*Please Note: This file was encoded from a DVD to an MP4 format so that it could be added to LGA's podcasts. Windows Media Player may say that it does not recognize the MP4, but it will still play. Please click "Yes" to open the file from a trustworthy source.

The 2008 Road to Excellence Conference entitled "Putting Intergovernmental Cooperation to Work: Employing Multi-Municipal Planning to Link Communities and Conserve Costs" was sponsored by Comcast and offered in partnership with Three Rivers Workforce Investment Board. Ron spoke on the consequences of the trend in development where residential, commercial, and office developments were spread over the southwest Pennsylvania region, separating where people live and where they work.

Ron explained the classic economic equation of land+labor+capital = the cost of our doing business. He said that in this age, talent, or human capital, is the most important part of the equation. Companies search for talent, making the location where they choose to do business very important. Therefore, it is important for Pennsylvania and the southwest Pennsylvania region to educate, train, and retrain our labor force. Ron noted that PA commits about $20 million of general revenue dollars for incumbent worker training, making the state a national leader in talent development.

Listen to Ron note that the southwest PA region has more people over the age of 65 and less under the age of 18 than the benchmark city average, which are those cities with comparable industries to southwest PA

The aging of the workforce in the region is also important. The region has more people over the age of 65 and less under the age of 18 than the benchmark city average. Benchmark cities are those that have similar industries as southwest PA. These regions compete with southwest PA for talented workers as well as industry and development.

Click to hear Ron explain that the migration of workers in, out, and within the region affects the region's ability to retain workers, especially younger workers

Ron reminded participants that a major issue for PA and the region is workforce retention, particularly the retention of younger workers. Migration in, out, and within the region affects workforce retention. People within the region tend to stay in one neighborhood for long periods of time, but more people are leaving than coming into the region. Ron explained that people, especially younger people, like the density of cities, and that Pittsburgh needs to consider density in all of the development decisions we make. He also reminded participants that 40% of the PhDs and scientists working in the U.S. are foreign-born, and that immigration is important to workforce development. The United States and PA needs to compete internationally as well as domestically for the most talented workers.

Listen to Ron speak about the consequences of sprawl and spatial mismatch, explaining that available jobs are not always located where the workers who would fill those jobs actually live, making commuting difficult, expensive, and nearly impossible for some workers

Ron explained that suburbanization and decentralization of job sites leads to urban sprawl, where more land is being consumed for development and existing jobs may be moved around the region instead of new jobs coming in. The region will be better off if more people are coming in and more net jobs are created. Ron asked the question, "Where is the work, and where is the worker?â People are commuting out of their home communities for work because the jobs that exist there often do not match the skills, education, and salary requirements of the residents. This decreases quality of life by adding to traffic congestion, because suburban jobs are spread along major transportation corridors. This can necessitate having a workforce that drives, making hiring and retaining workers more difficult in these areas. This phenomenon is called âspatial mismatchâ, where the jobs that many low-income workers would fill are located in the suburbs, far from their homes in the urban core. This makes commuting difficult and expensive for many workers. Pittsburgh, however, is a city that has a high number of jobs in the city, in fact, the count is higher than many comparable cities.

Click to hear Ron explain how intergovernmental cooperation can be used to create of good jobs, improve access to these jobs through infrastructure and multi-modal transportation, and create affordable housing

Addressing the mismatch between âwhere is the work and where is the workerâ involves intergovernmental cooperation for the creation of good jobs, improved access to these jobs through infrastructure and multi-modal transportation, and affordable housing. Many low-income workers do not drive and rely on public transportation, which is a major problem for suburban employers who cannot attract these workers. Three Rivers Workforce Investment Board can help with economic development project assessment, so that communities can minimize spatial mismatch.

Click to view the 2008 Road to Excellence Conference Handout Booklet

 Court explained that sustainability is a process that is continuously adapting and changing to better maximize economy, environment, and equity at the systems level, which speaks to the need for regional coordination. Court said that the sprawling land-use patterns that have been traditionally used in the region are not cost-effective and contribute to the growing social inequity in the region. The challenge of sustainability is where we should more effectively use our community assets and avoid the costs of poor planning to the region.

Listen as Court explains how the Municipalities Planning Code and its amendments allowed for multi-municipal planning, which provided a tool for municipalities to work towards sustainable community development

Multi-municipal comprehensive land-use planning within the framework of sustainability and coordination of issues should not be thought of as conflicting with the state of Pennsylvania or the region's local control, because multi-municipal planning respects both. The Municipalities Planning Code does not explicitly mention sustainability, but Court noted that it references sustainable concepts enabling municipalities to adopt comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances, for example. Acts 67 and 68 of 2000 authorized multi-municipal planning, and allowed for traditional neighborhood development. Court explained that the Municipalities Planning Code and its amendments enabled multi-municipal planning to be undertaken, providing a tool for working towards sustainable development in the "bricks and mortar senseâ, but also through the idea of the coordination of services across boundaries.

Click to hear Court present a case study of Cranberry Township to explain some resources that municipalities can use to incorporate sustainability principles into their planning

Court responded to a question on incorporating sustainability principles in planning and the available resources to help municipalities. The question was posed by Alex Graziani of the Smart Growth Partnership of Westmoreland County. Court explained how Sustainable Pittsburgh assisted Cranberry Township in comprehensive planning for a sustainable community. Cranberry learned how to use the principles of sustainability as a framework for their comprehensive plan. Experts on sustainability assessed the municipal operations and conducted an âextreme sustainability makeoverâ, recommending how Cranberry could conserve resources, become more equitable, and save costs. Alex also asked how municipalities like Cranberry can get assistance for sustainability planning. Court confirmed that Cranberry used state funds, and he mentioned that the hiring of sustainability coordinators is a route that corporations in Pittsburgh have taken to become more sustainable, which is a trend that could be explored in the public sector.

Other resources:

Sustainable Development Diagram

Sustainability Checklist

Sustainability Assessment Tool

Principles to Guide Cranberry Township's Sustainable Development

Click to view the 2008 Road to Excellence Conference Handout Booklet

Click here to listen to Mayor Currin explain Northeast Ohio's pursuit of regional planning and how the region is working towards a tax-base sharing plan. Mayor Currin also identifies the role of the Northeast Ohio Mayors and City Managers Association in the program

Mayor Currin explained that the Fund for Economic Future was formed in 2004 by some philanthropic organizations in Northeast Ohio to strengthen the region's competitiveness through research. In 2005, the main issues that regional leaders identified in Northeastern Ohio were similar to Southwest PA. Territorialism, regional governance, competition between local governments for the same businesses, and spatial mismatch were major issues. The Advance Northeast Ohio initiative, involving over 20,000 people, identified the number one issue as government collaboration and efficiency. The phase one study resulted in an action plan to implement region-wide land-use planning and revenue-sharing in the region. Currin quoted an MIT economist, saying that the economic unit of the 21^st century is the region, not cities.

