SW
Idaho Resource Advisory Committee
Meeting Notes
Boise
Idaho
October 20, 2004
In Attendance:
SW Idaho RAC Members/Actings: David Whaley (Vice-Chair), Sandra
Mitchell, Lois Hoover, Robert Baker, Barry Ross, John McCarthy, Tom Glass, Ed
Mansfield, Dale Hanson John Gebhards, and Darel Harris
Designated Federal Officer: Doug Gochnour
Others: Andy
Brunelle (Legislative Affairs, USFS), Charlie LaRose (Recorder)
v
Vice-chair David Whaley called the meeting to
order at 10:40 a.m. The DFO, Doug
Gochnour indicated there was a quorum present.
v
The agenda was reviewed for changes. Doug stated that if time ran out all seven
projects would not have to be reviewed.
They are listed in priority order according to Ron Juliann’s
priority.
v
Charlie LaRose was introduced as the
notetaker. DFO Gochnour wanted the group
to know that Linda Steinhaus is the one behind the scenes setting up the room
and the great food and decorations. A
big thank-you to Linda!
v
DFO Gochnour apologized if everyone had not
received his email and sent around a list for everyone to update his or her
email. He asked if receiving all the
paperwork in one big stack would be convenient, everyone agreed. The minutes were to be reviewed later when
everyone had a chance to review them.
v
DFO Gochnour went over the expenses for last
month. He said he would include a sheet
at the next meeting. The expenditures
were $274.52 for lunch/refreshments; $31 for the legal notice; $176 per diem
for a total of $481.52.
A motion to approve the
expenditures as presented was made by Darel Harris Ed Mansfield seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
v
The meetings are usually held the third
Wednesday of the month. DFO Gochnour
suggested he send out an email to see if a meeting should be held on 17
November or have a combined meeting on 1 December since five meetings were
cancelled last year due to no projects.
v
Dust Abatement—DFO Gochnour stated that there
was a concern stated in the last minutes about the timing of the submissions
and using the entire budget to pursue dust abatement. Bob Baker stated that if there were surplus
funds at the end of the year, a percentage of those funds should be allocated
with a limitation of how much for each county.
This would force counties to reconsider their budgets and encourage them
to come in with viable projects.
Dale Hanson stated that dust
abatement was just a temporary fix and funding should target permanent
solutions such as paving of roads. Darel
Harris echoed Dale’s input that funding should be used for permanent, not temporary
solutions.
Louis Van Hoover stated that a
percentage should go to dust abatement.
That counties should look and see what they can do first, but she did
believe that a percentage at the end of the year should be used for dust abatement.
Barry Ross stated that the
committee should look at projects and see how the money is disbursed—other
committees disburse only once or twice a year.
It might be easier if we did it that way. We could accumulate projects all year, but
only disburse the funds at a certain time.
It would give us a chance to set up priorities and know how much money
we would have at the end of the year to actually give to dust abatement.
Tom Glass said that other RAC’s
disburse their funding the same way we do.
He wanted to know if there was a requirement on how often funds are
disbursed. David Whaley stated that the
RAC sets the direction on how they want to disburse the funding. John McCarthy stated that he felt all the
dust abatement projects should be held and reviewed at the same time. This way a priority order could be set up.
Bob Baker made the motion to
review dust abatement projects at the final meeting of the year. To consider the applications not to exceed
20% of our carryover balance. Each project
would be weighed one against the other for priority. We can try it one year (calendar year) and
see how it works. Then discuss if we
want to proceed the same way the next year.
Sandra Mitchell seconded the motion.
v
Darel Harris did not support the motion. He said there might be a high priority
project and that he thought dust abatement projects should be accepted at
regular meetings.
John McCarthy stated that Bob’s
proposal makes sense, that people can plan and know how much money is
available. John Gebhards said that in
the beginning of the year one project could potentially use the entire cap set
aside and no one else would get any money.
Sandra Mitchell said that it makes sense to compare the projects.
Bob Baker stated that RAC should
write a letter to all the road departments or county commissioners explaining
the process for dust abatement. He also
stated the letter should talk about matching funds.
David Whaley suggested the motion
be amended to add 05 dust abatement, they must apply by 1 February 06 and for 06
they must apply by 1 November.
