The challenges of getting people to care about stormwater management in an area where rainfall is scarce.

By Michael A. Worlton and J. Ryan Christensen

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater programs were introduced to alleviate the quantity of impaired surface water bodies located within the United States. When people consider the requirements of the Phase I and Phase II programs, they might envision best management practices (BMPs) being put in place to minimize polluted stormwater runoff flowing into our nation's treasured streams and lakes. This program provides benefits and makes sense. These water bodies not only serve as a valuable natural resource but also might enhance quality of life.

When applied to the desert Southwest, this vision of the NPDES program is not so easy to grasp. First, very little rainfall is received in desert areas. Second, in the desert, the term "river" is associated more commonly with a dry riverbed than with a flowing body of water. These realities play a significant role in influencing public opinion about stormwater pollution.

With these certainties in mind, regulated municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) throughout the Phoenix, AZ, metropolitan area recently came together to form a regional public outreach organization. This article describes how Phase I and Phase II municipalities worked together to change the way stormwater-quality concerns are perceived in an area where some view these concerns on the same level as UFO sightings. This article will discuss the methods used, challenges encountered, and lessons learned in forming a stormwater public outreach group in the Phoenix metropolitan area.

History

In 1990, large municipalities around Arizona began to face the challenge of regulating the quality of stormwater. The NPDES permit application published on November 19, 1990, brought a new connotation to the word "stormwater" in Arizona. When speaking of stormwater in an arid climate that receives an average rainfall of only about 6 in./yr. (see http://ag.arizona.edu/oals/watershed/highlands/climate.html), pollution is not the first issue that comes to mind. Nonetheless, Arizona's Phase I municipalities worked diligently to successfully implement effective stormwater programs. Representatives from these municipalities shared ideas and information; however, their NPDES permit applications and program details varied from municipality to municipality. Permitted municipalities each developed unique programs to address public outreach, inspections, enforcement, representative rainstorms, and other program requirements.

This individual approach to NPDES issues would change in 1997, when the cities of Tempe, Tucson, Mesa, and Phoenix and Pima County, AZ, petitioned against numeric limitations on water-quality standards (see Defenders of Wildlife v Browner, 98-71080 [September 15, 1999]). The petition process, and the subsequent defense of their petition in a lawsuit brought by Defenders of Wildlife, helped these municipalities form stronger relationships and unify their vision. In the late 1990s, the cities of Glendale and Scottsdale, AZ, also were issued NPDES permits, and they began developing relationships with representatives from other Phase I communities. By this time, the Phase I communities organized themselves to form a fairly cohesive unit with a unified voice.

In early 2000, the State of Arizona's Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) began working toward NPDES permitting program approval (see www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/permits/federal.html#quest). This event sparked the interest of other municipalities, many of which would be designated as regulated MS4s under the Phase II NPDES program. Many of the larger municipalities throughout the state worked together as stakeholders in ADEQ's quest for NPDES primacy. This process formed a working relationship among the Phase I communities and several of the larger Phase II communities.

These events, which formed the foundation for the NPDES program in Arizona, played an important role in bringing municipalities together as partners. Relationships were developed, ideas were shared, and assistance was offered. This atmosphere provided a good foundation for the creation of a regional public outreach group. Several communities realized the benefits of working together on a regional level, and they began exploring the idea of a regional public outreach program.

Forming a Regional Public Outreach Group

The first recommendation in EPA's Phase II Rule for developing public education and outreach programs is to form state or regional partnerships with other governmental entities (EPA Fact Sheet 2.3, January 2000). The EPA Fact Sheet on public education and outreach suggests that regional programs are more cost-effective because they utilize shared resources and existing education and outreach materials. As discussed later, there are additional benefits to regional public outreach groups. These benefits stem from the collective creativity and variety of experience and interests shared by the group.

The concept of regulated communities in Arizona forming partnerships was not new, but a new enthusiasm was generated when public works planners from the City of Scottsdale met with the City of Phoenix's chief water-quality inspector to talk about public education and outreach. This enthusiasm was translated into action, leading to the coordination of a regional meeting.

