A Catalyst for Community

Land Use Change

National NEMO Network

2008 Progress Report
 Contents
Who We Are Local Impacts Network Coordination

3 About This Report 8 Changes to Land Use Plans 30 The NEMO Hub: Coordinating
the Network
4 About the NEMO Network 11 Spotlight on South Carolina
32 Strengthening Network
6 Local Land Use Impacts 12 Changes to Land Use Regulations Programs: NEMO Network
15 Spotlight on Tennessee Initiatives

Contact the Network Hub 16 On the Ground Changes 36 Moving Forward

The University of Connecticut 19 Spotlight on Maine 37 Network Members Directory
Cooperative Extension System
P.O. Box 70, 1066 Saybrook Road
Haddam, CT 06438 20 Changes to the Decision Making
Process
David Dickson, NEMO Network Coordinator
david.dickson@uconn.edu 23 Spotlight on Connecticut
860-345-5228
24 Changes to Research &
Kara Bonsack, NEMO Network Communicator
kara.bonsack@uconn.edu Information Gathering
860-345-5227
27 Spotlight on Minnesota
Website: nemonet.uconn.edu
Written and edited by David Dickson and Chet
28 Beyond Local Impacts
Arnold, with contributions from our Network col-
leagues. Design and production management by
Kara Bonsack. Photography by the NEMO Hub and
Network members. Photography credits given in
the Local Impacts section for all non-Hub related
photographs.

Printing funded by USDA CSREES Water Quality

Program. This report was printed with vegetable
oil-based inks on 30% post-consumer recycled
paper using biogas energy and certified by
SmartWood for Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)
standards. Cover: Photo of attendees of NEMO University 6 (U6) held in Monterey, CA in October 2008. Member states are
listed on the left column of the cover, including the year they joined the Network. (Full color photo of attendees
on inside back cover.)

National NEMO Network member programs are supported by many different federal, state and local sources.
Coordination for the NEMO Network by the University of Connecticut Department of Extension is currently supported
by the USDA CSREES Water Quality and Forestry Programs, and the EPA Office of Water Nonpoint Source Control
CLEAR print 030930.1 Branch. The National NEMO Network is a USDA CSREES National Facilitation Project and a focus area of the
Northeast States and Caribbean Islands Regional Water Program.
About This Report
... we invite you to see for yourself the power of professional, research-
based education and outreach to change the way communities plan
and build their future.

This report highlights the work and The Network has now truly reached
progress of the National NEMO maturation. The rapid growth in the
Network, a unique confederation of number of programs in the Network
educational programs that are helping has leveled off, but the impacts of
communities across the country make NEMO programs have continued to
better land use decisions. The Network grow. While compiling this report, it
is not the result of an agency directive became evident that not only are more
or initiative: it was created in 2000 by communities involved with NEMO, but
its member programs, who share a that the resulting local actions are both
desire to promote natural resource-based greater in number and more varied.
community planning, and a belief that Examples of these local efforts are spot-
education is the way to make it happen. lighted in this report.

This is the third progress report on the Finally, this report also describes
National NEMO Network. It highlights Network-wide initiatives to strengthen
impacts from NEMO programs, in the and enhance the educational, topical
form of local actions that have been and technical expertise that NEMO
taken by communities to better protect programs bring to these communities.
their natural and community resources As the Network has matured, the
through improved land use planning Network Hub at the University of
and design. Connecticut has shifted its primary
focus from helping to start programs, to
Our 2002 Progress Report focused on helping programs expand and enhance
the story of the Network and the struc- their efforts.
ture and goals of its programs. Three
years later, the evolution of these pro- On the pages that follow, we invite you
grams enabled our 2005 Progress Report to see for yourself the power of profes-
to be focused not on descriptions of sional, research-based education and
programs, but on the many impacts of outreach to change the way communities
these programs at the community level. plan and build their future.
This report continues that trend, and is
comprised primarily of brief vignettes of We hope this report serves as inspiration
what communities around the country both to those innovative local officials
are doing, catalyzed and assisted by looking to provide an effective balance
NEMO education and technical tools. between conservation and development
in their community, and the educators
who seek to help them.

3
About the
NEMO Network
NEMO programs use good old-fashioned outreach education to put commu-
nities in the driver seat as they seek to balance growth and protect natural
resources and community character.

The National NEMO Network is a • The method is research-based edu-

confederation of programs that educate cation. NEMO programs use good
local land use decision makers about old-fashioned outreach education to
the links between land use and natural put communities in the driver seat
resource protection. Network programs as they seek to balance growth and
are patterned after the original Nonpoint protect natural resources and com-
Education for Municipal Officials munity character. We believe that,
(NEMO) Program developed at the as this report demonstrates, outreach
University of Connecticut, but each education is the most flexible, effective
program is a unique entity, and cost-effective method
typically operated as a multi- for catalyzing change to
organizational consortium. local land use policies and
practices.
The University based USDA
Land Grant and NOAA Sea • The topic is natural
Grant systems are the most resource-based land use
common institutional homes planning and site design.
of NEMO programs, As countless studies have
although lead organizations found, many indicators of a
VT NEMO Coordinator,
also include state agencies Emma Melvin, officially community’s health trace
and nonprofit groups. These joins the Network by sign- back to land use. Chief
programs, now numbering ing the National NEMO among those is the health
Network Charter.
32 in 30 states (map, back of the community’s natural
cover), have joined together of their resources. However, all too often
own accord to create a unique national natural resources are seen as an
network that is sharing information, afterthought. NEMO programs
educational methods and technical encourage communities to consider
tools across state and agency lines. conservation and development as two
sides of the same coin to be consid-
Institutional makeup, geographic cover- ered in tandem at every phase of the
age, topical focus, methodology, funding land use planning process.
and staffing vary from state to state.
However, all NEMO programs share • The target audience is local land
these few key elements: use decision makers. While land use
has wide ranging impacts on com-

4
 Network Facts
munity health, land use decisions are
primarily made by volunteers serving
on local boards and commissions of •There are 32 NEMO programs in 30 states.
various shapes, scopes and sizes.
These folks need tools, resources and •NEMO programs on average work with 13 communities and
support to help them make informed reach approximately 450 local officials per year.
decisions for their community’s pres- •The typical NEMO program gives a workshop or presentation
ent and future. once every three weeks, or 17 times per year. The most active
programs conduct over 100 workshops per year.
• The educational messages are
•In addition to face-to-face presentations and workshops,
enhanced by the use of geospatial NEMO programs employ the whole gamut of outreach/
technology. One of the greatest chal- educational tools to reach their target audience. See the
lenges local land use officials face is graph below for more on the tools and publications NEMO
putting individual land use decisions programs use to supplement workshops.
into a broader community or water-
•About two thirds of NEMO programs review community plans,
shed context. Geospatial images and
regulations, and/or ordinances, make suggestions for incor-
technology help provide this context, porating natural resource protection into them, and provide
as well as analyze land use trends examples of model regulations.
and impacts.
•On average, NEMO programs operate on an annual budget
The formation of a network allows for of about $80,000.
the transfer of innovation and informa- •Universities, either
25

tion between programs so that it ulti- through Cooperative

mately can benefit the people who will Extension or Sea Grant 20

actually make the difference—land use systems, lead the majority

Web-based Maps/Tools

decision makers. Communication and of NEMO programs (28). 15

coordination for the Network comes

Campfire Songs

from the University of Connecticut 10

Guidance Publications

“Hub,” a part of the Center for Land

Other Publications

Use Education and Research (CLEAR). (Graph) NEMO programs use a

5
Fact Sheets

CDs/DVDs

Member programs demonstrate their variety of tools to reach their

GIS Maps
Websites

Videos

commitment to the Network by signing target audience. 0

a Charter of Operation. Additional

information on the Hub and Network-
wide initiatives appears in the “Network
Coordination” section of this report.

5
Local Land Use
Impacts
NEMO programs track their effectiveness in terms of the actions communities
take to improve their land use practices, procedures, and decisions as they
work toward that ultimate measure of a healthier community.

There are many ways to evaluate the On the following pages, this report
effectiveness of an educational pro- highlights examples of such local
gram. While the ultimate measure is a actions that NEMO programs have
healthier community with fewer pollu- helped put into motion. It should be
tants and cleaner air and water, it is noted that while NEMO programs
nearly impossible to demonstrate with served as a catalyst, volunteers serving
any degree of scientific certainty the on local planning boards and commis-
connection between those objectives sions created these changes and deserve
and a series of workshops conducted to be recognized for their efforts.
years earlier for a community’s land use
planning officials. For that reason, This is not intended to be an exhaus-
NEMO programs track their effective- tive list of all NEMO program impacts,
ness in terms of the actions communi- but rather a representative sample of
ties take to improve their land use the types of changes NEMO programs
practices, procedures, and decisions as are helping to bring about from coast
they work toward that ultimate meas- to coast.
ure of a healthier community.
For more details on what individual
While NEMO programs raise the NEMO programs are doing, and rout-
“capacity” and “knowledge base” of ing to member’s websites, visit the
local officials, this report does not Network website at
focus on those aspects. Rather, this nemonet.uconn.edu. Or use the
report documents how that increased Network Members Directory on pages
knowledge is translated into actions— 37 and 38 of this report to speak to a
real changes to land use policies and real live NEMOid in your state!
practices.

6
The impacts in this report are divided into six categories to
represent the various stages of local land use planning.
Changes to Land Use Plans ....................................... page 8
Plans constitute the backbone of local land use decision-making by setting
out long term goals and a vision for how a community will grow.

Changes to Land Use Regulations ............................. page 12

Regulations and ordinances give “teeth” to plans and dictate the specifics
of how, where and when development may occur. Changes here provide
direct protection for priority community resources.

On the Ground Changes ............................................ page 16

Where and how development occurs. From “low impact” subdivisions to
permanently protected open space, changes to the actual landscape are an
ultimate indicator of impact.

Changes to the Decision Making Process................... page 20

The players and specific steps involved in local land use decision-making
can make a huge difference. These changes create a decision making struc-
ture that is more conducive to proactive planning.

Changes to Research & Information Gathering........... page 24

These initiatives help provide the local data upon which rational land use
plans, regulations and decisions can be based.