Click here to listen to Mayor Currin explain the similarities between the issues that Northeast Ohio and Southwest PA deal with, such as fragmentation, and how the Advance Northeast Ohio initiative created a region-wide land-use planning and revenue-sharing plan

Mayor Currin suggested that Northeast Ohio needs to form one Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), as Southwestern PA has in the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission. He would also like to see the region minimalize environmental degradation and regionally manage stormwater, to name a few strategies. He said that citizens need to be informed and mobilized, because the greatest things accomplished in this society are started at the grassroots level. Currin even asked participants to envision the competitiveness of a Cleveland-Youngstown-Pittsburgh region that could be formed one day.

Listen to Mayor Currin present strategies for Northeast Ohio into the future

Denny Puko, planning program manager for the Governor's Center for Local Government Services, called for municipal officials to see intergovernmental cooperation as an opportunity for strength through collaboration instead of a concession of individual control. Denny noted that we have the tools available to target DRSIs to specific locations supported by zoning. Tools like revenue-sharing and tax-sharing reward collaboration, enhance communities, and increase the competitiveness of regions. Denny reminded participants that the tools and funding for intergovernmental cooperation are out there, but it is up to municipal and elected officials to pursue them.

John Theilacker, Associate Director for the Brandywine Conservancy Environmental Management Center, gave a presentation on how TDR, or Transfer Development Rights, can be a "win-winâ situation on the local and multi-municipal levels through the creative use of zoning. The use of TDRs can preserve greenspace and direct development to the desired places. According to John, conventional zoning often leads to sprawl. By using TDR, landowners from one area sell their development rights to landowners or developers from another area. Therefore, John explained, 'the land from which the development rights are sold is permanently protected while land where the sold development rights are applied is enhanced in development value.' In Pennsylvania, TDR is authorized by the Municipalities Planning Code. There are a few municipalities in the state that have TDR programs, but only one in Allegheny County.

John noted that TDRs are 'established by local ordinance but, ultimately, are a market-driven tool.' They only work when buyers want what can be built with TDRs, when landowners want to sell TDRs, and when developers want to buy TDRs and transfer them. John showed some examples of TDRs from across the state, such as those in West Hempfield and Warwick Townships in Lancaster County where farmland has been preserved. John gave some tips on implmenting TDRs for more than one municipality, and explained that extra density can be acheived through some TDR Ordinances. Finally, he said that TDR is not a new tool, and has significant potential for developments of regional impact.

The 2008 Road to Excellence Conference entitled "Putting Intergovernmental Cooperation to Work: Employing Multi-Municipal Planning to Link Communities and Conserve Costs" was sponsored by Comcast and offered in partnership with Three Rivers Workforce Investment Board. Ron Painter, CEO of the Three Rivers Workforce Investment Board, spoke on the consequences of the trend in development where residential, commercial, and office developments were spread over the southwest Pennsylvania region, separating where people live and where they work. Ron identified the need for an intergovernmental solution to the consequences of spatial mismatch, focusing on job creation and access and affordable housing.

The Honorable William Currin, Mayor of Hudson, Ohio, presented a case study of Northeast Ohio's pursuit of regional planning. Mayor Currin explained how the region is working towards a tax-base sharing plan, and identified the role of the Northeast Ohio Mayors and City Managers Association in the program.

Click to read the Multi-Municipal Planning Grant Program guidelines, or to view the 2008 MMP Program brochure.

The 2008 Road to Excellence Conference entitled "Putting Intergovernmental Cooperation to Work: Employing Multi-Municipal Planning to Link Communities and Conserve Costs" was sponsored by Comcast and offered in partnership with Three Rivers Workforce Investment Board. Ron Painter, CEO of the Three Rivers Workforce Investment Board, spoke on the consequences of the trend in development where residential, commercial, and office developments were spread over the southwest Pennsylvania region, separating where people live and where they work. In an era of rising fuel costs, this produces a dilemma for both employers and employees. Ron identified the need for an intergovernmental solution to the consequences of spatial mismatch, focusing on job creation and access and affordable housing.

Court Gould, Executive Director of Sustainable Pittsburgh, spoke about the role of municipal governments in the sustainability of communities. Court defined sustainable community development, and explained that the ways in which local governments respond to economic and social changes will determine the quality of life in a community.

Allen Kukovich, Director of the Governor's Southwest PA Regional Office, gave a progress report on multi-municipal planning in the region. Allen also explained the benefits of multi-municipal planning, and highlighted the state's priorities relating to planning.

The Honorable William A. Currin, Mayor of Hudson, Ohio, presented a case study of Northeast Ohio's pursuit of regional planning. Mayor Currin explained how the region is working towards a tax-base sharing plan, and identified the role of the Northeast Ohio Mayors and City Managers Association in the program.

Listen to the entire panel presentation and questions from the audience

The 2008 Road to Excellence Conference closed with a panel discussion on handling the costs and consequences of developments that have regional impact. The panel was moderated by Alex Graziani (right, at podium), Executive Director of the Smart Growth Partnership of Westmoreland County.  Panelists identified the criteria of developments of regional impact, and discussed the use of tools such as Transfer of Development Rights to enhance the ability of local governments to respond to developers in their communities. The other panelists were Phil Klotz (left), professional planner for the PA Local Government Commission; Blaine Lucas (second from left), solicitor for several local governments and shareholder in the Public Sector Services and Business Services Groups of Babst, Calland, Clements and Zomnir, P.C.; Denny Puko (center), planning program manager for the Governor's Center for Local Government Services; and John Theilacker, Associate Director for the Brandywine Conservancy Environmental Management Center.

The Honorable David J. Steil represents the 31st District in the PA House of Representatives and was a major force behind the amendments to the Municipalities Planning Code in the year 2000, Acts 67 and 68, allowing for multi-municipal planning. Steil has experience as a township supervisor in Lower Makefield Township and was a member of a local planning commission. He highlighted how multi-municipal planning aids local government administrators in addressing challenges in protecting their economic, social, and environmental assets. Steil explained how multi-municipal planning differs from traditional methods of regional planning, and gave an overview and update of efforts across the state since the amendments were passed. He also gave advice on where municipalities can receive technical and financial assistance for multi-municipal planning efforts, and how to avoid making common mistakes in implementation and in gaining support at the grassroots level.

Steil noted that the Municipalities Planning Code (MPC) was passed in 1968. It was outdated and needed changed to reflect new challenges. There are over 2,000 municipalities in PA, all with subdivision and land development authority, and according to Steil, this can be a good and bad thing. Municipal officials feel that they know what is best for their municipality, but their decisions may not always be best for the community.

While addressing the MPC, Steil explained that the role of counties in planning is not strong enough, many communities in PA are without zoning plans, and infrastructure is not coordinated across municipal lines. Land planning is bipartisan, but breaks along the urban/rural lines, according to Steil. He found that in working together with the Senate to gain support for the amendments to the MPC, there were many people across the state that were for the changes, but also many that opposed them. Many were worried that their property rights would not be protected, but the amendments were meant to make sure that land use by some would not infringe on the rights of their neighbors. By bringing all stakeholders together, namely the municipal associations, the homebuilders associations, and the environmental groups, all concerns could be addressed in the objectives of Acts 67 and 68. The purpose was not to tell municipalities what to do, but to provide municipalities tools for the most efficient planning and land use processes.

