Loading...
Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) - 13 Mar 2024 - Agenda - Pdf City of Atlantic Beach Agenda Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) Meeting Wednesday, March 13, 2024 - 6:00 p.m. City Hall, Commission Chamber 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 Page(s) 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR (5 MINS.) 4. CHAIR REMARKS 5. CONSENT AGENDA 5.A. Approve minutes of the January 10 2024, regular Environmental Stewardship Committee meeting Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) - 10 Jan 2024 - Minutes - Pdf 3 - 8 5.B. Approve of the February 14, Tree Subcommittee minutes Environmental Stewardship Committee Tree Subcommittee - 14 Feb 2024 - Minutes - Pdf 9 - 10 5.C. Approve minutes of the February 21, Outreach Subcommittee Environmental Stewardship Committee Tree Subcommittee - 14 Feb 2024 - Minutes - Pdf Environmental Stewardship Committee Outreach Subcommittee - 21 Feb 2024 - Minutes - Pdf 11 - 16 5.D. Note: Sustainability and Resiliency Subcommittee did not have a quorum therefore, no meeting was held 6. 90 DAY CALENDAR 6.A. ESC Planner/Calendar/Metrics noaa_33482_DS1 17 - 54 7. COMMISSION AND/OR STAFF REPORTS 7.A. Chapter 23 7.B. Parks Master Plan update 7.C. Commission 2024 Priorities priorities 55 - 80 Page 1 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) - 13 Mar 2024 7.D. Comp plan update and Chapter 24 update 8. OLD BUSINESS 8.A. Charter Review Committee 8.B. Marsh Priority 8.C. ESC self evaluation ESC 2023 Self Evaluation Survey Results 81 - 110 8.D. DRAFT ESC volunteer opportunities and recruitment ESC Volunteer and Community Service Hours Opportunities 111 - 112 8.E. Chemical Management Plan Chemical Management Plan Draft One as of 021924 113 - 130 9. NEW BUSINESS 10. SIGNIFICANT MATTERS ARISING IN SUBCOMMITTEES 10.A. Tree Subcommittee 10.B. Outreach Subcommittee 10.C. Sustainability and Resilience Subcommittee 11. MEMBERS CLOSING REMARKS 12. ADJOURNMENT Any person wishing to speak to the Environmental Stewardship Committee on any matter at this meeting should submit a Comment Card located at the entrance to Commission Chamber prior to the start of the meeting. This meeting will be live-streamed and videotaped. The video recording will be posted within four business days on the City's website. To access live or recorded videos, visit www.coab.us/live. In accordance with the American with Disabilities Act and Section 286.26 of the Florida Statutes, persons with disabilities needing special accommodations to participate in this meeting should contact Deputy City Ladayija Nichols at 247-5821 or at City Hall, 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, Florida not less than three (3) days prior to the date of this meeting. Page 2 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) January 10, 2024 MINUTES Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) Meeting Wednesday, January 10, 2024 - 6:00 PM Commission Chamber 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 Present: Bruce Andrews, District 1308 Member Sarah Boren, District 1306 Member Mark Gabrynowicz, District 1307 Member Daniele Giovannucci, At Large Member Todd Miner, At Large Member Amy Palmer, At Large Member Patrick Nobles, At Large Member Heather Markaj, At Large Member Romy Vann, At Large Member Absent: Anastasia Houston, At Large Member Also Present: Amanda Askew, Director of Planning and Community Development and Building Candace Kelly, City Commissioner, Seat 4 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Mark Gabrynowicz called the meeting to order. He called the roll. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA A. Approval of agenda MOTION: to approve the agenda Motion: Sarah Boren There was no second. There was no dissent. A vote was not recorded. 3. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR (5 MINS.) Commissioner Kelly reported that there will no longer be commission liaisons for boards and committees. Nicole Devenoge spoke about environmental stewardship work she does and offered to help with the upcoming Arbor Day event. 4. CHAIR REMARKS Mark Gabrynowicz discussed the elimination of the commission liaison and said they would have more details on how to relay information about the ESC in the future. Page 1 of 6 Agenda Item #5.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 3 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) January 10, 2024 Todd Miner and members went around the room to give brief introductions. 5. REVIEW OF ESC MEMBERSHIP POSITION RESPONSIBILITIES A. Positions Descriptions Mark Gabrynowicz introduced the position descriptions and stated that these should be stored with the ESC Meeting Rules. Daniele Giovannucci suggested refining the bullet points per position and to order them in a hierarchy of importance. MOTION: to approve the position descriptions Motion: Daniele Giovannucci Second: Sarah Boren There was no dissent. A vote was not recorded. 6. 2024 ESC POSITIONS ELECTIONS A. Election of ESC chair Sarah Boren nominated herself for chair. Bruce Andrews seconded the nomination. Mark Gabrynowicz stated with no further nominations Sarah Boren is elected chair. B. Election of ESC vice-chair Mark Gabrynowicz nominated Daniele Giovannucci as vice chair. Bruce Andrews seconded the nomination. Daniele Giovannucci nominated Mark Gabrynowicz as vice chair. Bruce Andrews seconded the nomination. Discussion about the position endued. Mark Gabrynowicz stated he would like to take a break from any chair positions. Daniele Giovannucci accepted the position. C. Election of Secretary Bruce Andrews nominated Romy Vann. Amy Palmer seconded the nomination. Sarah Boren stated the secretary and treasurer position can be separate of done by one person. Discussion ensued. Sarah Boren stated with no further nominations Romy Vann is elected secretary and treasurer. D. Election of Treasurer This item was discussed under item 6.C. E. Subcommittee members and member positions Page 2 of 6 Agenda Item #5.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 4 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) January 10, 2024 Tree Subcommittee: Daniele Giovannucci nominated Bruce Andrews as chair. Mark Gabrynowicz seconded the nomination. Sarah Boren stated with no further nominations Bruce Andrews is elected chair. Discussion about membership ensued to determine number of members and alternates. MOTION: to elect Bruce Andrews, Mark Gabrynowicz, and Daniele Giovannucci as members and Amy Palmer and Patrick Nobles as alternates. Motion: Heather Markaj Second: Daniele Giovannucci A vote was not recorded Bruce Andrews read Section 23-52(f)(1) and confirmed the tree subcommittee shall be comprised of 3 members with 1 alternate. Discussion ensued. MOTION: to elect Bruce Andrews, Amy Palmer, and Daniele Giovannucci as members and Patrick Nobles as the alternate. There was no dissent. A vote was not recorded. Outreach Subcommittee: Sarah Boren nominated Anastasia Houston for chair. Romy Vann seconded the nomination. Romy Vann nominated Patrick Nobles to be co-chair. Amy Palmer seconded the nomination. Anastasia Houston and Patrick Nobles were elected co-chairs. Mark Gabrynowicz, Sarah Boren, and Heather Markaj volunteered to be members. Sustainability and Resiliency Subcommittee: Mark Gabrynowicz, Romy Vann, Todd Miner, Heather Markaj, and Sarah Boren volunteered to be members. Romy Vann volunteered Sarah Boren as chair. Mark Gabrynowicz seconded the nomination. There was no dissent. 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of the December 13, 2023 minutes B. Tree Subcommittee Page 3 of 6 Agenda Item #5.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 5 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) January 10, 2024 C. Outreach Subcommittee Sarah Boren suggested revising the dates to say 2024 in items 5.A. and 5.B. D. Sustainability and Resiliency Subcommittee MOTION: to approve the consent agenda with the revisions to Outreach Subcommittee minutes. Motion: Bruce Andrews Second: Mark Gabrynowicz There was no dissent. A vote was not recorded. 8. 90 DAY CALENDAR Sarah Boren reviewed events on the 90 day calendar. 9. SIGNIFICANT MATTERS ARISING IN SUBCOMMITTEES A. Tree Subcommittee Bruce Andrews reported the subcommittee's discussion about requiring a budget line for landscaping for road improvement projects. He said this was going to staff for review then potentially to Commission. MOTION: to recommend the verbiage in the attachment under item 12.A. of the agenda Motion: Bruce Andrews Second: Mark Gabrynowicz There was no dissent. A vote was not recorded. B. Outreach Subcommittee Sarah Boren asked for ideas for the “how to” series. She explained the mature tree canopy contest and asked for name recommendations for the "ambassador program"/"block captains". C. Sustainability and Resiliency Subcommittee Sarah Boren said they are focusing on the Community Action Plan and Conservation Challenge. D. Charter Review Subcommittee This item was not discussed. 10. MAYOR AND OR STAFF REPORT A. Chapter 23 Update Page 4 of 6 Agenda Item #5.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 6 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) January 10, 2024 Amanda Askew said there will be a Commission Workshop on January 22, 2024 at 5:30 p.m. Sarah Boren asked for someone to volunteer to attend on behalf of ESC. Heather Markaj volunteered. 11. OLD BUSINESS A. ESC priorities There was no further input to the ESC priorities. B. ESC recommended priorities for Commission Sarah Boren reported that the recommended priorities were sent to Commission. She encouraged members to attend the priority setting meeting. 12. NEW BUSINESS A. Proposed Environmental Landscaping Policy for City Infrastructure from Tree Subcommittee This item was discussed under item 9.A. B. Volunteer/working groups needs based on 2024 priorities Sarah Boren expressed she thinks it will take more personal outreach to recruit people for working groups. Mark Gabrynowicz explained his friends of the park volunteer program. Discussion of friends of the park ensued. 13. MEMBERS CLOSING REMARKS Patrick Nobles spoke about a Marvin's Garden initiative. Todd Miner recommended writing lesson plans for schools regarding "park rangers". Bruce Andrews recommended not standardizing the play equipment at Marvin's Garden. Amy Palmer spoke about designating a historic corridor for trees. Sarah Boren asked members to complete the 2023 self-evaluations. 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, Sarah Boren declared the meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Attest: Page 5 of 6 Agenda Item #5.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 7 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee (ESC) January 10, 2024 Amanda Askew Sarah Boren Page 6 of 6 Agenda Item #5.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 8 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee Tree Subcommittee February 14, 2024 MINUTES Environmental Stewardship Committee Tree Subcommittee Meeting Wednesday, February 14, 2024 - 5:15 PM City Hall, Commission Chamber 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 Present: Amy Palmer, Bruce Andrews, Chair Daniele Giovannucci Mark Gabynowicz Absent: Patrick Nobles Also Present: Sarah Boren Amanda Askew (5:45 p.m.) 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Call to order at 5:18 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Approve minutes of the January 10, 2024 ESC Tree Subcommittee meeting. The minutes were approved. 3. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR (5 MINS.) Public comment was heard from Joan Horne. She reported unpermitted tree trimming/cutting after hours and had no ability to contact appropriate COAB staff. Called police and they told her to call code enforcement. Also, the tree permit website was not accessible. 4. REPORTS A. Tree Report The Committee reviewed the staff-prepared tree report but didn’t understand certain aspects and had no staff present to explain. Will review again when staff is present. 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Ongoing discussion of changes to Chapter 23, Protection of Trees and Native Vegetation The Committee discussed how to move forward with the changes to the ordinance that they have been working on. Our understanding that it has been discussed with the City Commission and will be moving through Commission. B. 2024 tree fund budget discussion The Committee had additional discussion on the tree fund budget template and agreed to finalize at our next meeting. Page 1 of 2 Agenda Item #5.B. 13 Mar 2024 Page 9 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee Tree Subcommittee February 14, 2024 C. Recommendation for policy changes to require the budgeting of funds for tree plantings and landscaping for new public building and road projects (see attachment). The Committee discussed and Amanda agreed to review with City Manager Killingsworth. She discussed with him and was told he did not support the suggestion at this time, primarily due to budget concerns. 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Discuss how trees that are relocated within a property are handled under the mitigation requirements of Chapter 23. Another item identified for next month’s agenda is trees that are relocated within an existing property. A motion was passed to ensure that staff is following the ordinance regarding posting of signs at properties where tree removal permits are in progress. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m. Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item #5.B. 13 Mar 2024 Page 10 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee Tree Subcommittee February 14, 2024 MINUTES Environmental Stewardship Committee Tree Subcommittee Meeting Wednesday, February 14, 2024 - 5:15 PM City Hall, Commission Chamber 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 Present: Amy Palmer, Bruce Andrews, Chair Daniele Giovannucci Mark Gabynowicz Absent: Patrick Nobles Also Present: Sarah Boren Amanda Askew (5:45 p.m.) 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Call to order at 5:18 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Approve minutes of the January 10, 2024 ESC Tree Subcommittee meeting. The minutes were approved. 3. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR (5 MINS.) Public comment was heard from Joan Horne. She reported unpermitted tree trimming/cutting after hours and had no ability to contact appropriate COAB staff. Called police and they told her to call code enforcement. Also, the tree permit website was not accessible. 4. REPORTS A. Tree Report The Committee reviewed the staff-prepared tree report but didn’t understand certain aspects and had no staff present to explain. Will review again when staff is present. 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Ongoing discussion of changes to Chapter 23, Protection of Trees and Native Vegetation The Committee discussed how to move forward with the changes to the ordinance that they have been working on. Our understanding that it has been discussed with the City Commission and will be moving through Commission. B. 2024 tree fund budget discussion The Committee had additional discussion on the tree fund budget template and agreed to finalize at our next meeting. Page 1 of 2 Agenda Item #5.C. 13 Mar 2024 Page 11 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee Tree Subcommittee February 14, 2024 C. Recommendation for policy changes to require the budgeting of funds for tree plantings and landscaping for new public building and road projects (see attachment). The Committee discussed and Amanda agreed to review with City Manager Killingsworth. She discussed with him and was told he did not support the suggestion at this time, primarily due to budget concerns. 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Discuss how trees that are relocated within a property are handled under the mitigation requirements of Chapter 23. Another item identified for next month’s agenda is trees that are relocated within an existing property. A motion was passed to ensure that staff is following the ordinance regarding posting of signs at properties where tree removal permits are in progress. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m. Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item #5.C. 13 Mar 2024 Page 12 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee Outreach Subcommittee February 21, 2024 MINUTES Environmental Stewardship Committee Outreach Subcommittee Meeting Wednesday, February 21, 2024 - 4:45 PM City Hall, Commission Chamber 800 Seminole Road, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233 Present: Anastasia Houston, Chair Absent: Patrick Nobles Mark Gabrynowicz Heather Markaj Also Present: Sarah Boren 1. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, AND CHAIR REMARKS A. Roll Call B. Chair Remarks 2. COURTESY OF THE FLOOR 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Approve minutes of the January 17, 2024 ESC Outreach Committee meeting. Minutes were approved. 