The Phoenix area

Identifying Membership

The first challenge faced in organizing our regional public outreach group was identifying membership. Before the first meeting could convene, a list of potential group members had to be created. It made the most sense to select municipalities affected by the regulation and located within a common region influenced by the same television and radio stations. It was also important to consider the communities that intermingle within the region. For example, a person who lives in Mesa might work in Phoenix and shop in Scottsdale. Someone from Peoria might work in Glendale and watch Cactus League baseball games in the city of Surprise. The original list of potential members included all known Phase I and Phase II municipalities in the selected region, Maricopa County Flood Control District, Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), ADEQ, and various other municipalities that were potential Phase II candidates. Key contacts for each municipal stormwater program were invited to attend. Once the potential members were identified, it was important that everyone had the opportunity to participate. Meeting announcements were distributed via e-mail, and RSVPs were requested. When a municipality did not respond, a follow-up call was made.

Maintaining Focus

The reason for the first meeting was to identify the level of interest for participation in the group, provide background information about public education and outreach requirements of the NPDES stormwater program, and discuss the viability of implementation. The inaugural meeting to coordinate a regional public outreach effort was held on June 14, 2001. More than 10 municipalities gathered at the Flood Control District of Maricopa County to participate. This historic meeting marked the commencement of a public outreach organization for the Phoenix metropolitan area, now known as STORM. Enthusiasm at the meeting was very encouraging, and many municipalities showed an interest in participating. The interest and support in forming a regional organization were established, but there was no decision or direction regarding where to go from there.

The Phase I municipalities forged ahead independently with their permit reapplications, while the Phase II communities went to seminars, began to budget, and contracted with consultants to prepare for their permit applications. Other priorities and lack of follow-through from this meeting caused a loss of focus, which was the second challenge to the establishment of our regional public outreach group. Almost one year would go by before a second meeting was held.

Another Try

One key to moving forward with the formation of STORM was establishing leadership. At first, several people seemed willing to fill the leadership role. As time passed, however, it became apparent that someone would need to assert himself or herself as a leader. This person needed to take the initiative, assume the role of coordinating with the selected municipalities, and plan meetings. The majority of the representatives from the municipalities were very willing and anxious to participate in the organization, but they had no extra time to dedicate to coordinating the meetings. The leader who took charge had to be willing to assume the majority of the workload before each meeting by organizing meeting locations, inviting the members to attend, and establishing an agenda. A consultant who has represented several Phase I and Phase II communities in the region assumed this role, making it a priority to ensure that the organization was established and interest did not wane. He also was motivated to understand individual needs, maintain good relationships, and stay impartial, since most of the participants were either current or prospective clients. Once this leader stepped forward, the pace quickened.

On May 7, 2002, a second meeting was held to reassert a regional public outreach effort. The goal of this meeting was to jumpstart the group again and establish a plan for the future. Some of the players had changed, so the meeting brought new faces and new questions. It was very well attended and produced tangible results. During the meeting, it became clear that this was the first exposure to NPDES program requirements for some of the municipalities in attendance. It therefore was necessary to provide some background information about the requirements of the Phase II program and the municipalities' responsibilities regarding the program. In addition, the group meeting served as a forum to identify the common goals and to outline the advantages of the group. It quickly became apparent that some of the municipalities desired to have a high level of participation, while others only wanted to become involved after the group had been established.

Both the Phase I and Phase II communities shared a desire to make this regional public outreach effort a success. The Phase I municipalities saw an immediate need to begin a regional partnership so they could integrate it into their existing program, and the Phase II municipalities wanted to capitalize on the experience and resources of the Phase I municipalities. Many were interested in the group's success because there was a feeling that this group could truly have a positive impact on its community and that those who participated in organizing this group would be part of something great. Another perceived benefit of the group was that it could reduce the public outreach burden on the individual municipalities. The Phase I municipalities with years of public outreach experience played a significant role in guiding the group, while the Phase II municipalities showed enthusiasm and unique viewpoints.

Identifying and Dealing With Issues

As subsequent meetings were held, more issues began to come out. Issues encountered in these meetings covered the decision-making process, the administrative model, leadership, and establishing a name and a purpose. Each issue had to be prioritized and then addressed by the group.

