The Warren Knowles Gaylord Nelson Stewardship Program Success

The Warren Knowles Gaylord Nelson Stewardship Program: Success Stories from Wisconsin We help people protect the special. places that make Wisconsin Gathering Waters’ goal is to increase the amount or protected land in Wisconsin through private voluntary action. We do this by: • Supporting a network of over 50 local land trusts • Promoting conservation policies and program • Educating the public • Advising landowners Wisconsin Land Trust Accomplishments Gathering Waters was started in 1994 with the ambitious goal of establishing a statewide network of land trusts. Today, in Wisconsin • There are over 50 land trusts • Land trusts have permanently protected over 200,000 acres • 50,000 individuals and families are members of a land trust The Knowles Nelson Stewardship Program • Enacted in 1989 to expand recreational opportunities and protect environmentally sensitive areas • More than 475,000 acres protected • State parks, forests, wildlife areas, urban green space, wild lakes and rivers, Great Lakes bluffs and shoreline, bike trails, etc. Stewardship Funding • Funded with 20-year General Purpose Revenue (GPR) bonds • Initially funded at $23.1m/year • At $60m/year through 2010 • Will increase to $86m in 2011 Program Overview Land Acquisition - $45m (a) DNR Land Acquisition (b) Nonprofit Grants Land Acquisition Local Assistance Grants - $8m Matching grants for local governments and nonprofits with funding to support nature-based outdoor recreation Property Development - $7m Additions and improvements to buildings and other structures on state land. Friends Groups - $250,000 Grants for local nonprofit organizations to improve facilities and restore habitat on state properties Stewardship Matching Grants: Fostering Partnerships and Leveraging Resources The Stewardship Fund provides 50% matching grants to both local governments and nonprofit conservation organizations for nature-based outdoor recreation Grants to Municipalities • Are eligible for up to $8m/year • Have received over 1000 grants to purchase land and develop recreational facilities • Have raised $75m to match state grants • Have protected 17,000 acres for intensive, outdoor recreation Grants to Non-Profits (NCOs) • Primary focus of this paper • NCOs are currently eligible for $8.25m/year • 54 different organizations have received grants • 325 grants awarded to date worth over $60m • Grants have been matched dollar-for-dollar with private donations, local funds and federal grants • Over 50,000 acres protected Capacity of NCOs has increased dramatically • In 1990s, NCOs were eligible for $2m/year in grants – now $8.25m • In 2010, NCOs will be eligible for a minimum of $12m/year • Are doing bigger, more complex, higher profile projects all the time • Many projects involve multiple partners – municipalities, agencies, Tribes, service groups, and local businesses Benefits of Grant Partnerships NCO and local government partners: • • • • • • Stretch state dollars – especially in areas of state where land values make purchases prohibitive Provide local support and community buy-in for a project. Ensure that a portion of state dollars support projects that reflect local priorities Assume short-term responsibility for negotiating land deals and longterm responsibility for managing properties Mobilize volunteers to help with management and monitoring Alternative for landowners who don’t want to work with DNR “One way to gauge the popularity of this program has been the widespread support of individuals, foundations, and corporations that have „over‟ matched Stewardship funds. The total cost of acquiring the Mequon Nature Preserve‟s 400+ acres was roughly $8 million. Stewardship provided less than $1 million of this amount. Its dollars prime the pump for a significant infusion of many more private dollars.” - Christine Nuernberg, Mayor, City of Mequon Stewardship Grants– A Model for Public/Private Partnerships • The following features of the Stewardship grant program have facilitated the involvement and success of non-profit partners in the program 1) Eligibility requirements encourage applicants – Must be 501(c)3 and mission must also include the acquisition of property for conservation purposes Range of groups have qualified: hunting clubs, nature centers, land trusts, national conservation organizations, etc. As a result NCO projects vary greatly in scope, location and purpose – – 2) Grantees can use land and in-kind donations as “match” NCO’s 50% match can be: – – – Cash Municipal or Federal funds Donations of land or conservation easements by a third party (within past 3 years) Bargain sale from the landowner – Easier to secure donations of land and easements and bargain sales than to raise cash 3) Grant calculations favor grantees Grant award is based on appraised NOT on the assessed value or purchase price of the land This means that if the landowner agrees to a bargain sale (to sell the land below its appraised value), than the land trust is credited with the donated value as match 4) Grant covers a range of expensive transaction costs The following expenses are eligible for 50% cost share under the grant agreement: – – – – Surveys Appraisals Title Evidence Environmental, historical and cultural assessments – Up to $1000 in legal fees 5) Pre-approval of project boundaries Grantees can have project boundaries, encompassing multiple properties, preapproved by the DNR. This means that all properties within the boundary can go through an expedited approval process. Promotes strategic and proactive conservation of priority sites 6) Pre-screening of Applications An extensive pre-screening process guarantees that almost all projects that make it the final application phase will be funded. This saves time, resources and unnecessary expenses (like appraisals) for the grantees. A downside is that DNR staff may artificially hold down competition and demand for grants Ensuring Strategic Conservation DNR staff considers the following when evaluating NCO grant applications. Does/is the project: • • • • • have regional, statewide or local significance? part of an existing project? been identified as important for natural resource protection as part of a plan? threatened by development or other conversion? Likely to succeed? Complex/Multi-partner Collaborations have become increasingly popular Involve two or more organizations and/or municipalities as well as others (service clubs, sporting groups, business leaders, etc.) Allow partners to pull resources and focus on individual strengths (fundraising versus real estate negotiations versus ecological restoration, for example) Frequently Stewardship grants are a small, but critical part of overall funding for a project Occur where development pressures and land values are the highest Complex Partnership Case Studies A. Mequon Nature Preserve Mid-Moraine Preserve La Crosse Blufflands Protection Program Door County B. C. D. Mequon Nature Preserve: Background • Major Players: (a) Ozaukee Washington Land Trust (b) The Greater Milwaukee Foundation (c) The City of Mequon • Total Funding: Over $8 million in public and private funds Stewardship Program: Provided more than $1 million in grants Over 400 acres protected to date in a highly urbanizing part of the state. • • Mid Moraine Preserve: Background • Major Players: (a) Cedar Lakes Conservation Foundation (b) The Girl Scouts of Milwaukee (c) Washington County (d) The Town of West Bend (e) The City of West Bend • Land Protected: More than 500 acres • Stewardship Program: $450,000 in grants La Crosse Blufflands Protection Program: Background • Major Players: (a) Mississippi Valley Conservancy (MVC) (b) City of La Crosse • Funding: City budgets $275,000 per year to MVC; that money is leveraged with grants from the Stewardship Program Door County • Tourist destination. More shoreline than any other county in the country. Intense development pressure Major Players: (a) (b) (c) (d) Door County Land Trust The Nature Conservancy Ridges Sanctuary Wisconsin DNR • • Partners have undertaken regional planning and identified where each partner would focus efforts. Would not be possible without Stewardship. Complex Partnership Case Studies Conclusions • • • • Partnerships tend to develop where development pressures and land values are the highest Partnerships allow each partner to focus on their strengths with land trusts frequently providing real estate “know-how” and serving as Stewardship grant applicant Stewardship funding was not necessarily the reason for the formation of the partnership but was critical to partnership’s success. Stewardship grants are often leveraged many times over but provide essential core support