that you have [43:09] with the local municipalities and and [43:12] how you all work together? [43:14] >> Yeah, I'll let Melissa take that because [43:16] she generally leads a lot of our [43:17] partnership work. But, I mean, we're it. [43:19] This is it. We don't have more staff [43:21] hiding somewhere. So, if it's water, [43:23] it's us or our partners and the work we [43:26] do with our partners. So, um Melissa's [43:28] done a lot with that. [43:30] >> So, on page six, there's quite a list [43:33] there. Um so let's start with the [43:35] aquatic invasive species prevention [43:36] program. So I partner with [43:39] um Parlake Spring Lake Wershed District. [43:42] We get a grant from the state currently [43:44] to address aquatic invasive species [43:46] prevention. Um we give them some of [43:49] those some of that funding so that they [43:51] can do surveys, they can treat for curly [43:54] leaf. Um I also work with the lake [43:57] association. So there's um [44:00] it's one, two, three. There's four lakes [44:02] that I work with that we also provide [44:05] funding and survey work um as part of [44:07] that program. Um and then I work with [44:10] the DNR quite a bit with that program as [44:12] well. um the Scott Clean Water Education [44:15] Program. It's really a partnership of [44:18] multiple different um organizations in [44:21] the county. several cities, Savage, [44:24] Shakape, [44:25] um Prior Lake, [44:29] uh Vermilion, [44:32] um our SWCD really administers it for [44:35] us, but uh a couple of the townships are [44:38] on there because if they're an MS4 [44:40] township, um we really developed that [44:42] program in order to meet the educational [44:45] requirements of the municipal separate [44:48] storm sewer system permit. [44:51] Um, [44:53] trying to think of who else is in there. [44:59] Um, I'll skip erosion sediment control [45:02] because that's not really my program to [45:04] talk about [45:06] tax program. Stream monitoring. Um, I [45:10] really work a lot with our SWCD. We hire [45:12] them to do the monitoring for us on [45:14] that. [45:16] Um, [45:18] the community assisted lake monitoring [45:20] program. So, I find volunteers on our [45:21] lakes. Um, I work with them. I give them [45:24] a kit and throughout the um growing [45:27] season, they take samples every two [45:29] weeks. Um, and I go out and collect [45:31] their samples a couple times a month or [45:34] I should say [45:36] every couple months I collect their [45:37] samples and then I work with Met [45:38] Council. They pick up the samples and [45:41] and take them and analyze them over the [45:43] over the winter. [45:46] Um, those are kind of the main ones that [45:49] I work on. And I won't speak to all of [45:50] them. I'll let share the talk here with [45:52] some of the others. [45:54] >> Um yeah, the cost share program. So [45:57] there's actually a couple examples in [45:58] your packet um where we worked with the [46:00] city of Savage and city of Shakape on [46:03] projects. So it actually touches on our [46:06] um techn uh technical assistance and [46:08] cost share program and also the second [46:10] to last one the watershed based [46:12] implementation funding. So, um, at those [46:15] meetings, you know, Vanessa will be at [46:16] them and basically getting all the LGUs [46:19] in a room and figuring out what projects [46:20] are out there. And that's how these two [46:23] kind of came about where um both the [46:26] cities identified these areas of u [46:30] development that they actually wanted to [46:32] enhance um and actually go above and [46:35] beyond the standards and it was an [46:38] opportunity for us to partner with them. [46:40] Um so City of Savage um redeveloped a [46:45] storm water pond um and included iron [46:48] enhanced sand filters uh to basically [46:52] you know bind to the dissolved [46:53] phosphorus um better capture that. And [46:56] then the um city of Shakipi one is [46:59] actually um it was a street [47:01] reconstruction job right down by [47:03] basically Malards if you know where that [47:05] restaurant is towards the river. Um so [47:07] they um installed saffl baffles. Um [47:10] basically it's just as storm water gets [47:13] into the storm drain it reduces