Approved January 16, 2024                                                                       

A hybrid Meeting held in-person at the Park Authority Board Room - Suite 921 of the Herrity Building - and virtually via Microsoft Teams                                                                                                

Ms. Bordas called the meeting to order at 10:11 a.m. Those present included:

• Adria Bordas, Director & Committee Chair, NVSWCD
• Chirs Koerner, Director, NVSWCD
• Shannon Bell, DPWES-SWPD
• John Peterson, Associate Director, NVSWCD
• Jim McGlone, VA DOF (retired)
• Scott Baron, NVSWCD
• Meghan Cunha, NVSWCD
• Trish Feth, NVSWCD
• Judy Fraser, NVSWCD
• Denisa Hendriyati, NVSWCD
• Heather Hunter-Nickels, NVSWCD
• Don Lacquement, NVSWCD
• Dan Schwartz, NVSWCD
• Sophia Woode, NVSWCD*
• Willie Woode, NVSWCD Executive Director

*Virtual attendance

MINUTES

Ms. Hunter-Nickels notes that the agricultural BMP project discussed at the last meeting is not yet approved, but is in the process of being approved by DCR’s engineering team. A motion (Fraser-Schwartz) to approve the revised minutes passes unanimously.

SOIL AND WATER QUALITY CONSERVATION PLANS

Ms. Hunter-Nickels presented three Conservation Plans for review by the Committee.

Fairfax County Park Authority – Laurel Hill Park, Lorton
 

• Park Authority wishes to convert 12-acres of flat, invasive-infested land to little bluestem prairie by removing trees, spraying with selected herbicides, bushhogging and burning prior to no-till drilling the native seeds.
• The Conservation Plan includes recommendations to prevent disturbance of neighboring steep slopes with fire line and erosion control measures to prevent burning too close to the slope. Additionally, the Plan recommends aeration of areas of soil compaction on the southern part of the site and information on altering soil pH to limit invasives and aluminum and manganese toxicity.
• Soil tests reveal the need for lime and fertilizer, but will ignore these recommendations since the native plants intended for the site are hearty pioneers that can grow on acidic soils. Liming and fertilizing will likely increase invasive pressure.
• No cost-share considerations

 

Fairfax County Park Authority – Cub Run Stream Valley Park, Centreville
 

• The Park Authority is planning a similar prairie conversion on 6-acres within the floodplain and RPA of Cub Run. The Conservation Plan is nearly the same as that for Laurel Hill.
• Since it is a visible stream-side public project, Mr. Woode recommends dividing the project into two or more portions, allowing the new plants in the first portion to establish ad stabilize before starting work on remainder of site. This may mean postponing work on the remaining sections for up to a year.
• No cost-share considerations.

 

Lift Me Up Therapeutic Riding Center – Great Falls
 

• The 3-acre property hosts five horses, but may expand to eight. The property is in the rezoning process to allow for increased traffic.
• The pastures are irrigated, have frost-free troughs, are aerated and seeded yearly, but Ms. Hunter-Nickels observed that they still appear overgrazed. This is likely due to them being overstocked.
• The RPA is fenced off, but the buffer is narrow. Drainage from the pastures flows to the RPA through a culvert. The manure pit is just outside the RPA on a concrete pad. Manure is hauled off once per month.
• Ms. Hunter-Nickels prepared a Conservation and Nutrient Management Plan for the property. Recommendations include a temporary fence around the culvert to allow vegetation to grow in more densely, increasing the density and quality of plants in the RPA, composting manure to spread in the fields, keeping horses off reseeded fields to allow the pasture to rest and regrow, and reducing the stocking rate of the pastures.
• Ms. Hunter-Nickels asks the Committee if the plan should recommend replacing the fence and widening the RPA buffer to 25 feet. The Committee agrees that this is a good recommendation and that the owners can be encouraged to apply for cost-share funding. Mr. Woode notes that this would be a voluntary action by the owners since their existing fence location is grandfathered in.
• The Committee also recommends putting out more feed to reduce overgrazing.

 

A motion (Schwartz-McGlone) that the Conservation and Nutrient Management Plans, as amended, be recommended for approval by the NVSWCD Board at their November meeting passed without objection.

 

CAP-VCAP PROGRAM
Ms. Fraser, Ms. Cunha and Mr. Schwartz presented six new CAP/VCAP applications and six CAP/VCAP reimbursement requests.