Beyond Local Impacts............................................... page 28

NEMO programs focus on local impacts. However, as an innovator,
NEMO programs often create or inspire changes to state or regional
plans, policies and programs.

7
 Changes to
Land Use Plans
Plans constitute the backbone of local land use decision-making by setting out long term goals and a vision
for how a community will grow. They can be comprehensive in scope or focus on particular community issues
or resources such as economic development or open space protection. Regardless of the type, community
land use plans act as a guide to a community’s priorities and objectives. NEMO programs are working with
communities to help ensure that their plans reflect their interest in protecting natural resources.

 Colorado: AWARE Colorado (the the Tennessee Growth Readiness workshop recom-
CO NEMO effort) participated in the mendations. The County also produced a DVD
Fountain Creek Vision Task Force. that highlights a local developer’s experience with
This multi-stakeholder effort resulted clustering building lots and green space to save
in a comprehensive watershed plan mountainous areas/provide visual protection.
for the 930-square-mile watershed that
addresses water resource impacts of  Indiana: Through Planning with POWER (the IN
land use and development. NEMO effort) Porter County adopted traditional
neighborhood design guidelines developed at a
 Connecticut: The towns of two-day design charrette facilitated by U.S. EPA
Killingworth and Killingly and the city and Planning with POWER. The guidelines
Falls at the headwaters of the of Torrington all made changes to encourage compact, walkable, mixed use design
Eightmile River in Devil’s Hopyard their comprehensive plans to include that protects open space and natural resources
State Park, Connecticut. strategies to protect water quality. The within the development tract.
towns of Morris, Killingworth and North Stonington
created new open space plans. The towns of East  Indiana: Planning with POWER facilitated the
Haddam, Salem and Lyme jointly adopted the establishment of a special Land Use Planning
Eightmile River Watershed Management Plan to Committee in Jasper County that looked at updating
help protect the quality of the watershed. the comprehensive
land use plan and
 Georgia: Towns County is including several of the zoning ordinances to
model principles from the Tennessee Growth address rural residen-
Readiness (the TN NEMO effort) workshop series tial housing, large
in their comprehensive plan. Towns County is agricultural operations
implementing an innovative new Appalachian and water/septic
Conservation Development Incentive Program issues in the county.
for conservation-based subdivision development. Based on recommen-
The Hiawassee River Watershed Coalition worked IN NEMO is helping communities form dations from that
with the Towns County conservation board to local committees to address natural process, Jasper County
design the program’s required practices, based on resource issues in land use planning. is updating their
(Photo courtesy of Planning with POWER.)

8
 comprehensive land use plan including ordinance slopes, and other criteria. Duluth is now working
revisions that address agricultural land, natural on developing form-based codes based on their
resources, water quality, septic issues, economic comprehensive plan.
development, and other priorities.
 Minnesota: Northland NEMO hosted a planning
 Kansas: KS NEMO was instrumental in the charrette that produced a plan of development
development of a watershed management plan for a 100 acre site alongside a trout stream within
for the city of Olathe to protect Lake Olathe. The the city of Duluth. The plan included several areas
plan was adopted by the city council for inclusion that had been targeted
in the city’s master plan. The plan includes recom- for preservation in the
mendations for protection of important natural city’s new comprehensive
resources, requiring either limits on the amount plan. Existing zoning
of impervious surface or best management prac- permits 36 units, with
tices that reduce alteration of hydrologic impacts, an estimated 10.4 acres
riparian buffer preservation/creation to protect of impervious surface,
streams from impacts from urban runoff. but the final charrette
Northland NEMO hosted a planning plan allows for 42 units
 Maine: A ME NEMO presentation on open space charrette to create a plan of develop- clustered on 30 acres,
ment for a 100 acre site. (Photo with only 4.7 acres of
planning in Raymond catalyzed the community to
courtesy of Jesse Schomberg.)
develop an open space plan that was based on the impervious surface. All
presentations recommendations. According to the units are adjacent to an existing neighborhood
city, “Our approach drew significantly on your with transit lines and neighborhood commercial
presentation and helped spring us into action!” services. The proposed preservation areas were
protected by this design as well.
 Minnesota: After working with Northland NEMO
educators, the city of Duluth completed a natural  Minnesota: After a Northland NEMO presentation
resource inventory as part of their comprehensive about natural resource-based planning, the city of
plan revision, and designated protection areas in Medina formed an open space task force to develop
their future land use map based on mitigating for- the open space plan component of their compre-
est fragmentation, trout stream impacts, steep hensive land use plan, and enacted a 6-month

9
 moratorium on new development. The task force  Oregon: OR NEMO provided assistance to the
recommended adoption of the plan by the compre- cities of Wheeler and Sutherlin to help them create
hensive plan committee and portions were included stormwater master plans.
in the current draft version of the comprehensive
plan. The open space plan called for the develop-  South Carolina: The town of Surfside Beach is
ment or updates of the following ordinances: natural incorporating pond management strategies learned
resource design standards; conservation develop- in SC NEMO stormwater education workshops,
ment ordinance; establishment of a local purchase including vegetated buffers and maintenance
of development rights program; and minor activities, into its stormwater management plan.
adjustments of the Park and Trail Dedication
Ordinance. Currently, they are working on these  Texas: Inspired
ordinance provisions. by TX NEMO,
stakeholders within
 Nevada: After participating in NV NEMO work- the Dickinson
shops, Washoe County’s comprehensive plan was Bayou Watershed
revised to incorporate low impact development and Partnership have
stormwater protection into the conservation element. put together a
watershed protec-
 Nevada: The North Valley of A stakeholder survey at Dickinson Bayou tion plan. The plan
Reno’s specific area plan, which Watershed Partnership Meeting. (Photo will serve as a road
is used to guide development in courtesy of Susan Benner.) map in the present
different areas of the city, requires and future protection of the watershed. This plan
consideration of infiltration best identifies the present state of the watershed, pollu-
management practices and low tants found in the watershed and possible sources,
impact development practices for as well as suggestions for actions to mitigate these
all new development. water quality issues.

 New Hampshire: One of the  Texas: The Arroyo Colorado Watershed Partnership
communities NROC (the NH completed their watershed protection plan with
The city of Reno, Nevada is encour- NEMO effort) worked with, assistance from TX NEMO. Incorporation of wet-
aging LID practices, such as this Wakefield, commissioned and lands into the treatment train of local wastewater
grass swale, to be used in all new participated in the development treatment plants was one new critical practice
development.
of a water resources chapter for introduced through the plan. The plan is final
their master plan. They are currently working on and implementation is well underway with several
an implementation plan for that chapter. new funded grant projects.

10
South Carolina
Jasper County’s Natural Resources Conservation Plan
Under the NEMO mantra of natural resource-based planning, communities are
encouraged to (1) conduct an inventory of natural and community resources, (2)
use the inventory in developing both open space and economic development plans,
and then (3) integrate all of that into a community’s comprehensive plan. SC NEMO’s
work with Jasper County epitomizes this approach.

Jasper County is a predominantly rural The first step in this conservation effort was
county of 24,000 people just outside of to conduct a natural resource inventory to
Savannah, Georgia with abundant natural assess the natural resource and conserva-
and cultural resources. In the face of tion assets and needs of the county. The
tremendous projected growth, local officials inventory was then used to set community
and residents were concerned that the conservation goals in the Jasper County
county’s planning policies Natural Resources
and zoning ordinances were Conservation Plan. The plan
ill-equipped to adequately identifies fragile ecosystems
balance the expected growth and other priority areas for
with protection of the area’s protection; provides innova-
natural resources. tive solutions for protecting
them; assists with directing
SC NEMO, in collaboration future growth to appropriate
with numerous partners, areas; and in general,
helped convene a county- serves as a guidebook for
wide conservation planning residents, developers and
effort. The effort included local officials on how to pre-
more than 100 stakeholders serve the rich heritage and
representing local and Jasper County, South Carolina created quality of life in the county.
regional government officials a natural resources inventory which
and staff, state and federal serves as a guidebook for community The stakeholder involvement
resource agencies, nonprofit resource protection, development helped provide strong sup-
conservation organizations, planning and the preservation of port for the conservation
quality of life.
local businesses, private plan. In fact, the entire nat-
landowners and concerned citizens. The ural resources conservation plan was
effort was timely in that it was undertaken included as an appendix to the county’s
just as the county began revising the coun- revised comprehensive plan and many of
tywide comprehensive plan. the goals, objectives and strategies were
integrated into the natural resources ele-
ment of the comprehensive plan.

11
 Land
Changes to
Use Regulations
While plans set the vision, that vision is implemented through land use regulations and ordinances. Regulations
define what is allowed and what is required of new or expanded developments. As our understanding of the
impacts of land use on water quality has increased, so has our knowledge of development practices that can
minimize those impacts. NEMO programs are working to help communities ensure that their zoning and sub-
division regulations reflect that knowledge.

 Arizona: Partially in response to AZ NEMO’s edu-  Connecticut: Based on cooperative research

cation efforts in the Middle San Pedro Watershed, between CT NEMO and the Department of
Cochise County developed an ordinance addressing Environmental Protection, the first impervious
development and water availability. The ordinance cover-based total maximum daily load (TMDL)
requires new subdivisions located outside a desig- regulation in the nation was approved for Eagleville
nated active management area have an adequate Brook in Mansfield, Connecticut. CT NEMO is
water supply in order for the subdivision to be now working with multiple state and local partners
approved. Cochise is the only county in the state to help the regulated communities create a water
to have adopted such a provision. quality management plan to address the TMDL.