the [47:16] turbulence or the vortex of those [47:18] suspended solids and it actually allows [47:20] them to better drop out. So that way you [47:23] can come back and clean those out um [47:26] later um and so then they wouldn't [47:28] actually be going down into the river. [47:30] So just two examples of you know [47:33] collaboration um that we do you know [47:35] with our partners. [47:39] >> So I would say the bulk of the work that [47:41] we do you don't see it because we're [47:43] usually doing it through our partners. [47:44] We do it because obviously we're a small [47:46] staff and it's the best way to get the [47:48] work done but it's also the most [47:49] costefficient way to do it the most [47:51] effective for our residents and it's the [47:52] best choice for our resources. Again [47:54] lakes like anything else don't care [47:55] about political boundaries. So when we [47:57] can get everybody together as a group [47:59] and say, "Okay, everybody who has some [48:02] little foot in this one, what do we want [48:04] to prioritize for this lake together?" [48:06] We're all on the same page and we could [48:08] do things together, right? We will [48:10] oftentimes decide what's best for us to [48:12] do on behalf of everybody. Like Schwep [48:15] is a good example. We contribute roughly [48:17] about a hundred,000 to $60,000 a year [48:20] towards that clean water education [48:22] partnership budget. And then that [48:24] provides outdoor education and [48:26] environmental education and water [48:27] resource education for the whole county, [48:30] not just our little corner of it. And by [48:32] doing that, that saves all those cities [48:34] and townships from basically duplicating [48:36] the same work. And then we also utilize [48:39] things like that to come up with [48:40] consistent messaging and rules and [48:41] regulations so that you know people [48:43] don't care. Again, I live in the city, [48:46] but I don't if I go to the next city [48:48] over, like if the rules are different, [48:50] that's just awkward and confusing. So, [48:53] we use that partnership together to come [48:55] up with consistent rules and regulations [48:57] as best we can and try to have [48:59] consistent language to make it again [49:01] easier for residents to do the right [49:03] thing, the things that they have to do. [49:05] And then again, that saves everybody [49:06] time and money. Um, so oftentimes you [49:09] don't actually see us through the things [49:10] that we do. Uh but oftentimes we're one [49:13] of the bigger drivers behind it. Um and [49:15] then again, as these guys have [49:16] mentioned, one of the biggest things we [49:18] actually do is go after grants for [49:20] everybody and then um based upon what [49:22] everybody gets together in Scott County, [49:25] what does everybody want to really focus [49:26] on, we'll help everybody get that [49:28] funding. [49:30] Sorry. [49:34] So I got that right. Like this is the [49:36] first time you've done a Scott County [49:38] delivers exactly like this. And so as [49:41] you put these packets together, [49:43] sometimes it gives you a chance to kind [49:45] of step back and look at kind of your [49:47] programming and your measures. And so [49:50] were there things that kind of either [49:53] surprised you or that you were like, [49:55] "Boy, I wish we'd measure this [49:57] differently or have this or um like gaps [50:01] within programming [50:04] >> or were you just like?" [50:06] >> Yeah, I mean I can I can touch base on [50:08] that. Um, so yeah, sometimes it doesn't [50:12] always tell the story in some of these [50:14] metrics like Melissa was alluding to [50:16] before, you know, creating community [50:18] capacity and getting people to um do [50:21] projects on their own. So, you know, [50:24] we're obviously doing a lot of work and [50:26] that's hopefully contributing to the [50:29] improvements in water quality, but we're [50:31] not the only ones. You know, there are [50:32] people out there that are doing things [50:34] on their own. Um, one example that we [50:37] recently had was where a land owner in a [50:40] development converted over some of their [50:41] turf grass into native grasses. So, that [50:44] goes down in our books