NEW APPLICATIONS

Cisternino Conservation Landscaping – Mount Vernon District, Little Hunting Creek Watershed

• 1.7 acres of mostly neighboring properties drains through two swales in Cisternino backyard. Construction at the next-door neighbor’s raises the applicants concern that extra runoff will lead to erosion and overtopping of the swales.
• The applicant’s plan calls for lining the swales with coir matting, laying rocks in the bottom, and planting the sides and borders with native plants. A level spreader will be installed in one swale near the uphill property line to slow and spread the next-door-neighbor’s runoff. The applicant will also use their own money to build a rock  landscaping wall along certain sections of the swale.
• Size – 1,100 ft²; Cost Estimate - $9,613.04; Cost-Share Request - $6,999.93
• The Committee suggests placing rock a few inches up sides of swales, not just in the bottom. The Committee also offers several suggestions for the planting plan, such as using dwarf versions of Joe Pye Weed and Rattlesnake Master and mixing in some faster growing groundcovers like Virginia strawberry.

 

Quinn Rain Garden– Providence District, Cameron Run Watershed

• The applicants propose a rain garden that will capture surface runoff and flow from two downspouts.
• Size – 200 ft²; Cost Estimate - $5,455.04; Cost-Share Request - $4,364.03

 

Ao/Dalesio Conservation Landscaping– Braddock District, Accotink Creek Watershed

• Property is within the RPA and on a steep slope that drains to Long Branch Central. RPA approval is pending from the county and needed before construction can start.
• The owners wish to create a path down the side of the property and heavily plant it on all sides with natives protected by jute matting. Downspout flow will be dispersed into plantings using gravel to spread out the flow.
• Size – 730 ft²; Cost - $10,950; Cost-Share Request - $7,000
• Committee says that Clethra alnifolia is native, but not to Northern VA, and the ruby spice cultivar has a color not attractive to bees.

Shackley Conservation Landscaping and Impervious Surface Removal – Braddock District, Accotink Creek Watershed

• Two projects are proposed at the same property.
• The first project removes bamboo on a steep slope and replaces it with natives. Logs of coir and cedar will be placed across the runoff flow path to control velocity. 57 ft² of impermeable pavers will be removed as part of the project.
• The second project will remove the existing patio and plant it and the surrounding areas with spreading herbaceous groundcover, shrubs and small trees to provide erosion control and screening.
• Project 1: Size – 1,892 ft²; Cost - $19,440; Cost-Share Request - $7,285
• Project 2: Size – 730 ft² planting, 530 ft² impervious removal; Cost - $9,990; Cost-Share Request - $8,002
• The Committee recommends controlling bamboo regrowth with monocot-specific herbicide or cutting new stems yearly.

Forsberg Conservation Landscaping – Mason District, Four Mile Run Watershed

• This lower-density “woodland-style” planting was presented at the previous Committee meeting for preliminary approval.
• The applicants will plant their steep, heavily forested backyard with a mix of shrubs, small trees, and herbaceous plants; and incorporate 4-6” diameter logs as natural terraces. The lower density, as compared to traditional conservation landscaping, will allow the applicants to place the new plants with minimal disturbance to the dense root mass of the existing tree canopy.
• Size – 1,200 ft²; Cost - $7,167; Cost-Share Request - $5,733.60
• The Committee provides several recommended alternatives for winged sumac and rattlesnake weed. Winged sumac aggressively suckers and Rattlesnake master may not grow well in the conditions.

REIMBURSEMENTS

Longoria-Green Conservation Landscaping – Mount Vernon District, Dogue Creek Watershed

• The total costs reduced because the applicants did more of the installation themselves than originally planned. Allowing a phased installation helped with this.
• Size 1,765 ft²; Cost - $20,538.36; Cost-share - $7,000

Allen Rain Garden, Dranesville District, Pimmit Run Watershed

• 10+ acres of overland flow passes through a drainage swale in the backyard.
• A raised catch basin in the swale directs a portion of the flow to the rain garden.
• The dry weather means that the rain garden has not yet been tested.
• Size – 95 ft²; Cost - $8,930; Cost-Share - $7,000

 

Fidducia Rain Garden, Hunter Mill District, Difficult Run Watershed

• The rain garden captures runoff from two downspouts off the home’s garage.
• Size – 98 ft2; Cost - $4,228; Cost-Share - $3,382.40
   

Fidducia Conservation Landscaping, Hunter Mill District, Difficult Run Watershed 

• On the downhill side of property, a steep slope next to the foundation was converted to a native bed using soil excavated from rain garden and brought-in topsoil.
• A wattle log at base of project reduces the slope and prevents erosion of the new soil and plantings.
• Size – 350 ft²; Cost - $5,588; Cost-Share - $4,470.40
   

