IRWM Grant Program Workshop Props 84 and 1E

1
IRWM Grant Program Workshop Props 84 and 1E

• Department of Water Resources Sept 21, 25, and 26
  2007

2
Agenda

• Welcome Introductions
• IRWM Plan Standards
• Break
• Planning Grant Program
• Implementation Grant Program
• Meeting Wrap Up

3
Prop 50 Round 2 Quick Update

• 28 applications received
• 11 disqualified
• Funds requested far exceed funds available
• Northern California 105.5 million
• Southern California 92.5 million
• Schedule
• Announce Call Back list November 2007
• Step 2 Applications due Early 2008

4
Budget Update

• Status of appropriations
• Proposition 50
• Proposition 84
• Proposition 1E
• Impacts to the Grant Program

5
Schedule

• September 2007 Scoping workshops
• December 2007 Release draft guidelines
• January-February 2008 Public Review
• Will include public meetings
• April 2008 Release final guidelines
• Solicitations to follow

6
Overview of Prop 84 IRWM

• Public Resources Code (PRC) 75026 et seq.
• PRC 75026 (a)
• Funding for local public agencies
• Defines what an IRWM plan shall do
• Defines projects eligible for funding
• Consistent with an adopted IRWM
• Multiple benefit
• One or more project elements, PRC 75026 (a)
  1-11
• PRC 75026 (b) Program Preferences

7

• PRC 75027
• 1 Billion for IRWM
• Allocated to CWP Hydrologic Regions sub-regions
  
• Funding Areas
• May be multiple IRWM regions in a funding area
• 100 million Interregional
• Multi-regional needs
• Issues of statewide significance

37
73
57
138
27
60
52
215
36
114
91
in millions
8
Overview of Prop 84 IRWM

• PRC 75028 (a)
• Competitive grants within each funding area
• May establish standards procedures
• Development approval of local project selection
  processes
• Defer to approved local project selection
• Review projects only for consistency with PRC
  75026
• PRC 75028 (b) No reallocation of funds

9
Overview of Prop 1E Stormwater-Flood Management

• PRC 5096.827
• 300 million
• Stormwater Flood Management Projects
• Designed to manage stormwater runoff to reduce
  flood damage
• Where feasible, provide other benefits
• Groundwater Recharge, Water Quality, Ecosystem
  restoration

10
Overview of Prop 1E Stormwater-Flood Management

• Non-state cost share of not less than 50
• Not part of the State Plan of Flood Control
• PRC 5096.805(j)
• Consistent with applicable IRWM plan
• Consistent with applicable regional water quality
  control plans (Basin Plan)

11
Purpose of Meeting

• To present program concepts for IRWM Program
  Guidelines and to solicit public input on those
  concepts.

12
Intended Outcomes

• DWR receives early, specific input on IRWM
  program concepts.
• Interested stakeholders understand the current
  status of DWRs IRWM Program Guidelines.

13
Framework

• Established South Coast Sub-regions
• Focus first on quality planning
• Heighten emphasis on flood management
• Increase involvement with regional efforts

14
Guideline Process

• Focus on standards development
• Draft Guidelines to include
• Draft Standards, Guidance, Planning PSP
• Guidance would contain
• Program information
• Explanation, examples, resources for standards
• Planning and Implementation Grant Process
• Finalize Standards, Guidance, Planning PSP
• Implementation PSP come after

15
Guideline Process

• Advantages
• Focus on IRWM Plan and Standards
• Allows more time and input on Implementation
  Process
• Better coordination with timing of funds
• Disadvantages
• Longer time for a complete picture
• Piecemealing

16
Discussion/QA
17
IRWM Plan Standards
18
IRWM Plan Standards

• Concept Improved IRWM planning
• Modify standards to provide impetus to
• Improve quality and content of plans
• While still allowing access to grant funds
• Eliminate Prop 50 minimum plan standards
• Proposal
• Standards would not change
• Implementation PSPs define an appropriate
  quality indicator
• Appropriate quality indicator may change each
  round