 Colorado: Follow-up surveys of local officials who  Delaware: In response to

participated in CO NEMO workshops indicate that a DE NEMO presentation on
changes are being made to comprehensive plans riparian buffers, the town of
and/or subdivision and zoning. Some examples of Ocean View passed a townwide
changes being made or considered: using stormwa- wetlands buffer regulation
ter filter and storage systems in parking lots; utilizing that prevents construction of
low impact development techniques in subdivision any kind within 25 feet of
design; green alleys; reductions in impervious sur- any wetland. The buffer zone
faces; limitations on post-construction stormwater must also be maintained in
quantities; more attention to water quality features natural vegetation.
in landscaping; tree preservation ordinances; and
expanding setbacks of development from water  Georgia: Rabun County
The town of Ocean View, Delaware
bodies. passed a townwide wetlands
is implementing a unified
buffer regulation to prevent con-
development code that limits
struction within 25 feet of any
 Connecticut: The town of North Stonington wetland. impervious surfaces in steep
adopted a comprehensive stormwater manage- slope areas, requires land-
ment regulation that requires the use of innova- scaped islands in commercial parking and improves
tive stormwater management techniques in any tree protection. Specifically, the code limits imper-
development that disturbs more than 1 acre of vious cover to 10 percent on lots with 40 percent
land. The city of Torrington regulations require or greater slope; reduces the number of parking
the use of low impact development techniques for spaces; limits the number of trees that can be
new development or redevelopment. removed (particularly on steep slopes); and requires

12
 tree protection on construction sites, with physical  Maine: After a ME NEMO presentation on open
barriers on saved trees. In addition, commercial space subdivisions, the town council in Scarborough
and industrial sites have a 30-foot setback from adopted conservation subdivision design regula-
streets with landscaping. tions for subdivisions that contain wetlands. This
ordinance allows cluster subdivisions and requires
 Indiana: Porter County adopted a watershed any subdivision with 1-plus acres of wetland on
overlay district ordinance that provides three site, or impacting 4300 square feet of wetland, to
riparian buffer zones for all be designed with clustered housing with a minimum
streams and rivers in the county. of 50 percent of the area preserved in open space.
The overlay district extends 500
feet on either side of the river-  Maine: Following a ME NEMO presentation on
bank for major drainageways and low impact development (LID), the town of York
high priority bodies of water. passed an LID ordinance referendum by a huge
For major collectors, continually majority (2047 to 244). The ordinance states
flowing drainways to major water “Initially LID standards should be integrated into
bodies and small lakes, the dis- the town’s land use codes. As local experience is
Porter County, Indiana adopted a watershed trict extends 300 feet on each gained with LID practices, policies should be
overlay district ordinance for all streams
and rivers in the county. (Photo courtesy of side. For minor drainways and expanded to encourage or require LID design
Planning with POWER.) intermittent streams, the district where appropriate.” The ballot referenced a ME
extends 100 feet. NEMO publication.

 Indiana: Following two “Hillside Development”  Nevada: Following a NV NEMO presentation in

workshops by Planning with POWER (the IN Douglas County, the county developed draft design
NEMO effort) Dearborn County adopted a hillside standards and conducted a review of their codes,
development ordinance that requires additional ordinances and standards to ensure compatibility
geotechnical inspection and mitigation when with low impact development approaches. Similarly,
building on steep slopes greater than 20 percent Washoe County is conducting a review of their
and under certain soil and geologic conditions. codes, ordinances and design standards and have
Additional retaining wall structures are now in required infiltration best management practices
place on recent developments along the Ohio be incorporated into the design of parking lots.
River flood plain and other sensitive areas. The
city of Aurora has passed a similar ordinance.  New Hampshire: The picturesque rural community
of Deerfield made several changes to its land use
 Kansas: KS NEMO presentations to city of regulations to protect water quality and community
Lawrence staff and city commissioners about the character. It increased stream setbacks, or buffers,
impacts of impervious surfaces resulted in the to 100 feet along surface waters and wetlands, and
redrawing of floodplain boundaries along streams required open space set-asides for new subdivisions.
and new floodplain development restrictions.

13
  New York: Based on NY NEMO recommendations, watershed assessments that RI NEMO conducted
communities have made changes to their erosion for the coastal ponds. As a result, the town
and sediment control and post-construction strengthened its wetland buffer ordinance with
design specifications, as well as site plan review additional standards for approval of special use
procedures and inspections. The changes have permits where buffer alteration is unavoidable,
included an ordinance for retention of rainwater including use of advanced wastewater treatment
from new driveways in Great Neck; erosion and systems and control of stormwater runoff volume.
sediment controls for construction projects
smaller than 1 acre in Sea Cliff; tree protection  Rhode Island: After town staff and planning
requirements during construction activities in board members attended RI NEMO workshops
Roslyn Harbor; and erosion and sediment controls on groundwater protection, the town of Coventry,
in Manorhaven. Rhode Island adopted a private well protection
ordinance that ensures new wells are properly
 New York: Nassau County constructed and provide safe yield before a building
strengthened its drainage permit is issued.
requirements for development,
re-development and the subdi-  Texas: After sev-
vision of land. Developers are eral training sessions
responsible for providing storage on natural area
for 8 inches of runoff from the preservation and
New York NEMO recommendations are
subdivision’s tributary area, compact growth in
changing how runoff is addressed in new whether from onsite or offsite the coastal commu-
developments. (Photo courtesy of NY Sea sources. The county also encour- nity of Rockport and
Grant NEMO.) ages low impact development Aransas County,
techniques in its subdivision and an extensive
Rockport County residents playing the
requirements. community survey
“chips” game at a county fair. (Photo
courtesy of TX NEMO.) conducted at two
 Rhode Island: The town of Cumberland developed county fairs; local
a water resources overlay district to protect drink- decision makers are using compact growth to
ing water supply watersheds, wellhead protection accommodate the projected growth on Live Oak
areas and groundwater aquifers. In addition to Peninsula. An overlay district was formed as a
restricting use of hazardous materials and under- result of this project for the older, “heritage” section
ground storage tanks in source areas, the proposed of town that enables much denser development
ordinance establishes buffers to wetlands and sur- than previously allowable.
face waters, limits impervious cover, and requires
use of low impact stormwater management controls  Vermont: After VT NEMO conducted a buildout
for new construction and redevelopment. assessment on their proposed zoning plan and its
effects on a town brook, the town of Colchester
 Rhode Island: RI NEMO documented the need added language within their parking regulations
for enhanced wetland buffer protection in South encouraging infiltration of stormwater in landscaped
Kingstown based on current research findings and areas within parking lots.

14
Tennessee
In Tennessee, like much of the Southeast, the pace of development is challenging the staff, expertise
and capacity of local governments to manage growth in economically and environmentally beneficial
ways. Growing concern for water quality combined with new statewide stormwater regulations
have motivated community leaders to re-examine land use policies and the relationship between
land use and the protection of water quality and water supply. Tennessee Growth Readiness (the
TN NEMO effort) is designed to help these decision makers manage growth while protecting water
resources and the quality of life in their communities.

A primary focus of Tennessee Growth Readiness is Similarly, Marshall County, Tennessee passed a
to help communities evaluate their land use codes change in their zoning requirements to include
and ordinances for their capacity to meet water decentralized sewer systems. The County Board of
quality goals. Using the Center for Watershed Utilities will receive the deed to the system from
Protection’s Codes and Ordinances Worksheet, the developer. In return, the developer will be
Tennessee Growth Readiness helps communities allowed reduced lot sizes of 15,000 square feet,
identify areas in their regulations that can be with the condition that 10 percent of the total land
improved to better protect water quality and other area must be retained in green space. Meanwhile,
natural resources. the planning commission approved a preliminary
plat for a subdivision of 335 acres, 99 of which will
To date, Tennessee Growth Readiness has helped be retained in green space.
over 200 communities evaluate their land use codes
and ordinances and pursue changes. Approximately Tennessee Growth Readiness’s efforts have also
45 percent of these communities have either made had an impact on communities in neighboring
or are in the process of making changes to their states. Tazewell County, Virginia is working on
codes and ordinances. revising its land use practices and ordinances
using recommendations from Tennessee Growth
For example, Columbia, Tennessee adopted a zoning Readiness. The town made several changes to its
ordinance that has provisions for buffers, tree zoning ordinances, including reducing parking space
preservation, enhanced visual quality, open space requirements. Tennessee Growth Readiness’s rec-
requirements and smart growth techniques. In ommendations were also incorporated into a total
addition, a tree preservation plan is required which maximum daily load implementation plan for sedi-
includes: (1) inventory of existing vegetation, (2) ment being developed by the Virginia Department
footprints of buildings, roads and retaining walls, of Environmental Quality in conjunction with local
(3) location of existing and proposed utility services, citizens and agency partners. This plan represents
(4) boundaries of all required buffer planting areas a significant step forward in the implementation of
and (5) a detailed drawing of tree protection zones. changes to local codes and ordinances.
They also have provisions for clustering and open
space requirements, and limits for impervious
cover for planned unit developments.

15
 On the Ground
Changes

The goal of changes to local plans and regulations is to open the door for tangible, on the ground changes to
the way development happens or doesn’t happen. This category of impacts includes everything from the con-
servation of critical natural areas to the application of low impact development and other techniques to a new
or retrofit development.

 Alabama: AL NEMO has park that is being used as a demonstration and

partnered with Alabama education site.
Department of Environmental
Management, the Alabama  Arizona: AZ NEMO-supported grant applications
Clean Water Partnership, to both the Arizona DEQ 319 Fund and the
Alabama Cooperative Extension Arizona Water Protection Fund have resulted in
System, local governments, the construction of erosion control structures on
watershed groups, and other the San Francisco River in Greenlee County; erosion
partners around the state to control structures in Cochise County along the
Students help plant the Yarborough install demonstration low San Pedro River; and buffer strip installations and
Elementary School Rain Garden in the city
impact development practices. lake dredging in Navajo County.
of Auburn. (Photo courtesy of Eve Brantley.)
Educational workshops on the
benefits of low impact development practices have  Connecticut: After a series of CT NEMO workshops
led to projects in the cities of Gadsden (filter strip), in the town of Madison, a developer proposed and
Auburn (rain garden), Alexander City (rain garden) built a subdivision that uses low impact develop-
and Fairhope (pervious concrete sidewalks). ment practices.