4. REPORTS A. Events: 1. Earth Day To do: a. Email suggestions on how to prepare for Earth Day famers market to vendors. b. Earth day best practices, suggestions on how to make their booth interactive, themed c. List of vendors for Earth Day recognition d. Budget 650$ e. Mrs Olett (sp?) (Environmental Club at Fletcher) community service for H.S. students f. (S) Tree Give-a-way i. Timing and location: Busy with baseball, market, etc ii. Paper shredding g. Need to go through Amanda for any expense related item h. Book: Planting a refuge for wildlife i. Sustainability focused top 40 things for your home. j. Craft: face painting Hard deadline: Printing, bags, emails, promotion, infographic Page 1 of 4 Agenda Item #5.C. 13 Mar 2024 Page 13 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee Outreach Subcommittee February 21, 2024 2. AB ESC How to Series a. Speakers b. Marsh, trees 3. Annual Awards a. Meet with finance director to see how to cover event cost (food, drink, EtOH?, awards) b. Nomination process: Google forms? B. Campaigns: 1. CAP Survey – Reach out to Kevin to publish 2. Conservation Challenge – Map out once a month training / goal, sign up at Earth Day event 3. MFH Recycling Campaign – identify which MFH want to recycle; will GFL pick up? C. Programs and Initiatives: 1. Verified Tree Services – 2. Demonstration Garden – Bull Park (A): Inspiration: Sierra Club – Conserve Nassau demonstration garden Stewards of the park: weed warriors to help maintain garden 3. Welcome Kit / Citizens Guide D. Marking and Outreach: 1. AB Ambassadors Program – Environmental Corps or AB Green Corps 2. Social Media Updates – Heather, listing of ideas and pre-post 3. Newsletter – need content updates 4. Website – priority– to highlight accomplishments, where to find information E. Organization Excellence: 1. ShareFile 2. ESC Member onboarding packet 5. OLD BUSINESS A. Review of OSC 2024 priorities and workshops 1. Educate about ordinance and benefits of trees at least once a month (Outreach Subcommittee leads with Tree Subcommittee’s help with content) -- Maritime Forest Priority  Continue to educate and reinforce the value, importance, and benefits of trees (including absorption) – share inspiring local stories,  Create an editorial calendar where ESC (maybe in partnership with UF/IFAS) creates and city posts helpful tree information each month, etc.  Train citizens on tree removal rules.  Emphasize that AB is a tree loving community in all media. Page 2 of 4 Agenda Item #5.C. 13 Mar 2024 Page 14 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee Outreach Subcommittee February 21, 2024 2. Create a Friends of the Park Working Group that covers each major AB park/open space (Outreach Subcommittee leads) -- Parks & Open Spaces Priority  Define WGs role, expectations and goals for each park in collaboration with ARCC – keep an eye out for any issues (e.g., maintenance, issues, and needs), service days, ideas for improvement, events in parks, time commitment, etc.  Strategic call for volunteers of people at addresses around/near each park  Host WGs for each park all together on one zoom call or in one park once a quarter and then offer break out rooms/groups if they want to get specific park work done. Use Parks Master Plan as a work plan. 3. Educate the community about AB parks and open spaces at least once a month (Outreach Subcommittee leads) -- Parks & Open Spaces Priority  Education about the benefits for parks, open spaces and green spaces (e.g., create an editorial and content calendar for sharing stories about each open space/park AB has)  Participate in Homegrown National Park effort  Promote with City on Tour de Parks (biking to each park) 4. Outreach and educate at least once a quarter about how City is beautifying in an environmentally friendly manner its public spaces and how residents/commercial owners beautify their private spaces (Outreach Subcommittee leads) -- Beautification Priority  Educational campaigns for the following, which are interconnected: native landscaping, Florida Friendly and Right Plant Right Place (see public comment), no biocides, backyard habitat corridor, etc 5. Support S&R Subcommittee’s hosting of a Household Hazardous Waste event in AB (S&R Subcommittee leads with support from Outreach Subcommittee)  Educational campaign on what is HHW and how to refuse, reduce, repurpose, and properly dispose; human health consequences; e-waste  Promotion of actual event  Help recruit volunteers to staff the event 6. Expand outreach through improved website, social media, newsletter, guerrilla tactics (e.g., door hangers, yard signs), events, etc. by improving traffic by 50% (Outreach Subcommittee leads) – Organizational Excellence Priority –This will support all other OSC priorities.  Visibility is a valuable metric and actual output should also be an early metric. Then soon after we should gauge how many people are aware of messaging we put out. 7. Increase the number of ESC volunteers, subject matter experts, and partners by at least 7 out of 20 (Outreach Subcommittee leads but is responsibility of all ESC members and each subcommittee to recruit) – Organizational Excellence Priority  Establish first a list of specific needs or skills that can then be published on website and water bill circulars. We need to first establish respected well- Page 3 of 4 Agenda Item #5.C. 13 Mar 2024 Page 15 of 130 Environmental Stewardship Committee Outreach Subcommittee February 21, 2024 connected allies such as Profs at local Universities (students can be useful volunteers), news people, etc. 8. Organizational Excellence Priority -- Help increase effectiveness, accessibility, productivity, accountability, and satisfaction of all ESC & Outreach Subcommittee meetings, processes, and funding and measure success via annual ESC self- evaluation questionnaire overall scores (ESC Chair leads with support from Vice Chair, Secretary and Subcommittee Chairs) – Organizational Excellence Priority  Consolidate your efforts so people will pay attention.  Rotate the emails to the community between each SC member.  Instead of the speaker series which may not appeal to everyone, a hands on workshop would be fun. How to start an herb garden, how to compost at home, and planting pollinators. I think these sorts of things will engage with more of the community. Note: The above 2024 priorities are in addition to the Outreach Subcommittee’s typical and regular work of organizing & hosting events, creating graphics and posting to social media, crafting and distributing a newsletter, running campaigns and maintaining programs under its purview, managing volunteers, etc. REGULAR ONGOING DUTIES & CARRY OVER PRIORITIES/ACTIONS/REQUIREMENTS  Choreographing campaigns, challenges, & initiatives – Thermometer tree planting campaign, Tree City USA / Arbor Day, Monarch Butterfly campaign, Welcome Kit, Demonstration Garden  Website/webpages  Social media  Newsletter  Guerrilla promotion/marketing – yard signs, chalk stencils, door hangers  Ongoing Programs - Verified Tree Service Program Events – Arbor Day, Earth Day, Speaker & Salon, Partner events (Weed Wrangle & Tour de Parks), Household  Hazardous Waste, Film Screenings, Service Days (invasive species/Brazilian Pepper Tree), Lunch & Learn with PV Title TBD, what is a Resilience Hub educational event TBD,  Volunteers 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Marvin’s Gardens pollinator garden B. Round table 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 6:23 p.m. Page 4 of 4 Agenda Item #5.C. 13 Mar 2024 Page 16 of 130 Comprehensive Plans as Tools for Enhancing Coastal Community Resilience Authors: Cucuzza, M., J. S. Stoll, and H. M. Leslie Published: Journal of Environmental Planning and Management https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09640568.2019.1700943 Planning for change is critical to ensuring resilient coastal communities. In Maine, USA, the comprehensive planning process provides a platform for communities to articulate policies that address social, economic, and environmental issues. While comprehensive plans were initially required of municipalities to address urban sprawl over thirty years ago, a broad range of challenges face coastal communities today. Here we report on an assessment of 30 comprehensive plans from coastal communities across the state. We analyzed the degree to which plans incorporate principles of social-ecological resilience. Our results reveal significant variability across comprehensive plans with some communities addressing key indicators of resilience and others engaging with them in a limited way. By more explicitly incorporating principles of social-ecological resilience, the next-generation of comprehensive plans can be repurposed to serve as tools for communities to implement strategies that build adaptive capacity as they face unprecedented challenges and plan for a changing world. Keywords: coastal communities, community planning, comprehensive plans, social-ecological resilience Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 17 of 130 Comprehensive Plans as Tools for Enhancing Coastal Community Resilience 1. Introduction Coastal communities around the world are increasingly recognized as vulnerable places, particularly in the context of climate change (Beatley 2009; Barbier 2014; USGCRP 2014; IPCC 2018; USGCRP 2017). Planning for both social and ecological resilience is key to ensuring the longevity of coastal communities (Berke and Conroy, 2000). In this context, resilience can be understood as the ability of coastal communities to withstand disturbances without fundamentally altering their essential identity, structure, and functions (after Berkes and Folke, 1998; Leslie and Kinzig, 2009). Examples of disturbances include environmental stressors, i.e., flooding, storm surge, sea level rise (USGCRP 2014; Fu et al., 2017; USGCRP 2017; IPCC 2018), as well as socioeconomic stressors, i.e. recession, shifts in market demand (Kashem et al., 2016; Stoll et al., 2016). Resilience planning emphasizes building capacity to anticipate and prepare for crises under uncertainty (Walker and Salt 2012), and reducing both individuals and communities’ vulnerability to potential disturbances, thereby increasing adaptive capacity (Beatley, 2009). Many scholars argue that polycentric governance arrangements are effective at addressing complex natural resource challenges (Ostrom, 2009; McGinnis & Walker, 2010; Sovacool, 2011). Decisions and policies about how to adapt and remain resilient in the face of change need to be implemented at multiple governance levels (Tribbia and Moser, 2008). State and national governments in the US and many other nations have foregrounded resilience planning at the community scale. For example, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management Policy identifies maintaining community resilience and evaluating community well-being as essential parts of the resilient ecosystem guiding principles Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 18 of 130 of the Policy Implementation Roadmap (NMFSI 01-120-01). Additionally, the 2010 U.S. National Ocean Policy incorporated actions aimed to specifically benefit coastal communities such as enhanced research and communication about the direct and indirect impacts of climate change, ocean acidification, infrastructure, economies, habitats and key species (E. O. 13547). While these policy frameworks highlight the importance of planning for resilience, they are not necessarily linked with community-scale concerns or strategies (Sievanen et al., 2011). Similarly, adaptation plans are often developed at geographically extensive scales. Yet, drivers of change in coastal systems, such as declining fish stocks, flooding, population decline, and economic disruption are experienced at the local scale –in the social and ecological interactions that people have with one another and the coastal and marine ecosystems of which they are part (Sievanen et al., 2011). Communities are unique and have their own specific needs, experiences, resources, and ideas about preventing and responding to stressors that threaten coastal ecosystems and local economies (Brody, 2003). Comprehensive plans are intended to guide the future actions and direction of a community (Conroy and Berke, 2004). The comprehensive planning process serves as a platform for communities to envision the future and outline objectives and policies that address social, economic, and environmental issues to guide the future direction of the community (Berke and Conroy, 2000). Critically assessing resilience in comprehensive plans is key to understanding the aspects of resilience that are prioritized by communities. Complementing research on resilience planning at broader scales, our paper focuses on local scale planning efforts and how they align with resilience principles. Maine provides a useful case study as changing ocean conditions, declines in marine fisheries, and the loss of Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 19 of 130 working waterfront infrastructure threaten the resilience of coastal communities throughout the state. With over 3,000 miles of coastline and a culture and economy deeply tied to marine resources, citizens and municipalities in Maine have important questions and concerns about the capacity of their coastal communities to respond and adapt in the face of mounting social, economic, and environmental pressures. The goal of our study was to investigate how local planning is addressing resilience principles. To explore this, we investigate the degree to which Maine’s coastal communities are incorporating resilience principles into their comprehensive plans. To answer this, first we provide an overview of the history of comprehensive planning in Maine, including the state requirements that guide plan development. Next, we explore the concept of social-ecological resilience in the context of coastal communities. We apply a framework for evaluating the incorporation of resilience principles to analyze 30 comprehensive plans from coastal communities in Maine. We draw on a framework that employs three types of resilience indicators– ecological, social, and economic–which together reflect elements of social-ecological resilience. Finally, we explore the factors that may be influencing the degree to which comprehensive plans incorporate resilience principles and offer recommendations for the use of comprehensive plans as tools to enhance coastal community resilience. 1.1 Exploring Social-Ecological Resilience in a Community Context In its broadest sense, resilience recognizes social systems and ecosystems as “coupled, interdependent, and co-evolving” (Berkes, 2015 pg. 51). The focus on social-ecological systems emphasizes the complexity that arises from interactions among the biophysical and institutional domains and across spatial and temporal scales (Ensor and Berger, 2009, Berkes and Folke, 1998; Adger and Barnett, 2009). Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 20 of 130 In a resilient social–ecological system, social and ecological changes create opportunity for innovation and development (Folke, 2006). Folke and colleagues (2010) differentiate between “specific” and “general” resilience. Specific resilience refers to the capacity of the system to withstand one kind of disturbance, whereas general resilience relates to the capacity of a system to withstand all kinds of disturbances (Folke et al., 2010). This is a significant distinction, as general resilience encompasses coping with stressors in all ways, whereas specific resilience only buffers the system against one kind of shock or protects particular components of the system from disturbance (Folke et al., 2010). Efforts to foster specific resilience may not be beneficial long term, as the concentration on individual parts of the system and specific shocks may inadvertently cause the system as a whole to lose resilience in other critical ways (Folke et al., 2010). Resilience can be cultivated at both the individual and collective level and can occur at multiple spatial and geographic scales (Ross and Berkes, 2014; Beatley 2009). There are a diversity of definitions of resilience from fields such as ecology, engineering, and geography. The concept of ‘community resilience’ similarly has varied definitions. In general, it is viewed as a positive attribute, associated with decreased risk and increased local capacity at the community scale (Patel et al., 2017). A community’s resilience is often described as a function of the community members’ capacity to mobilize, learn, and work towards a common goal (Steiner and Atterton, 2015). For example, after a systematic assessment of definitions of community resilience from the peer reviewed and grey literature, Patel et al. (2017) found that the concept is associated with decreasing risk and increasing social support and resources in a community. Additionally, local knowledge, community networks, effective communication, and leadership, among other attributes, emerged as critical elements that can build resilience Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 21 of 130 within a community before a disaster and can mitigate long-term damages and retain the essential structure and function of a community after a disaster (Patel et al. 2017). In assessing coastal community resilience, themes of flexibility, adaptability, opportunity, and durability are prominent in the literature (Beatley 2009). Paton (2006) advocates for a bottom-up, community-based approach to effectively plan for resilience. Walker and Salt (2012) identify a number of characteristics of a ‘resilient world,’ including ecological variability, diversity, innovation, modularity, and overlaps in governance. Buckle (2006) additionally identifies several elements that support resilience at the community scale, such as robust social networks, connected information channels, and community knowledge of hazards. Communities are also influenced by both internal and external economic forces such as economic growth opportunities, stability and diversity of livelihoods, and equitable distribution of income (Norris et al., 2008). Community resilience is supported by a resilient local economy with diverse businesses and employment opportunities (Steiner and Atterton, 2015). Building community resilience requires the development of a community’s social capital (Putnam, 1995; Magis, 2010). Resilient communities promote human well-being by creating common objectives to strive for and encouraging citizens to work together for the greater good (Patel et al., 2017). Many definitions of community resilience focus on enhancing adaptive capacity, or the ability of social actors to make deliberate changes that influence the resilience of the complex social-ecological systems in which they are embedded (Ensor et al, 2014; Walker et al., 2014). Although communities do not control all of the conditions that affect them, they do have the ability to anticipate, plan for, and change many of the conditions that can increase their overall resilience and adaptive capacity in the face of disturbances. Adaptive capacity is defined by the ability Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 22 of 130 of systems to modify their structure in response to changing socioeconomic and environmental conditions in order to adjust and cope with these changes, moderate potential damage, and take advantage of opportunities that arise from change (Adger and Vincent, 2005; Folke, 2002). Advancing adaptive capacity in coastal communities requires holistic planning efforts and the principles of social-ecological resilience provide critical insight to sound coastal management in the future. Through this analysis, we seek to understand the degree to which comprehensive plans in Maine are currently incorporating principles of social-ecological resilience. Answers to this question highlight the general challenges of enhancing the resilience of communities in Maine. Plan evaluation is a critical component of the comprehensive planning process as the quality of the plan affects its implementation. Information gained from a systematic review of comprehensive plans is vital to determine strengths and weaknesses in Maine’s local planning approaches and will provide valuable insight into planning for resiliency in coastal communities in the future. 1.2 A history of comprehensive planning in Maine Municipalities in Maine began writing comprehensive plans as early as 1918 (Richert and Most, 2005). The development of these initial plans across the country was primarily driven by the interest in adopting zoning ordinances to direct population growth and developmental sprawl. Comprehensive plans are the legal underpinning of zoning ordinances and are intended to ensure that zoning is conducted fairly and with careful consideration to community needs (Conroy and Berke, 2004). In keeping with planning conversations nationwide, sprawl became a major concern in Maine in the 1970s and 1980s, as rapid population growth shifted from urban centers to rural communities. Rural municipalities did not have the appropriate infrastructure, ordinances, or facilities to support the rapidly increasing populations. As a result, Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 23 of 130 residents across the state were concerned that the rural character of their communities would decline as roads became increasingly congested, forests were cleared for housing development, and taxes began to rise (Richert and Most, 2005). In 1988, Maine adopted the Comprehensive Planning and Land Use Act, also known as the Growth Management Law. This law initially established local comprehensive planning and land use management in each municipality of the state (30- A M.R.S.A. §§ 4312 - 4350). The Act requires that municipalities appoint a planning committee to prepare a comprehensive plan, which must consider a broad range of public review and comment from the community. As planning for population increase was a pressing issue in the state during 1970s and 1980s, a central goal of the Act is preventing developmental sprawl (Dolan and Walker, 2004). To achieve this, comprehensive plans were designed to direct anticipated growth to specific designated growth areas, and away from rural areas in each municipality (Richert and Most, 2005). The Act details 11 goals that promote the ‘health, safety, and welfare of citizens of the state.’ These goals include the protection of the state’s natural resources such as agricultural, forest, and marine resources, the preservation of historic and archaeologic resources, the promotion of recreational opportunities, and the promotion of affordable housing. Additionally, it calls for a three-stage analysis as part of each plan: inventory and analysis of existing conditions, policies to address the issues identified in the inventory section, and implementation strategies to address these issues. Towns are asked to address 13 topics as part of the inventory and analysis section: topography (soils, geology, and water resources), habitat and other significant natural resources, historical and archaeological resources, agriculture/forestry and marine resources, local and regional economy, population and demographics, land use patterns, housing, transportation, recreation and open space, public facilities and services, and fiscal Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 24 of 130 capacity. In addition to inventorying these topic areas, comprehensive plans are required to include policies that address specific issues raised in the inventory section, in addition to strategies to achieve these goals (30-A M.R.S.A. §§ 4312 - 4350). In the late 1990s and early 2000s, many Maine communities began to update their comprehensive plans. Most municipalities had plans that were over 10 years old. At the same time, the Maine State Planning Office (SPO), as part of ongoing efforts to curb sprawl and promote smart growth, began advocating for bolder comprehensive plans that were more effective at guiding growth and addressing other pressing local and regional issues. By 2003, 47% of Maine’s organized municipalities developed comprehensive plans that were compliant with the goals of the Comprehensive Planning and Land Use Act (Richert and Most, 2005). That same year, the SPO developed a handbook of 50 recommendations to help guide towns in strategies to address sustainable growth patterns (Richert and Most, 2005). The handbook served as an opportunity for the SPO to reflect on some of the lessons learned from the collective experience of over 10 years of comprehensive planning in Maine under the Planning and Land Use Regulation Act. The handbook accompanied an updated comprehensive plan grant program that the SPO launched in 2001. This new grant program provided state funding for comprehensive plan development for the first time. The grants were geared towards a new generation of comprehensive plans that incorporated stronger policies and implementation strategies to address pressing issues facing Maine’s communities. This shift was largely in response to the earlier generation of comprehensive plans that were effective at inventorying community resources, but less successful at guiding growth and meeting other planning objectives. In many cases, these early comprehensive plans Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 25 of 130 were quite vague, resulting in ineffective strategies to implement policies (Richert and Most, 2005). In 2005, the Maine State Planning Office released a manual to guide Maine’s communities in developing comprehensive plans. The manual called for communities to tackle a broad range of community issues and encouraged them to take a critical look at their growth patterns and to develop a stronger next generation of plans. It emphasized the importance of citizen involvement as a continuous process in the development of comprehensive plans and calls for realistic, specific, and directive policies. The manual states that the State Planning Office recognizes that comprehensive plans that are consistent with state laws may not necessarily fulfil the local goals and policies of a community, and thus encouraged municipalities to go beyond state laws and develop strategies to meet local needs as well as the requirements of the state (Richert & Most, 2005). The Growth Management Law was amended in the early 1990s. The mandate for municipalities to develop a plan was removed when the economic boom ended and state budgetary problems resulted in cutbacks that limited funding for local growth management efforts. While state approval of municipal comprehensive plans are no longer required, there is a process for the voluntary review of the plans by the Maine Municipal Planning Assistance Program. If a town’s plan is found to be consistent with the Growth Management Act guidelines, there can be benefits for the municipality, including preferential treatment for some state grant programs (MMPAP, 2017). Over $80 million is awarded annually through 25 state grant and loan programs that include approval of a comprehensive plan as a review criterion. Examples of these programs include the Land and Water Conservation Fund and Community Development Block Grants. In addition, as provided by state law, when a comprehensive plans is adopted by Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 26 of 130 the municipality, it serves as the basis for updating the town’s zoning and land use regulations. In addition to funding opportunities, in order to provide legal support for any local zoning, zoning ordinances must be pursuant to and consistent with a comprehensive plan adopted by the municipality (Richert and Most, 2005). Comprehensive plans detail many different aspects of a community. These include community goals and policies that address issues identified by the community, a future land use plan that anticipates growth and development, and implementation strategies that describe how the plan objectives will be implemented in the future (Berke and Conroy, 2000). A review of the evolution of comprehensive planning in Maine highlights a complex history of local governance. Plans were initially intended to address urban sprawl, a pressing issue in Maine in the 1970s and 1980s. While this no longer is a critical issue facing many towns, municipalities are actively developing comprehensive plans throughout the state to be eligible to compete for grant opportunities and to update local zoning ordinances. Although comprehensive planning is no longer mandatory by the state, the local planning process provides a platform for communities to address challenges facing the community and assert a set of priorities and policies to implement a collective vision for the future. Social-ecological resilience offers a flexible, holistic, and robust lens to critically address the multifaceted challenges that coastal communities face and focuses on interactions that are relevant in managing human- environment systems in the context of change (Quinlan et al., 2016). 2. Methods 2.1 Plan selection We analysed comprehensive plans from coastal communities across the state of Maine to investigate how social-ecological resilience principles have been incorporated in Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 27 of 130 local planning documents. Comprehensive plans were selected based on a sample from each coastal community county in Maine. Each municipality is located within Maine’s coastal zone as designated by the Maine Coastal Program. The plans selected for analysis were identified as consistent with Maine’s Growth Management Act by the Maine Municipal Planning Assistance Program. Municipalities closest to the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile of the county population were selected in order to assure that both small and large municipalities are included in the analysis. Thirty plans out of a total of 49 state-approved coastal plans were analyzed, thereby representing 61% of all possible coastal municipal plans. The goal of this sampling process was to represent the diversity of Maine’s coastal communities with active, state-approved comprehensive plans. 2.2 Resilience Assessment To assess the degree to which Maine’s coastal communities are incorporating resilience principles in their local planning efforts, comprehensive plans were evaluated using an assessment framework focused on social-ecological resilience (modified from Boulware et al., 2013). The framework integrates key indicators of resilience from a variety of nationally recognized resilience frameworks such as the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's Coastal Community Resilience Indicators and Rating System (NOAA Coastal Community Indicator and Rating System) as well as the Federal Emergency Management Agency Community Resilience Indicators (FEMA Community Resilience Indicators), and is consistent with the diversity of resilience principles outlined in the peer-reviewed literature (Godschalk et al., 2000; Chaskin 2001, Beatley 2009; Leslie and Kinzig 2009, Magis et al., 2010; Boulware, 2013). Although indicators are drawn from national frameworks, they are generalizable with the intent to be applied to any community. Downsizing national frameworks to the local scale may not capture the local needs of a community. To address this, indicators were Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 28 of 130 specifically selected based on the hazards and threats facing the state of Maine. Resilience principles were divided into three categories for analysis: ecological, social, and economic. Although the resilience indicators were categorized for evaluation purposes, they are interrelated and in many ways overlap and are dependent on each other (See Appendix A for complete indicator list). Ecological principles address the relationship between physical development and natural processes and include indicators such as conservation and restoration of natural systems, wetland migration, hazardous area acquisition, shoreline protection, and the incorporation of policies related to coastal hazards such as sea level rise, storm surge, erosion, and flooding (Godschalk, et. al. 2000; Beatley 2009; NOAA 2010). Social aspects of increasing resilience include indicators such as identifying vulnerable populations within the community, enhancing community education of hazards, promoting emotional and physical well-being among residents, and providing opportunities to strengthen social networks (Godshalk 2003; Magis 2010; Beatley 2009). Economic aspects of increasing resiliency include indicators such as promoting a diverse economic base in the community, business owner education related to hazards, and fostering relationships between local businesses and the community (Beatley 2009). Each comprehensive plan (n=30) was coded based on the incorporation of social-ecological resilience indicators outlined in the framework using the qualitative data analysis computer software package NVivo version 11.4.2. Each plan was scored on a scale of 0-2 for the presence or absence of each individual indicator (after Berke 2000). A ranking of 0 indicates that an indicator is not identified in a comprehensive plan. A ranking of 1 indicates that the indicator was suggested or vaguely defined, but not well incorporated throughout the plan. A ranking of 2 indicates that the indicator was well identified in detail, contains directive language and specific guiding policies or Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 29 of 130 goals addressing the indicator. This method is widely applied in the planning field as a systematic approach to operationalize qualitative planning evaluation measures (Berke et al. 2000; Godshalk et al. 2000; Paton 2006). A complete list of indicators is outlined in Appendix A. The total score for each of the three resilience categories was calculated by the number of points (raw score) scored divided by the total possible points for that category. Total resilience scores were calculated for each of the 30 plans in addition to individual scores for social, ecological, and economic resilience. The maximum possible score that a plan could receive was 100%. Nonparametric statistical tests were conducted to test whether there are significant differences in resilience category scores. Specifically, a Kruskal- Wallis test was used to investigate if there is a statistically significant difference between ecological, social, and economic resilience category scores for the comprehensive plans analysed. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to determine if plans addressed resiliency differently based on the year they were adopted. 3. Results 3.1 Total Social-Ecological Resilience Score: Total resilience scores for each plan were calculated and reported based on percentage of the summed values from the ecological, social, and economic scores present in each plan (Figure 1). Portland had the highest total social-ecological resilience score calculated for a municipality, at 80%. Bangor had the lowest score, of 18%. The average total score for the 30 plans evaluated was 40% (Table 1). [Figure 1. here] [Table 1. here] 3.2 Resilience Scores by Category Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 30 of 130 We evaluated the comprehensive plans based on the presence of resilience indicators in three categories: ecological, social, and economic resilience. The scores for each municipality by category are summarized in Table 2 and depicted in Figure 2. The average score for the social resilience category was higher than ecological and economic scores for the comprehensive plans analyzed. The average ecological score for all municipalities analyzed was 40%. The average social score was 55% and the average economic score was 32%. We summarized the variation in total resilience scores, and the relative emphasis different communities place on the social, ecological, and economic elements of resilience in their plans in Figure 3. [Figure 2. here] [Table 2. here] [Figure 3. here] Results from a Kruskal-Wallis test indicate a statistically significant difference between ecological, social, and economic resilience category scores (p <0.05). Paired contrasts were examined through a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results indicate that there is a statistically significant difference between social and economic scores (p < 0.05), however there is no statistically significant difference between ecological and social or ecological and economic scores (p > 0.05). Statistical analyses revealed that social attributes of resilience were emphasized over ecological and economic aspects of resilience in the comprehensive plans that were assessed. One criteria that may have influenced overall plan ranking is the year the plan was adopted. This could potentially be significant given that more recent plans should reflect the availability of recent research related to coastal community resilience and hazard mitigation in addition to the 2005 Maine State Planning office directive for comprehensive plans to address a broader range of challenges in communities. A Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 31 of 130 Wilcoxon signed-rank test was conducted to determine if plans addressed resiliency differently based on the year they were adopted. Results indicate that there is an association between total resilience score and year adopted (p < 0.05) such that more recent plans tend to have higher total scores. Figure 4 depicts average total comprehensive plan resilience score by year. Population, land area, and per capita income were not significant drivers of plan score. [Figure 4. here] 3.3 Resilience Indicator Analysis Analysis of resilience scores relating to particular indicators in the framework reveal which indicators were well incorporated in comprehensive plans as well as the indicators that were largely not addressed. Thus, this analysis highlights what coastal municipalities prioritize in resilience planning throughout the state. The highest and lowest indicators for each resilience category are outlined in Table 3. Indicators that received an average score greater than or equal to 70% and less than or equal to 30% are reported for each resilience category. [Table 3. here] 4. Discussion Our results reveal that social-ecological resilience principles are not well incorporated in Maine’s current comprehensive plans in coastal communities overall, but have increased through time. Of the 30 comprehensive plans analyzed, the highest score assigned to a municipality was 80%, the lowest score was 18%, and the average resilience score for municipal comprehensive plans was just 40% out of a possible 100%. Plans that received lower scores failed to address specific indicators, or did not incorporate policies, strategies, or action items that detailed how the community will address the indicators. In comparison, plans that received high scores had a detailed Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 32 of 130 vision statement, thorough inventory sections, and policies or action items derived from the inventory sections that outline major priorities and delegate specific committees or organizations within a community with oversight and implementation. We also found heterogeneity in the degree to which municipalities are incorporating indicators of resilience. Although Maine’s coastal community comprehensive plans overall do not incorporate social-ecological resilience principles, there is a higher emphasis on social measures relative to ecological and economic measures. Many of the plans emphasized a strong sense of community and a desire to limit development and maintain a rural character of the town. This is exemplified in the Edgecomb town vision to “accommodate and guide Edgecomb’s growth while supporting the expressed wishes of the townspeople to retain their individual autonomy, the community spirit and rural environment” (Edgecomb Comprehensive Plan, pg 1). Emotional and physical well-being and an increased quality of life were promoted throughout many of the plans as goals. Mention of community hazard awareness and education as well as policies and goals focused on adaptive capacity were absent in many of the plans. Priorities in comprehensive plans within the ecological resilience category focused around erosion and flooding and were specifically attentive to infrastructure protection. Some plans encouraged the conservation of natural systems as well as the use of living shorelines for shoreline stabilization. The strong emphasis on erosion and shoreline stabilization in comprehensive plans is likely a reflection of Maine’s Mandatory Shoreline Zoning Act (M.R.S.A. sections 435-449), which controls land uses and placement of structures within the shoreland area for the purposes of protecting habitat, wildlife, water quality, historic and archaeological sites, in addition to conserving space and public access. In addition, the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 33 of 130 (Public Law 106-390) encourages communities to develop policies that mitigate long- term effects of coastal hazards. The incorporation of these policies in comprehensive plans likely resulted in high scores for indicators related to flooding, erosion, and shoreline stabilization in the ecological resilience category across all the comprehensive plans that were analysed. However, few plans incorporated policies that related to the accommodation or relocation of structures in hazardous area, the prevention of hazardous area acquisition, and redevelopment of structures after hazardous occurrences. Allusions to climate change impacts were absent from a majority of the plans. Few plans called out sea level rise and storm surge as potential threats. When these threats were identified, objectives and policies addressing these hazards in the community were absent. Results of the ecological resiliency category indicate that many Maine communities are not considering potential impacts of climate change in town planning. The median adoption year of these plans is 2011, however plans developed after this year tend to include more explicit language about climate change impacts and adaptation planning. It is important to note that towns may be planning for and incorporating aspects of resilience in documents other than comprehensive plans. For example, the town of Georgetown has developed a climate adaptation report, which outlines potential climate-related impacts to the community and lists recommendations for the community to prepare for these impacts. Similarly, Lincoln County has prepared a sea level rise plan for the region that projects scenarios of flooding in specific areas in the associated communities. These plans provide valuable information to inform community planning and should be included as part of the comprehensive planning efforts (Baynham and Stevens, 2012). Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 34 of 130 Components of economic resilience that were highlighted in the plans include policies that encourage coordinated business planning to achieve objectives focused on protecting, sustaining, and enhancing the economic base of the municipality. Many of the plans recognized the relationship between healthy natural systems and a healthy economy, as many coastal municipalities are heavily dependent on commercially harvested marine resources as well as marine tourism. Many municipalities acknowledge this economic dependence in their plans, however few address strategies for economic diversification. Economic recovery options in the face of stressors such as natural disasters or recession were absent from most of the comprehensive plans. Coastal communities in Maine rely on natural resources activities such as fishing, forestry, and agriculture. The future of these resources is threatened by coastal hazards and anthropogenic impacts such as climate change. Greater efforts should be put toward developing policies that address the natural resource dependency of economies in Maine’s coastal regions in local planning policies. Investing in resilience planning can be economically beneficial to municipalities in the long-run. For example, the Maine Coastal Program administers a competitive grant program that provides financial assistance for municipalities to conduct projects related to topics such as storm hazard resiliency, water quality improvement, and public access. In 2013, the town of York used these funds to develop a sea-level rise analysis and adaptation strategy chapter for their comprehensive plan. This work allowed the community to assess inundation areas and identify vulnerable infrastructure to prioritize action strategies to mitigate the costs of replacing infrastructure in the future. Incorporating social-ecological resilience measures into comprehensive plans is an important step toward fostering resilience in coastal communities (Beatley 2009). In addition to the focus on social aspects of resilience, many of the comprehensive plans in Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 35 of 130 Maine focus on specific resilience by prioritizing actions and policies that mitigate disturbances related exclusively to infrastructure. While prioritizing specific hazards can help communities prepare for particular disturbances, a social-ecological resilience approach that emphasizes general resilience by encompassing components of social, ecological, and economic resilience has a greater capacity to prepare communities to adapt to a broad range of disturbances long-term (Folke 2010; Boulware, 2013). Communities face social, ecological, and economic challenges, thus a holistic prioritization of resilience that moves beyond a focus on infrastructure alone may help communities in Maine prepare for extreme, novel, or unexpected disturbances. Comprehensive plans cover a variety of topics such as housing, natural resources, transportation, and the local economy. These sections and related policies are often written in isolation, however the multifaceted nature of the plans can facilitate a general resilience approach with a prioritization of feedbacks and connectivity between the different components of a community plan. There are numerous social, political, and economic barriers to building resilience that are specific to the context of each community. Increasing resilience at the community scale requires financial investments, time, and human resources. Some of the major obstacles that have been identified in the coastal planning literature include low prioritization of hazards, limited ability or willingness to confront big issues, short decision-making time-frames, political impediments, as well as limited financial resources and staff capacity (Beatley 2009; Picketts et al., 2013). There are many tradeoffs associated with resilience planning, as building resilience at the community scale may compete with other local objectives. Thus, increasing resilience in one area may be at the expense of another. For example, development of land may increase economic productivity in a community, but may negatively impact critical habitats such Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 36 of 130 as wetlands, which provide extensive ecosystem services that contribute to human well- being. Communities in Maine are faced with addressing these tradeoffs. The town of Stonington, Maine’s leading port for commercial fisheries landings, is confronted with the need to adjust infrastructure to address storm surge and sea level rise hazards while maintaining the working waterfront infrastructure that is necessary for its viability as a fishing port. The development of effective local and regional planning strategies to enhance resilience and increase adaptive capacity among coastal communities necessitates a deep and multifasceted understanding of these obstacles to inform efforts to address them (Beatley 2009). There is no panacea to overcome the complex barriers to building resilience in coastal communities. However, comprehensive plans can be repurposed to serve as a tool to address and plan for challenges around resilience and adaptive capacity at the community level. Climate change impacts such as sea level rise, ocean acidification, and increased storm severity are already being experienced in coastal communities in the US Northeast (Moser et al., 2008; Lyles et al., 2014; Hare et al., 2016). Policy- makers and resource managers must prepare and plan for the impacts of climate change to coastal communities and implement plans on the ground to address these stressors. We envision the next generation of comprehensive plans as iterative, adaptive planning documents that not only identify resource challenges in communities, but also articulate goals and management strategies across the ecological, social, and economic domains that can support resilient coastal communities. 5. Conclusion Coastal communities worldwide face an extensive set of threats from a myriad of ecological, economic, and social stressors. Many high-level international and national policies acknowledge the importance of resilient coastal communities, however they do Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 37 of 130 not touch the ground on the community level, where people are closely connected to the coast and are vulnerable to such stressors. Coastal communities may be better able to prepare for the impacts from socioeconomic and environmental change if they began preparing for them now. Planning for resilience is integral to ensuring the longevity of coastal communities and building local adaptive capacity in the face of ecological and socio-economic change. Comprehensive plans serve as a platform for communities to develop policies that encourage responsible use of coastal resources and acknowledging the connections of the natural and human systems in order to foster social-ecological resilience. The emphasis on social-ecological resilience focuses on interactions that are relevant in managing human-environment systems in the face of change (Quinlan et al., 2016). Several key planning dimensions are critical to advance social-ecological resilience in coastal communities: resilience of ecosystems and coastal environments, social resilience, and economic resilience (Beatley 2009). These categories of resilience are not independent but are intricately related. A key step in moving communities toward resilience is to monitor, assess, and evaluate the degree to which local communities are integrating resilience in local planning documents. A review of 30 active comprehensive plans from coastal communities in Maine among these three categories of resilience revealed that coastal municipalities are not incorporating social-ecological resilience principles in their comprehensive plans. The results of the comprehensive plan analysis demonstrate a gap between the academic development of resilience indicators, frameworks, and policies and the integration of key aspects of resilience into coastal community comprehensive plans. Further, there is heterogeneity in the extent to which components of resilience are Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 38 of 130 addressed in comprehensive plans, with social characteristics outweighing ecological and economic components. Anticipating potential disturbances through the early implementation of resilience principles can be cost effective and can provide current and future benefits to communities. The comprehensive planning process provides a platform for communities to envision the future and outline objectives and policies that address social, economic, and environmental issues to guide the future direction of the community. Comprehensive plans along Maine’s coast have largely not altered from the original requirements of the Comprehensive Planning and Land Use Act. This act was written in the 1988 to encourage towns to address the pressing issue of urban sprawl. Thirty years later, sprawl no longer remains the central challenge facing municipalities. Comprehensive plans are no longer a requirement of municipalities in Maine, however grant based incentives and local zoning ordinances motivate municipalities to keep updated comprehensive plans. New, expansive directions beyond inventorying community resources and directing sprawl are required to reform how comprehensive plans are made. Climate change is already and will continue to impact every aspect of municipalities including infrastructure, but also public health, housing and biodiversity. Building resilience requires significant structural shifts to address the root causes of challenges in the community as well as a paradigm shift in planning to move towards a more proactive approach and a holistic consideration of resilience. Resilience building is an ongoing process and comprehensive plans are living documents that foster a platform for coastal communities to articulate their vision for the future and implement strategies to build adaptive capacity as we face unprecedented challenges and plan for a changing world. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 39 of 130 Acknowledgements: [Removed for Review] References: Adger, W. N., & Vincent, K. (2005). Uncertainty in adaptive capacity. Comptes Rendus Geoscience, 337(4), 399-410. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 40 of 130 Adger, W. N., & Barnett, J. (2009). Four reasons for concern about adaptation to climate change. Environment and Planning A, 41(12), 2800-2805. Armitage, D., Béné, C., Charles, A. T., Johnson, D., & Allison, E. H. (2012). The interplay of well-being and resilience in applying a social-ecological perspective. Ecology and Society, 17(4). Barbier, E. B. (2014). A global strategy for protecting vulnerable coastal populations. Science, 345(6202), 1250-1251. Baynham, M., & Stevens, M. (2014). Are we planning effectively for climate change? An evaluation of official community plans in British Columbia. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 57(4), 557-587. Beatley, T. (2009). Planning for coastal resilience: Best practices for calamitous times. Island Press. Beatley T. (2014) Planning for Resilient Coastal Communities: Emerging Practice and Future Directions. In: Glavovic B., Smith G. (eds) Adapting to Climate Change. Environmental Hazards. Springer, Dordrecht. Berke, P. R., & Conroy, M. M. (2000). Are we planning for sustainable development? An evaluation of 30 comprehensive plans. Journal of the American planning association, 66(1), 21-33. Berkes, F. (2015). Coasts for people: Interdisciplinary approaches to coastal and marine resource management. Routledge Berkes, F., & Folke, C. (1998). Linking Sociological and Ecological Systems for resilience and sustainability. id.. Linking Sociological and Ecological Systems: Management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1-25. Berkes, F., & Seixas, C. S. (2005). Building resilience in lagoon social–ecological systems: a local-level perspective. Ecosystems, 8(8), 967-974. Boulware, F. (2013). Planning for resilient coastal communities: An analysis of coastal plans in South Carolina (Doctoral dissertation, Clemson University). Brody, S. D. (2003). Examining the role of resource-based industries in ecosystem approaches to management: An evaluation of comprehensive plans in Florida. Society &Natural Resources, 16(7), 625-641. Brody, S. D. (2003). Examining the effects of biodiversity on the ability of local plans to manage ecological systems. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 46(6), 817-837. Buckle, P. (2006). Assessing social resilience. Disaster resilience: An integrated approach, 88- 103. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 41 of 130 Chaskin, R. J. (2001). Building community capacity: A definitional framework and case studies from a comprehensive community initiative. Urban affairs review, 36(3), 291-323. Conroy, M. M., & Berke, P. R. (2004). What makes a good sustainable development plan? An analysis of factors that influence principles of sustainable development. Environment and planning A, 36(8), 1381-1396. de Coninck, H., Revi, A., Babiker, M., Bertoldi, P., Buckeridge, M., Cartwright, A., ... & Ley, D. (2018). Strengthening and implementing the global response. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Dolan, A. H., & Walker, I. J. (2006). Understanding vulnerability of coastal communities to climate change related risks. Journal of Coastal Research, 1316-1323. Ensor, J., & Berger, R. (2009). Community-based adaptation and culture in theory and practice (pp. 227-239). Cambridge University Press, New York. Ensor, J., Huq, S., & Berger, R. (Eds.). (2014). Community-based adaptation to climate change: emerging lessons. Practical Action Publishing. Executive Order 13547. (2010) Stewardship of the ocean, our coasts, and the great lakes. President Barack Obama, Office of the Press Secretary. July 19, 2010. Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2013). “Integrating Hazard Mitigation Into Local Planning: Case Studies and Tools for Community Officials.” Integrating Hazard Mitigation Into Local Planning: Case Studies and Tools for Community Officials. Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Elmqvist, T., Gunderson, L., Holling, C. S., & Walker, B. (2002). Resilience and sustainable development: building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations. AMBIO: A journal of the human environment, 31(5), 437-441. Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global environmental change, 16(3), 253-267. Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., & Rockström, J. (2010). Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology and society, 15(4). Fu, X., Gomaa, M., Deng, Y., & Peng, Z. R. (2017). Adaptation planning for sea level rise: a study of US coastal cities. Journal of environmental planning and management, 60(2), 249-265. Godshalk, David R. "Urban Hazard Mitigation: Creating Resilient Cities." Natural Hazards Review, August 2003: 136-143. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 42 of 130 Godshalk, David R., Richard Norton, Craig Richardson, and David Salvesen. "Avoiding coastal Hazard Areas: Best State Mitigation Practices." Environmental Geosciences 7, no. 1 (2000): 13-22. Guidelines for the Comprehensive Planning and Land Use Regulation Act (30 M.R.S.A. Sec. 4960). 1988. Office of Comprehensive Planning, Maine Dept. of Economic and Community Development Congress. Goodwin, N. R. (2003). Five kinds of capital: Useful concepts for sustainable development (No. 1434-2016-118878). Hare, J. A., Morrison, W. E., Nelson, M. W., Stachura, M. M., Teeters, E. J., Griffis, R. B., ... & Chute, A. S. (2016). A vulnerability assessment of fish and invertebrates to climate change on the Northeast US Continental Shelf. PloS one, 11(2), e0146756. Kashem, S. B., Wilson, B., & Van Zandt, S. (2016). Planning for climate adaptation: Evaluating the changing patterns of social vulnerability and adaptation challenges in three coastal cities. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 36(3), 304-318. Leslie, H. M., Basurto, X., Nenadovic, M., Sievanen, L., Cavanaugh, K. C., Cota-Nieto, J. J., ... & Nagavarapu, S. (2015). Operationalizing the social-ecological systems framework to assess sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(19), 5979- 5984. Leslie, Heather M., and Ann P. Kinzig. Resilience science. Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2009. Lyles, W., Berke, P., & Overstreet, K. H. (2018). Where to begin municipal climate adaptation planning? Evaluating two local choices. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 61(11), 1994-2014. Magis, K. (2010). Community resilience: An indicator of social sustainability. Society and Natural Resources, 23(5), 401-416. McGinnis, M. D., & Walker, J. M. (2010). Foundations of the Ostrom workshop: institutional analysis, polycentricity, and self-governance of the commons. Public Choice, 143(3-4), 293-301. Moser, S. C., Kasperson, R. E., Yohe, G., & Agyeman, J. (2008). Adaptation to climate change in the Northeast United States: opportunities, processes, constraints. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 13(5-6), 643-659. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "Adapting to Climate Change: A planning Guide for State Coastal Managers." NOAA Office of Ocean and Coastal resource Management. 2010. http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/climate/adaptation.html. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 43 of 130 National Marine Fisheries Service Policy Directive 01-120-01 (2016). Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management Road Map. Retrieved from: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/document/ecosystem-based-fisheries- management-road-map. “National Institute of Standards and Technology.” NIST, 7 May 2018, www.nist.gov/. Norris, F. H., Stevens, S. P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K. F., & Pfefferbaum, R. L. (2008). Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. American journal of community psychology, 41(1-2), 127-150. Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325(5939), 419-422. Patel, S. S., Rogers, M. B., Amlôt, R., & Rubin, G. J. (2017). What do we mean by 'community resilience'? A systematic literature review of how it is defined in the literature. PLoS currents, 9. Paton, D. (2006). Disaster resilience: building capacity to co-exist with natural hazards and their consequences. Disaster resilience: An integrated approach, 3-10. Picketts, I. M., Déry, S. J., & Curry, J. A. (2014). Incorporating climate change adaptation into local plans. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 57(7), 984-1002. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. PS: Political science & politics, 28(4), 664-683. Quinlan, A. E., Berbés-Blázquez, M., Haider, L. J., & Peterson, G. D. (2016). Measuring and assessing resilience: broadening understanding through multiple disciplinary perspectives. Journal of Applied Ecology, 53(3), 677-687. Richert, E., & Most, S. Comprehensive Planning: a Manual for Maine Communities. Comprehensive Planning: a Manual for Maine Communities, Maine State Planning Office, 2005. Ross, H., & Berkes, F. (2014). Research approaches for understanding, enhancing, and monitoring community resilience. Society & Natural Resources, 27(8), 787-804. Sovacool, B. K. (2011). Hard and soft paths for climate change adaptation. Climate Policy, 11(4), 1177-1183. Sievanen, L., Leslie, H. M., Wondolleck, J. M., Yaffee, S. L., McLeod, K. L., & Campbell, L. M. (2011). Linking top-down and bottom-up processes through the new US National Ocean Policy. Conservation Letters, 4(4), 298-303. Springuel, N., Tenga-Gonzalez, K., Owen, B., Whiting-Grant, K., White, S., & Anderson, P. (2007). Access to the waterfront: Issues and solutions across the nation. Steiner, A., & Atterton, J. (2015). Exploring the contribution of rural enterprises to local resilience. Journal of Rural Studies, 40, 30-45. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 44 of 130 Stoll, J. S., Beitl, C. M., & Wilson, J. A. (2016). How access to Maine’ s fisheries has changed over a quarter century: The cumulative effects of licensing on resilience. Global Environmental Change, 37, 79-91. Tribbia, J., & Moser, S. C. (2008). More than information: what coastal managers need to plan for climate change. Environmental science & policy, 11(4), 315-328. United States, Congress, Coastal Zone Management Act Amendments of 1980: Report to Accompany S. 2622. 1980. U.S. Govt. Print. Off. Congress. USGCRP (2014). Horton, R., G. Yohe, W. Easterling, R. Kates, M. Ruth, E. Sussman, A. Whelchel, D. Wolfe, and F. Lipschultz, 2014: Ch. 16: Northeast. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program. USGCRP (2017). Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I [Wuebbles,D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program. Walker, B., & Salt, D. (2012). Resilience thinking: sustaining ecosystems and people in a changing world. Island Press. Walker, B. (2014). 11. Understanding Resilience and Reducing Future Vulnerabilities in Social-Ecological Systems. Future-Proofing the State, 123. Wilkinson, C. (2012). Social-ecological resilience: Insights and issues for planning theory. Planning Theory, 11(2), 148-169. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 45 of 130 Figure Caption List Figure 1. Total resilience score for each municipality. Total scores calculated for each municipality out of a maximum score of 100%. Figure 2. Comprehensive plan total scores for each municipality by resilience category. Figure 3. Comprehensive plan analysis scores by resilience category and mapped by municipality. Figure 4. Total comprehensive plan resilience score and the year each plan was adopted. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 46 of 130 100 Total score = sum of resilience component scores x 100 n=30 for a plan total possible score90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 • Average resilience score was 40% • Lowest score was 18% • Highest score assigned to a municipality was just 80% out of Portland Kittery Saco Boothbay Harbor Islesboro Rockland Boothbay Southwest Harbor Machiasport Kennebunkport Frenchboro Lubec South Bristol South Thomaston Hampden Gardiner Brewer Calais Pembroke & Perry Bath Randolph Hallowell Phippsburg Milbridge Bowdoinham Castine Isle au Haut Long Island Freeport Bangor 100% Cucuzza, M. et al. in review. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management.Municipality Total Resilience Score Total Resilience Score Agenda Item #6.A.13 Mar 2024Page 47 of 130 • Average score for the social resilience category was higher than ecological and economic scores Average social score= 55% Average ecological score =40% Average economic score=32% Cucuzza, M. et al. in review. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. Agenda Item #6.A.13 Mar 2024Page 48 of 130 Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 49 of 130 Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 50 of 130 Municipality Year Established Total Resilience Score Bangor Bath 2012 18.6 2010 34.88 Boothbay Boothbay Harbor Bowdoinham 2015 53.48 2015 55.81 2014 29.06 Brewer 2015 38.37 Calais 2005 37.2 Castine 2010 27.9 Freeport Frenchboro 2011 22.09 2016 44.18 Gardiner 2014 38.37 Hallowell 2010 32.55 Hampden Isle au Haut 2010 38.37 2016 25.58 Islesboro 2017 54.65 Kennebunkport Kittery Long Island Lubec 2012 45.34 2015 65.11 2008 24.41 2010 43.02 Machiasport Milbridge Pembroke & Perry Phippsburg Portland 2009 45.34 2012 29.06 2009 36.04 2006 30.23 2017 80.23 Randolph Rockland 2013 33.72 2002 53.48 Saco 2018 61.62 South Bristol 2010 40.69 South Thomaston Southwest Harbor 2010 38.37 2010 51.16 Table 1. Total scores for each municipality are depicted along with the year each plan was completed. Each total social-ecological resilience score is based on the summed values of the plan’s ecological, social, and economic scores, which was then converted into a percentage. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 51 of 130 Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 52 of 130 ECOLOGICAL SOCIAL ECONOMIC MUNICIPALITY Raw Score Total Score Raw Score Total Score Raw Score Total Score BANGOR BATH BOOTHBAY BOOTHBAY HARBOR BOWDOINHAM BREWER CALAIS CASTINE FREEPORT FRENCHBORO GARDINER HALLOWELL HAMPDEN ISLE AU HAUT ISLESBORO KENNEBUNKPORT KITTERY LONG ISLAND LUBEC MACHIASPORT MILBRIDGE PEMBROKE & PERRY PHIPPSBURG PORTLAND RANDOLPH ROCKLAND SACO SOUTH BRISTOL SOUTH THOMASTON SOUTHWEST HARBOR 6 10 28 26 10 19 17 18 4 23 18 16 20 7 24 24 25 8 17 25 17 12 19 29 15 25 31 22 16 26 13.04 21.74 60.87 56.52 21.74 41.30 36.96 39.13 8.70 50.00 39.13 34.78 43.48 15.22 52.17 52.17 54.35 17.39 36.96 54.35 36.96 26.09 41.30 63.04 32.61 54.35 67.39 47.83 34.78 56.52 6 12 8 10 10 6 9 4 8 9 7 6 10 9 13 9 16 8 10 6 5 11 4 16 4 11 14 8 10 9 37.5 75 50 62.5 62.5 37.5 56.25 25 50 56.25 43.75 37.5 62.5 56.25 81.25 56.25 100 50 62.5 37.5 31.25 68.75 25 100 25 68.75 87.5 50 62.5 56.25 4 8 10 12 5 8 6 2 7 6 8 6 3 6 10 6 15 5 10 8 3 8 3 24 10 10 8 5 7 9 16.67 33.33 41.67 50.00 20.83 33.33 25.00 8.33 29.17 25.00 33.33 25.00 12.50 25.00 41.67 25.00 62.50 20.83 41.67 33.33 12.50 33.33 12.50 100.00 41.67 41.67 33.33 20.83 29.17 37.50 TOTAL POSSIBLE SCORE PER CATEGORY 46 16 24 Table 2. Scores for each municipality by resilience category are reported. Raw scores represent the total number of points for the resilience category from the comprehensive plan analysis. Total scores were calculated based on the raw score divided by the total possible score for each resilience category. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 53 of 130 Resilience Category Indicators Frequently Excluded from Maine’s Comprehensive Plans Indicators Well Incorporated in Maine’s Comprehensive Plans Social • Plan promotes community hazard awareness and education • Plan discusses adaptive capacity • Plan establishes a sense of community • Plan promotes emotional and physical well-being and increased quality of life Economic • Plan discusses economic recovery options • Plan encourages a business owner education component related to hazards • Planning encourages coordinated planning to achieve objectives focused on protecting, sustaining, and enhancing a communities economic base • Plan recognizes the relationship between healthy natural systems and economy Ecological • Plan addresses sea level rise • Plan addresses storm surge • Plan discourages hazardous area acquisition • Plan promotes the relocation of critical facilities out of hazardous areas • Plan promotes the conservation of natural systems • Plan promotes living shorelines & wetland protection • Plan addresses erosion • Plan addresses flooding Table 3. Indicators of social-ecological resilience that scored an average of 30% or below or a score of 70% or above for each resilience category. These thresholds represent indicators that are minimally addressed and integrated in the comprehensive plans as well as indicators that are well integrated into comprehensive plans on average. Agenda Item #6.A. 13 Mar 2024 Page 54 of 130 1 The makings of a strategic plan City of Atlantic Beach, Florida Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 55 of 130 222 Themes, Priorities, and Projects Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 56 of 130 3 Themes Priorities Projects •Long-term outcomes •Medium-term outcomes •Short-term outcomes Business fundamentals •Operational outcomes Implements the Vision Implements the Mission Hierarchy of Outcomes Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 57 of 130 44 In Atlantic Beach, we have a strong sense of belonging and safety. Our citizens and government care deeply about community character, and understand that unified support is required to preserve it. We are graced with the functional beauty of our beach, our marsh, and our tree canopy. Our shady streets and multi-use paths connect our welcoming neighborhoods and vibrant local businesses. Our city supports our diverse, multigenerational, socially linked community with green spaces, active lifestyles, parks, and programming. Vision Statement 4 Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 58 of 130 5 Create a strong sense of belonging and safety Preserve community character Connect our neighborhoods and businesses     Promote a socially linked community through green spaces, active lifestyles, parks, and programming Maintain a strong financial condition suitable for implementing the City’s vision Themes Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 59 of 130 6 Create a strong sense of belonging and safety  Priorities 1.0 Increase awareness of bicycle safety and bicycle laws. 1.1 The Chief of Police will create Directed Enforcement activities to survey, educate and enforce bicycle regulations by December 2024. 2.0 Develop a customer-centric culture. 2.1 The Deputy City Manager will develop an ongoing system for tracking the customer experience by December 2024. 2.2 The Deputy City Manager will provide level 1 training to all employees and level 2 training to all public facing employees focusing on the customer experience by March 2025.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 60 of 130 7 Preserve community character  Priorities 1.0 Review Code Enforcement policies. 1.1 The Planning Director will review policies and code regarding proactive versus reactive code enforcement by December 2024. 1.2 The Planning Director will recommend changes to code enforcement policies and/or code by December 2024. 1.3 The Planning Director will create a written procedural manual by March 2025. 2.0 Establish policies to preserve the marshfront. 2.1 The Planning Director will propose objectives to the City’s Comprehensive Plan specific to the marsh prior to the Plan’s adoption. 2.2 The Planning Director will develop a marsh protection education campaign by March 2025. 2.3 The Planning Director will identify marsh priority projects consistent with the Adaptation Plan update by August 2025.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 61 of 130 88 Preserve community character  Priorities 3.0 Reassess the Stormwater Master plan. 3.1 The City Engineer will develop scope of work for the Stormwater Master Plan Update by March 2025. 3.2 The City Engineer will propose methods to accelerate the Stormwater Master Plan by December 2024. 4.0 Establish sustainability goals. 4.1 The Planning Director will identify sustainability goals for City projects, City buildings, and City land by September 2025.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 62 of 130 99 Connect our neighborhoods and businesses  Priorities 1.0 Be ranked a gold standard bike friendly community. 1.1 The Deputy City Manager will conduct a bicycle-friendly self-assessment by March 2025. 1.2 The Deputy City Manager will engage community stakeholders by March 2025. 1.3 The Deputy City Manager will apply to the League of American Bicyclists’ Bicycle Friendly Community recognition by August 2025. 2.0 Prioritize projects to implement the Connectivity Plan. 2.1 The Planning Director will develop an implementation schedule by March 2025. 2.2 The Planning Director will propose amendments the CIP with prioritized projects to implement the Connectivity Plan by June 2025.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 63 of 130 1010 Promote a socially linked community through green spaces, active lifestyles, parks, and programming  Priorities 1.0 Create a plan to remedy gaps in Arts & Recreation programming. 1.1 The Deputy City Manager will propose an organizational change that supports Arts & Recreation programming by April 2024. 1.2 The Deputy City Manager will identify gaps in current Arts & Recreation Programming by December 2024. 1.3 The Deputy City Manager will propose a program of Arts and Recreation to meets the needs of the community April 2025. 2.0 Prioritize projects to implement the Parks Master Plan. 2.1 The Planning Director will develop a prioritized list of projects from the Parks Master Plan by December 2024. 2.2 The Planning Director will propose amendments the CIP to implement the priority projects from the Parks Master Plan by March 2025.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 64 of 130 11 Maintain a strong financial condition suitable for implementing the City’s vision  Priorities 1.0 Establish a risk management program for city facilities and contracts. 1.1 The Risk Management Officer will identify at least five best practices regarding risk management for city facilities and contracts from other municipalities by March 2024. 1.2 The Risk Management Officer will propose to the City Manager policies and procedures that identify, evaluate, mitigate and monitor potential liabilities to the City regarding city facilities and contracts by May 2024. 2.0 Review fleet maintenance and replacement policies. 2.1 The Chief of Police will draft a city fleet vehicle replacement policy by July 2024. 3.0 Analyze cost-benefits of outsourcing permitting inspection. 3.1 The Planning Director will collect data to analyze the cost-benefits of outsourcing permitting inspection by March 2025. 3.2 The Planning Director in coordination with the Finance Director will prepare a cost-benefit analysis of outsourcing permitting inspection by June 2025. 3.3 The Planning Director will provide a recommendation to the City Commission by June 2025.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 65 of 130 12 Maintain a strong financial condition suitable for implementing the City’s vision  Priorities 4.0 Cultivate relationships to demonstrate the need for resources and cooperation. 4.1 The Deputy City Manager will identify opportunities to build relationships between city elected officials and other elected officials by May 2024. 4.2 The Deputy City Manager will identify organizations for the city to participate in and/or partner with that will leverage the city’s needs by December 2024. 5.0 Use data and budget analysis to understand fiscal effects prior to budget approval. 5.1 The Finance Director will develop financial condition indicators to understand impacts to the budget due to socio-economic and policy changes by August 2024. 5.2 The Finance Director will create a standardized way of reporting fund changes due to project budget amendments by October 2024. 6.0 Provide regular updates on project timelines and finances. 6.1 The City Engineer will develop a system to track project timelines and finances by December 2024. 6.2 The Directors will systematically report changes to project timelines and finances by December 2024. 6.3 The Deputy City Manager will systematically update the website with project timelines and finances by January 2025.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 66 of 130 131313 Performance Measures Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 67 of 130 1414 Business Fundamentals 14 Business fundamentals fulfill the mission •Effective missions are memorable. •Must be recitable •Must be integrable into daily decision making •Must be useable to test current and proposed activity •The mission must be deployed to all management units •Management units break the mission into lower level activities essential to achieving the mission •Lower level activities are further broken into key processes •Follow Pareto Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 68 of 130 1515 Mission Statement 15 The place to be, through exceptional public services.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 69 of 130 1616 Performance Measures 16 What are Performance Measures? •They quantify performance of key processes. •Indicators are made up of quality, cost, and delivery measures. •All key processes need at least one performance measure. •Don’t make quality, cost, and delivery come at the expense of people.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 70 of 130 1717 Performance Measures 17 Action Limits •Define the range of variance •Data varies •Individual data points are unpredictable •Groups of data points form patterns and predictability •Mean is the central tendency •Standard deviation is a measure of spread Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 71 of 130 1818 Performance Measures 18 Goals •A process operating within its action limits is operating normally •If we don’t like the results, change the process •A goal is desired new outcome •Goals may reduce/increase central tendency •Goals may reduce variance Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 72 of 130 1919 Performance Measures 19 Common Mistakes •Lack of periodic review and reporting •Measuring too much; measure the critical few •Selecting safe measures that don’t track performance •Linking performance measures to employee compensation Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 73 of 130 202020 Financial Indicators Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 74 of 130 2121 Gauging Financial Condition 21 What is financial condition? •The ability to finance the City’s services on an ongoing basis. •Its ability to maintain existing service levels •Its ability to withstand economic disruptions (economic resilience) •Its ability to meet the needs of change •Its not an accounting system focused on auditability, or legal compliance, or financial statements.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 75 of 130 2222 Financial Trend Monitoring System 22 What is FTMS? •It identifies factors that increase the City’s ability to maintain existing service levels, to withstand economic disruptions (economic resilience), and to meet the needs of change •Indicators are made up of environmental, organizational, and financial factors. •The indicators are tracked for change. •The direction of change may provide a reason to investigate.Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 76 of 130 2323 Financial Trend Monitoring System 23 A FTMS helps the City •Introduce long-range considerations into the budget process •Set financial policy •Track changes over time •Provide early warning to hidden or emerging problems •Receive clues to the causes •Afford time to take action Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 77 of 130 2424 Financial Trend Monitoring System 24 Example FTMS Indicators •Revenue per capita in constant dollars •Expenditures per capita in constant dollars •Percent of mandated expenditures •Employees per capita •Plant maintenance effort •Percent of user charge coverage Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 78 of 130 252525 Long-term Financial Plan and Budget Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 79 of 130 26 Insert ImageTHANK YOU Agenda Item #7.C.13 Mar 2024Page 80 of 130 ESC 2023 Self-Evaluation & Continual Improvement Survey Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 81 of 130 ESC fulfilled its overall purpose and charge in 2023 ESC fulfilled its charge towards maritime forest ESC fulfilled its charge towards parks and open spaces ESC fulfilled its charge towards beautific ation ESC fulfilled its charge towards environme ntal leadership ESC’s  meeting agendas clearly reflect its purpose and priorities ESC has insured that it has a one- year workplan for the upcoming yea ESC provided recommend ations to Commissio n and staff on how to achieve goals and priorities ESC accomplishmen ts and challenges were communicated to Commission, staff, residents, and stakeholders.Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 82 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 83 of 130 Please list what you think ESC’s accomplishments were  in 2023 •Strengthen C23, host public events (S&S series, Arbor Day, Earth Day, etc) •Ensured compliance with tree ordinance •Speaker & Salon series and its ripple effects •We made progress on or completed everything on our priorities list. •Some successful new programs were launched: free tree plantings, tree trimmer verification program, salon series, Earth Day, newsletter. We have indications that the commission will agree to free tree plantings in backyards. For the first time, the ESC has a budget! Our policies and processes are improving and becoming codified. •Progress in implementation of S&R objectives, improved organizational effectiveness, increase of community environmental awareness •Providing a steady and consistent voice for many of the major issues within our remit. Moving the agenda forward and advocating with Commission, city, staff, and perhaps less so with our neighbors •Better community engagement through the speaker series and mailers. More recognition and transparency regarding tree removal ordinances and process. Earth day event was wonderful. Creating foundation for priorities for coming year.Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 84 of 130 Please list ESC potential areas of improvement or where it can continually improve •Community outreach/community awareness of ESC and efforts. Recruitment for members. •More educational outreach. Strengthen social media presence. •More beautification •More efficient and content rich meetings •Stay focused on stated priorities and be creative about how to accomplish goals. •I think we need to "do less, but better." There so many things that we should/could be doing that it is overwhelming. While we do have plans I don't think it is realistic that we will accomplish everything. Perhaps having one significant, achievable goal per area of the ESC's charge -- along with completing items with budgetary implications -- would be the way to go. Also, I think we should focus more on policy -- making recommendations to the commission -- and continually and systematically be communicating our concerns and priorities to the commission. •Individual member participation/engagement •We could be much more rigorous about assigning metrics to our objectives, assigning, not just people, but also time frames to each task that we agree on. Finally, I think the largest done piece of work for us is to create a more active and relevant outreach for the community to engage them more actively Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 85 of 130 ESC members are aware of their role and what is expected of them so that we are able to get through all necessary ESC business. ESC members come to meetings prepared Written reports/s ubcommi ttee minutes to the ESC are received in advance of our meetings All ESC member s participa te in importan t ESC discussi ons ESC does a good job encour aging and dealing with differen t points of view All ESC members support the decisions we make. Each ESC member has taken responsi bility for recruitin g new board member s ESC has planned and led the orientatio n process for new board members ESC has a plan for member onboardi ng, educatio n and further leadersh ip develop ment ESC meetings are always interestin g ESC meeting s are frequen tly fun.Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 86 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 87 of 130 .] My performance as an individual ESC member [.] My performance as an individual ESC member [I stay informed about issues relevant to our mission and bring information to the attention of the ESC.] I am aware of what is expected of me as a ESC member I have a good record of meeting attendance I read the minutes, reports and other materials IN ADVANCE of our ESC meetings I am familiar with what is in the ESC’s ordinance, its purpose and charge I frequently encourage other ESC members to express their opinions at meetings I am encouraged by other ESC members to express my opinions at meetings I am a good listener at meetings When I have a different opinion than the majority, I raise it. I support ESC decisions once they are made even if I do not agree with them I promote the work of ESC in the communit y whenever I have a chance to do so I follow through on things I have said I would do I stay informed about issues relevant to our mission and bring informatio n to the attention of the ESC Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 88 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 89 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 90 of 130 Please share any lessons you learned during 2023 while serving on the ESC •The surprisingly resilient power of entrenched economics and politics •There is a lot more to this committee and what is being undertaken. •Our priorities setting process has been effective. Delegation is important to avoid burn-out. Dealing directly, 1-on-1 with staff helps move things along quicker. •I am learning of other people/groups in our community with similar interests and priorities and finding ways to connect (i.e. Beaches Home Tour). I learned how awful artificial turf grass is!Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 91 of 130 Feedback to the Chair of the ESC 1.ESC has discussed the role and responsibilities of the Chair and Vice Chair clearly. 2.Chair is well prepared for meetings. 3.Chair helps the ESC to stick to the agenda 4.Chair ensures that every ESC member has an opportunity to be heard. 5.Chair is skilled at managing different points of view. 6.Chair can be tough on us as a group when we get out-of-line. 7.Chair knows how to be direct with an individual ESC member when their behavior needs to change 8.Chair helps the ESC work well together. 9.Chair demonstrates good listening and communication skills. 10.ESC supports the Chair. 11.Chair is effective in delegating responsibility amongst ESC members.Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 92 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 93 of 130 Please list accolades and areas of improvement for the Chair •Mark is very diligent and full of passion to help the ESC and its mission. He attends a ton of meetings to promote ESC and improve communications. •I've enjoyed working with Mark and have given him my input on how to improve the meetings. I still believe that he could be better at guiding the discussions, allowing everyone to speak (as in a round-robin), and not allowing interruptions. •Has worked to codify policies and procedures. He has excellent attendance, including attending all the subcommittee meetings. He has formed relationships with staff and commissioners, and has tried to create connections with other CoAB committees. He works independently on items like the chemical management plan. •Marc has brought a balanced perspective of the many priorities. He manages meetings reasonably well (it would be nice to end on time) and is always well prepared. •Well organized. Present in many meetings and events outside of ESC. •Mark works hard and is conscientious.Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 94 of 130 Please list accolades/gratitude and/or areas of improvement for other fellow ESC members  •I appreciate Anastasia taking over the OSC Chair--she is a great inspiration to others and her knowledge of social media is sorely needed. I hope she can attend more meetings. Danielle is great at tempering a discussion and clarifying the real issues. He's an excellent spokesperson and I'm sorry I didn't get to work directly with him very much. Bruce lends historical knowledge, and sometimes a different, not-so-popular perspective, to the group. I admire how he got Selva Preserve done. He could listen more, and expand his interests beyond just trees. Amy brings new ideas from the community. I think she could be a valuable subcommittee member as long as she has time to contribute. I'm glad to see Patrick, Romy and Heather taking on more responsibility and adding energy to the subcommittees. Having Sarah as Vice-chair has been an improvement. We've gotten much more done since she joined and her connections have been invaluable. I've had to push back on some of her more aggressive workloads and timelines, so that role will be needed in the future. •Linda Chipperfield -- her tree trimmer verification program, among other word products. Anastasia did a great job on Earth Day. Sarah devoted so much time and energy in 2023 to numerous initiatives and provided leadership as vice chair. It is such a pleasure to work with each and every member. Such a good group of civic and environmentally-minded volunteers. Thank you all! •What a great bunch! To have so many dedicated individuals. I would also single out for special mention the consistently excellent efforts and contributions of Sarah Boren. Her level of knowledge, preparedness, and tangible commitment are extraordinary. She would be a notable asset on any committee in practically any city. We are quite fortunate to have her •Sarah's lead of the LEED has been critical to our success over the last 12 months and the trajectory moving forward. Patrick's effort with the Monarch Pledge is greatly appreciated. Anastasia's Earth Day event was a huge success. •Sarah goes above and beyond. •Thank you to Sarah for her leadership and always being prepared and prioritizing ESC to keep us on track and moving forward. I appreciate all our members’ contributions and think we accomplished a lot given the scope of volunteerism hours available from each member Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 95 of 130 How can we improve ESC’s priority setting process?  What did  you like about this year’s process and what do you believe can  be improved?   •I'm glad we streamlined it. It would help to refer back to the list more often during the year. I've tried to keep track of how our activities meet the priorities by including reference to them in the OSC agendas and minutes. •Broaden focus •It takes leadership and also preliminary effort from the entire committee. Sarah provided both the leadership and the impetus for all of us in order for that work to happen. •More individualized effort outside of meetings. I myself am holding myself better accountable for this in the coming year. •Focus on priorities and outcomes that are obtainable - often we get too in the weeds on subjects and what is often a simple idea or exercise becomes exhaustive, thus losing the interest and momentum of members / community. •Continues to be tedious •Already doing it. •I would be interested to see it digitized as a web-based document that could be completed and discussed in real time - the live discussion is helpful to clarify different points and strategies but I don’t love the dot exercise portion as truly getting to the heart of our priorities •Repeating my response from above question: Please list ESC potential areas of improvement or where it can continually improve. I think we need to "do less, but better." There so many things that we should/could be doing that it is overwhelming. While we do have plans I don't think it is realistic that we will accomplish everything. Perhaps having one significant, achievable goal per area of the ESC's charge -- along with completing items with budgetary implications -- would be the way to go. Also, I think we should focus more on policy -- making recommendations to the commission -- and continually and systematically be communicating our concerns and priorities to the commission. •I liked the presurvey that we did this year. It seemed to streamline the process.Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 96 of 130 Please share any additional ideas, suggestions, concerns and more regarding ESC performance or whatever is on your mind.  •Don't worry too much about what the public says about what the ESC has or has not accomplished. Keep pushing forward on our goals and priorities and most people will be happy with what gets done. Promote our successes frequently to fight the nay-sayers. •My participation this year was challenged by an inordinate amount of additional personal and professional commitments. I hope that I can do better in 2024 and I have some goals for myself to achieve as an ESC member. It is an honor to serve on this group. I believe so strongly in the mission. •More info, calendars, work flow, forms etc can be digitized and housed online for better/ease of access Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 97 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 98 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 99 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 100 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 101 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 102 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 103 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 104 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 105 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 106 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 107 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 108 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 109 of 130 Agenda Item #8.C.13 Mar 2024Page 110 of 130 Agenda Item #8.D. 13 Mar 2024 Page 111 of 130 Agenda Item #8.D. 13 Mar 2024 Page 112 of 130 Chemical Management Plan CMP Agenda Item #8.E.13 Mar 2024Page 113 of 130 CMP SCOPE •Biocides •Pollutants from Stormwater Runoff •Pollutants from Hazardous Waste •Green House Gases •Pollutants form Hazardous Airborne Chemicals Agenda Item #8.E.13 Mar 2024Page 114 of 130 CMP Development Assess Current State Identify Resources Engage Stakeholders Establish Action Plans Implement Plans Evaluate Effectivenes s Agenda Item #8.E.13 Mar 2024Page 115 of 130 Biocides Objective 1: •Assess current state of pest infestation in all COAB ecosystems. •Collect information on the presence of pests, their life cycles, and their interaction with the environment. •Evaluate degree of pest damage. •Identify correlation with existing COAB plans and ordinances to avoid conflicts and remedy if required. Objective 2: •Develop an Integrated Pest Management (IPM). With Goal 1 data assess best available pest control methods (chemical, biological, cultural, and/or mechanical to mitigate existing pest damage and prevent additional pest damage by the most economical means with the least possible hazard to people, property, and the environment. Agenda Item #8.E.13 Mar 2024Page 116 of 130 Pollutants From Storm Runoff (SWM)   If warranted, conduct assessment using EPA’s National  Stormwater Calculator : https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019- 08/stormwatercalculator-v2.0.0.1.zip Develop short- and long-term goals to correct identified problems. Identify correlation with existing COAB plans and ordinances to avoid conflicts and remedy if required. Develop educational program to increase community awareness of SWM Agenda Item #8.E.13 Mar 2024Page 117 of 130 Pollutants from Hazardous Waste Goal 1: Assess current state of HHW and Universal collection opportunities. If warranted develop in collaboration with neighboring communities more frequent and more accessible collection sites. Develop waste disposal goals. Develop educational program to increase community awareness of HHW and Universal Waste goals and disposal opportunities. Goal 2: Assess adequacy of plans to contain and chemical waste and biohazard spills. If warranted revise plans in collaboration with neighboring communities to revise.Agenda Item #8.E.13 Mar 2024Page 118 of 130 Greenhouse Gases (GHG) Goal 1: Complete a review of existing governance to establish current regulatory state. Identify gaps in city contracts involving potential release of GHG, e.g., idling of motor vehicles, efficiency of city- controlled HVAC systems, use of battery powered equipment and make recommendations to minimize GHG release when warranted. Review Building Codes to require the most efficient standards for new construction e.g., reducing the urban heat island effect by planting trees and incorporating reflective roofs and light-colored pavement. Expand use of renewable energy resources for controlled facilities. Develop strategies to include Advanced Meter Infrastructure for real-time energy consumption information and community-based social marketing programs and incentive programs for building retrofits that increase energy efficiency and reduce the carbon footprint of existing buildings..    Agenda Item #8.E.13 Mar 2024Page 119 of 130 Greenhouse Gases (GHG) •Goal 2: •Advocate individual and community adoption of less fossil fuel energy dependent practices to include inter alia: •Using landscaping to increase summer shading and minimize air conditioning use. •Promote community campaign to educate about food choice as part of a climate- friendly lifestyle. Specifically encourage reduced consumption of red meat and dairy products and other carbon-intensive foods. • Encourage the community to engage in their most impactful action to reduce GHG: CO2 Carbon Dioxide CH4 Methane N20 Nitrous Oxide Agenda Item #8.E.13 Mar 2024Page 120 of 130 Pollutants from Hazardous Airborne Chemicals Goal 1: Complete a review of existing governance to determine current state of rules related to: -permitting open air burning (campfires and waste) -commercial use of perchloroethylene and methylene chloride  Goal 2: Develop proposals to correct deficiencies in governance found during the review.  Goal 3: Develop community awareness program to address dangers of Hazardous Airborne Chemicals. Agenda Item #8.E.13 Mar 2024Page 121 of 130 How to get there •Agree to scope •Establish a CM sub committee •Identify overlap with S&R CAP, other plans, •Develop plan to engage stakeholders - residents, - SMEs - Commissioners - staff Agenda Item #8.E.13 Mar 2024Page 122 of 130 1 The City of Atlantic Beach Chemical Management Plan (CMP) 2 3 Background 4 Protecting our environment from chemical contamination is a core priority of the City of 5 Atlantic Beach (COAB). As stated in the Comprehensive plan Goal D.3, “The city shall protect 6 preserve and maintain natural environmental resources so as to maintain or enhance air 7 quality, water quality, vegetative communities’ wildlife habitats, and the natural functions of 8 soils fisheries wetlands and estuarine marshes”. The explosive growth of the use of chemicals 9 since the 1930s has made the realization of this goal progressively more difficult. “Better living 10 through chemistry” a variation of Du Pont’s famous advertising slogan, manifests the belief that 11 through science we can improve our lives and control our environment. This optimistic view 12 was supported by many early successes but because of failures to fully appreciate the impact of 13 the new wonder chemicals, we subsequently learned that sometimes our fix to the initial 14 problems created problems far greater than the original problem. Today we recognize the 15 need to protect our health and the health of our environment through proper management of 16 the chemicals we use. The objectives of the COAB CMP are to inform, instruct and to establish 17 guidelines for the management of chemicals within the city limits to advance attainment of 18 Goal D.3 19 20 Scope 21 We need not be chemists to understand the full impact of chemicals on our lives and our 22 environment but do need to understand and manage the impacts of those chemicals we use. 23 The following are the five categories of the chemicals addressed in the CMP: 24 25 Biocides 26 Pollutants from Storm Runoff 27 Pollutants from Hazardous Waste 28 Green House Gases (GHG) 29 Pollutants from Hazardous Airborne Chemicals 30 31 The CMP with its five categories is expansive each with a range of sources, effects, and 32 potential mitigation measures. While we can never eliminate all the harmful chemicals in our 33 environment, our goal is to increase awareness of their impacts and advocate safe use and 34 disposal to minimize the environmental impact. Initial steps of the plan are: 35 36 1. Defining the scope of the problem, 37 2. Clarification of Issues 38 3. Development of a Plan of Action (POA) 39 40 As with all plans, periodic reviews with assessments of actions taken and corrections where 41 warranted are required. This CMP will be a standalone plan but as elements of all five 42 categories are addressed in other COAB Plans and Ordinances, the CMP will be integrated with 43 these other directives. Agenda Item #8.E. 13 Mar 2024 Page 123 of 130 44 Category 1 Biocides 45 46 Scope of Problem 47 The CMP uses the more inclusive term “Biocide” instead of the more common “pesticide” as 48 our history as shown that pesticides have had an unintended detrimental impact beyond the 49 pesticide’s targeted group of “pests”. This preference notwithstanding, the use of “pesticide 50 “appears when referencing outside sources. 