October Leadership Planning Meeting

CWEA October Leadership Planning Meeting 2004 DRAFT

October Leadership Planning Meeting

October 19, 2004

Ontario Convention Center

1. Call to Order (10:10 am)

President Elect and Planning and Program Development Chair Kathy Suter opened the meeting and thanked everyone for their participation.

2. Welcome and Introductions

The following people were in attendance (listed by work group):

Government Affairs/Share Our Expertise –

CWEA October Leadership Planning Meeting 2004 DRAFT

·  Toby Weissert

·  Reza Iranpour

·  Elmo Dagondon

·  Mike Selna

·  Maura Bonnarens

·  Sharon Green

·  James Colston

CWEA October Leadership Planning Meeting 2004 DRAFT

Public Education/Tell Our Story –

CWEA October Leadership Planning Meeting 2004 DRAFT

·  Tracy Stigers

·  Connie Leonard

·  Paul Shaffer

·  Helen Ling

·  Joe Haworth

·  Ralph Palomares

·  Rupam Soni

·  Kathy Whalen

·  Jeanne Edwards

CWEA October Leadership Planning Meeting 2004 DRAFT

Leadership Development/Got Successors? –

CWEA October Leadership Planning Meeting 2004 DRAFT

·  Steven Agor

·  Carrie Mattingly

·  Mike Hogan

·  Nick Pinhey

·  Paula Zeller

·  Dolly Chen

·  Phil Scott

CWEA October Leadership Planning Meeting 2004 DRAFT

Certification/Build Credibility through Certification –

CWEA October Leadership Planning Meeting 2004 DRAFT

·  Chris Lundeen, Director of Certification

·  Jeff Carter

·  Kris Flaig

·  Hoyt Pemberton

·  Victor Moraga

·  Mike Dozier

·  Paul Louis

·  Lorenzo Amis

·  Walter Payne

·  Simon Watson

CWEA October Leadership Planning Meeting 2004 DRAFT

Others (supported multiple work groups) –

·  Jean Frankel, Consultant and Facilitator

·  Kathy Suter, PPD Chair and President Elect

·  Elizabeth Allan, Executive Director

·  Brian Murray, Finance & Corporate Services Manager

·  Angela Nielsen, Executive Assistant & Coordinator of Leadership Development

3. Strategic Planning Briefing

Consultant Jean Frankel introduced the concepts behind strategic planning. She emphasized the following key points:

·  Strategic planning is a thinking and planning process to ensure our relevance over time

·  The plan should reflect our thinking about how the world would be different as a result of what we do

·  Strategic planning identifies what we are not already doing, but must do to be successful

·  Strategic planning is different from our annual programs of work

·  Planning timeline stretches from now (operational planning) to 10 – 30 years (envisioned future).

·  This kind of planning is different from what we are used to as it –

o  moves from a vision to current projects,

o  provides opportunity for changes at varying points in the process (as it has many smaller goals and objectives),

o  is a longer timeline than is typical, and

o  shows a direct link between current work and where we want to be in the future.

PPD Chair Suter presented the key elements of CWEA’s Strategic Plan:

·  Core ideology - preserves our past and central identity

·  Goals – six important areas for CWEA to address in the next 10 years in order to remain relevant to our members and the public –

o  Image of our industry and profession

o  Inclusive membership

o  Professionally competent and ample workforce

o  Value and recognition of certification

o  Information and knowledge

o  Impacting water quality industry leadership.

·  Vivid descriptions – how the world would be different if we accomplished our goals, and what benefits would come from it.

4. Brainstorming the Future – How can we best refer to our industry?

1.  What do we think we know about this issue in each of the knowledge bases?

A.  What do we know about our stakeholders’ needs, wants, and preferences that is relevant to this decision?

·  Public doesn’t want to think about what we do, and we want them to know about it.

·  Need to be public in an obvious way through developing brand recognition.

·  The public needs to be educated.

·  Members want to relate firefighters and police to the wastewater industry, perhaps by publicizing the percentage of children living due to clean water.

·  Stakeholders defined as environmentalists, and we need to be seen as partners in protecting the environment.

·  We are water custodians, sewer cops, and enforcers of the Clean Water Act.

·  Members want the public to know what we do so public understands what we do and what issues we can partner with the public on.

·  Members who are certified have a goal of being wastewater professionals.