Some of the first issues to be tackled revolved around the question of how to make decisions. Buy-in from the whole group was important, but we found that there was always some disagreement about what was the best decision. Consequently, the organization established a policy of majority rule and general consensus. This meant that decisions were narrowed down to the point where a vote could be taken, and then all members were polled to make sure that they could live with the decisions.

The issues of establishing a name and a mission for the group were dealt with next. The group leader generated a list of names to which the group added other names. This was a somewhat painful process because everyone seemed attached to specific ideas or names that they thought were the best. Several creative names, such as "Maricopa County Public Outreach Organization" (MC-POO) and "Storm Water Education Taskforce" (SWET) were cut immediately due to concern that they would have a bad connotation. Eventually, after nearly two hours of deliberation, the name "STormwater Outreach for Regional Municipalities," or STORM, was accepted by the group. The following mission statement also was established: "STORM promotes regional stormwater public education through outreach."

One major issue addressed early on was financing of the organization. This was a very difficult issue because it involved city budgets, intergovernmental cooperation, financial management, and finding an equitable way to distribute the projected costs for the program. Discussion among regional Phase II municipalities revealed common concerns about acquiring the resources to pay for the new program. Their budget for the entire NPDES stormwater program ranged from $10,000 to $500,000. Most of the Phase I communities already had established budgets for public education and outreach, but there was concern about how much could be allocated to the group.

The City of Phoenix already has made a significant investment in outreach and educational materials, freely sharing all the information and materials that it had developed. These materials included storm drain marker design, BMP pamphlets, and a comic-book series detailing the adventures of Storm Drain Dan, a stormwater-quality superhero. Phoenix even volunteered to send electronic copies of its printed materials so that other municipalities could customize them by changing the logos and contact information. Although these materials came at no cost, another goal of STORM was to allow member municipalities to capitalize on the buying power of the group and to distribute the cost for the development of television and radio spots.

Because of timing, most budgets for the 2002-2003 fiscal year had just been established. This allowed STORM members some time to identify the benefits of the group and their level of commitment before worrying about obtaining a budget. Before the group could publish any materials, funding mechanisms needed to be identified. The following funding ideas were presented:

• Base membership fees on distinct population categories, similar to what is done by the National Association of Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies.
• Assess membership fees on a per-capita basis. (i.e., $0.05/person within the municipality).
• Establish in-kind contributions in lieu of membership fees.
• Assess a flat membership fee for all members of the group.
• Pay as you go; provide an à la carte menu of public education and outreach materials that municipalities can buy individually.
• Provide no funding. Use the group to share resources and ideas.

Although the main goal behind the organization of STORM was to provide a mechanism by which the member municipalities could pool their resources, it turned out that the inventory of actual resources was not the first priority. The ideas for funding are still under consideration, but the group is moving forward, establishing the organization model.

Another issue faced was overcoming perceptions that stormwater pollution prevention is an insignificant priority for local government. These perceptions were not limited to the public but also were shared by some city officials and even expressed by potential members of STORM. The perceptions of city officials often go hand in hand with local perceptions. When city managers and councils don't consider the stormwater runoff a high priority, it is unlikely that sufficient funding will be dedicated to the program.

An independent effort was initiated by MAG (an established regional planning organization) to educate and offer assistance to city managers. Another approach to educating decision-makers was for group members to work individually with their municipality's management. This presents an additional opportunity for the group to make an impact. The group discussed these issues and provided recommendations that would assist its members in approaching their decision-makers.

The group also addressed the issue of public perception among their communities. These perceptions also governed the type of outreach that each of the municipalities was interested in. Group members stressed that the stormwater pollution prevention message had to be tailored to meet the needs of the area. While many locations can create storm drain markers with slogans such as "No dumping … drains to ocean" or "No dumping … drains to river," in the Phoenix region a more appropriate slogan would be "No dumping … drains to dry riverbed." Therefore, more creative solutions had to be presented, such as "Only Rain in the Drain" or "Storm Drains … No Dumping." The general feeling was that the message had to target pollution prevention strongly with stormwater undertones. A regional group speaking to the public with a common voice and a consistent message has a much better chance at educating the public than would inconsistent messages from independent sources.