Boertlein Conservation Landscaping – Dranesville District, Pimmit Run Watershed

• A large planting incorporates coir logs and native plants along the steep slope behind home.
• Size 2,490 ft²; Cost - $23,778.74; Cost-share - $7,000

 

Hancock Rain Garden – Providence District, Cameron Run Watershed

• Rain garden captures roof runoff from rear downspout
• Their was concern about the depth, but the construction photos do show 6 inches of ponding.
• Size 80 ft²; Cost - $7,739.62; Cost-share - $6,191.70

 

A motion (McGlone-Koerner) that the CAP-VCAP applications and reimbursements be recommended for approval by the NVSWCD Board at their November meeting passed without objection.

 

OTHER CAP/VCAP ITEMS

Ms. Fraser informs the Committee that LDS is requiring that CAP/VCAP projects in the RPA must now apply for permits. Mr. McGlone says that the RPA permitting system is not set up for projects that seek to improve environmental conditions. He suggests that LDS should be providing assistance to our affected applicants. Mr. Lacquement mentions that he is working with LDS staff on related issues.

Mr. McGlone mentions that the Erosion & Sediment (E&S) laws address silvicultural and agricultural development, but not natural resource management. Ms. Bell mentions that the new stormwater management handbook might apply. Mr. Koerner and Mr. McGlone both suggest that the sections 118 and 104 of the county code may need to change to include conservation and resource management.

Ms. Fraser shared a link to a new infiltration test instructional video for CAP/VCAP applicants.

 

ADJOURNMENT
Ms. Bordas adjourned the meeting at 11:35. The next Committee meeting will be on January 16^th.

 

Approved January 23, 2024

Meeting held in person 

MINUTES

Mr. Peters called the meeting to order at 1:37. Those attending in person were:

NVSWCD Directors and Associate Directors

Jerry Peters, Director-Chairman

Scott Cameron, Director-Vice Chairman

Chris Koerner, Director-Secretary/Treasurer

Monica Billger, Director

Adria Bordas, Director-Extension

 

Cooperating Agency Representatives

Debbie Cross, Virginia DCR

 

Guests

Rhonda Bitterli, Incoming Director

Dr. Jim Rice, Gallagher Consultants

 

NVSWCD Staff Members

Willie Woode, Executive Director

Scott Baron, Urban Conservation Specialist

Megan Cunha, Urban Conservation Specialist

Trish Feth, Communication Specialist

Judy Fraser, Urban Conservation Specialist

Denisa Hendriyadi, Education Specialist Intern

Heather Hunter-Nickels, Ag. Water Qual. & Cons. Specialist

Don Lacquement, Urban Conservation Engineer

Ashley Palmer, Communications & Education Specialist

Dan Schwartz, Soil Scientist

Heather Shackley, Operations Manager
Sophia Wood, Urban Conservation Specialist

 

Presentation
Jim Rice, National Advisor for Governance and Leadership, Gallagher Consultants

With authorization and input from the NVSWCD Board of Directors, Dr. Jim Rice and his team conducted a survey and individual interviews with members of the board and select members of district staff.  The purpose of today’s meeting is for Dr. Rice to present to the board his findings along with recommendations for strengthening working relationships within NVSWCD. 

 

Dr. Rice provided electronic copies of his report in advance of the meeting and brought printed copies to share with those present.  Electronic copies will be made available after the meeting. 

 

Dr. Rice used a PowerPoint presentation to give board and staff members an overview of the results of his work and his recommendations. He then opened the floor to questions from board members, followed by questions from staff.

Questions and Discussion
Mr. Peters commented on casual conversations with staff, noting that directors have previously been cautioned to keep a certain professional distance from staff. Mr. Peters would like to see definitions of appropriate boundaries between board members, staff, and the Executive Director, and suggestions on how to still have valuable discussions while maintaining those boundaries.

Staff shared similar confusion about the roles of board members and staff and their respective roles within the organization.

Dr. Rice directed everyone to appendix 7 and 7a of his report, Managing Boundaries, which outlines how to clarify decision making roles. He stated that Mr. Woode is the liaison between the board and the staff and information should go through him. For example, staff should not approach board members directly with an idea for work and vice versa.

Ms. Bordas noted that there is a difference between engaging with staff members socially and business relationships between board and staff, and that boundaries have been overstepped in the past.