Cooperative municipality planning options were the tools offered to municipalities. Allowing the option of traditional neighborhood development for integrated communities using multiple-use zoning as opposed to single-use zoning, and protecting private property rights, were key in passing Acts 67 and 68. Municipalities could decide the extent of their multi-municipal planning, whether it is a shared piece of equipment or a joint inter-municipal plan. Steil explained that municipalities need to focus on the issues facing their communities, not politics or individual motives.

At the time, Steil noted that over 550 communities in PA were cooperating in one form or another and most are using intergovernmental cooperation agreements. He explained the resources and tools that those communities had used in their efforts, including those offered by the Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED). Steil felt that the $2.5 million in grant money awarded per year was still too low because the incentives for municipalities to work together are not strong enough.

The future challenges and opportunities for more cooperation, according to Steil, are legislative obstacles relating to impact fees, coordinated infrastructure and development planning, and outreach and education on the importance of smart planning relating to open space and managing density. Steil explained common-base zoning as another option that municipalities can use in planning and conceptualized what Lower Makefield Township could look like if common-base zoning were used, preserving areas of continuous open space. Steil advocated the use of incentives to guide municipalities to cooperate.

Tom Headley, Executive Director of Westmoreland Heritage, also served as a Township Supervisor for Forward Township and as President of The Twin Rivers Council of Governments. Mr. Headley is also Chairman of the Twin Rivers Regional Planning Committee, a group responsible for the development of a new Regional Plan for the Twin Rivers COG communities. Headley moderated a panel on case studies of multi-municipal planning, featuring panelists who shared the factors contributing to their success with multi-municipal planning, as well as the things that they would do differently next time they embarked on a collaborative plan.

Ray Reaves, planning consultant and a Local Government Academy Board Member, presented an overview of LGA's Multi-Municipal Comprehensive Planning Grant Program supported by the Heinz Endowments, encouraging attendants of the conference to apply. Reaves explained that eligible applicants must involve two or more municipalities where an intergovernmental cooperative agreement has been signed, they must attend three workshops on multi-municipal planning, and must be able to provide 10% of the project cost in cash. The grants are awarded twice a year of up to $7500 per municipality for the preparation of a multi-municipal plan or the implementation of ordinances.

Sylvia Wack (center), Assistant Secretary of Lancaster Township, Butler County, explained the joint initiative in Lancaster Township and Muddy Creek Township to develop and implement a Comprehensive Plan with a Geographic Information System component to provide these communities with the ability to promote future development, planning, and economic growth. Wack noted that there is a small population between the two communities, and a main problem was choosing a steering committee that supported the comprehensive plan because many residents did not want growth. Residents had to be informed that growth would come with or without planning, but that planning for growth would protect the interests of the residents more effectively. Despite objections, the plan was signed.

Click here to read about the Lancaster Township and Muddy Creek Comp. Plan

Rob Ritson (second from left), Township Manager for Hempfield Township, was appointed to serve on the Hempfield/Greensburg joint multi-municipal planning committee. Ritson explained that despite the rural nature of Westmoreland County, Hempfield Township has experienced growth and leadership change. The elected officials noticed that complaints on growth and infrastructure demanded a change in planning. The comprehensive plan was from 1976 and the City of Greensburg had adopted a new plan two years before, so when the Smart Growth Partnership of Westmoreland County approached Hempfield with the idea for them to hold multi-municipal planning workshops with the help of the Local Government Academy, they invited all their neighboring municipalities and prepared themselves to develop a multi-municipal plan. Although they lost a few of the municipalities because of perceptions of loss of power, the plan moved forward with a visioning process by building their credibility through actions and not words. The planner for the City of Greensburg worked on the plan with Hempfield, offering professional planning experience.

Click here to read about the Hempfield Township and City of Greensburg Comp Plan

Lew Villotti is the Planning and Development Director for the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC),the ten county regional commission responsible for transportation planning and local development in southwestern Pennsylvania. Villotti talked about the status of the county comprehensive plans as well as the status of the new regional comprehensive plan. Villotti began by explaining that there are different types of regional planning, from city and county planning, to multi-municipal planning, and multi-county regionalism. Municipal comprehensive plans should be generally consistent with county comprehensive plans, which according to Villotti had been either very old or nonexistent until recently. Three counties had recently adopted comprehensive plans or amendments to their comprehensive plans at the time of the 2004 conference, and the other seven counties in the ten county region were not far behind. Villotti anticipated that all ten counties would have comprehensive plans within three years for the first time in the history of southwestern Pennsylvania.

Villotti discussed the role of the SPC in the region and explained that they are "the forum for regional consensus in public decision-making.â They receive state and federal funds for regional decision-making. SPC had a requirement to develop a 20 year regional plan, which is the ânewâ regional plan since the region became ten counties. The plan's purpose is to empower the new ten county region, focusing on the positive qualities. Villotti noted that seventeen states have populations less than the southwestern Pennsylvania region making it comparable to a state as far as population goes, so developing a new regional plan for the ten-county region was important as far as coordinating transportation and economic development and responding to industry demands and market realities.

The new plan built on the past two regional plans, while emulating successful strategies from comprehensive plans across the country, or the use of technology for a stronger, more thorough approach to public participation in forming a comprehensive plan. Visual presentation of information, expanding the use of the internet to reach people, and visioning processes to identify communities" wants and needs are all part of this. The three goals of the plan are to empower the region, transcend boundaries, and build on what came before. Empowering the region includes involving all members of communities in a transparent planning process, while identifying common goals among different sectors within the region by transcending boundaries. The SPC holds many public meetings in addition to collecting information from the public via internet.

Click here to read the SPC's 2035 Transportation and Development Plan for Southwestern Pennsylvania, which was adopted June 28, 2007.

Marshall Bond (second from right), Manager of the Municipality of Monroeville, was the moderator of a panel on the successes, obstacles, and trends of intergovernmental cooperation in the region. Bond gave a short background on the panelists before they spoke. Fred Reddig, Deputy Director for the Governor's Center for Local Government Services, administers the Center"s range of information, training, technical and financial services, and programs for local governments. Reddig spoke first on the diversity and fragmentation of Pennsylvania as both strengths and weaknesses from environmental, social, and economic perspectives. He explained that local governments are not only in competition with each other, but with other cities and states across the country. Reddig noted that trends of out-migration and decline in Pennsylvania make the state and its local governments less competitive, and that change is necessary to slow and reverse these trends. One change that helps strengthen the stability of metropolitan areas is structural change in municipal mergers, multi-municipal planning, and intergovernmental cooperation. Reddig mentions some success stories in Pennsylvania along the continuum of intergovernmental cooperation from shared services, to Councils of Governments, to boundary change. He highlighted the success of the 911 emergency response services consolidation in Allegheny County.

Local governments have three roles in economic development according to Reddig: establishing an environment for economic development through effective and efficient service delivery, comprehensive planning, and implementation; establishing partnerships with all stakeholders in the economic development arena; and developing a toolbox of resources for implementing economic development in cooperation with the state. Reddig recognized some tools that the state makes available for economic development and intergovernmental cooperation. He explained how the "three Câs of intergovernmental cooperationâ are necessary for successful ventures, which include creativity, communication, and commitment.