as like one [50:46] project, right? We get to count that [50:48] one. But then what that that person did [50:51] is they actually got their whole [50:52] neighborhood to do that same thing. [50:55] Well, that doesn't necessarily count [50:57] towards our project because they didn't [50:58] use our funding, but it's still an [51:01] improvement. it's still they're building [51:03] upon you know what we're hoping to get [51:05] to. You know we can't financially get [51:07] ourselves out of everything. So we are [51:10] kind of working on some you know side [51:13] key performance indicators that you know [51:16] hopefully can tell a broader story as [51:18] well about you know other things that [51:20] maybe aren't always being captured in [51:22] some of these metrics but are still [51:24] contributing factors. [51:27] And that's really significant because [51:29] since 2011, that's what we've set out to [51:31] do was to change people's perspective [51:35] and behaviors to start doing these [51:37] things by themselves without our help. [51:39] And now we're starting to see that. [51:42] >> So that was really exciting to see. [51:47] >> I I'm really biased. I love the way we [51:50] do stuff here in Scott County. There are [51:52] only two counties in the entire state of [51:54] Minnesota that operate a watershed [51:55] agency. Us and Carver. Rest of the [51:58] state, no other county deals with what [51:59] you guys get to deal with. [52:01] >> But it's amazing because really the [52:03] reality is is water is the epitome of [52:06] systems thinking. It touches everything [52:07] and it works on everything. So there is [52:09] no real linear approach to water. But [52:11] that also creates those challenges like [52:13] how do we talk about this kind of stuff [52:16] when it's everywhere? So I think having [52:19] to do like doing this again um maybe [52:22] instead of trying to capture everything [52:24] we might just pick one topic. Um but we [52:28] get so excited. We love what we do. Um [52:31] but because it's a really it's a real [52:32] systems thinking approach. [52:35] >> It's hard to keep it [52:38] contained. [52:40] I think you have taken this though from [52:42] a very [52:45] scientific if you will as a lay person [52:48] um [52:50] process or you know the way it's laid [52:52] out here and just hearing the passion [52:56] and the um the way you're able to [52:58] translate it into things that I as [53:01] someone who knows very little about what [53:04] you do if nothing um you make it [53:07] exciting for us too. I mean, this really [53:08] has been something that I've learned a [53:11] lot just in the last hour. So, thank [53:14] you. [53:16] >> Those guys do really great work. They [53:17] work really hard. Even if you don't see [53:18] them, they're working really hard. [53:21] >> With respect to time, do does anybody [53:23] have any final burning questions or [53:25] anything from the panelists that you [53:27] didn't feel like you wanted to say or [53:29] you didn't get to say and you wanted to? [53:32] >> I do. I want to touch base on our CIPs. [53:34] Um I it it kind of follows the theme of [53:38] like going unseen, but we might get the [53:42] credit for doing this project, but our [53:46] survey department, our you know, highway [53:48] department, [53:50] um all these different departments help [53:52] us out and they do it at the drop of a [53:56] hat. They they don't like ask questions [53:58] or whatever. They're just willing to [54:00] help out. So, you know, you approach [54:02] them, the surveyors, hey, I need some [54:04] help with the easements, you know, [54:06] generating those for this project. [54:08] >> Not a problem, right? And they're [54:10] willing to do that. And so, I want to [54:12] make sure that they get recognized as [54:13] well that there's so many more people [54:16] that go into these large scale projects [54:18] that don't their names aren't on any of [54:20] this stuff, but they're there. They're [54:22] doing the work. They're helping us out [54:24] with construction inspections or, you [54:26] know, land records or recording those [54:28] easements for us. just there's so many [54:30] more people that go into it. So, I want [54:32] to make sure that they