Bob Baker made a motion to amend
the motion on the table to state that for fiscal year 04 the deadline would be
March 1, 2005 and that other applications would be considered in conjunction
with these abatement projects. On November 1, 2005 the
decision on the projects would be made.
Also we would relook in a year to see how the process was going. Sandra Mitchell seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
v
David Whaley said he reviewed the bylaws, etc to
find out if meetings had to be held every month or what the frequency was. There were no set times that he could find.
Bob Baker stated that we should
have meetings every other month unless we can’t get to the issues and have to
schedule a meeting in between.
Tom Glass made a motion to
change the meetings to every other month—pending revision. Ed Mansfield seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Lunch: A working lunch was provided.
v
Andy Brunelle that concerning status of
reappointments—they expire on the 28th of this month. Everybody applied to serve three more years
except Barry Ross. He had not heard from
John Cramer. He stated that the background
checks were done.
v
Andy Brunelle briefed that the reauthorization
of Legislation oversight hearings will be in early spring—part of a review
group in September met with the Deshutes and Umpqua RACs. The Deschutes money
goes into fuel treatment for the forest.
When thinning they use prison crews—getting 5 to 6,000 acres done
annually. One issue brought up in the
review was how well have RACs stuck to the 50 percent into watershed and road
maintenance? The WO was concerned—RACs
need to make sure that anything listed as a watershed restoration project,
truly is. The Idaho RAC more than
exceeded the 50 percent. Andy discussed
a conference call he had concerning having another Workshop in Reno.
David Whaley recommended that
this be brought up in April to discuss if we will have another Workshop. Ed Mansfield made a motion to have the
information discussed and decided in April.
Lois Van Hoover seconded the motion.
Motion carried unanimously.
v
Barry Ross asked a question about the evaluation
criteria. He was asking if there is
truly a benefit to keep using the same evaluation criteria for selecting
projects. Sandra Mitchell stated that
she thinks it still has value. Lois Van
Hoover said it helps her to see someone else’s perspective on an issue and it
has changed her opinion at times.
Barry Ross stated that we could
get rid of item #4 because there were no projects that went longer that one
year. Lois Van Hoover stated that one of
the dust abatement projects was a 3-year project, but it was only funded for
one year. Darel Harris felt it was an
obligation to the applicant to put each project through the same process. Andy Brunelle stated that the criteria for
projects are that they will have widespread public support—this committee
represents that support because it represents a large scope of communities. The process works because of that. Tom Glass said that he felt comfortable with
how we approach each project—it gives everyone a chance to get all the
information together, especially for the inexperienced person reviewing the
project.
Tom Glass made a motion to keep
the evaluation criteria as is. Lois Van
Hoover seconded the motion and it was unanimously accepted.
Barry Ross made a motion to
accept the minutes from the previous meeting as written. Ed Mansfield seconded and the motion was
accepted unanimously.
Project Log#: 05001
Project Name:
Southern Valley County Snowmobile Map
Project Sponsor:
Ronn Julian, Cascade Ranger District, Boise National Forest
Ronn explained how he sees projects from planning to design,
to administration and then implementation.
He discussed how the northern part of the county has a map put together
by the Payette National Forest. The map
from the Boise National Forest is outdated, out of print and no longer
available. Establishing a map using the
forest’s computer system—they could create the map and put in it in reproducible
from to the local communities and/or Chamber of Commerce.
This would benefit the overall tourist program and bring in
new customers to use this map. The
estimated cost to establish the map is $2,800.00, which would include the draft
copies and salary time. The forest would
take the copies to the communities.
Bob Baker stated that if he went to the forest to get a map
to go camping, it costs $6.00—how come snowmobilers don’t have to pay, but
campers do? I don’t think it fits the
criteria. Tom Glass said that he is an
old snowmobiler and recognizes the need for good maps, but it would be a major
stretch to get it to fit the criteria.
David Whaley stated why should campers have to pay and snowmobilers get
a map free? Dale Hanson also stated that
it wouldn’t be fair to give free maps to some and not others. John Gebhards said next it would be free maps
for hikers, horsemen, campers, etc.
Bob Baker made a motion to deny
the project since it did not fit the intent of the program. Dale Hanson seconded. The motion carried, 2 abstained.