51 52 We aggressively seek to control pests in our homes, in our gardens, at our workspaces and in 53 public areas. Fortunately, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) narrows the scope of 54 what we can and cannot use to control pests. Manufacturers and distributors of pesticides 55 additionally have strict laws regarding their manufacture, sale, and application. 56 57 Common practice is to periodically apply specifically formulated biocides to areas we seek to 58 control. While effective, these biocides may either directly or indirectly affect other living 59 organisms. Mitigation of these unintended consequences is the focus of biocide control. 60 61 Issues 62 Biodiversity loss was ranked as the third most severe threat humanity will face in the next 10 63 years in the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2022 64 Overuse or misuse of pest management biocides has significantly decreased our native 65 biodiversity. Targeted pests may have been a source of food for other organisms or may have 66 contributed to sustaining a balance in the broader species population. The elimination or 67 reduction of the targeted species often results in the propagation of invasive species. 68 69 70 Definitions 71 The EPA defines a “pesticide” (with certain minor exceptions) as: 72 •Any substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, 73 or mitigating any pest. 74 •Any substance or mixture of substances intended for use as a plant regulator, defoliant, 75 or desiccant. 76 •Any nitrogen stabilizer. 77 78 EPA also defines “pest” as: 79 Any species, strain or biotype of plant, animal, or pathogenic agent injurious to plants 80 and plant products, materials or environments and includes vectors of parasites or 81 pathogens of human and animal disease and animals causing public health nuisance. 82 83 84 85 Additional EPA definitions are at: 86 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2013-title7/html/USCODE-2013-title7-chap6- 87 subchapII-sec136.htm Agenda Item #8.E. 13 Mar 2024 Page 124 of 130 88 89 90 Development of a Plan of Action (POA) 91 92 Goal 1: Assess current state of pest infestation in all COAB ecosystems. 93 •Collect information on the presence of pests, their life cycles, and their interaction with 94 the environment. 95 •Evaluate degree of pest damage. 96 •Identify correlation with existing COAB plans and ordinances to avoid conflicts and 97 remedy if required. 98 99 Goal 2: Develop an Integrated Pest Management (IPM). With Goal 1 data assess best available 100 pest control methods, to mitigate existing pest damage and prevent additional pest damage by 101 the most economical means with the least possible hazard to people, property, and the 102 environment. 103 The IPM will: 104 •Promote the judicious use of pesticides. 105 •Establish environmentally friendly pest control practices to include an increased 106 use of natural landscaping to obviate pesticide use. 107 •Establish action thresholds for early identification of pest invasion to minimize 108 impact and spread. 109 •Advocate coordination with neighboring communities to expand safe, effective 110 pest management. 111 112 Category 2 Pollutants from Storm Runoff 113 114 Scope of Problem 115 When rainwater flows over hard surfaces directly into a storm drain, there is no opportunity for 116 soil and plants or a water treatment facility to filter out pollutants, nitrogen and phosphorus 117 from fertilizers, pet and yard waste. Nitrogen and phosphorus are nutrients that are natural 118 parts of aquatic ecosystems and support the growth of algae and aquatic plants, which provide 119 food and habitat for fish, shellfish and smaller organisms that live in water. 120 121 Issues 122 Too much nitrogen and phosphorus in the water causes algae to grow faster than ecosystems 123 can handle. Significant increases in algae harm water quality, food resources and habitats, and 124 decrease the oxygen that fish and other aquatic life need to survive. Large growths of algae 125 (algal blooms) can severely reduce or eliminate oxygen in the water, leading to illnesses in fish 126 and the death of large numbers of fish. Some algal blooms are harmful to humans because they 127 produce elevated toxins and bacterial growth that can make people sick if they encounter 128 polluted water, consume tainted fish or shellfish, or drink contaminated water. 129 130 Nutrient pollution in ground water can be harmful, even at low levels. Infants are vulnerable to Agenda Item #8.E. 13 Mar 2024 Page 125 of 130 131 a nitrogen-based compound called nitrates in drinking water. Excess nitrogen in the 132 atmosphere can produce pollutants such as ammonia and ozone, which can impair our ability 133 to breathe, limit visibility and alter plant growth. When excess nitrogen comes back to earth 134 from the atmosphere, it can harm the health of forests, soils and waterways. 135 136 Green infrastructure works by slowing down the runoff, spreading it out over the land, and 137 slowly soaking it into the ground, or in some cases reusing the water onsite. Green 138 infrastructure is also sometimes referred to as low impact development. These techniques also 139 help to remove pollutants from runoff, buy allowing plants to filter out pollutants as the water 140 slowly infiltrates into the ground. Some examples of green infrastructure techniques include 141 rain gardens, pervious pavement, rain barrels, and green roofs. 142 143 https://www.epa.gov/green-infrastructure 144 145 Development of a Plan of Action (POA) 146 147 Goals: Assess current state of Storm Water Management (SWM) 148 149 •If warranted, conduct assessment using EPA’s National Stormwater Calculator : 150 https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-08/stormwatercalculator-v2.0.0.1.zip 151 •Develop short- and long-term goals to correct identified problems. 152 •Identify correlation with existing COAB plans and ordinances to avoid conflicts and 153 remedy if required. 154 •Develop educational program to increase community awareness of SWM 155 156 Category 3 Pollutants from Hazardous Waste 157 158 Scope of Problem 159 A hazardous waste is an unwanted/discarded material with properties that make it dangerous 160 or capable of having a harmful effect on human health or the environment. These properties 161 include ignitability, reactivity, corrosivity or toxicity. Hazardous waste is generated from many 162 sources, ranging from industrial manufacturing process wastes to batteries and may come in 163 many forms, including liquids, solids gases, and sludges. The most significant hazardous waste 164 concerns are related to commercial/industrial uses; however two other categories of waste, 165 Universal Wastes and Household Hazardous Wastes (HHW) are a concern to our community 166 167 Universal Wastes generally pose a lower threat relative to other hazardous wastes but are 168 ubiquitous and produced in very large quantities. Some of the most common are: fluorescent 169 light bulbs, some specialty batteries (e.g. lithium or lead containing batteries), cathode ray 170 tubes, and mercury-containing devices. 171 Universal wastes are subject to somewhat less stringent regulatory requirements must still be 172 disposed of properly. Agenda Item #8.E. 13 Mar 2024 Page 126 of 130 173 HHW is generated from residential households. HHW only applies to waste coming from the 174 use of materials that are labeled for and sold for "home use". Waste generated by a company 175 or at an industrial setting is not HHW. 176 The following list includes categories often applied to HHW. It is important to note that many of 177 these categories overlap and that many household wastes can fall into multiple categories: 178 •Paints and solvents 179 •Automotive wastes (used motor oil, antifreeze, etc.) 180 •Pesticides (insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, etc.) 181 •Mercury -containing wastes (thermometers, switches, fluorescent lighting, etc.) 182 •Electronics (computers, televisions, mobile phones) 183 •Aerosols / Propane cylinders 184 •Caustics / Cleaning agents 185 •Refrigerant-containing appliances 186 •Some specialty batteries (e.g. lithium, nickel cadmium, or button cell batteries) 187 •Ammunition 188 •Asbestos 189 •Car batteries 190 •Radioactive wastes (some home smoke detectors are classified as radioactive waste 191 because they contain very small amounts of radioactive isotope americium, 192 •Smoke from chimneys 193 194 Issues 195 Unfortunately, disposal of both Universal Waste and HHW is all too easy as the proper disposal 196 is way too hard. Simply adding the HHW and Universal Waste to regular waste containers for 197 routine collection or dumping the waste in our yards does not require any additional discrete 198 action when compared to the effort required to collect, store, and transfer the waste to an 199 officially designated collection site. 200 201 Development of a Plan of Action (POA) 202 203 Goal 1: Assess current state of HHW and Universal collection opportunities. 204 •If warranted develop in collaboration with neighboring communities more frequent and 205 more accessible collection sites. 206 •Develop waste disposal goals. 207 •Develop educational program to increase community awareness of HHW and Universal 208 Waste goals and disposal opportunities. 209 Goal 2: Assess adequacy of plans to contain and chemical waste and biohazard spills. 210 •If warranted revise plans in collaboration with neighboring communities to revise. 211 212 Category 4 Greenhouse Gases (GHG) 213 Agenda Item #8.E. 13 Mar 2024 Page 127 of 130 214 Scope of Problem 215 The earth receives radiant energy from the sun—part of which is reflected back to space. Some 216 gases, including carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, surround the earth and trap some 217 of this energy—keeping the surface warm and making life on earth possible. Gases that trap 218 heat in the atmosphere are called greenhouse gases. 219 220 221 •Carbon dioxide (CO2): Carbon dioxide enters the atmosphere through burning fossil 222 fuels (coal, natural gas, and oil), solid waste, trees and other biological materials, and 223 also as a result of certain chemical reactions (e.g., manufacture of cement). Carbon 224 dioxide is removed from the atmosphere (or "sequestered") when it is absorbed by 225 plants as part of the biological carbon cycle. 226 227 •Methane (CH4): Methane is emitted during the production and transport of coal, natural 228 gas, and oil. Methane emissions also result from livestock and other agricultural 229 practices, land use and by the decay of organic waste in municipal solid waste landfills. 230 231 •Nitrous oxide (N2O): Nitrous oxide is emitted during agricultural, land use, and industrial 232 activities; combustion of fossil fuels and solid waste; as well as during treatment of 233 wastewater. 234 235 Fluorinated gases: Hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, and nitrogen 236 trifluoride are synthetic, powerful greenhouse gases that are emitted from a variety of 237 household, commercial, and industrial applications and processes. Fluorinated gases (especially 238 hydrofluorocarbons) are sometimes used as substitutes for stratospheric ozone-depleting 239 substances (e.g., chlorofluorocarbons, hydrochlorofluorocarbons, and halons). Fluorinated 240 gases are typically emitted in smaller quantities than other greenhouse gases, but they are 241 potent greenhouse gases. With significantly global warming potentials (GWPs) they are 242 sometimes referred to as high-GWP gases because, for a given amount of mass, they trap 243 substantially more heat than CO2. 244 245 Issues 246 We burn fossil fuels such as oil, coal, and natural gas to heat and light our homes and 247 businesses, create electricity, and provide transportation. Expanding populations and economic 248 activity (trade and building) result in increases in GHG emissions which increases atmospheric 249 warming which changes our climate. 250 251 Given the scale of the excessive GHG emissions and its global impact on life it seems that 252 individuals and small communities such as ours are powerless to effect change. There are 253 nonetheless some behavioral changes individuals can adopt which contribute to the reduction 254 of GHG emissions. 255 On a larger scale more impactful measures are available to deal with the consequences of 256 climate change to enhance the sustainability and resiliencies of our community. 257 Agenda Item #8.E. 13 Mar 2024 Page 128 of 130 258 259 Development of a Plan of Action (POA) 260 Goal 1: Complete a review of existing governance to establish current regulatory state. 261 •Identify gaps in city contracts involving potential release of GHG, e.g., idling of 262 motor vehicles, efficiency of city-controlled HVAC systems, use of battery 263 powered equipment and make recommendations to minimize GHG release when 264 warranted. 265 •Review Building Codes to require the most efficient standards for new 266 construction e.g., reducing the urban heat island effect by planting trees and 267 incorporating reflective roofs and light-colored pavement. 268 •Expand use of renewable energy resources for controlled facilities. 269 •Develop strategies to include Advanced Meter Infrastructure for real-time 270 energy consumption information and community-based social marketing 271 programs and incentive programs for building retrofits that increase energy 272 efficiency and reduce the carbon footprint of existing buildings.. 273 274 Goal 2: 275 •Advocate individual and community adoption of less fossil fuel energy 276 dependent practices to include inter alia: 277 o Using landscaping to increase summer shading and minimize air 278 conditioning use. 279 o Promote community campaign to educate about food choice as part of a 280 climate-friendly lifestyle. Specifically encourage reduced consumption of 281 red meat and dairy products and other carbon-intensive foods. 282 o Encourage the community to engage in their most impactful action to 283 reduce GHG: 284 285 Elect government officials at all levels of 286 representation who understand the impact of 287 increasing GHG and are willing to take positive 288 steps to reduce those GHG emissions. 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 Agenda Item #8.E. 13 Mar 2024 Page 129 of 130 299 Category 5 Pollutants from Hazardous Airborne Chemicals 300 301 Scope of Problem 302 Hazardous air pollutants also known as toxic air pollutants or air toxics, are those pollutants 303 that are known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious health effects, such as 304 reproductive effects or birth defects, or adverse environmental effects 305 Examples of toxic air pollutants include: 306 •benzene, which is found in gasoline; 307 •perchloroethylene, which is emitted from some dry-cleaning facilities; and 308 •methylene chloride, which is used as a solvent and paint stripper by industries. 309 310 Other listed air toxics include dioxin, asbestos, toluene, and metals such as cadmium, mercury, 311 chromium, and lead compounds. While this class of pollutants is not a significant problem in 312 COAB, they nonetheless are present and warrant control to prevent inadvertent into the 313 environment. 314 315 Issues 316 Like the GHG emissions issue we have almost no means to control the air we breathe on a city- 317 wide scale. We can however adopt localized measures to reduce hazardous airborne 318 chemicals. 319 320 Development of a Plan of Action (POA) 321 Goal 1: Complete a review of existing governance to determine current state of rules 322 related to: 323 o permitting open air burning (campfires and waste) 324 o commercial use of perchloroethylene and methylene chloride 325 o 326 Goal 2: Develop proposals to correct deficiencies in governance found during the 327 review. 328 329 Goal 3: Develop community awareness program to address dangers of Hazardous 330 Airborne Chemicals. 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 Agenda Item #8.E. 13 Mar 2024 Page 130 of 130