get credit for [54:34] this stuff as well. [54:35] >> And that sharing of resources again is [54:37] unique to us because if we were a [54:39] freestanding agency, we wouldn't be able [54:42] to do that. So, we get to leverage and [54:44] share because we have that. [54:48] >> Thank you. Thank you all for educating [54:50] us today and for your work on this [54:51] packet. With that, I'll turn it back to [54:53] Mr. Chair and the rest of the [54:54] commissioners. [54:55] >> Great. Thank you so much. There was a [54:57] lot to learn and I think we might have a [54:58] few questions. I see a reach for a [55:00] button. [55:00] >> Well, I I just want to I've been going [55:04] to the WPC meetings for the last year [55:06] and appreciate um getting to know all of [55:09] you better, but also the volunteers that [55:13] are so integral in the work that you do. [55:17] So, um but I want have do have question. [55:19] We didn't really talk about invasive [55:21] species, but I think I heard that zebra [55:24] muscles and are are found in all of our [55:26] lakes. Now, is that true? [55:30] Not all of our lakes. No. Um, [55:32] unfortunately, we recently found zebra [55:35] muzzles that were confirmed in Cedar [55:37] Lake this year, and we've been trying [55:38] really hard to protect Cedar Lake. Um, [55:41] they've ne they haven't been found in [55:43] McMahon or Odow or Thol. Um, that's what [55:47] I know of the WO lakes. I know that um [55:49] Spring and Prior Lakes have them and [55:53] Pike Lake. So that's in Pri Spring Lake [55:56] watershed district. [55:59] Um [56:01] I think those are the only lakes. There [56:03] might be one more. Oh, Jeffers Pond. I [56:06] don't know how they got in there, but [56:07] they were found in there as well. So, [56:10] um, or you know, some of the grant [56:12] funding that we get from the aquatic [56:13] invasive species prevention grant, we [56:15] use a large portion of that towards [56:17] watercraft inspections to try to prevent [56:19] this. [56:21] You know, we don't have enough of that [56:23] money to have inspectors on there seven [56:26] days a week, you know. So, somehow Cedar [56:29] Lake got infected and it's it's well [56:32] established, we've discovered this year. [56:34] So, um, so not all of our lakes have it. [56:38] cross our fingers they won't get it. [56:40] >> Okay. [56:41] >> But it really uh what we found is [56:43] watercraft inspections um are really a [56:46] key component to helping educate land [56:49] owners at the location that you want [56:51] them to change their behavior. You know, [56:53] we want them to come to the access with [56:57] the plug out so that they don't have any [56:59] water in their boats that came from [57:00] another lake. They we want them to come [57:02] with nothing, no plants, no mud, nothing [57:06] that can be seen stuck to their trailer [57:08] or their boat. Um, so those inspectors [57:11] teach them that in three minutes. [57:14] >> Okay. [57:16] >> Thank you. [57:18] >> Any other questions? [57:21] >> Probably not a question. Thank you. A [57:23] lot of information. I think this is [57:25] probably because we had a a similar [57:27] conversation with the townships last [57:29] night about code enforcement. So, I [57:30] really was interested. We talked about [57:32] the the warnings and the citations, [57:35] especially with erosion control and and [57:37] building and um and talked about some [57:40] really true barriers. I understand, you [57:43] know, that sometimes that's not going to [57:44] be done when the project's done, [57:46] landscapes are involved. So, I I think [57:47] I'd like to know more about that in the [57:49] future and and I'm sure you have some [57:51] ideas about how how we can do better [57:53] because I think we've learned from our [57:55] other activities it it doesn't just [57:58] solve it if we give citations [58:01] um because we can't charge enough to [58:03] make it worth it. [58:04] But yeah, so I'm interested in that and [58:06] and I don't know if you have any any [58:08] short comments about it, but that might [58:10] be something that that as as we have [58:13] future future conversations to keep [58:15] brainstorming and talking about how how [58:17] we can be sure that people um