·  Members desire a way to speak without negative connotations about their profession, and they want a distinguishable and honest identity.

·  We need to show our part of the watershed process.

·  Stakeholders include citizens of California who are not aware of the industry. These include vocal citizens (active) and the quiet group (don’t have interest). Their wants and preferences include wanting to stay unaware of what we do, likelihood of changing their interest level once they have a basic understanding of the service provided.

·  Members desire to be seen as being on the side of good.

·  Stakeholders are also the membership, regulatory agencies, treatment plants, contractors, and environmentalists.

·  The public wants a clean environment. They need more education (public, media, and environmentalists).

·  The public wants us to succeed at what we do – treat wastewater.

·  Regulators need (and are trying to get) a wider knowledge-base.

·  A goal for our members is to be able to show value in what we do.

·  We (as an industry) need more advertising similar to energy utilities about what we do and how to conserve water.

·  We (as an industry) need branding with catchy name/slogan and marketing to the public about the industry.

·  Want to make sure that the public understands what we are capable of, and what services are provided (i.e. sewage, not stormwater).

B.  What do we know about the current realities and evolving dynamics of our organization’s environment that is relevant to this decision?

·  We (as an industry) trained/allowed the public to not think about what we do.

·  We (as an industry) provide a service, rather than a product.

·  The (clean) water industry has not done a good job in protecting their image (or creating one) as is evidenced by the growth of the bottled water industry.

·  We are also similar to firefighters and police officers as we are social services that protect and serve, providing safety to everyone (but that no one wants to see on their doorstep).

·  The public traditionally takes the stance of out of sight, out of mind.

·  There is a public distrust of agencies/the government.

·  We can use the enthusiasm and potential of the younger generation to spread our message.

·  WEF has a new approach of “water is water.”

·  AMSA has the water quality institute.

·  The central valley has a “Central Valley Clean Water Association.”

·  The word sanitary brings to mind the solid waste industry rather than wastewater (sewage).

·  There is a big difference (which is not readily understood) between waste water and wastewater.

·  There is a watershed approach to water issues and industries.

·  The environment outside the association is that there is a water scarcity (particularly in California)

·  There are increasing dual certifications and cross-training between wastewater and other water certifications.

·  The industry is evolving faster than the public knows.

·  We have the tools and resources to start the image-changing process.

·  Members hold multiple certifications and training.

·  California is a leader in the US across industries, so we are the best positioned of any of the MAs to take a position about image (set the standard).

·  We have members already involved in other aspects of the watershed.

·  There are different views of the mission, depending on the sector of the stakeholders.

·  Members are both proud of what we do and are trying to hide it from the public.

·  We are not polluters, but a part of the water cycle that cleans (we are the solution).

·  People confuse water, sewer, stormwater, and non-point source pollution.

·  There is confusion among members and the public about CWEA’s purpose, and the industry’s purpose (to create potable or non-potable water).

·  Children have a natural curiosity that we can use to spread our message.

·  The industry overlaps with water, solids, and gas utilities. Each district and community or municipality needs to have their own education program for its customers since all are run differently. But, we can begin an industry-wide name as a start.

·  We are a critical link in the watershed process.

C.  What do we know about the capacity and strategic position of CWEA that is relevant to this decision?

·  Interest to do public education and image building is there, but we don’t have the capacity to do it on our own.

·  Professional resources and resources from WEF can be leveraged locally.

·  Everyone has a role in getting the message out.

·  WEF has public messages that we can use, and additional resources and ideas that we can leverage.

·  CWEA has a film library, and needs to promote education, outreach, and public discussion.

D.  What are the ethical implications of our choices?

·  We need to encourage the mutual trust between the industry and the public – we need them and they need us.

·  Need to be honest about who we are and what we do.

·  We don’t want to disenfranchise our members that are more focused on other aspects of watershed (stormwater for example).

·  We need to be honest about our role and our focus.

E.  What do we wish we knew, but don’t?

·  We need to know more about what our members want to be called.

·  We need to know more about what environmental groups perceive about our industry (and why).

F.  Other items discussed include:

·  Keep the wastewater professional identity of the association.

·  Possible names:

o  Water quality (field) professional.

o  Environmental professional.

o  Water environmental professional.

o  Champions for the (water) environment through…

o  Benefiting the environment…

o  Ensuring a clean environment through water.

o  Clean water professionals.

o  The original 24/7 water cleaners/environmental stewards/ water environment custodians.