The municipalities also expressed concern about how the group would be controlled. Members would have to be committed to STORM either financially or through service in order to accomplish the organization's mission. Decisions would be made as a group, but someone has to be responsible for following through. The Flood Control District expressed a willingness to be the lead organization and desired to handle the funding through intergovernmental agreements with the member municipalities. This can be a burden for the lead agency, however, and members also were concerned that they would not have sufficient oversight of the lead agency.

To address these concerns, a subcommittee of STORM researched several models for the management of the funds and coordination of contracts. These models include the several existing programs administered by the City of Phoenix, Flood Control District of Maricopa County, and various nonprofit organizations. Based on these models, a lead organization is selected and a structure is established for the administration of STORM.

Lessons Learned

Many challenges have been faced during the establishment of STORM, and many lie ahead. In the process of overcoming these challenges, various lessons were learned that might assist others in developing a regional education and public outreach program.

Understanding Needs

Since the needs of each municipality dictate the direction of the regional education and public outreach group, it is important that these needs be identified. It was interesting to observe that the goal of some municipalities was to utilize the efforts of STORM to totally fulfill the public outreach requirements of their permits. Other municipalities desired only a minimal amount of participation, seeing the organization as merely a purchasing entity that would allow them additional buying power. Respecting and understanding these and other group needs led to a balanced approach in establishing the objectives of the group. Understanding the needs of the group members also helped them remain focused on the issues of highest importance.

Taking the Initiative, Sustaining the Effort

An important lesson was learned from the year lag between the first and second meetings of STORM: finding someone to take the initiative in forming the group and to follow through with implementation was critical to establishing the organization. Although many members had good intentions and desired to help, it wasn't until someone asserted leadership of the group that STORM became a reality. (If the effort is not sustained, little will be gained. Leaders and members of the group must be committed to the effort.) Success in sustaining the organizational effort for STORM was realized through the following process:

• Prepare and organize meeting details and agendas–It is important to meet in a central location and have an agenda that catches the attention of potential members.
• Identify and invite potential members–A key to getting such a strong showing of Phase II municipalities was getting the larger Phase I municipalities involved.
• Follow up on invitations personally–When a municipality neglected to RSVP, a personal follow-up call was made to extend the invitation.
• Make assignments–When the members participate, there is a sense of ownership and greater buy-in.
• Sustain the effort for future meetings–This was done by setting a date and time for the next meeting before adjourning.

As this process was repeated, the group began looking ahead to the next meeting and the momentum continued to build.

Encourage Cooperation Between Phase I and Phase II Communities

Cooperation between Phase I and Phase II communities was essential to the success of STORM. Although many of the local Phase I communities already established independent public education and outreach programs, they wanted these programs to be more effective and desired to help Phase II municipalities with their programs. The Phase II municipalities wanted to take advantage of the experience and wisdom of the Phase I municipalities. This interdependence encouraged cooperation, which provided the group with added enthusiasm, accelerated the pace, and helped establish an organization that could reach the entire region.

Maintaining Control

One of the great challenges was keeping the members of the group focused on the tasks at hand. As with most large meetings, there was a tendency for attendees to lose sight of the topic and try to walk before they can crawl. In the beginning some unproductive time was spent in discussing specific costs, outreach methods, and details before the basic structure of the group had been set up. Identifying priority topics and staying on the agenda helped control the direction of the group. But the key to maintaining a consistent approach was to build from the ground up. This means a decision-making process had to be established before decisions were made and a mission statement had to be generated before goals were made.

The process of creating a successful regional public education and outreach organization does not happen overnight. It takes careful planning, consistent effort, discipline, and cooperation to build the foundation of an organization that will have a lasting impact. STORM has found success in applying these principles.

Michael A. Worlton, P.E., and J. Ryan Christensen work in the water resources department at RBF Consulting's Phoenix, AZ, office. Worlton led the establishment of STORM and currently is serving as facilitator to the organization.

SW - November/December 2002

Home + About + Subscribe + News + Calendar + Glossary
Talk + Images + Advertise + Contact Us + Search + Register + Services

Erosion Control Magazine | MSW Management Magazine
Grading & Excavation Contractor | ForesterPress | Forester Media

© 2000 - 2002 FORESTER MEDIA, INC.