Project Log #: 05002
Project Name:
Paradise Valley (Road #488) Surfacing
Project Sponsor:
Ronn Julian, Cascade Ranger District, Boise National Forest
This project would include the reshaping of the roadbed, reshaping
of existing drainage structures, and placement of crushed aggregate on .41
miles of the Paradise Valley Road #488 between the Cabin Creek Road #467 and
the Cabin Creek Ford. A private
contractor would complete this work.
Darel Harris stated that we agreed not to pay for
administrative costs. It states that you
need $1,500 in contract administration.
It was decided on April 21, 2004 that we not pay d, e, and f on the Project
Cost Analysis Table, which are project design and engineering, contract preparation
and contract administration. Lois Van
Hoover asked Ronn, “If we do not pay the administrative costs, will you do the
project?” Ronn stated that he would not
do the project without the administrative costs. Darel Harris stated if we don’t pay the
contract administration, it’s not productive to go through the review.
Darel Harris made a motion to
deny project 05002 due to the committee’s policy on not paying administrative
costs. Barry Ross seconded the
motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Project Log #: 05003
Project Name:
East Mountain Communication Site Lightning Protection
Project Sponsor:
Ronn Julian, Cascade Ranger District, Boise National Forest
The Forest Service replaced the East Mountain communication
site last fiscal year. The original
communication site was located in the old East Mountain Lookout building, which
was destroyed in a wildfire several years ago.
Lightning protection was not included in the site replacement contract,
but is needed to protect new, sensitive electronic equipment. This communication site is vital to not only
the Forest Service but is needed to protect new, sensitive electronic
equipment. This communication site is vital
to not only the Forest Service, but is utilized by the Valley County Sheriff’s
Department, Valley County Snowmobile Groomer operations, and Valley County
Search and Rescue.
Bob Baker asked Ronn if the committee did not fund the $500
for contract administration, would he still go on with the project? Lois Van Hoover stated that this is
extremely important to Valley County and to all emergency services—the County
Commissioners gave their support. Bob
Baker asked why this was not being funded through Title 3, which is
specifically for this type of funding?
DFO Gochnour asked the questions for Part I of the Evaluation Criteria.
Part I evaluation:
|
Matching
Funds
|
Multiple
Benefits
|
Affordable
|
Completed in
One Year or
Annual
Increments
|
Long-term
Benefits
|
Finite
Project
|
Admin
Costs
|
|
N
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
N
|
Tom Glass made the motion to
move to Part 2 of the Evaluation Criteria.
Dale Hanson seconded.
Discussion: Barry
Ross stated this needs to be moved to Title 3, its not appropriate under Title
2. Bob Baker concurred.
Barry Ross made a motion to deny
Project 05003 due to this being a Title 3 project. Bob Baker seconded. Motion carries not to recommend this project
because it belongs in Title 3.
v
Sandra Mitchell wanted to revisit the last item
05002. She wanted to know if
administrative costs could be considered under matching funds. Lois Van Hoover said that we couldn’t fund
administrative costs to government agencies that already receive funds. John McCarthy stated that the staff is
getting paid administrative costs. So, why would we give money to do that—we
are doubling their salary. Barry Ross
stated that he was definitely opposed to supplementing forest service
budgets—they can get other entities involved to make that happen. Darel Harris said he would not support.
Dale Hanson made a motion to
reconsider Project 05002. John Gebhards
seconded. No one voted for the motion.
The motion was denied.
v
John McCarthy said that he sees a problem with
Projects 05004 and 05005, due to administrative costs, etc. But he did not see a problem with 05006 and
05007. He wanted to know if we could
change the order and review 05006 and 05007 first.
Barry Ross made a motion to
amend the agenda to start with Projects 05007 and 05006 and then go on with
05005 and 05004. Bob Baker seconded the
motion. The motion was unanimously
accepted.
Project Log #:
05007
Project Name: Kline Mountain Road Restoration
Project Sponsor: Ronn
Julian, Cascade Ranger District, Boise National Forest
The purpose of the project addresses an increasing need to
provide for public safety, improving water quality and fisheries habitat, and
providing quality recreational experience.