Tom Benecki (second from left) joined the Allegheny Valley North Council of Governments (AVNCOG) as Executive Director in 1991. The AVNCO G is a voluntary association of fourteen municipal governments and two authorities in the northeastern corner of Allegheny County. Benecki's presentation focused on Councils of Governments, or COGs, in Allegheny County of which there are eight. Allegheny County is unusual, according to Benecki, because of the amount of incorporation of individual municipalities, but also because the COGs have a formal organization that they all belong to, the Allegheny InterCOG Council, where they can work closely together and discuss regional issues. Benecki explained that the COGs provide services specific to the wants and needs of their member municipalities, and stressed that COGs are not another layer of government. COGs are a voluntary municipal association to serve their member municipalities. Benecki elaborated on four classes of programs that are well-subscribed to by member municipalities in COGs across the state because they have proven to be successful: joint purchasing, grant administration, shared equipment, and shared services. Benecki stated that he believes these programs are so successful because of the economies of scale that can be achieved. Benecki also described some failures of COGs. For example, the sewer maintenance and cleaning program and police consolidation programs were failures at the AVNCOG.

Denny Puko (left) is a professional planner and works for the Governor's Center for Local Government Services southwest and northwest regional offices assisting local governments with planning and related matters. He previously was Executive Director of the Mercer County Regional Planning Commission, a joint municipal-county planning commission. Puko spoke about mergers and consolidations and used the Shenango Valley story as a case study. At the time, there was a Shenango Valley consolidation measure on the ballot for November.

First, Puko went over the legal context of the 1994 Merger Act, and then discussed the history of mergers in Pennsylvania, noting that from 1975 to 2004 there had been 22 consolidation proposals, with 8 passing. Puko presented the Shenango Valley case, explaining that Ferrel was in Act 47 bankruptcy and it was recommended that they consider consolidating. The study process included hiring a professional consultant, creating an advisory committee with 8 subcommittees to discuss different service provision, and other professional resources with an emphasis on partnerships and evaluation. The advisory committee did not recommend consolidation and the municipalities did not initiate it, but a petition was circulated and the referendum was put on the ballot for November 2004. Puko evaluated the factors leading to the outcome, noting that local leadership was strong and there was a sense of commonality, but there were also separate histories and segregation based on wealth. There was a history of cooperation, but Puko notes that critical issues were not resolved early enough. The process moved too slowly, especially within the subcommittees. Puko also feels that the proposal may have been too narrowly focused and restrictive. Ultimately, the referendum did not pass.

Click here to read the Shenango Valley Intergovernmental Study Committee Final Report

For more information on the Shenango Valley case, please listen to the George Gearhart and Anthony Moscato presentations from the 2005 Road to Excellence Conference Podcasts.

Rob Jones is currently the Chairman of the Local Government Academy's Board of Directors. At the time of the 2004 Road to Excellence Conference, he was Vice Chairman of LGA"s Board and Senior Manager of External Affairs at Dominion. Jones moderated a panel on intergovernmental revenue trends, tax-sharing, and public-private partnerships. David Donahue (right) was named the first Executive Director of the Allegheny Regional Asset District (ARAD) in 1995. Authorized by state law, The District distributes dedicated public funds to libraries, parks, cultural and regional attractions, and sports facilities in Pittsburgh and Allegheny County, Pa. Donahue gave a ten year review of the ARAD as they were celebrating their tenth anniversary. Donahue said that ARAD is an example of fiscal regionalism.

According to Donahue, these fiscal regionalism entities are government without being government because although they spend public money, they do not provide service. They provide for a distribution of the benefits of growth to neighboring municipalities where growth occurs. Fiscal regionalism entities minimize fiscal mercantilism, which encourages development other than tax-producing development, Donahue explained. These entities prevent free-riding so that all people who benefit share in the cost. True tax-base sharing agreements are very rare, and fiscal regionalism can incorporate some of the benefits of these agreements into the region. The entities help avoid the wins and losses associated with annexation laws and they try to level the playing field as far as wealth and service disparities. Before the ARAD was created, Pittsburgh was paying 56% of the bill for regional assets like museums, stadiums, libraries, the zoo, etc. when it only had 25% of the countyâs tax base. A sales tax increase of 1% took place in 1994, where about 75% is paid by the residents of Allegheny County and 25% is paid by nonresidents. The pot is divided every month, where 50% is allocated among regional assets, 25% goes to the County, and 25% is distributed among the rest of the municipalities. The municipal distribution formula measures municipal tax burden relative to other municipalities. Donahue mentioned that the ARAD reduces reliance on property tax and other taxes and all that benefit and use regional assets pay into it. Finally, ARAD promotes cooperation and private initiative, and makes available more private funding and state funds like intergovernmental aid. Donahue closed by recommending a clear communications plan between stakeholders before the agreement is made.

David Davare (second from right) is the director of research services for the Pennsylvania School Boards Association. Davare provided an overview of the changes in state funding of municipalities and school districts over the years and an analysis of the relationships between local and state governments and school districts. Davare deals with school districts in terms of economic development. He explained that school districts are dealing with revenue changes such as subsidies and special education funding due to intergovernmental trends. Davare showed a graph to illustrate why school district tax dollars keep increasing compared to state contributions, and explained that state educational mandates, special education services, and the No Child Left Behind Act are major reasons for the rise in expenditures. Davare reminded participants that education is the only public service mandated by the state constitution.

Property tax was the original tax-base sharing in Pennsylvania. All the taxing jurisdictions shared the same tax base. However, municipal entities prefer residential development and school districts prefer commercial development. The school district tax base is dependent on property value and personal income, but school districts have increased the personal income contribution at much different rates in PA from 1979 to 1999. The market value of homes indicates how much state aid municipalities will get for their schools. However, school districts have very little time to provide input in economic development decisions before they are approved by counties or municipalities. Davare noted that school districts are important in economic development because they make up about 70% of the average property tax bill; they cover several municipal jurisdictions, and perhaps overlap counties. Davare explained that although the intent of economic development is to address blighted areas with vacant properties so that they can increase their tax base and increase employment through development, municipalities do this based on entire jurisdictions instead of targeted areas. This does not make sense in terms of strengthening the community, and it creates competition for residents because of differences in property tax rates. School districts want to take part in economic development, but do not have the opportunity to deal with zoning issues and changes, which can lead to more students in the district, problems with space, and transportation issues. Davare said school boards need to ask municipal governments for more time and greater roles in economic development decisions, and they should hold public hearings on the decisions and joint meetings with the municipal governments, because economic development and zoning decisions can greatly affect school districts.

Finally, Davare explained how Act 72 tax reform provides homestead exemption and limits tax increases without voter approval. It will require school districts to shift away from property tax to higher earned income tax and offsets from state gaming revenue. Davare noted that people will react to earned income tax increases and property tax reductions, and these changes will greatly affect school districts in the near future.