 Alabama: AL NEMO, Alabama Cooperative  Delaware: The University of Delaware College of

Extension System, ADEM, U.S. EPA Region 4, Marine and Earth Studies, with support from DE
North Carolina State University and USDA CSREES NEMO, Broadkill Tributary Action Team and the
Southern Regional Water Program worked with Department of Natural Resources and Environmental
the city of Auburn and other Conservation is installing bioretention swales on
partners to conduct a series of existing parking lots to serve as demonstration sites
workshops on stream restora- for retrofitting old parking lots with low impact
tion that corresponded to the development practices.
planning, design and construc-
tion of a restored stream. Five  Georgia: As a demonstration of better site design
workshops were completed in principles, Towns County Public Works Department
2007 – 2008 that trained over installed a porous paving system and vertical infil-
200 professionals from across tration drain at the county’s swim beach and play-
AL NEMO is helping restore streams in the Southeast. Additionally, ground on Lake Chatuge, through a cooperative
the city of Auburn. (Photo courtesy of 1000 feet of stream were partnership with Tennessee Growth Readiness (the
Eve Brantley.) restored in a city of Auburn TN NEMO effort) and the Tennessee Valley

16
 Authority, which provided the materials and tech-  New York: The villages of Northport, Freeport
nical support for the project. and Babylon, Nassau and Suffolk Counties and
the town of Huntington have all initiated storm
 Kansas: KS NEMO presentations to Topeka, drain retrofit pilot projects. The town of
Kansas city planning staff and stormwater manage- Huntington installed filtration devices in storm
ment staff helped shape the way redevelopment was drains at ten locations within the Bay Complex
done along a major city street. Redevelopment watershed to filter out bacteria prior to discharge
consisted of directing stormwater runoff into to marine receiving waters. Nassau County installed
native vegetation-dominated bioretention areas in sedimentation basins, in-line treatment devices,
several locations along the street. wetland plantings, catch basin inserts, and float-
able removal structures. The village of Northport
 Nevada: The city of Reno installed installed catch basin inlets/leaching pools at ten
four tree filter boxes as part of their locations within the village.
downtown renovation project. The boxes
intercept runoff that previously ran  Oregon: OR NEMO has helped several communi-
directly (and visibly) into the Truckee ties design and implement low impact development
River. The city also received grant projects. These projects include the incorporation
funding for a watershed protection of bioswales and rain gardens in the city of
program incorporating low impact Brookings new Port office and retail building;
development to address high total dis- constructed wetlands at Baby Bear Creek in
solved solids concerns in Chalk Creek and Medford; underground stormwater detention
is designing infiltration best management chambers at the Southern Oregon University
The city of Reno, Nevada practices to capture, divert and infiltrate dormitory; bioswales in the city of Tillamook and
installed four tree filter boxes stormwater runoff that currently enters Pacific City; and several water quality-friendly fea-
as part of their downtown reno- the drinking water supply ditch. tures in Redwood Park at the city of Grants Pass.
vation project. (Photo courtesy
 Rhode Island: The towns of Charlestown, South
of NV NEMO.)
 Nevada: A new Cabela’s retail
development in Verdi was required to Kingstown and New Shoreham (located on Block
use low impact development Island) participated in an EPA-funded community
techniques by the city of Reno. wastewater demonstration project that helped
The development incorporated each town to establish a municipal wastewater
bioretention islands with curb management program to protect groundwater
cuts into their parking lots. resources and coastal waters. With the project

Cabela’s retail store in Verdi, Nevada

installed bioretention islands in their park-
ing lots. (Photo courtesy of NV NEMO.)

17
 coming to a close, each municipality has allocated  Texas: Under the direction of TX NEMO, a
funds to maintain the program, with funding for WaterSmart Demonstration School Habitat Lab
a full time wastewater manager in each community. was installed at the Environmental Institute of
RI NEMO has provided education and technical Houston on the campus of the University of
support to the towns in setting up these programs. Houston at Clear Lake as a means of creating a
habitat for wildlife that also functions as an instruc-
 Tennessee: Tennessee tional lab for teachers, students and the community.
Growth Readiness (the TN The landscape provides a safe, accessible area to
NEMO effort) added a green experience hands-on
roof demonstration project to a environmental edu-
residential building in downtown cation for teachers
Nashville. The green roof project and students. For
supports the ideals of the Growth the community, it
Readiness Program and helps highlights environ-
A green roof demonstration project in address the urban stormwater mentally friendly
downtown Nashville, Tennessee. (Photo management issues in Nashville. landscaping practices
courtesy of Ralph Velasquez.)
that incorporate
 Texas: TX NEMO coordinated the installation of landscaping for
the first demonstration rain garden in the Houston WaterSmart Demonstration School Habitat wildlife and can be
area. Located in front of the Bay Area Courthouse Lab, Environmental Institute of Houston on used in residential
the campus of University of Houston at Clear and commercial
annex in Houston, the rain garden brings public Lake. (Photo courtesy of Chris LaChance.)
awareness of this natural process for treating locations.
stormwater where it falls in a beautiful and func-
tional way, while it provides habitat for wildlife with  Vermont: VT NEMO worked with the towns of
the inclusion of native plants. Winooski, Montpelier, Barre, Berlin and St. Albans
to install demonstration rain gardens that have
 Texas: TX NEMO led the Mason Park Stormwater had a ripple effect through these communities.
Wetland project along Brays Bayou in Houston, The Winooski project has lead to a series of pre-
Texas. Constructed wetlands are known to be fairly sentations for the Vermont Association of
effective at removing bacteria from stormwater, Professional Horticulturists and an advanced Master
but the Brays Bayou stormwater wetland is the Gardeners training. Master gardeners in this
first documented proof of the region have since installed numerous rain gardens
effectiveness of this method in and have taken responsibility for their maintenance.
the Houston region. This wetland The St. Albans project included a porous concrete
consistently removes nearly 99 sidewalk, painted rain barrels project (60 barrels
percent of the bacteria in the distributed throughout the city) and cistern systems
stormwater inflow. The project at the public works building and the fire department
won several national and state building.
awards and serves as a demon-
stration of how wetlands can be
A constructed wetland along the Brays incorporated into drainage
Bayou in Houston, Texas. (Photo courtesy infrastructure.
of TX NEMO.)

18
Maine The Town of Ogunquit

After a series of NEMO open space planning workshops, the town of Ogunquit, Maine
took action on several fronts in the interest of preserving open space in the community.

With the assistance of the Southern Maine sent a series of letters defining the Ogunquit
Regional Planning Commission, a new Conservation Land Fund’s interest, and
town ordinance was created that requires inviting them to a public workshop on con-
50 percent of developable land servation easements. Several
in new subdivisions be set aside of those landowners have
as open space. The town also set expressed interest in pursuing
up the Ogunquit Conservation easements.
Land Fund to purchase priority
parcels and obtain conservation While this was going on, the
easements. The fund is sup- conservation commission
ported by an annual citizens’ located three large contiguous
approval grant of $25,000, tracts, totaling about 100 acres,
which is used to locate sources about 1.5 miles from downtown
of matching funds. Ogunquit. Private parties own
two and the other is town
In addition, the Ogunquit land. The private land
Conservation Commission owners have committed
collaborated with the Mt. to the conservation com-
Agamenticus to the Sea mission to place conser-
Coalition, South Maine vation easements on the
Regional Planning parcels.
Commission and the Wells
National Estuary Reserve Finally, the town acquired,
The town of Ogunquit acquired 1.5 acres of
to acquire and preserve forest and wetland property abutting the by donation, 1.5 acres of
as open space portions of Josias River. This piece of land has been forest and wetland prop-
a large rural/farm area developed into the Josias River Public erty abutting the Josias
west of the Maine turnpike. Park. (Photo courtesy of ME NEMO.) River, near downtown.
From geographic information systems This parcel has been
topographic maps that were overlaid with developed into the Josias River Public Park.
tax parcels, they selected a number of
In total, the town has set aside more than
larger contiguous tracts of open land. The
570 acres of land as open space and other
landowners for those parcels were then
preserved lands in recent years.

19
Changes to the Decision
Making Process
How a community makes decisions about land use can have a major impact on what decisions are made. Who
is allowed to comment? Who is tasked with protecting natural resources? Do different departments or com-
munities work collaboratively? Through encouraging partnerships, collaboration, and connecting individual
development decisions with a broader community context, NEMO programs are helping communities improve
the way they “do business.”

 Arizona: In Cochise and Navajo counties, AZ  Colorado: Respondents to a survey by AWARE

NEMO-supported watershed partnerships have Colorado indicated that decision makers, staff and
become the “New Democracy” with leadership the public discuss water quality more often at
suddenly finding a voice in front of planning-related meetings and in board and/or
county commissioners. AZ NEMO commission meeting materials and documents fol-
maps and science education have lowing participation in AWARE Colorado training.
empowered community leaders to
bring their concerns to their legislators  Connecticut: Three towns have created open space
and other government representatives. planning committees. The city of Torrington created
a new position, geographic information systems
 Colorado: AWARE Colorado technician, to help with resource inventories and
(the CO NEMO effort) produced a data analysis for future planning issues.
“Water Protection Toolkit for local
officials” that was downloaded over  Delaware: DE NEMO developed a natural resource-
10,000 times last year from the based planning guide for Delaware communities
AWARE Colorado website. Through that was adapted from similar guides
a grant from Coors Brewing in Minnesota and Connecticut.
AZ NEMO maps and science educa- Company, it has been distributed The guide has been distrib-
tion have empowered community to every municipality in Colorado. uted to every Delaware
leaders to bring their concerns to The Keep it Clean Partnership, a county and municipality
government representatives.
coalition of six communities in the and is available on the
Boulder and St. Vrain watersheds that implements DE NEMO website.
a regional stormwater management program, used
the toolkit to develop a “Checklist for Potential  Delaware: DE NEMO led
Implementation of Low Impact Development storm drain mapping projects
(LID).” Developers and planning staff will use the in the communities of Rehoboth,
checklist to evaluate potential LID practices that Lewes and Milton. None of
can be implemented at development sites. The DE NEMO developed a natural the communities had a map
partnership is also funding an LID barrier analysis resource-based planning guide of storm drains, so DE
for communities and distributed
to better understand how LID can be promoted in it to every Delaware county and NEMO provided a mobile
its communities. municipality. mapper and made a storm

