West St. Petersburg Community Library @ St. Petersburg College
April 24, 2007 - St. Petersburg

The meeting began with an open house, with displays around the room of Tampa Bay Water information regarding the planning process, screening criteria, project list, and source water protection.  After signing in, attendees were provided with an information packet containing the meeting agenda, comment sheet, copies of the presentation materials, and the comprehensive project list.  Attendees had the opportunity to review the information and ask questions of available Tampa Bay Water, TBRPC, and Black & Veatch staff.

Paula Dye of Tampa Bay Water began the presentation at 6:00 p.m.  She made introductions and covered the agenda, background information, and the planning process.  Steve Simpson of Black & Veatch continued the presentation with the goals and screening criteria.  An attendee questioned why projects that conflict with Local Sources First are on the Comprehensive Project List.  Steve advised that the intent of the list was to include ideas without editing to document that many different water supply ideas were considered. 

Brady Smith of TBRPC led an audience response segment to gather input on the relative importance of the screening criteria.  Environmental and Source Water Protection was ranked most important by 60% of the attendees.  Implementation/feasibility ranked less important by 40%.  70% of attendees ranked Project Cost as least important.  Regulatory requirements was ranked as important by 40%.  Yield was ranked as neutral by 30% and Least Important by 30%.

A comment was made that e-mail notification should be added to the advertisement methods for the public meetings.  A comment that boat sewage discharge to the bay should be regulated and the responsibility for regulating should be better known.  An attendee commented that depending on where the discharge was, the Coast Guard may be the regulatory authority.   

Paula Dye continued the presentation by discussing source water protection, with examples of existing programs in the region and examples of Tampa Bay Water efforts.  Brady Smith led an audience response segment to gather input on the importance of the region doing source water protection.  Attendees ranked Public Information and Education as least important (40%), and Protective Policies and Regulations as most important (50%).  Land Acquisition was ranked neutral by 30% of attendees.  Best Management Practices were ranked most important by 30% and less important by 30%.  Local Watershed Protection Actions ranked important (50%).
 
Brady also led a voting segment on the importance of Tampa Bay Water performing source water protection actions.  Attendees ranked continuing to advocate for source water protection as high priority for Tampa Bay Water (100%).  Supporting the development of ordinances was rated high (78%).  Implementing stormwater projects was rated high priority by 67%, and minimizing industrial discharges was rated high priority by 67%.  Supporting Low Impact Development was rated high by 56% of attendees.  The priority for Tampa Bay Water to Research and perform outreach on Low Impact Development was ranked medium (56%). The priority for Tampa Bay Water to produce educational materials was ranked high (56%).

Paula Dye thanked the attendees for participating, and invited them to take advantage of the remaining open-house format meeting to add project ideas to the comprehensive list, to provide additional comments via the comment sheet, and to ask additional questions of staff at the meeting.  Paula also noted that the website www.futurewater.org contained the same survey questions and much of the same information as the presentation, so additional comments and input could be provided at future public meetings, on the website, or by addressing questions through the website.