Barry Ford (center) is the President of Development for Continental Real Estate in Pittsburgh. Ford explained how three municipalities worked together in a tax-base sharing plan to attract The Waterfront Development in the Monongahela Valley. Ford told the story of the intergovernmental cooperation that occurred between Munhall, Homestead, and West Homestead to bring development to an area where the Homestead Works steel mill used to exist and where a vacant brownfield remained. Ford explained that a plan was needed to create infrastructure for development such as roads and sewer lines, and a tax-increment financing district was developed to come up with the money. All three municipalities had different zoning ordinances, and a common zoning ordinance was needed to create The Waterfront. The Steel Valley School District was at the table from the beginning of the discussions. The solution to the question of where each business would go and which municipality would benefit was the creation of a tax-base sharing plan through the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act. Munhall received 30% of the property in the TIF district, 50% is in Homestead, and 20% is in West Homestead. The revenues go into a fund controlled by Allegheny County through the Redevelopment Authority and is redistributed back to the communities according to these percentages. The communities decided to do the tax sharing for twenty years although by law it should exist for fifteen years. They cooperated on zoning, tax-sharing, and set some money aside for other projects such as main street development.

Deb Lange (second from left) is the Executive Director of the Steinbrenner Institute for Environmental Education and Research. The mission of the Steinbrenner Institute for Environmental Education and Research (SEER) is to help to change the ways the Carnegie Mellon University community and the world thinks and acts about the environment. She is also the Executive Director of the Brownfields Center at CMU. Lange provided an overview of public-private partnerships with regards to federal funding for brownfields cleanup and development. Lange defined brownfields from federal legislation as "âreal property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminantââ and explained the benefits of cleaning up and developing them. Economic development on brownfields sites allows communities to benefit from land that was unused and potentially hazardous by creating taxable properties and jobs. Lange described the Environmental Protection Agency's Brownfields Program and briefly explained the monetary amounts and uses for the grant money available through it. The Brownfields Program offers four kinds of grants: Assessment Grants, Revolving Loan Fund Grants, Job Training Grants, and Cleanup Grants. Lange identified some recipients of Brownfields Program grants from the Pittsburgh region and noted that although federal money is available, success occurs at the local level. She also expressed the belief that local incentives are needed to attract private investors in brownfield redevelopment.

Richard M. Nemoytin (left), Field Office Director in Pittsburgh for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), provided some tips and perspectives on retaining federal funds. Nemoytin expressed the opinion that communities need to enter into partnerships that leverage the private sector to invest. He also explained the importance of a well-written grant in competing for federal funds. Nemoytin described the strategy of partnering with other people who already receive federal funds, such as entitlement communities and nonprofits, rather than going after them directly. Finally, Nemoytin explained that using multiple federal funding partners is an option for receiving more money.

J. Bracken Burns, Chair of the Washington County Board of Commissioners, presented his vision of the southwestern Pennsylvania region in 20 years, including the role of local governments and the legislative actions that can be taken to respond to and build on the region's successes. Commissioner Burns envisioned a region where human needs are met and where wellness is present. Burns defined wellness as "a sense that things are as they ought to be; it is peace of mind; it is an environment where order and beauty are dominant features." Burns' initial representation of his vision was idealistic and inspiring. He warned of the depleting natural resources, increases in waste and energy consumption, and noted that Pittsburgh is one of the least ethnically diverse regions in the county. Burns explained that a challenge is being able to pay for all of the things we want and need to do, such as building a new arena for the Pittsburgh Penguins and repairing the sewer infrastructure.

Burns noted that regional consensus is important to move forward cohesively, and a mechanism is needed to reach that consensus. The public, private, and nonprofit communities need to be represented in the appropriate forums for a regional voice. Burns said he believes that a study should be done on the "multiplicity of municipalitiesâ in the region to deal with the fragmentation in the region and the state. He gave examples of small municipalities in the state, questioning whether or not some small communities can provide quality leadership and services, and wondering whether or not communities such as those he mentioned should be consolidated.

Uniform Boundary Change legislation was required under amendment to the Constitution, and municipal consolidation was examined as a possibility during a Constitutional Convention in 1968. This Convention did not mandate or authorize mergers or consolidation. Burns noted that under his hypothesis, small communities, which according to his definition had fewer than 5,000 residents, were not capable of providing services and leadership. Therefore, the state of PA and its southwest region had a long way to go considering the small number of consolidations and the creation of new states since the Constitutional Convention of 1968.

Commissioner Burns recommended that another Constitutional Convention be convened to readdress the issue of the multiplicity of municipalities. An appropriate combination of incentives and mandates should be set in place so that Pennsylvania has a âworkableâ number of municipalities where economies of scale can be achieved. Burns explained that this is important to the ability of southwestern PA to function as a region. Burns revisited the example of the aging water and sewer infrastructure in the region, and explained that the $10 billion price tag that the Environmental Protection Agency put on the problem was most likely too conservative, given the number of individual municipalities involved in trying to address the issue. Regional authorities should be created with taxing power to address regional issues, according to Burns.

Burns acknowledged that his ideas may seem unattainable to many, but asked how southwest PA can call itself a region when institutions and organizations with a regional name or title serve a population that is far below the regional, ten-county service area. The vision of a Pittsburgh region where people want to live is attainable, Burns explained, and encouraged attendants to strive for it.   

Three Rivers Wet Weather is a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit that is committed to improving the water quality in the region. One of the organizationâs goals is funding Stormwater Best Management Practice demonstration projects, where they focus on lot-level or Low-Impact Development projects. Low-Impact Development projects control stormwater at the source and attempt to find uses for it instead of letting it enter and overflow the sewer systems. Two 3RWW demonstration projects that have been completed are the rain barrel project with the Nine Mile Run Watershed Association in 2004, and the LID green roof demonstration project on the Shadyside Giant Eagle, Hammerschlag Hall on Carnegie Mellon Universityâs campus, and the retrofitting of an existing commercial /residential building on the main street of Homestead with a green roof.

Read about 3RWW Green Roof Demonstration Project here.

In addition to funding the construction of these green roofs, 3RWW is funding the development of monitoring projects by the engineering departments at the University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University (CMU). The roofs at the Giant Eagle and Hammerschlag Hall are being monitored, but monitoring on the building at 213-215 East Eighth Avenue in Homestead has not been started. The hope is that these monitoring processes will aid in offering standards to evaluate the performance of green roofs in stormwater management, energy efficiency, and temperature reduction caused by the urban heat island effect. The urban heat island effect is a phenomenon where urban built environments and suburbs can be several degrees warmer than surrounding rural areas.

Click on the podcast to hear Janie talk about the green roof demonstration projects and their successes.

Read an article about CMUâs roof.

Click on the link at the bottom of the page to read a report on CMUâs roof, see a picture, and to see a live web cam view of the roof.

See results from Pittâs monitoring of the Shadyside Giant Eagle roof.

Pittsburgh experiences frequent âwet weatherâ such as rain, thunderstorms, and snow that affects its aging infrastructure due to the overwhelming amount of runoff that enters the combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs). Although Pittsburgh has taken steps to address the issue, a heavy focus on end-of-pipe solutions for stormwater management still results in an excess of runoff entering the sewer systems. An increased focus on source controls for stormwater management, such as green roofs, can help.