20
 drain data layer for each. DE NEMO also helped think about using water and how the water we use
coordinate storm drain stenciling programs for gets infiltrated back into the watershed and the river.”
Lewes and Milton.
 New Hampshire: After working with NROC (the
 Delaware: DE NEMO outreach efforts have con- NH NEMO effort) the towns of Wakefield and
tributed to greater community deliberation—in Rollinsford included local watershed organizations
local media (print, radio and TV), in town halls in their community-based planning efforts for the
and across backyard fences—on the importance of first time.
natural resource-based planning and management.
Terms like “impervious surface” “source water  New York: NY NEMO
protection” “riparian buffers” “open space” and Sea Grant has provided
“natural resource-based planning” have been ral- direct support to nearly 100
lying cries of informed citizens that are trying to Long Island municipalities
protect natural resources. In Lewes, in particular, through review and written
residents have been able to influence where and feedback on their annual
how new development is located. Phase II stormwater program
progress reports. Examples of
 Minnesota: Inspired by a Northland NEMO changes include the develop-
presentation on natural resource-based planning, ment of sustainable funding
the city of Greenfield formed an open space mechanisms (village of Kings
committee. The committee drafted and submitted NY NEMO Sea Grant is helping Point and the town of
recommendations to the city council to be consid- Long Island Communities Babylon); additional staff
ered as they develop their next city comprehensive address Phase II stormwater (village of Manorhaven); a
plan. issues. (Photo courtesy of NY reforestation program (village
NEMO Sea Grant.)
of Plandome Manor); a septic
 Nevada: As of the end of system inspection program (village of Plandome
2007, 190 board members or Manor); equipment procurement (village of Port
commissioners have attended Jefferson); and planned water quality improvement
the 3.5-hour NV NEMO train- studies (village of Plandome Manor). Further,
ing, representing 69 percent of interdepartmental work groups have been formed
targeted groups. Students who within the towns of Hempstead, Huntington, Islip
completed pre- and post- work- and Brookhaven to ensure stormwater program
shop tests showed an average coordination and effectiveness.
Local officials in Nevada show an average increase of 20 percent in the
20 percent increase in their knowledge of number of correct answers on  New York: NY NEMO Sea Grant has helped Long
land use impacts to water quality after the post-test. One participant Island municipalities evaluate the effectiveness of
attending NV NEMO training. (Photo cour- wrote “…it changed the way I their stormwater management efforts. For example,
tesy of T. Svetich.)

21
 the town of Huntington has made improvements open space board and staff planners use this list
to its pollution prevention record-keeping pro- to make recommendations to the county council
gram—the objective being to modify procedures, for property acquisition.
equipment and schedules as necessary. Several
operating departments are developing record sheets  Tennessee: The Tennessee Growth Readiness (the
to target and quantify the recovery of gray water, TN NEMO effort) workshop series has increased
oils, grease and sand from streets and storm drains. intra-local and inter-local communication between
For example, the highway and general services counties and towns. For example, in the Duck
department reported recovery of nearly 8000 gallons River Watershed Growth Readiness Workshop, the
of waste oil. core team is collabo-
rating to implement
 New York: NY NEMO Sea Grant has served as a communication
catalyst, facilitator, support and liaison to promote and outreach plan
inter-municipal natural resource protection and to work towards
restoration. The towns of Babylon, Huntington adoption of the rec-
and Southampton have established partnerships ommendations,
with neighboring villages to co-implement various including developing
stormwater programs including public education, presentations and
The Tennessee Growth Readiness program
illicit discharge detection, staff training, revision publications to
workshops have increased intra-local and
of local laws and procurement of equipment. In inter-local communication between counties describe the work-
addition, NY NEMO Sea Grant has helped estab- and towns. (Photo courtesy of Tennessee shop process and
lish an inter-municipal stormwater workgroup on Growth Readiness.) characterize the
the east end of Long Island in the Peconic Estuary land use and zoning
drainage area. changes that were recommended. These products
were shared with elected officials and decision
 South Carolina: Horry makers in many of the communities within the
County worked with SC watershed; and the state of Tennessee’s local plan-
NEMO to conduct a county- ning office has used the materials in staff training.
wide open space inventory of
all protected open space and  Virginia: Following a Tennessee Growth Readiness
undeveloped, un-protected workshop series, the town of Cedar Bluff was
parcels. This inventory, in awarded a $52,000 Water Quality Improvement
conjunction with modeling Act grant to conduct an urban hotspot survey of
efforts, was used to establish a the town to identify sites for installation of six
An open space inventory and decision
matrix is helping focus land construction decision-making framework bio-retention retrofits. An education plan for the
efforts in Horry County, South Carolina. that analyzes impacts on the retrofits includes signage and a walking trail—cur-
(Photo courtesy of SC NEMO.) county’s open space and to rently in the design phase and scheduled to be
develop a list of significant installed in the near future. The town is also using
properties that should be acquired, leased, pre- information from the workshops in negotiations
served or otherwise protected. Horry county’s with developers and businesses.

22
Connecticut The Town of Waterford
Waterford, Connecticut, home of the Jordan Cove demonstration project, is an urban coastal town
bisected by two interstate highways. The town, which serves as a regional commercial center, has
experienced growing development pressures. The amount of developed land has increased by
over 20 percent during the past two decades.

In 1992, CT NEMO held its very first workshop in development (LID) stormwater practices. The existing
Waterford, Connecticut. CT NEMO staff met with subdivision and zoning regulations did not allow
town officials and others to explore the connection several of the LID features that were planned for
between land use and water quality and the impact the site. Instead of changing its regulations to allow
land use planning and regulations could have. what was then unproven technology, the planning
“NEMO challenged the way we and zoning commission used its
thought about development,” authority under Connecticut law
explains town planner Tom Wagner. to grant waivers to allow the Jordan
“We tended to think of development Cove subdivision to proceed.
on the site-by-site basis. NEMO Waivers included allowing for
helped us to think more compre- reduced road width; the use of
hensively on the watershed level.” porous pavers; elimination of
curbs and gutters; the installation
Soon after the CT NEMO workshop, of a cul-de-sac with a central
the Environmental Protection bioretention cell; and several
Individual homes at Jordan Cove have
Agency and the Connecticut pervious driveway materials, rain gardens other features.
Department of Environmental handling roof runoff, and “no mow” zones
Protection began looking for a in the back yards featuring native vegeta- Now completed, the “Jordan Cove”
location to host an applied tion. A sunken, vegetated cul-de-sac center project demonstrates that when
research study of low impact accepts and treats runoff and there are used in combination, LID practices
development practices—what swales located on each side of the street. can indeed be used to replicate
eventually came to be the Jordan the natural hydrology of a site.
Cove project. The survey team found a site within Waterford’s flexibility with waiving traditional sub-
Waterford and approached the town and the division requirements allowed the project to move
developer to assess interest. With assistance from forward. Given the success of Jordan Cove and
NEMO, Wagner and the Waterford Planning other water quality projects in town, Waterford is
Commission saw the potential value of the project working with CT NEMO to revise its land use regu-
and helped make it happen. lations to require the use of LID practices for all
new development.
Still, Connecticut is called “the land of steady habits”
for good reason, and there was some hesitation in For more information, visit the Jordan Cove website
town at being first to try out a range of low impact at www.jordancove.uconn.edu.

23
 Research &
Changes in
Information Gathering
Land use decisions are only as good as the information upon which they are based. Accurate, comprehensive
and easily accessible information is critical to effective community planning. NEMO programs are helping
communities gather and analyze land use information, whether it’s conducting a simple community resource
inventory or visualizing future build-out scenarios using sophisticated GIS tools.

 Arizona: Watershed groups and communities  Connecticut: CT NEMO has three interwoven
throughout Arizona are accessing the geospatial data stormwater tools online. The Planning for
AZ NEMO provides on their website to facilitate Stormwater site directs people to general low impact
land use planning. For example, the Upper Gila development (LID) information and links them to
Watershed Partnership (Safford, Arizona) utilized specific sections of the state stormwater quality
the data on the AZ NEMO website to support their manual. The LID Inventory site interactively takes
ultimately successful grant application to the Arizona users to LID emplacements around the state, and
Water Protection Fund to remove a river levee and the LID Regulations site allows them to read the
restore the Gila River to natural flow conditions. complete text of local LID regulations in Connecticut
towns. Together, these sites are visited about 650
 Colorado: AWARE Colorado (the CO NEMO times per month.
effort) workshop surveys demonstrate the program
is having an impact in the state. Ninety-three percent  Indiana:
of participants indicate that the presentations Planning with
increased their knowledge about strategies com- POWER (the IN
munities can employ to prevent negative water NEMO effort) has
quality impacts due to land use. In addition, the developed a web-
majority of respondents indicated they were very based Local Decision
likely to consider the information presented about Maker GIS Tool
water quality impacts when making land use and/or that is helping com-
community planning decisions. munities understand
A sample screen capture of Planning with the resources they
 Connecticut: The CT NEMO Community Resource Decision POWER’s new online tool, Local Community
Maker. The image depicts land
have and to integrate
Inventory Online (CRI) has made geographic cover change between 1992 - 2003. those resources into
information systems information and maps available land use plans and
to every town in the state. CT NEMO staff have decisions.
conducted several workshops across the state intro-
ducing the website and have put together a newsletter  Kansas: The KS NEMO Program provided support
and mailed it to every town commission. On average, for other groups to make presentations to city and
660 individuals access CRI maps on the site each county officials on identifying native forests and
month. prairies in Douglas County, as well as identifying
already impacted areas that are better suited for
industrial or similar types of development.