19
IRWM Plan Standards

• Advantages
• Standards remain constant
• Can gain access to funding sooner
• Disadvantages
• Can be impetus for early poor planning
• Other options
• Raise standards each round
• Raise standards all at once and hold all plans to
  that benchmark

20
IRWM Plan Standards

• Regions will need to coordinate plan adoption and
  plan modifications
• Mechanisms
• Specified in each IRWM Plan?
• DWR supply format(s) in Guidelines or PSP?
• Implication
• Planning Grants
• Implementation Grants

21
IRWM Plan Standards

• Proposed Changes from Prop 50
• Mandated Changes
• Bond law changes
• Process Improvement Changes
• Standards and separate Guidance
• Prop 50 lessons learned
• Other changes, such as
• Climate Change
• Governance
• Flood management guidance

22
Governance

• Propose to include
• Regional water management group standard
• Plan Adoption
• Plan must describe chosen governance
• How governance addresses functions
• Propose replacement of Implementation standard
  with Governance and Project Review standards

23
Project Review

• Prioritization standard PRC75028.(a)
• Propose to include
• IRWM plan describe the specific process
• List of project review factors that process must
  incorporate
• List or link to list of projects post process
• Reduce scope of DWRs review of specific projects

24
Regional Description

• Propose guidance section topics
• Using water system manmade and natural to help
  define boundaries
• Include water management issue problem
  statement

25
Regional Description

• IRWM regions vs. Funding Areas
• IRWM regions do not have to match funding areas
• Multiple regions in a funding area are OK
• Desirable Know and cooperate/coordinate with
  neighboring IRWMs
• Undesirable Overlapping, conflicting,
  non-regional

26
Objectives

• Propose to allow prioritization of the objectives
• Propose removal of Regional Priority Standard
• Regional priorities covered by prioritized
  objectives and project review process
• Objectives must be measurable

27
Water Management Strategies

• CWP Resource Management Strategies
• Propose Guidance section include
• Definition of strategy
• Importance in diversification of water portfolio
• Definition and examples of what is meant by
  consider each strategy
• http//www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/strategies/index
  .cfm

28
Integration

• Propose standard change to be inclusive of
  different types of integration
• Not just water management strategies
• Propose Guidance Section include
• Information on what is meant by integration,
  examples, and types
• Integration as evidence of functional
  collaboration

29
Technical Analysis and Plan Performance

• Propose to separate into 2 standards
• Plan Performance
• Performance measures and monitoring
• Technical Analysis
• What IRWM did to figure out the picture on the
  planning horizon

30
Statewide Priorities

• Propose to replace this standard
• Statewide Priorities is now a Program Preference
• Propose to replace with
• Relation to statewide issues
• Interregional issues
• Relation to Resource specific plans, such as
• CA water plan
• Conservancy plans
• Forest plans

31
Climate Change

• Propose to add consideration of Climate Change
• Governors and DWRs emphasis on Climate Change
• IRWM Plans key mechanism in
• Preparing/planning for effects
• Mitigation
• Components of such a standard
• Planning based on effects
• Mitigation of greenhouse gases
• Stand alone?
• Imbedded in other standards?

32
Discussion/QA
33
Planning Grants
34
Planning Grants

• Concept
• 2 years of funding
• 2 rounds per year
• Max grant 1M per IRWM effort
• What does that mean?
• 25 funding match
• Non-state funds

35
Planning Grants

• Concept, continued
• Focus on Plan as the Product
• Development, updating, or improvement
• No studies, assessments, or other activities that
  do not result in new, revised, complete portion
  of plan meeting standards
• Evaluated on how product meets IRWM Plan Standards

36
Planning Grants

• Concept continued
• Close of application periods spaced 6 months
  apart
• Allow for review, award, debrief, and
  reapplication
• 1st solicitation of the year
• Award up to 75 of funds available
• 2nd solicitation of the year
• Award up to the balance of funds
• 25 of years funds available roll over from 1st
  solicitation
• Or variation

