2. Why is this problem important?.

Most of Minnesota's key policies are 20-30 years old. Exurbanization has more than doubled the population of shoreline houses and there is a widespread sense of declining quality of lake environments. Growth (and energy production) has also stressed groundwater resources. Finally, implementation of several major new federal regulations regarding impaired waters (the TMDL mandate) and urban stormwater require major rethinking of old approaches. In summary, this is a very timely topic for the CL to address.

3. How could the Citizens League make a unique contribution?

Because water policies are fragmented and implemented by various agencies and at various scales, it is very unlikely the government will ever be able to develop a holistic, future-oriented vision. This is precisely the strength of the CL, and the key reason the CL should undertake this project.

The goal here should be more along the lines of pathway towards developing policy solutions more than recommendations for very specific changes in individual policies.

4. What are prospects that project would yield recommendations that could be implemented and have a major impact on the problem?

The prospects are strong. From my experience, counties,agencies and citizens are hugely frustrated by current policies, so there is a hunger for improved policies. As I noted above, the CL is particularly good at looking at the big picture, and this is precisely what needs to be done here.

One way to enhance prospects for implementing proposed solutions is to include major stakeholders and agencies, allowing them to be part of the solution.

5. Explain how this problem can be addressed by data, research, and reason? Identify probable sources for data and research.

I've identified some of these in the April 2006 issue of the Minnesota Journal (see "preserving lakes for our kid's kids" and the accompanying Facts Unfiltered column). In general, there is reasonably good data to document the extent and trends of contamination of surface waters. Data from the Census Bureau, the State Demographers office, SETA, etc. can be used to evaluate changes in population, economic activity, housing, etc. A 1999 Sea Grant program survey provides a good baseline for evaluating human perception ; it would be ideal to develop a follow-on survey for comparison. Some information from the MAP 150 project may be quite useful.

6. Explain how this proposal can be framed without partisan bias.

Water is a uniter, not a divider. Really, about 75% of the population regularly engages in water-based recreation, and we all drink the stuff. Note that no one has proposed major rollbacks of the Clean Water Act. There are, of course, different ways to address the problem, but I believe a broad, non-partisan concensus regarding a general pathway could be developed.

7. Why would this project be attractive to members?

This study could initiate an new environmental focus for the CL. This would be particularly attractive to younger members, who are keenly concerned about our environmental future. This project (with concurrent and follow-on events) might be a major attractant for younger members.

8. How would this project reach out to under-represented segments of the community?

Mainly, by identifying the cultural relationships of various groups with water, and then recognizing these needs in developing policy concepts. This could be done by inclusion of members of underrepresented groups in the study committee or through interviews, surveys or other means.

9. What is the potential for making this issue visible to a broader public? Why?

Very high, because the public is vitally interested in water. In the Sea Grant program survey, 95% of Minnesotans felt that lakes "should be preserved for future generations". Coming up with ways to do that - and protect other vital water resources - would be very well received by the public.

Because the interest is widespread, this would be an excellent study to disseminate via CL events, both during the study (workshops?) and afterward.

10. What resources—funding, experts, etc. might be available to support this project?

There is a wealth of expertise at the University and in various agencies to provide technical advice, and I know most of them. I would also strongly encourage several former students from the Water Resources Science Program to participate. I'm nearly certain that many of the water-oriented non-profits would be interested in participating. Minnesota Coalition for Environmental Advocacy, Minnesota Waters and Clean Water Action come to mind.

If we moved very quickly, this project could possibly seek funding through the LCMR process. Otherwise, I do not know of specific sources of funding for this type of project, though I would like some of the major foundations would be interested.