24
 Maine: ME NEMO worked with the Sagadahoc neighborhood assessment of residential stormwater
Region Rural Resource Initiative (SRRRI) to con- best management practices (BMPs) in two neigh-
duct a regional build-out analysis for the seven borhoods. The city of Duluth planning department
towns in the region and hope to preserve the rural is also distributing Northland NEMO’s “Building
character and resources of the region. The SRRRI Superior Coastal Communities” guidebook to
group is also gathering natural resource information developers interested in building in the community.
for the region to coordinate land use decisions
regarding zoning and natural areas. The SRRRI  Nevada: NV NEMO workshop evaluations indicate
runs a model to rank habitat in the region, and that they are having a wide range of impacts beyond
then combines the habitat priorities with undevel- just local land use officials. A nursery worker used
oped blocks to show critical large blocks. ME NEMO the information in
is working to make this digital data available to the designing and plan-
towns, and several of them are integrating it into ning medium-size
land use plans. Topsham is using it in a natural residential landscape
resource plan; Harpswell is using it in an open projects, and a land-
space plan. scaper became more
conscious of the
 Maine: ME NEMO has developed a popular problem of excessive
“Standards of Practice” workshop for town facilities irrigation water use.
and maintenance staff. Through this effort the One respondent
A landscaper in Nevada modified his prac-
program has trained 350 public works employees tices to address excessive irrigation water noted “When we’re
from 25 towns on standard operating procedures use after attending a NEMO training. approached by
to improve water quality. A participant from the (Photo courtesy of NV NEMO.) other organizations
town of Cape Elizabeth reports “The training has needing our help
raised the awareness level of the employees that on water issues, NV NEMO training helps me to
have attended the training sessions. On two occa- understand the issue involved and how we can
sions, employees have brought to my attention help.” Students in 2006 rated the course materials
two possible IDD’s (illicit discharge detections) in and presentations highly (4.7 out of 5), with no
catch basins. They are definitely more aware of score lower than 4. They rated their improved
what is proper and not proper in a typical catch understanding at 4.6 out of 5, and feel more likely
basin.” ME NEMO has shared its training materials to ask for more information during plan review
with educators in 28 states, Puerto Rico and (4.7 out of 5).
Australia and it is currently being modified for
use in Florida to train municipal staff.  New Hampshire: NROC (the NH NEMO effort)
has worked with several communities to integrate
 Minnesota: In collaboration with Northland community surveys into local land use decisions
NEMO, the city of Duluth is conducting a paired and plans. Community groups conducted surveys

25
 in New Durham (re: their master plan) and  South Carolina: A small grants program coordi-
Wakefield (re: conservation funding). NROC nated by SC NEMO funded the Beaufort County
communities have also sought to develop better Storm Drain Marker Project. Beaufort County
water quality data. Rollinsford initiated a water Public Works partnered with a local environmental
quality monitoring program on local streams. organization (Friends
Wakefield commissioned a synthesis of existing of the Rivers) to iden-
water quality data in order to better understand tify and mark more
the status of their lakes. than 1000 storm
drain inlets through-
 Rhode Island: The RI NEMO Program worked out the county’s
with the state’s Water Resources Board and municipalities and
Department of Health to develop a consistent way unincorporated areas.
for municipalities and other water suppliers to In addition to the
identify threats and rank susceptibility of drinking Anne Kitchell, volunteer project coordina- public education
water sources to pollution and track trends over tor, demonstrates the installation of a component of the
time. All municipalities and private water suppliers storm drain marker in Beaufort, South project, the marked
Carolina. (Photo courtesy of SC NEMO.)
with major community water supplies will be using inlets, local outfalls
the method to update water supply management and associated structural stormwater management
plans, as required by Rhode Island Water Resources practices are being documented with a GPS
Board regulations, and can integrate this informa- (global positioning system) to field verify and/or
tion into land use decisions. update county infrastructure mapping. This will
allow for inspection for potential illicit discharge
 Rhode Island: In partnership with the Department investigation, repair and maintenance and will be
of Environmental Management and a private firm, recorded and reported to the county public works
RI NEMO developed the Rhode Island Wastewater department.
Information System (RIWIS): a statewide, web-
accessed database that organizes local information  Texas: TX NEMO created a new initiative,
about onsite systems and cesspools, including their WaterSmart Landscaping: Habitat Highways, to address
location and condition, inspection results and habitat loss and fragmentation by generating public
maintenance. Towns are using the database to awareness; training and empowering volunteers
develop wastewater management programs, a with information
basic element in protecting groundwater supplies, and the skills to pre-
private wells and public drinking water sources. serve, restore and
Through a series of workshops and technical sup- create urban wildlife
port, RI NEMO has increased the number of towns habitats; and forming
actively using the site in their programs from 3 to 12. social networks to
best address urban
 South Carolina: Following significant turnover in wildlife and habitat
their land use boards, the town of Bluffton and problems. The pro-
Beaufort County invited the SC NEMO team to gram held its inau-
Habitat Highways trainees participate in
conduct a workshop for elected officials and a second hands-on design and installation of a gural training series
one for planning commission members, staff and school habitat at Travis Elementary and receiving enthu-
citizens. Since then, the Bluffton town administrator School, Houston. (Photo courtesy of TX siastic response from
and mayor now require all of the town’s officials NEMO.) participants and local
and staff to attend at a minimum a “refresher” media. Direct training was limited to 40 participants,
course of NEMO 101 on an annual basis. but the reach of these trainees is multiplied as
they continue their role as advocates for wildlife.
Several students from this first HH class have gone
on to initiate habitat projects in the community.

26
Minnesota The Vermillion River Watershed
The education efforts of Northland NEMO and its partners, over a number of years, have catalyzed
significant impacts in the Vermillion River Watershed, a world class trout stream and the largest
Minneapolis/St. Paul area watershed.

Surface and Groundwater Study Vermillion River and its tributaries. The credits are
Northland NEMO provided opportunities for the to be given for practices listed on a menu of low
Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization impact development and restoration activities that
Board and the Watershed Planning Commission to reduce thermal, nutrient and sediment pollution
further their goals by initiating a surface and while improving overall water management within
groundwater study that included a parking utiliza- the watershed.
tion study and a waterway/watershed assessment.
The Lakeville Low Impact Development Study
These efforts led to creating the Optimal Regulatory The Lakeville Low Impact Development Study was
and Market Framework to Preserve Stream Flow a finalist for a 2006 Minnesota Environment
and Temperature Stability in an Initiative Award in the land use
Urbanizing Trout Stream in the category. The project was a part-
Midwest, a plan for a market- nership between the Minnesota
based set of regulations that seek Department of Natural Resources,
to protect the river from warm the Minnesota Pollution Control
water flows that are damaging the Agency, Emmons Oliver Resources,
stream as a prime trout habitat. the Friends of the Mississippi
Specifically, the regulations would River and several local watershed
establish temperature control units. The side-by-side comparison
requirements to preserve the cold of two development scenarios
water inflows (e.g., via infiltration New regulations protect the Vermillion addressed stormwater quality,
and shading). The regulation would River and its tributaries from warm water stormwater volume and rates,
flows that are damaging prime trout
allow for “trading” between devel- habitat. (Photo courtesy of Northland development costs, development
opment in areas that have the NEMO.) yield, 30-year maintenance costs,
greatest opportunity and benefit to property values, quality of life,
achieve these functions with areas that are limited environmental benefits and meeting national and
by soil characteristics, groundwater table constraints local models.
or land use factors.
Vermillion Stewards Program
Watershed Initiative Project Finally, the Vermillion Stewards Program was
Friends of the Mississippi River, a local Northland established to provide watershed citizens education
NEMO partner, initiated a watershed initiative project on their responsibilities to protect the river at the
that contributed to the adopted watershed standards, individual property owner scale. These impacts
a receipt of an EPA Grant, and development of a grew from planting a seed rooted in NEMO-based
“pollution-trading” program that will offer “credits” education while comprehensively working with many
for offsetting thermal loading (heat pollution) to the local partners.

27
 Beyond Local Impacts

NEMO programs are primarily focused on helping communities make better land use decisions that balance
growth and natural resource protection. However, we have found this often leads to secondary impacts in the
form of changes to statewide policies or procedures and state and national recognition.

 Arizona: The Arizona Department of Environmental the results of buildout techniques of differing degrees
Quality uses AZ NEMO’s watershed-based planning of sophistication and data needs. OPM then used
documents to rank and prioritize locations across the results to report to the Connecticut Legislature
the state for Clean Water Act Nonpoint Source on the options for a statewide buildout program.
Pollution Program (Section 319) funding. The
documents use geographic information systems  Connecticut: CT
hydrologic modeling (i.e., Automated Geospatial NEMO won the 2006
Watershed Assessment Method - AGWA) to Outstanding Achievement
model watershed response to rainfall events–the Award from the Renewable
ranking and prioritization of funding is based on Natural Resources
that modeling. Foundation in D.C. for
its publication Putting
 Arizona: The AZ NEMO Communities in Charge,
video, “Stormwater Manage- CT NEMO’s award winning publica- which details the on-the-
ment from a Watershed tion Putting Communities in Charge ground actions that
details actions municipalities have
Perspective: Extreme Western taken based on working with the CT Connecticut municipalities
Climates,” produced in partner- NEMO Program. have taken after working
ship with the University of with CT NEMO.
Washington, has won numerous
awards, including AEGIS Film  Delaware: The DE NEMO-sponsored Stormwater
and Video Production Award: Pond Maintenance Advisory Committee makes
2007 Finalist; HERMES Creative recommendations to the Department of Natural
Awards - 2007 Gold Winner; Resources and Environmental Control secretary to
AZ NEMO’s award winning video The Videographer Awards - 2007 be included in a statewide regulatory update.
“Stormwater Management from a Honorable Mention; The Telly
 Indiana: Planning with POWER (the IN NEMO
Watershed Perspective: Extreme Western
Awards - 2007 Bronze Winner.
Climates”.
effort) provides input and technical assistance to
 Connecticut: CT NEMO conducted a project to the Indiana Land Resources Council, appointed
evaluate options for statewide buildout analyses for by the Governor to address land use issues across
the Connecticut Office of Policy and Management the state of Indiana. Also, Planning with POWER
(OPM), in partnership with the Central Naugatuck provides assistance and technical support to the
Valley Council of Governments. The study compared Indiana Land Use Consortium, a group of organi-

28
 zations, agencies, non-government organizations won a Gulf of Maine Visionary Award for their
and nonprofits concerned about land use issues Growing Greener workshop.
in Indiana and coordinates a state land use confer-
ence each year.  New Hampshire:
The Institute for New
 Minnesota: The Minnesota Department Hampshire Studies at
of Natural Resources and Northland NEMO Plymouth State
developed a multimedia Guide to Using University independently
Natural Resource Information in Local Decision reviewed NROC. This
Making, honored with the Merit in Planning included a review of
Award from the Minnesota Chapter of the As a recent impact report and NROC materials and pre-
American Society of Landscape Architects. review illustrate, NROC (NH NEMO) sentations, interviews with
is energizing local officials to the program’s partners
 National: The National NEMO Network address conservation and growth. and a community survey.
won the 2008 Outstanding Integrated Water The institute concluded
Resources Program Award from USDA. that the program has energized local officials to
Minnesota’s Guide to Using
address conservation and growth; enabled them
Natural Resource Information
in Local Decision Making  Nevada: NV NEMO won the Association to more effectively address land use and water
brochure and interactive CD. of Natural Resource Extension Professionals’ quality issues; and is the most cost effective option
Silver Award for a Long Publication, for their for using available resources to effect land use.
set of five NV NEMO fact sheets
in 2005. The fact sheets also won  New York: New York NEMO Sea Grant has
the 2005 Award of Excellence from assisted in the development of statewide municipal
Communication Concepts 17th guidance materials pertaining to local authority
Annual Award Competition. and natural resource protection; illicit discharge
detection and elimination; pollution prevention
 New Hampshire: Several towns and good housekeeping; and stormwater program
NROC (the NH NEMO effort) has implementation.
worked with have won awards for
their work. For example, Dover

NV NEMO’s resource binder is an important

resource for planning commissioners.