Janie referred us to a report by Mike Plumb, legal intern for the Columbia Environmental Law Clinic working for Riverkeeper, for more information on how source controls can manage stormwater more efficiently and effectively. Plumb looks at how New Yorkâs DEP was investing in what he calls âobsolete infrastructureâ in the forms of end-of-pipe tanks and in-line storage for CSO overflows. Plumbâs research found that for every $1,000 invested in these projects, New York could decrease CSO overflow by 2,400 gallons per year, whereas the same investment in source controls would decrease this overflow much more significantly. Street trees would decrease overflows by 13,170 gallons per year, green streets by 14,800 gallons, rain barrels by 9,000 gallons, new green roofs by 810 gallons, retrofitted green roofs by 865 gallons, and incentivized green roofs by 12,000 gallons per year (Plumb, 2008).

Read more about other forms of green infrastructure source controls in Plumbâs report, âSustainable Raindrops.â

Most green roofs require an insulation layer, a waterproof membrane, a root barrier to prevent the roots of plants from penetrating the waterproof layer, a drainage layer, a filter mat, soil and, of course, vegetation. The type of vegetation planted on green roofs depends on the climate in the area and the effects of the different types of vegetation on water retention and heat absorption. Green roofs can be either intensive or extensive, where intensive green roofs usually require a deeper soil layer because they are typically planted with larger plants with roots that run deeper. Intensive green roofs are often accessible to the public, acting as a âroof-top garden.â Extensive roofs are usually not accessible for people to walk onto and enjoy, but are less expensive to install.

The benefits of green roofs can be realized at the private or building-level, and the public, or city-level. At the private level, green roofs require a larger initial investment, but they are estimated to extend the life of the roof twice as long, and they contribute to savings on energy costs, heating and cooling costs, and stormwater costs. Additionally, they provide sound insulation and aesthetic value, and intensive green roofs and rain gardens can be used for food production and can create a place for âcommunity involvementâ among employees of the building, boosting employee morale.

At the public level, green roofs can significantly reduce stormwater runoff and the impact on sewer infrastructure from too much water in the system, and they can reduce the urban heat island effect, reduce greenhouse gases, and improve air quality by replacing traditional, heat-absorbing roof surfaces with vegetation that cool the air through evapotranspiration (or evaporation of water from leaves). Greening the urban environment also improves the aesthetic quality of the city. The costs of green roofs at the private level would be the higher initial cost of the green roof and maintenance, and the costs to the public sector are those relating to program administration and start-up. However in both instances, the argument is often made that the benefits outweigh the costs.

Read more about how green roofs are built and the benefits they offer by visiting the âGreen Roofs for Healthy Citiesâ website.

During our interview with Janie, she noted that the major barrier for green roof implementation in the southwestern Pennsylvania region is funding. We discussed the Green Roof Grant Program in Chicago as an example of a way to use incentives to fund green roof projects.

Read about the Chicago Green Roof Grant Program.

We have identified some available funding sources through the Pennsylvania state and federal governments:

In Allegheny County, Conservation Consultants Inc. received $54,128 through an Energy Harvest Grant for a 1,700-square-foot green roof, and Phipps Conservatory and Botanical Gardens received $250,000 for an integrated water management system. This system is used for geothermal heating and cooling, but also treats and reuses wastewater. Growing Greener II Grants, which give â$625 million to clean up rivers and streams; protect natural areas, open spaces and working farmsâ can be used for green roof demonstration projects and green infrastructure conservation projects. Pennsylvania also has grants and reimbursements awarded through the Stormwater Management Act 167 where local governments can be reimbursed for 75% of the money they put into a watershed protection program.

The EPA also awards grants for green roof demonstration projects and other green infrastructure projects under its Nonpoint Source Management Program. âUnder section 319, State, Territories, and Indian Tribes receive grant money which support a wide variety of activities including technical assistance, financial assistance, education, training, technology transfer, demonstration projects, and monitoring to assess the success of specific nonpoint source implementation projects.â  Funding from the EPA can also be obtained through the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund; Source Reduction Assistance Grants; Surveys, Studies, Investigations, Demonstrations, and Special Purpose Grants ; and Air Quality Grants. This grant money can be received through PAâs Department of Environmental Protection.

According to Katrin Scholz-Barth, expert and consultant for green roof installation, extensive green roofs are, âthe single most effective solution to stormwater management,â because they do not take up additional land, are easily adaptable and are economically efficient, they are not difficult to add to architectural designs, and they are easily retrofitted to existing structures. For a developed city with a lot of existing buildings in need of renovations, Pittsburgh is a good candidate for green roofs.

Click on the podcast to hear Janie talk about retrofitting green roofs to existing structures and efforts to green the urban landscape.

Read more about green infrastructure in this report from the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Finally, Janie informed LGA how individual homeowners can become involved in managing stormwater. In addition to rain barrels, we discussed rain gardens and water conservation and water quality protection behaviors that any homeowner can engage in.

Click on the podcast to hear Janie talk about what homeowners can do to get involved in stormwater management.

View 3RWWâs education and outreach materials, including their âRole of the Homeownerâ guide.

Read an article on planting rain gardens and Three Rivers Rain Garden Alliance.

* The construction of the rain garden at Phipps has been delayed *

Read an article about a new rain garden on Mount Washington.

The Pittsburgh region can focus on greening the urban landscape with various forms of green infrastructure, such as trees, vegetation, wetlands, and open space that can be preserved or created in built environments, because not only does green infrastructure contribute to stormwater management, it also aids in energy efficiency, causes a reduction in the urban heat island effect, and holds a greater aesthetic value than vast landscapes of concrete.

To read more on stormwater management in the southwest Pennsylvania region, read the LGA Lyceum piece âThis needs to sink inâ by Stan Kabala, Center for Environmental Research and Education, Duquesne University.

To learn about the use of adaptive governance for stormwater management, please visit the LGA Adaptive Governance wiki.

Jerry explained that traditional neighborhood development, or TND as it is commonly referred to, is 'an attempt to recreate a sense of place that people are looking for now where they live.' When looking back at development in previous generations, people valued the proximity to each other and connectivity. Pennsylvaniaâs zoning became segregated, splitting land for residential use, commercial use, etc., resulting in sprawl. Jerry explains TND as a design model rooted in tradition, although the incorporation of it in development today seems innovative compared to the sprawl that has been prevalent for years.

TND desegregates zoning to allow for mixed-use development, such as buildings with retail spaces on the first floor and residential spaces above. It also uses different design elements, such as streetlamps, benches, and traditional storefronts right on the sidewalks, offering more of a quaint, town-like atmosphere. TND uses wider sidewalks to encourage walking and biking, and on-street parking is encouraged for direct access to all available amenities. The proximity of different types of development and the services they have to offer encourage people to be friendly with each other. TND encourages people to get back to an integrated way of living, which is more sustainable than continuing sprawl.