·  Phrases related to our industry and services:

o  Not sanitation

o  Not clean water

o  Stewards

o  Recycling

o  Reliable

o  Good neighbor

o  Cost effective

o  Help maintain a clean environment

2.  How do we know? What can we observe? What’s the basis of our thinking?

·  The industry is under-funded.

·  Partnerships with environmental activists where possible will allow us to better educate the public and policy makers to get our funding to do our job better.

·  We know because of our experience, expertise, and feedback from other industry professionals and members.

5. Action Plans from Work Groups

Consultant Frankel introduced the action planning development process. She explained the link between the 3 – 10 year strategic plan and the annual plan which supports the annual program of work as being action plans that have checkpoints, milestones, and progress towards goals. She reiterated that this October meeting is a precursor to the work that the Planning and Program Development Committee will be doing in planning for the next fiscal year. She noted that the action plans will be reviewed in terms of a greater context of work as well as the resources that are available in the coming year.

6. Action Work Group Reports

The work groups drafted the attached action plans for review by PPD for the 2005-2006 program of work.

7.  Work Review

The work groups presented their work, including the strategy (or strategies) selected, receiving feedback and applause from the group. Plans were noted the order of the strategies and objectives that the groups identified and where they fit within the context of the strategic plan.

8. What’s Next

PPD Chair Suter reviewed the next steps in the planning process, with specific regard to what will be happening with the draft action plans developed, with the following key dates:

·  November – meeting notes will be delivered via Leader Link

·  January – Board will review PPD’s work to date on the annual plan

·  February – an update will be distributed via Leader Link

·  April – PPD will refine the plan and update the Board

·  May – PPD will refine the plan and (depending on progress) may update leaders via Leader Link

·  June – The Board will approve the FY 05-06 Program of Work & Budget

·  July – an update will be distributed via Leader Link.

9. Adjourn

Chair Suter thanked the participants for their time and work. She adjourned the meeting at 2:45 p.m.

Draft Action Plan

October 19, 2004

Government Affairs: Share Our Expertise
Strategy: Reinvigorate the Government Affairs Committee
------
Define the purpose of the GAC relative to Tri-TAC and CASA – carrying messages back from Tri-TAC to CWEA membership and from CWEA membership to Tri-TAC by:
Key Event / Responsibility / Target Date
Reviewing and modifying Standing Rules / GAC Chair / April 2005
Expanding the membership of GAC for more regional balance and operators on the committee. / GAC (whole) / April 2005
Fill out slate of GAC officers, assigning roles of government affairs committee to specific officers. / GAC Chair / April 2005
Speak to local sections about GAC – develop key messages presentation. / GAC Chair to develop presentation, GAC members to present / January 2005 (developed – to be given by Dec. 2005)
Provide a feedback mechanism to/from membership to include:
Annual report on Gov’t Affairs at AC;
Periodic reports on GAC issues via WW Professional with information about GAC members;
Survey members about issues and interests. / GAC members / April 2005
Resources Required: Staff time for survey, costs associated with travel to local section meetings by GAC members for presentations. (Additional time for GAC members.)

Draft Action Plan

October 19, 2004

Government Affairs: Share Our Expertise
Strategy: Training on Media Contacts (How to Deliver a Key Message)
Key Event / Responsibility / Target Date
Discuss with Public Education Committee for joint participation / GAC Chair and Public Ed Chair / November 2004
Develop task force/partnership of committees for meeting at AC / GAC Chair and Pub Ed Chair / April 2005
Define scope of specialty conference (coordinate with TCC) / Task Force/partnership with TCC / April 2005
Select format of conference and keynote speaker / Task Force/partnership / April 2005
Develop schedule for steps leading to conference / Task Force/Partnership / April 2005
Pick locations / Task Force/Partnership and Local Sections/TCC / May 2005
Develop advertising plan / Task Force/Partnership / May 2005
Develop budget / Task Force/Partnership / June 2005
Develop brochure / Task Force/Partnership / July 2005
Hold conference / Task Force/Partnership and Local Section hosts / November 2005
Resources Required: Same as required for specialty conferences, and GAC Chair and Public Education Chair.

Draft Action Plan