29
The NEMO Hub
Coordinating the Network

To date, the Hub has conducted over 100 scoping and follow-up workshops
around the country, facilitating the creation of NEMO programs in 38 states.

The NEMO Network is coordinated by • serves as a national liaison between

the University of Connecticut’s the Network, federal agencies and
Department of Extension and is part of national organizations interested in
the Center for Land Use Education water quality, local land use and
and Research (CLEAR). The Network resource protection.
“Hub” consists of two full time staff, a
Network Coordinator and a Network Starting Programs
Communicator, with regular contribu- In the initial days of the Network, the
tions and support from the CT NEMO Hub’s primary function was to help
team. The Network is a USDA CSREES universities and organizations in other
National Facilitation Project. states develop a NEMO program. As
folks in other states heard about the
As the Network Hub, the University of CT NEMO approach, they requested
Connecticut: Connecticut staff put on “scoping
• helps interested universities and other workshops” to guide them in exploring
organizations start a NEMO program, and establishing a NEMO program. To
date, the Hub has conducted over 100
• facilitates communication and scoping and follow-up workshops around
resource sharing between NEMO the country, facilitating the creation of
programs, NEMO programs in 38 states (see map
• provides training opportunities to below). The Hub continues to conduct
help increase the capacity of NEMO scoping workshops today at an average
programs, of two per year.

National NEMO Network Members Map

Active Members
Inactive Members
Former Members
In Development
Network Hub

30
Facilitation like the Online Community Resource
As the Network has grown, the Hub’s Inventory (CRI) or the Impervious
primary role has shifted from helping Surface Analysis Tool (ISAT) to their
programs get started to facilitating com- state. In addition, starting with NEMO
NEMO Hub Base Funding 2008
munication and resource sharing U4, the Hub has been integrating train-
between programs. The Hub manages a ing opportunities into our national
Network listserv and has created a conference. The Network Initiatives
“members only” website section (page 32) of this
for the sharing of pre- report has more details
sentations, publications on some of the Hub’s
and other resources training efforts.
amongst programs. The
Network also gathers USDA CSREES Water
every eighteen months Partnerships USDA CSREES Forest
to two years at NEMO The Hub also serves as NOAA CICEET
University (NEMO U), the Network’s liaison to
the national conference federal agencies and (Graph 1) Primary funding for the Hub comes
of the Network. NEMO regional and national from the USDA CSREES Water Quality Program.
organizations. As such, Other funding is for specific projects.
U is a seminal event in The NEMO Hub and CT NEMO team
the growth and develop- pose for a group photo at NEMO U6 the Hub keeps partners (Graph 2) Leveraged funds shared with Network
ment of the Network, in Monterey, California. and potential partners members for participation in specific projects.
providing an opportunity for folks to informed on the progress
forge connections across the country and achievement of individual programs
and the growth of the Network as a Funds Leveraged to Network Members 2008
and learn from one another.
whole. In turn, these agencies and $200,000
organizations provide technical, topical
Trainings and, occasionally, financial assistance
In addition to facilitating interaction to member programs. Key partners $150,000
$106,000
between programs, the Hub provides include the USDA CSREES, U.S. CICEET
member programs with training oppor- EPA, NOAA, Center for Watershed $100,000
tunities to help build their topical and Protection and the Cooperative
technical prowess. Past Network-wide Institute for Coastal and Estuarine
training workshops have focused on Environmental Technology (CICEET). $50,0000
$50,000
helping programs establish new educa- See graph 2 for more on how funding
USDA Forestry
tional resources on topics like open for Network coordination has been 0
space protection and forest resources, leveraged with more resources for
develop or expand their use of geospatial Network members.
technologies and adapt technical tools

31
Strengthening
Network Programs
NEMO Network Initiatives
In addition to day-to-day Network coordination, the Hub has launched several
initiatives, involving a number of partner agencies and organizations, to assist
NEMO programs in enhancing their educational repertoire. These include:

Forest Resource Education for Municipal Officials

In 2006 the Network Hub, in partner-
ship with the USDA CSREES Forestry
Program and the U.S. Forest Service,
launched an effort to integrate the
forested landscape into NEMO educa-
tional programming for local officials.
As communities continue to grow and
develop, the health of our forestlands
(and with it the economic, ecological
and public health of our communities) Network members networking at the FREMO work-
is threatened by their conversion to other shop in Annapolis, Maryland.
uses, fragmentation and subdivision. It
is become increasingly apparent that in resource, and ways to factor in forests
addition to educating private landowners in the land use planning process.
about forest stewardship, there is also a FREMO facilitates the development of
need to educate community land use educational workshops, materials and
decision-makers about accurately valuing resources that can be adapted by pro-
the forest resource in the land use plan- grams throughout the Network.
ning process.
Educators from NEMO programs in 14
The Forest Resource Education for states participated in a FREMO work-
Municipal Officials (FREMO) project shop in Annapolis, Maryland in 2007.
seeks to take advantage of The workshop featured discussions on
NEMO programs’ expertise the benefits of forests, the links between
in working with local land forested landscapes and water quality,
use officials by adding infor- and strategies for integrating forest-
mation on forests to their related issues into natural resource-based
educational arsenals. The planning. Following the workshop,
approach is to train NEMO four NEMO programs (OR, NC, VT
programs on the benefits of, and MN/WI) have launched efforts to
and threats to, the forest take the information and materials
from the workshop and, in collaboration

32
with foresters, tailor new programs for Pollution and Erosion Comparison
their states. All materials developed from Tool (N-SPECT).
the four pilots will be made available
to the entire Network for adaptation. In 2007, the Network Hub collaborated
with NOAA CSC and the National

Geospatial Training
Association of Counties to develop
and pilot test a new remote sensing
The use of geospatial data and analysis workshop focused on using remotely
to support education has long been a sensed imagery in the land use deci-
hallmark of NEMO programs. While sion-making context. The training was
about two-thirds of NEMO programs broken down into three modules, (1)
utilize geospatial imagery and data in Remote Sensing Basics, (2) Remote
their presentations, currently only one- Sensing Tools and (3) Putting Maps,
third of NEMO programs have the Images and Data on the Web. The
capacity to provide geospatial support third module has since been delivered
to communities in the form of new as a stand alone training at NEMO U6
tools, analysis and/or modeling. The and turned into a web resource for
Network Hub is working to increase anyone looking to learn more about The NEMO Hub is working with the NOAA Coastal
putting maps and data on the internet. Services Center and other partners to provide geospa-
both of these percentages through tial training opportunities to Network members.
trainings and other opportunities for Regional training workshops in collab-
Network members. oration with USDA and NOAA CSC
are being discussed.
In 2006, the Network Hub partnered
with the NOAA Coastal Services
Center (CSC) to provide basic training
in geographic information systems (GIS) On the Web
and remote sensing technologies to 11 • National NEMO Network Website - nemonet.uconn.edu
NEMO programs. This has been used • Network Initiatives - Updates and additional Information about the Network’s
as a building block for future, more initiatives can be found online at nemonet.uconn.edu/hub/initiatives.htm.
advanced trainings. So far, technical Tools
training opportunities have been • CommunityViz® - www.communityviz.com
offered on a variety of tools, including • Impervious Surface Analysis Tool (ISAT) - www.csc.noaa.gov/crs/cwq/isat.html
CommunityViz® visualization software, • Nonpoint Source Pollution and Erosion Comparison Tool (N-SPECT) -
the Impervious Surface Analysis Tool www.csc.noaa.gov/crs/cwq/nspect.html
• Putting Maps, Images and Data on the Web - clear.uconn.edu/tools/share
(ISAT), and the Nonpoint Source
Partners
• USDA CSREES - www.csrees.usda.gov
• U.S. Forest Service - www.fs.fed.us
• NOAA Coastal Services Center - www.csc.noaa.gov

33
Strengthening
Network Programs
Initiatives continued...

Web-Based Tools
Over the last decade, the volume of
geospatial data available at the local level
has increased dramatically. This has
created a great opportunity to provide
much needed context for local land use
decision-makers. However, the increase
has also created challenges, particularly
for smaller, developing communities
(Top) From the Print Your CRI page, you can either
without the staff or expertise to identify
print single maps, or the whole set complete with a
what data to use and how to use it. title page.
NEMO programs are increasingly work-
ing to help communities overcome (Bottom) The Network Hub held a training session in
January of 2009 for NEMO programs interested in
these challenges through simple yet building their own Online CRI tool.
flexible tools that utilize the web to
provide access to the most pertinent
geospatial data.