Mr. Woode noted that board members should not communicate directly with staff, but instead follow proper channels of communication through the Executive Director.

It was suggested that ideas be explored for how to bridge the perceived gaps between board members and staff to clarify roles while strengthening communication and understanding. Several ideas were discussed, and possible solutions suggested, including the following points:

• What constitutes appropriate communication between board members and staff?
• How to maintain meaningful relationships and communication while respecting roles and boundaries?  For example, staff have made presentations at board meetings in the past to share information with board members about their work areas and areas of expertise. Another suggestions was to have a workshop or a retreat. 

 

 

Governance Committee Composition
What followed was a discussion about the ideal composition and format of the Governance Committee.  Who should be asked to serve on it, and should it be an ad hoc or standing committee?

Dr. Rice said that associate directors and staff can participate in the Governance Committee and warned against stretching the board too thin. He noted that some boards have a standing governance committee that conducts an annual self-assessment, strategizes ways to enhance governance, and is a resource for potential board members. This could be a work group including some board directors, some staff members, and a partner agency representative such as Ms. Cross.

A motion (Cameron-Billger) was made that the Governance Committee be redesignated as an ad-hoc committee.

Mr. Peters suggested that he nominate three people and Mr. Woode nominate three people to serve on the committee.

Mr. Woode outlined the difference between an ad hoc and a standing governance committee, saying one purpose of an ad hoc committee would be to deliver the governance document, which could then be incorporated into the Department of Conservation and Recreation Board of Directors training and handbook for NVSWCD directors.

An amended motion (Cameron-Billger) to create a Governance Working Group that would take recommendations of the governance consultant, as suggested in his report, and create an operational governance document to bring to the January 2024 meeting of the NVSWCD Board of Directors, passed by voice vote.

There was further discussion among board members and staff about who to appoint to the governance committee.

A motion (Cameron-Koerner) for staff and board members to provide their ideas for and interest in governance and/or a statement of their willingness to join the Governance Working Group to Mr. Woode and Mr. Peters, passed by voice vote.

A motion (Cameron-Koerner) to adjourn the meeting at 4:05 pm was passed by voice vote.

 Approved January 23, 2024

In-Person Meeting in the NVSWCD Conference Room

 

In Attendance

• Monica Billger, NVSWCD Director
• Scott Cameron, NVSWCD Vice-Chairman
• Chris Koerner, NVSWCD Treasurer
• Adria Bordas, NVSWCD Director-Extension
• Willie Woode, Executive Director
• Heather Shackley, Operations Manager
• Debbie Cross, DCR

 

Call to Order

Mr. Cameron noted that Mr. Peters was ill and would not be able to join us.  He called the meeting to order at 8:46 am and noted that an in-person quorum was present.  Mr. Woode apologized for the technical difficulties which delayed the meeting’s start time.

 

Approval of Minutes

Following a motion (Bordas-Koerner) the minutes of the June 27, 2023 meeting of the Executive-Operations Committee were approved by voice vote.

 

CLOSED SESSION (8:50 am)

A motion (Bordas-Billger) to go into closed meeting as provided for in the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), to discuss staff salaries, was approved unanimously by voice vote.

 

OPEN SESSION (9:25 am)

A motion (Cameron-Bordas) to reconvene the Executive Committee meeting in open session was made, certifying that, during the closed session, only business matters specifically identified in the original motion were discussed.  The motion was approved by voice vote.

 

Recommendations to the NVSWCD Board of Directors. 

Mr. Koerner noted for the record that during the closed session a detailed discussion of staff salaries and recommendations for changes to specific staff salaries were discussed at the meeting. 

 

FY 25 and Revisions to fy 24 Updated Budget and Contributory Report

Draft schedules for the FY 2025 Budget and Contributory Request had been provided to the Finance Committee in advance of the meeting. 

 

A motion (Koerner-Bordas) to approve the FY 2025 Budget and Contributory Report, the revisions to the FY 2024 budget, and to authorize the submission of NVSWCD’s annual contributory request to Fairfax County’s Department of Management and Budget in the amount of $646,978, as presented by the Executive Director, was approved by voice vote.

A motion (Koerner-Billger) to authorize adjustments to district staffing and compensation, as outlined in the FY 2025 Budget (with updates for FY 2024), following the details as outlined and discussed at the Finance and Executive Committees was approved by voice vote.

 

Adjournment

There being no other business, and by consensus, Mr. Cameron adjourned the meeting at 9:29 am.

 

Minutes of the November 27, 2023 meeting will be approved at the next Finance Committee meeting.