Currently, TND can only be done as an overlay, and it is still a planning option for municipalities. Jerry described an overlay district as placing inducements over a single purpose zone, such as a retail zone, to incorporate mixed-use development, such as buildings that can serve both residential and commercial purposes. House Bill 1280 would give a community the power to make TND the primary type of land-use that they would allow, although it may be contested because of the costs associated with TND, which are higher than other forms of development. Jerry suggested that including incentives for TND and other measures for sustainable development would help cover some of the costs. House Bill 1280 is in the third consideration and final passage phase, meaning that it has a strong possibility of passing the Senate and becoming law.

Jerry acknowledged that Pennsylvania is not known for having the most innovative planning, and he cited fragmentation as a main reason for this. He said that local governments need to put resources into planning for tomorrow as well as today, and that those communities that are really preparing for future generations set goals for sustainability in development. Jerry mentioned that working together with neighbors was a good solution for cutting costs in service delivery and planning, such as efforts for TND. 'I would always advocate an intergovernmental approach in everything we do.'

When considering TND in a particular area, it is important to have planners, engineers, and the community working together for a holistic view of the effects it might have on the daily workings of the neighborhoods involved and the lives of the people residing there. Jerry explained the importance of a collaborative vision in planning. 'I am a big believer in visioning. Every community needs to know what they want to be when they grow up!' Cranberry just passed Ordinance 2007-377, creating a new planning advisory commission that will be dedicated to involving the citizens in their community in the planning process. Jerry expressed confidence in the 'community ambassadors', which are volunteers from Cranberry Township that will take a grassroots approach in finding out what is important to those who live in Cranberry. They have nearly 90 people who have signed up to become ambassadors.

The 'Cranberry Plan' is an update to the current comprehensive plan that includes a new phase of TND planning, using a bottom-up approach with the community ambassadors to really represent the wishes of community members. Jerry is proud that Cranberryâs elected officials are very supportive of significant citizen involvement in the plan. 'Anything that is sustainable cannot come from five, or seven, or nine elected officials. It must come from the community.'

Dr. Frederickson is the Edwin O. Stene Distinguished Professor of Public Administration at the University of Kansas, one of the top rated public affairs departments in the United States. Dr. Frederickson has taught, been published, and is co-editor of The Future of Local Government Administration, published by the International City Management Association in 2002. Listen as Dr. Frederickson answers the questions: Why is local government structure important? What is the impact of structure in terms of achieving economic, efficient, equitable government and what is its impact on the business climate and the quality of life for the average citizen?

Click here to read the Report of the Shenango Valley Intergovernmental Study Committee

http://www.mcrpc.com/svisc/finalreport.pdf

George Gearhart is the Director of the Shenango Valley Chamber of Commerce, and was a member of the Shenango Valley study committee for consolidation as a citizen representative of the city of Sharon. Gearhart believes that racial and economic issues were involved in preventing the consolidation referendum from being passed in all of the municipalities. He also talked about the process of conducting the study and getting the public involved, and noted that although opponents to the consolidation were organized and mobilized right away, the proponents of consolidation were not as organized as they should have been from the start. Gearhart also pointed out that the commonwealth promised grants and funding, but never confirmed exact figures or amounts, leaving municipalities wondering if the state would cover their outstanding debts moving into consolidation. Gearhart explained that after the four year study, the committee voted not to recommend anything. Then, the citizen groupâs petition got the referendum on the ballot, which ultimately did not pass in all five municipalities.

Click here to read the Report of the Shenango Valley Intergovernmental Study Committee http://www.mcrpc.com/svisc/finalreport.pdf

View other IGC Success Stories at www.igcsuccess.org

Click on the POD icon above to hear a clip from this year's Keynote Speaker Dr. Bruce Stiftel on the importance of the issue of water management. Time: 25 sec

Going with the Flow: Governance Options for Clean Water Act Compliance

Adapting governance for clean water was the topic at the 2007 Road to Excellence Conference sponsored by Comcast. The Road to Excellence Conference is an annual event focusing on intergovernmental cooperation in the southwestern Pennsylvania region.

The Local Government Academy has made the content from the 2007 Road to Excellence Conference available in audio, visual, and textual formats. Under the "Highlights" category in the column to the right, you will find enhanced podcasts that have been edited to include sound clips and presentation slides for an interactive and informative experience.

In order to view the enhanced podcasts, you will need to have the Quicktime application on your computer. To download this free application, click on http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/.

Those unable to attend this year's event can listen to audio tracks of the entire event under the "Full Conference" category.

Click to view the agenda from the 2007 Road to Excellence Conference

Click to view John Schombert's presentation slides with interactive links

John Schombert from 3 Rivers Wet Weather opened the conference by defining the geographic, economic, and political problems of wet weather issues in the southwestern Pennsylvania region and the Ohio River Basin. He gave an overview of the Consent Orders enforced by DEP and the Allegheny County Department of Health, and then cited two examples of regional collaboration in a manhole mapping project and a flow monitoring plan, showing that the notion of 'adapting governance' has succeeded in the past. Finally, Schombert closed by predicting the economic impact on the region and the burden placed on future generations if wet weather problems are not addressed regionally, and he suggested sustainable solutions to the problem that would require efforts in adaptive governance.

Other resources:

Read information on the Clean Water Act on the EPA's website

Visit the ALCOSAN website and read about the Consent Orders

Check out PA's Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual

Learn about "green roofs" and their impact on wet weather issues

Read an article about Pittsburgh being voted the "Most Livable City"

Time: 59 min 34 sec

Listen to Dr. Bruce Stiftel's entire presentation and questions from the audience

Click to view Dr. Stiftel's presentation slides

What, exactly, is adaptive governance? According to Dr. Bruce Stiftel and John T. Scholz, co-editors of Adaptive Governance and Water Conflict: New Institutions for Collaborative Planning, adaptive governance is, 'âa new generation of governance institutions for resolving collective action problems that occur between different types of resource users.' In the case of water, Stiftel and Scholz explain that new water conflicts between stakeholders necessitate innovative approaches to policy making and changes in water management institutions. Court Gould is a member of LGAâs Board of Directors and is the Director of Sustainable Pittsburgh, an organization that affects decision-making processes in order to integrate economic prosperity, social equity, and environmental quality in the regionâs development. Court introduced Keynote Speaker Dr. Bruce Stiftel, and identified the issues involved in water management, including fragmentation, technology, cooperation, political will, and best practices.

Dr. Bruce Stiftel shared his experiences in Florida, a region with great water access challenges and history of contention over water. Stiftel noted that the planet is 75% water and each of us is 60% water. 'Anything that is that ubiquitous in our world, in our cells, and all the life around us is going to touch an enormous number of the things we do, the policies we set, the institutions that we have,' Stiftel declared, as he begin explaining the many uses of water and the different agencies and stakeholders that interact and conflict over its management and use. He cited examples from his home state of Florida to illustrate the context for discussions of adaptive governance.