Online Community Resource Inventory

One such tool is CT NEMO’s Online
Community Resource Inventory (CRI).
The Online CRI is a website that pro-
vides users with access to 14 natural,
cultural and economic resource maps
for every town in Connecticut. As users
should begin with an understanding of
page through the data, they effectively
what and where the community’s natural
produce a basic resource inventory that
and cultural resources are.
can be used to inform land use planning
decisions. The website is a complement
To help facilitate the development of
to NEMO workshops that
these tools in other states, the Network
focus on the basic premise
Hub is “franchising” the Online CRI
that good local planning
tool by working with NEMO programs

34
in Rhode Island, Minnesota, South to highlight innovative stormwater
Carolina, New York and Delaware to management projects throughout the
adapt the tool for their states. The project state. LID practices include green roofs,
is funded by the Cooperative Institute vegetated swales, pervious pavement,
for Coastal and Estuarine Environmental rain gardens and other site design tools
Technology (CICEET), a partnership of that encourage infiltration and processing
the University of New Hampshire and of stormwater as close to where it falls
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric as possible.
Administration (NOAA).
The National LID Atlas seeks to help (Top) An example of a pervious parking lot
located in Old Saybrook, Connecticut that can
Each of the states involved is taking a communities get over their natural
be found on the LID Atlas.
slightly different approach to building reluctance to be the first to pursue
the tool, but all will maintain the basic some of these innovative practices, by (Bottom) The National Low Impact Development
idea of keeping it simple enough to be connecting them with other communi- Atlas highlights examples of LID practices
nationwide.
useful for local officials of varying tech- ties that have done it. Powered by
nical backgrounds. At the completion GoogleTM Maps, the Atlas provides
of the project, the Hub will produce an details on LID projects nationwide,
online “Cookbook” demonstrating how complete with contact information and
to build a site like this with explanations links to more detailed information.
of the different approaches taken. NEMO programs coordinate which
projects are added to the Atlas from
National Low Impact Development Atlas their states and can embed a localized,
Another tool the Hub has developed, state-specific version into their own
in collaboration with the CT and CA websites.
NEMO programs, for use and adapta-
tion by the Network is the National
Low Impact Development (LID) Atlas.
The Atlas grew out of CT NEMO’s
statewide LID inventory, which sought
On the Web
Tools
• Online Community Resource Inventory - nemo.uconn.edu/tools.htm
• National Low Impact Development Atlas - nemonet.uconn.edu/hub/initiatives.htm
Partners
• CICEET - ciceet.unh.edu
• CT NEMO Program - nemo.uconn.edu
• CA WALUP - cawalup.usc.edu:3455/cawalup

35
Moving Forward
As the Network approaches its tenth year of existence, it is clear that the
education and support of local land use officials is just as critical, if not
more so, to the health and sustainability of our communities as it was when
we began at the turn of the century.

As the Network approaches its tenth nerships with NEMO programs. We

year of existence, it is clear that the hope that these are signs of an increased
education and support of local land use investment in local land use education.
officials is just as critical, if not more so,
to the health and sustainability of our As this report demonstrates, NEMO
communities as it was when we began programs are willing and able to con-
at the turn of the century. tinue to encourage and assist communi-
ties interested in natural resource-based
Increasingly, NEMO programs are rec- planning and site design. And the
ognized as experts in reaching this critical Network Hub will continue to help
audience and achieving real change in NEMO programs by providing training
land use practices and decisions. Thanks opportunities to help expand their
to this expertise and the growing national capacity and reach, developing new
interest in local land use decisions, we and innovative web-based technologies
have seen an increased interest in and educating federal agencies and
enhancing the NEMO message and national organizations about the
expanding the approach. progress NEMO programs are making.

Foresters have seen NEMO programs

as a valuable partner in expanding
their educational efforts from private
landowners to community land use
decision makers (See FREMO initiative,
page 32). NOAA’s Cooperative Institute
for Coastal and Estuarine Environmental
Technology (CICEET) launched a new
funding program focused on land use
decision makers and encouraging part-

36
 Network Members Directory
State Contact Organization Phone Email Address Website

Alabama Patti Hurley Alabama Department of Environmental Management 334-394-4350 pah@adem.state.al.us www.aces.edu/waterquality/nemo/intro.htm
Eve Brantley Alabama Cooperative Extension System 334-844-3927 brantef@auburn.edu
Arizona Kristine Uhlman University of Arizona 520-621-9591 x51 kuhlman@ag.arizona.edu www.arizonanemo.org
Channah Rock University of Arizona 520-381-2258 channah@cals.arizona.edu
D. Phillip Guertin University of Arizona 520-621-1723 phil@snr.arizona.edu
California Susan Zaleski University of Southern California Sea Grant Program 213-740-8602 szaleski@usc.edu cawalup.usc.edu:3455/cawalup
Al Wanger California Coastal Commission 415-904-5265 awanger@coastal.ca.gov
Monique Myers University of California Sea Grant 805-645-1482 nicmyers@ucdavis.edu
Timothy Lawrence University of California Sea Grant 530-574-5742 tjlawrence@ucdavis.edu www.stormulator.com
Colorado Cynthia Peterson League of Women Voters of Colorado Education Fund 303-861-5195 awarecolorado@earthlink.net www.awarecolorado.org
Connecticut John Rozum University of Connecticut Cooperative Extension 860-345-5225 john.rozum@uconn.edu nemo.uconn.edu
Delaware Joe Farrell University of Delaware Sea Grant 302-645-4250 jfarrell@udel.edu nemo.udel.edu
Florida Rosalyn F. Kilcollins Apalachicola National Estuarine Research Reserve 850-653-8063 x13 rosalyn.kilcollins@dep.state.fl.us
Georgia Keren Giovengo University of Georgia 912-280-1586 giovengo@uga.edu www.uga.edu/coastalnemo
Hawaii Jolie Wagner University of Hawaii Sea Grant 808-956-7031 wagner@hawaii.edu
Indiana Bob McCormick Purdue University/Illinois-Indiana Sea Grsnt 765-494-3627 rmccormi@purdue.edu www.planningwithpower.org
Kansas Paul Liechti University of Kansas 785-864-1527 pliechti@ku.edu
Maine LaMarr Clannon Partnership for Environmental Technology Education 207-771-9020 lcannon@maine.rr.com www.mainenemo.org
Maryland Jonathan Doherty National Park Service 410-295-3147 jdoherty@chesapeakebay.net
Amy Handen National Park Service 410-295-3147 ahanden@chesapeakebay.net
Minnesota Jesse Schomberg Minnesota Sea Grant 218-726-6182 jschombe@d.umn.edu northlandnemo.org
John Bilotta University of Minnesota Extension 651-480-7788 jbilotta@umn.edu
Julie Westerlund Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 952-471-0590 x209 jwesterlund@minnehahacreek.org
Mississippi Ronn Killebrew Mississippi State Department of Environmental Quality 601-961-5328 ronn_killebrew@deq.state.ms.us
Nevada Susan Donaldson University of Nevada Cooperative Extension 775-856-8401 donaldsons@unce.unr.edu www.unce.unr.edu/nemo
New Hampshire Julia Peterson New Hampshire Sea Grant 603-749-1565 julia.peterson@unh.edu extension.unh.edu/CommDev/nroc/canroc.cfm
Amanda Stone University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension 603-364-5324 amanda.stone@unh.edu

continued ...
Network Members Directory continued...
State Contact Organization Phone Email Address Website

New York - Hudson River Barbara Kendall Hudson River Estuary Program 845-256-3163 blkendal@gw.dec.state.ny.us
New York - Long Island Eileen Keenan New York Sea Grant 631-444-0422 emkeenan@gw.dec.state.ny.us www.seagrant.sunysb.edu/nemo
North Carolina Patrick Beggs WECO, North Carolina State University 919-515-4525 patrick_beggs@ncsu.edu www.ncsu.edu/nemo
Christy Perrin WECO, North Carolina State University 919-515-4542 christy_perrin@ncsu.edu
Gloria Putnam North Carolina State University Sea Grant 919-513-0117 gfputnam@gw.fis.ncsu.edu www.ncsu.edu/nemo
Ohio Jessica D’Ambrosio Ohio State University 614-688-4438 dambrosio.9@osu.edu nemo.osu.edu
Andy Ward Ohio State University 614-292-9354 ward.2@osu.edu
Oregon Megan Kleibacker Oregon State University Sea Grant Extension 541-737-8715 megan.kleibacker@oregonstate.edu
Derek Godwin Oregon State University Sea Grant Extension 503-566-2909 derek.godwin@oregonstate.edu
Frank Burris Oregon State University Sea Grant Extension 541-247-6672 frank.burris@oregonstate.edu
Robert Emanuel Oregon State University Sea Grant Extension 503 842-5708 x210 robert.emanuel@oregonstate.edu
Sam Chan Oregon State University Sea Grant Extension 503-679-4828 samuel.chan@oregonstate.edu
Pennsylvania - Lake Erie Dave Skellie Pennsylvania Sea Grant 814-217-9014 dus18@psu.edu www.seagrant.psu.edu/nemo
Sean Rafferty Pennsylvania Sea Grant 814-217-9013 sdr138@psu.edu
Pennsylvania - Schuylkill River Watershed Susan Myerov Heritage Conservancy 215-345-7020 smyerov@heritageconservancy.org
Rhode Island Lorraine B. Joubert University of Rhode Island Cooperative Extension 401-874-2138 ljoubert@uri.edu www.uri.edu/ce/wq/nemo
Lisa DeProspo Philo University of Rhode Island Cooperative Extension 401-874-5687 lphilo@uri.edu
South Carolina April Turner South Carolina Sea Grant Extension Program 843.953.2078 april.turner@scseagrant.org www.scseagrant.org/scnemo
Tennessee Liz Upchurch Tennessee Valley Authority 865-632-8305 efupchurch@tva.gov tgrowth.org
Joel Haden Tennessee Valley Authority 865-632-2132 jmhaden@tva.gov
Texas John Jacob Texas Sea Grant/Agrilife Extension 281-218-0565 jjacob@tamu.edu www.urban-nature.org
Vermont Emma Melvin UVM Extension Lake Champlain Sea Grant 802-859-3086 x340 emelvin@uvm.edu
Virginia Todd Janeski Virginia DCR/VCU 804-371-8984 todd.janeski@dcr.virginia.gov
Matt Benson Virginia Cooperative Extension 540-341-7961 mcbenson@vt.edu
Jonah Fogel Virginia Cooperative Extension 804-527-4234 jfogel@vt.edu
Wisconsin Sue O’Halloran University of Wisconsin-Extension 715-394-8525 sohallor@uwsuper.edu northlandnemo.org
Network Members 2008
National NEMO Network Members

The National NEMO Network is a program of the Center for Land Use Education and Research (CLEAR). Land, Sea and Space Grant collaborating.
The University of Connecticut supports all state and federal laws that promote equal opportunity and prohibit discrimination. © 2009 University of Connecticut.