37
Example Funding Cycle
DWR Awards Up to Balance
DWR Awards Up to 75
38
Encouraging Regional Flood Management Planning

• Additional funding from Proposition 84
• Chapter 3 Flood Control
• Use to support
• Improving existing Flood Management portion of
  IRWM Plan
• Begin planning Flood Management issues regionally

39
Linking Regional Flood Planning to IRWM Plans

• Expand the Flood Management component of IRWM
  Plans to encourage regional flood management
  planning
• Additional funding for regional flood planning
  through the Planning Grant application

40
Linking Regional Flood Planning to IRWM Plans

• Why
• Flood management issues are already addressed in
  IRWM plans
• Leverage existing regional efforts
• Interdisciplinary, multi-objective approach
• Mirror integration of flood planning into CWP

41
Regional Flood Planning

• Propose to include guidance section on Regional
  Flood Planning
• Grant applicant needs to identify requested
  sources of funding
• IRWM Planning
• Regional Flood Management
• Additive funding

42
Discussion/QA
43
Implementation Grants
44
Implementation Grants Concepts

• Schedule funding to encourage IRWM Planning
• Improve existing plans
• Develop new plans
• Multiple rounds of funding
• No maximum grant amount
• 25 Minimum cost share
• Option to waive

45
Implementation Grants Concepts

• Use 1 application for Prop 84 and 1E funds
• Separate funding sources
• Applicant indicates types of funds sought
• Cost share dependant on funding source
• Match funding to project type
• Minimize burden of multiple separate solicitations

46
Implementation Grants Concepts

• Depending on project types, grant award could
  consist of
• P84 IRWM Funding Area funds
• P84 IRWM Interregional funds
• P84 IRWM DAC funds
• Prop 1E Stormwater-Flood Management funds

47
Allocation of Funding Area Funds

• Must be competitive
• Allocation of funding
• Input provided DWR will consider
• Input not provided DWR decides

48
Implementation Grants Concepts

• Pre-screening
• Step 1
• Step 2

49
Pre-Screening-Early Involvement

• Avoid repeat of Prop 50 Round 1 consolidations
• Identify regional planning efforts
• Early identification of consolidation needs
• Evaluate funding needs
• Formal process vs. Ad-hoc process

50
Implementation Grants

• Step 1
• Evaluate IRWM Plan
• IRWM Plan must meet quality standard established
  in PSP to be invited to Step 2

51
Implementation Grants

• Step 2 Evaluation of Proposal
• Defer to regional project selection
• Evaluate
• Work plan
• Consistency with standards
• Consistency with PRC 75026
• Funding source requirements
• Will look different from Prop 50

52
Stormwater-Flood Management

• Eligible grant recipient Be inclusive
• Max grant amount 30 million/project
• Must demonstrate reduction in flood damage
• How to guidance

53
Stormwater-Flood Management

• Non-state cost share of not less than 50
• Cannot waive or reduce
• Not part of the State Plan of Flood Control
• Need to provide technical assistance
• Tiered Evaluation
• Obviously not part
• Unclear DWR consultation
• Detailed technical analysis

54
Stormwater-Flood Management

• Consistent with applicable IRWM plan
• Must be included in an IRWM plan
• Consistent with Basin Plan
• Coordinate with RWQCB
• DWR will also coordinate with SWRCB
• Prop 84 Stormwater Grant funding
• Input on water quality issues

55
Stormwater-Flood ManagementPending Legislation

• SB 1002
• AB 739 Program Preferences
• Not receiving other state funding for flood
  control or flood prevention
• Multiple Benefits
• Water quality improvement
• Ecosystem benefits
• Reduction of in-stream erosion sedimentation
• Groundwater recharge

56
Discussion/QA
57
Wrap up

• Electronic Input
• Word compatible file
• Emailed to jyun_at_water.ca.gov
• Received by October 19, 2007
• Questions
• email Joe Yun
• [phone]
• http//www.grantsloans.water.ca.gov/grants/irwm/in
  tegregio.cfm