Water management in Florida needed new, innovative approaches, which became apparent when conflicts over the Everglades region were heating up. The region spreads across county and watershed lines, and the responsibilities and management issues facing the stakeholders in the Everglades first inspired regional conflict assessment and subsequent discussions. Stiftel presented two examples of Florida regions attempting to overcome challenges to adaptive governance where overuse and degradation of watersheds were at issue: one in the Tampa Bay area where the road to regionalization was rough, and one in East Central Florida where neutral facilitators helped to smoothly mediate cooperation.

Techniques of conflict resolution to balance the interests of stakeholders are incorporated in efforts to adapt government. Facilitating conflict naturally produces challenges to cooperation and communication. Dr. Stiftel presented five challenges to adaptive governance that were identified by the contributors to the study of water management in Florida, which help explain that the concept of adaptive governance is in its early stages and that these challenges are 'key to creating successful second-order institutions capable of adaptive governance.'

Time: 1 hr 23 min 15 sec

Over lunch, DEP Deputy Secretary, Office of Water Management Cathleen Curran Myers spoke of the hope that the DEP has to be involved with regional water management efforts in southwestern Pennsylvania. Rob Jones is the Chairman of the Local Government Academyâs Board of Directors and CEO of In Good Company, a strategic planning company. Rob introduced Cathleen Curran Myers to the conference, and recognized the importance of remembering that problems and progress in resource management issues affect constituents, and that we can all learn from their stories.Meyers talked about the nature of Pennsylvaniaâs government infrastructures, and explained that although they are not supportive of adaptive governance, she saw opportunities for cooperation to achieve the desired end result of better water quality in the state and region. Myers contended that more monitoring will only tell us what we already know, which is that, 'when it rains, we have pathogens everywhere and we canât meet the water quality standards.' Instead of more monitoring, she advocated for better monitoring combined with modeling for adaptive governance efforts. Meyers drew laughs when she sympathized with municipalities over the complicated processes that they have to follow in order to be in compliance with DEP and Health Department regulations. She presented the idea of having one water resources management plan with a template to follow in order to save each municipality from an unreasonable amount of planning, and requested help from officials to work towards the comprehensive plan.

Time: 28 min 19 sec

Moderated by Cindy Hasenjager of 3 Rivers Wet Weather, a panel of local experts provided perspectives on adaptive governance options and water management issues that they have handled in their communities.

Douglas Watkins of Upper St. Clair Township gave the perspective of a middle watershed and spoke of the success that they have had with collaboration in dealing with the Painters Run and Chartiers Creek watersheds. Watkins noted that Upper St. Clair, through bond issues, has incurred millions of dollars in debt because they are committed to fixing the water management problems, and explained that intergovernmental cooperation can assure local interest, responsibility, and essential services.

Mary Ellen Ramage of the Borough of Etna described the ongoing and persistent problems faced by lower watersheds affected by upstream communitiesâ runoff, citing the specific example of the flooding of Etna after Hurricane Ivan in 2004. Ramage noted that the Consent Order process proved that neighboring communities can get along, and said that working together with the four watersheds in their COG has yielded progress in managing flooding and stormwater issues.

Michael Dufallo of Indiana County Municipal Services Authority talked about the challenges of cooperation and infrastructure repair in a rural, upper watershed. He spoke of the County Municipal Services Authority that governs the water management issues in Indiana County, and mentioned that a county authority takes away from a lot of the politics involved with getting municipalities to work together. He also said it provides for planning and better service. Duffalo conveyed to the audience how the incentives for lower user fees and for newer, better infrastructure and treatment plants in member municipalities inspires them to join county authorities.

Click to view Mike Duffalo's presentation slides

Kevin Garber of Babst, Calland, Clements and Zomnir, P.C. offered some legal incentives to adapting government, like the ability to self-regulate taps, availability of resources, and long-term planning. He also spoke of some practical ways to adapting, like making sure all agencies are on the same page, ensuring that the plans are achievable, getting the citizens involved, and creating management ease with one group overseeing compliance with regulations. Garber advocated for bringing wet weather water quality standards into the forefront of discussion, and performing supplemental environmental work in lieu of incurring penalties to show good faith.

Ty Gourley of the Institute of Politics promoted the work the Regional Water Management Task Force is doing to provide models for multi-municipal collaboration in water management, and to educate municipalities on the water quality benefits and economic benefits of regional collaboration. Gourley acknowledged the balancing act involved with stakeholder values, and explained that efficiency is not the ultimate goal. Cooperation can take many forms, and according to Gourley, the Task Force is dedicated to designing achievable plans that will result in desirable outcomes.

Click to view Ty Gourley's presentation slides

Time: 1 hr 1 min 57 sec

The day concluded with an appearance from Allegheny County Chief Executive Dan Onorato. He noted that the consent orders were moving into the 'fix it' phase, and said that he was determined to lobby for federal and state dollars with a collective, regional plan for how the money will be used. Onorato expressed the feeling that the quality control and contracting processes would be adversely affected if separate contracts for each municipality were drawn instead of one regional contract, but conceded that there is not one certain entity that should oversee the process. He stated that economic status should not matter, because a regional approach means that all communities should be involved in water management and should have stable infrastructure to support it. Onorato explained the comprehensive plan for Allegheny County and long-term planning for the future, and how a sustainable plan for water and sewer management would fit into the bigger picture. The audience was given the opportunity to ask questions of Onorato, where the consent orders and the comprehensive regional plan were discussed further.

Time: 25 min 32 sec

Other resources:

Read information on the Clean Water Act on the EPA's website

Visit the ALCOSAN website and read about the Consent Orders

Check out PA's Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual

Learn about "green roofs" and their impact on wet weather issues

Read an article about Pittsburgh being voted the "Most Livable City"

Time: 26 min 11 sec

Time: 5 min 37 sec

Dr. Stiftel contrasted the ways in which the stakeholders in the two regions have attempted to adapt to deal with their water supply problems. In the 'Tampa Bay Water Wars', a growing population in the three-county area led to overpumping. The Southwest Florida Water Management District (WMD) began to deny water use permits and issued Water Shortage Orders which had a severe effect on development. The WMD was sued in excess of $10 million, and the conflict was fueled on by the media. A first attempt at a long-term plan failed, creating embarrassment for political leaders and governmental entities. Negotiations finally began to take place when the Conflict Resolution Consortium was brought in to mediate and an incentive was provided by the WMD to pay for a new desalinization plant. Tampa Bay Water is in existence today, and seems to be working so far.

Where negotiations in the Tampa Bay Water Wars were largely encouraged by the governor and legislators who wanted to stop the embarrassment of the ongoing problems, conflict resolution in the case of East Central Florida was encouraged by a desire to avert the crisis altogether. Facilitators and experts were consulted immediately to assess a potential conflict that could occur with a projected shortage of water across three water management districts. Together, the stakeholders compiled a prioritized list of projects and devised a long-term plan for the East Central Florida region that is currently waiting for approval.

Time: 11 min 19 sec

Time: 10 min 14 sec

Time: 3 min 42 sec 

Time 12 min 32 sec

Time: 6 min 13 sec

Time: 6 min 49 sec

Time: 9 min 13 sec

Time: 8 min 39 sec

Time: 3 min 44 sec

Time: 9 min 26 sec