comply [58:20] with what they're supposed to comply to [58:21] in those circumstances. [58:24] >> Um so I'll take that one. Um actually we [58:26] we just had a meeting earlier today to [58:29] work on refining um a new permitting [58:32] process to try and address some of these [58:34] issues that we've been having with our [58:36] erosion and sediment control permits. Um [58:39] they're tough because the the ones that [58:41] are going to cause problems are always [58:42] going to cause problems and it's not an [58:45] easy um problem to solve but yes we are [58:49] working on it. [58:50] >> Yeah. Yeah. And then the water resource [58:52] scale committee this year uh priority is [58:55] coming up with again streamlined [58:57] consistent language across the county [58:59] that we can all use whether you're in [59:01] Savage, Shakipi, the WMO, Elgo New [59:04] Market and that you know it's kind of a [59:06] one-stop okay this is what I need to do. [59:08] This is where I need to go and trying to [59:10] again educate and get ahead of the game [59:13] but then also trying to be more [59:15] consistent and streamlined. Just trying [59:17] to make it easier trying to make it [59:19] universal. So it's not like, oh, I [59:21] thought it was this because it was over [59:22] here or this is over there. [59:24] >> Thank you. I appreciate that. [59:27] >> So I've got a question. Ryan, you talked [59:29] about how we collaborate and there's [59:31] another question line of questioning [59:32] about how we partner and which I think [59:34] at the county I feel like we're kind of [59:37] known for that trying to, you know, how [59:38] do we regionalize? How do we think [59:40] outside the box? I know cliche, I get [59:42] it, but how do we lower the cost of [59:44] government, improve better outcomes? So [59:46] this line of questioning, really one [59:48] question comes from that. And it goes to [59:50] Megan. Ready for this? And it's a little [59:52] little strange, especially on a cold day [59:54] today. Not that strange, but catch [59:56] basins. So, Shako just did the baffles, [59:59] some sort of baffles that minimize the [60:01] vortex, whatever, so you're not washing [60:02] stuff out in the river. Couple of us sit [60:04] on the mosquito control board, and [60:06] there's talk about catch basins that [60:08] harbor certain types of vectors, as they [60:11] like to call them, that um tend to be a [60:14] little more disease laden than other [60:16] vectors or other types of mosquitoes. [60:19] Are there catch basins that are less wet [60:23] or or that are um don't promote mosquito [60:26] larvae and and that process to keep [60:29] disease control down um that doesn't [60:32] cost an arm and a leg and is effective. [60:37] >> Yeah, you're right. It's one of these [60:39] you try and solve one problem and you [60:40] just create another problem kind of [60:42] thing. [60:42] >> Yeah. [60:43] >> Um not every catch basin has standing [60:45] water in it. Um, these ones that Ryan [60:48] were talking about do have what is [60:50] called a sump in the bottom, which is, [60:52] you know, stand, you know, four to six [60:53] feet of standing water to allow the [60:55] sediment to um, disperse. Um, [60:59] I haven't really heard of people [61:01] treating those individual catch basins, [61:03] but it's not that large of a volume and [61:05] they probably could be treated with [61:07] mosquito pellets or something like that. [61:10] Um, it really depends also on how much [61:13] how much rain we get, how fast water's [61:14] moving through there, how long it's [61:16] sitting there. You know, there's a lot [61:17] that goes into it [61:18] >> and those are all the things we hear [61:20] about in those on those meetings and and [61:22] and for some areas of the city, they [61:24] they do treat them. Um, but you start [61:27] extrapolating from the metropolitan [61:30] area, you know, with them. [61:32] >> I mean, yeah, you can't treat every [61:33] single one. [61:34] >> It's a it's a it's a large number. So, I [61:36] was just curious about that. not that [61:37] we're going to go and retrofit, you [61:38] know. Um I was just curious since we had [61:41] you here. [61:42] >> Um [61:43] >> Mr. Chair, I can I used to work for [61:45] mosquito control back in the day and so [61:47] I can tell you that was actually a day [61:49] that you look forward to work cuz you'd [61:52] have your treatment out the window and [61:53] you just dump it right right into the [61:56] >> Yeah. [61:56] >> So it wasn't a lot of uh a lot of heavy [61:58] lifting that day. So but it was um you'd [62:01] identify ones that actually held water [62:03] and ones that didn't. So you weren't [62:05] wasting your material down ones that are [62:07] dry. So [62:08] >> yeah. Yeah. Then you got that whole [62:10] question which people ask that of course [62:12] all the time. [62:13] >> Um yeah, the invasive species that's [62:15] another one I that is that's a tough [62:18] one. That's a really really tough one. [62:20] Um and I don't know what the answer is. [62:22] I know when I sat on the one of the [62:23] wersheds they talked about well maybe [62:25] the state is looking at and and maybe [62:28] you can check me on this. Well, maybe we [62:30] permit every dock and we're already [62:32] permitting watercrafts for the most [62:33] part, but every dock and lift that's, [62:35] you know, moving around. And I was like, [62:37] holy cow, that seems um the things that [62:40] actually move are, you know, jet skis, [62:42] boats, pontoons are already licensed, [62:46] but it sound like it was a next level. [62:48] Like now we're I'm not saying they're [62:50] putting a tracker on there, but some [62:52] tracking type system like holy cow. Um, [62:56] has that gone anywhere? Is there any [62:58] chatter in your fun little groups that [63:00] you get to meet with? [63:03] >> So, I I was a few weeks ago on a um [63:07] meeting with the DNR and other AIS [63:09] coordinators across the state. Um they [63:12] are starting to have discussions on [63:14] options on how we can fund the [63:16] prevention program. again. Um I haven't [63:20] heard any solutions yet, but you know, [63:22] it is in my work plan in 2027 to get the [63:26] you know, some of the local [63:26] organizations in Scott County that maybe [63:29] we can come up with some ideas ourselves [63:31] on what to do. [63:32] >> Yeah. So, I was just I was just curious [63:34] where that was because yeah, you don't [63:35] want them in water bodies where they're [63:36] not there, but it's like wow, that is a [63:39] tall tall order [63:41] >> and it's duck season. You got decoys [63:42] coming and going and like, you know, um [63:46] >> Yeah. [63:46] >> Oh, yeah. They can. So, I mean, I happen [63:48] to know a few duck hunters and try to [63:49] clean those things really, really good [63:51] so they're not going in and out of [63:52] different lakes and breathing stuff, but [63:55] >> yeah, Mr. Chair, commissioners, it [63:57] aquatic invasive species again, it's one [63:59] of those that doesn't follow political [64:00] boundaries, right? So, even trying to [64:02] keep it in a count a county level [64:03] management honestly doesn't really make [64:05] a lot of sense. It really is a statewide [64:08] problem and we can help, but [64:12] without it being stateled, it's going to [64:15] be a very uphill battle. So, so what [64:17] you're saying is the the lakes in the [64:19] blue districts versus the lakes and [64:21] streams and rivers in the red districts, [64:23] you're not seeing any difference in [64:25] >> it is proximity related. But I mean, you [64:29] know, if you were going to take your [64:30] boat to Prior Lake and then you want to [64:34] go up north, what are the chances are [64:36] you're going to bring your own boat if [64:37] you already have the boat? [64:40] >> What can we do in Scott County to help [64:43] >> you're right to coordinate? We're now [64:45] coordinating across the state. [64:47] Yep. [64:49] Fun stuff on a cold afternoon. Any other [64:53] questions? Otherwise, thank you so much [64:56] for this uh information. I hope we got a [64:57] few viewers. We're we're going to check [64:59] the trend on that YouTube channel and [65:01] see when you got real nerdy. Did that [65:02] did that go off or did that [65:05] >> immediate sign off right there. These [65:07] guys boring me. [65:09] >> No, it was good stuff. It was good [65:11] stuff. So, thank you so much. Really [65:13] appreciate it.