It also fulfills direction identified in the revised Boise National
Forest Land and Resource management Plan at the Forest-wide level and for Management
Area 19—Warm Lake. The project is
located north of Stolle Meadows, south of the Warm Lake Highway and west of
Warm Lake. The project is located
approximately 20 miles northeast of Cascade in the South Fork Salmon river
drainage.
Part I evaluation:
|
Matching
Funds
|
Multiple
Benefits
|
Affordable
|
Completed in
One Year or
Annual
Increments
|
Long-term
Benefits
|
Finite
Project
|
Admin
Costs
|
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
N
|
Barry Ross made a motion to move
on to Part 2 of the evaluation criteria.
Sandra Mitchell seconded the motion.
It was unanimously carried.
Part 2 Evaluation:
|
Multiple
Benefits
|
Community
Stability
& Job Opps
|
Cooperative
Relations
|
Benefit/
Cost
& Affordable
|
Project
Quality
& Coord
|
Matching
Funds
|
Urgency
To
Implement
|
Tangible
Outcome
|
|
5
|
5
|
5
|
5
|
5
|
5
|
4
|
5
|
Part 2 of the Evaluation Criteria equaled 35.4
Sandra Mitchell moved to fund
Project 05007 upon the contingent on receiving a 319 grant for the
administrative costs. Barry Ross
seconded the motion. The motion carried
unanimously.
Project Log #:
05006
Project Name: YCC Program—Cascade Ranger District
Project Sponsor: Ronn
Julian, Cascade Ranger District, Boise National Forest
This project is intended to be an 8-week working session for
5 area youth to learn insights into resource management. The emphasis will be hands on learning in a
variety of work situations as well as environmental education where area
specialists will conduct one day a week learning sessions in the field. Youth will be paid up to $7.00 per hour for a
40-hour week. Project also includes cost
of a crew boss (temporary employee) and vehicle (possibly rental from local
vendor). Barry Ross wanted to know why
there were not school district costs under “Other Contributions”.
Barry Ross made a motion to
amend the proposal and add $1,000 in matching funds under “Other
Contributions”. Bob Baker seconded and
the motion carried unanimously.
Bob Baker made a motion to
dispense with the Part 2 (chart) section of the evaluation and to go ahead and
approve Project 05007. Barry Ross
seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously.
Project Log #:
05005
Project Name: Yellow Pine SST’s
Project Sponsor: Ronn
Julian, Cascade Ranger District, Boise National Forest
The community of Yellow Pine hosts several public events (4th
of July celebration, Harmonica Festival, Golf Tournament, etc) attracting a
large number of people. Commercial
lodging within the community is very limited, resulting in a large portion of
the visiting public camping on private lands or on the adjacent National Forest
system lands. This high concentration of
dispersed campers causes unsanitary conditions.
The only National Forest developed campground in the area, is the Yellow
Pine Campground, with 14 campsites. This
project would place 2 concrete vaulted SST’s near to the Yellow Pine Fire Hall
or on School property.
Tom Glass wanted to know if the property it was placed on
would become matching funds. Barry Ross
wanted to know if the community was going to pay any funds. Lois Van Hoover stated that the community
didn’t have any money to put into the pot.
Bob Baker wanted to know how we could use Federal money to put an SST on
school property. He wanted to know who
owns them when they are built and who maintains them.
A motion was made by Barry Ross
to table Project 05005 until the questions of ownership and maintenance are
answered. Also any matching funds needs
to be shown on the proposal. Sandra
Mitchell seconded the motion. Project
05005 was unanimously tabled.
Project Log #:
05004
Project Name: Landmark Airfield Rehabilitation
Project Sponsor: Ronn
Julian, Cascade Ranger District, Boise National Forest
This would be to rehabilitate the Landmark Airfield (remote)
following heavy use for several consecutive years. This would upgrade tie down and camping
facilities.
Barry Ross stated that the project had administrative
costs. Asks how did the runway get in
the condition it is in. Ronn Julian
explained that Pistol Creek Ranch had several planes flying in with
supplies. The planes were heavy and tore
up the runway. Barry Ross asked why
Pistol Creek Ranch couldn’t pay the administrative costs since they use it so
much. Bob Baker stated that Pistol Creek
Ranch should be asked to pay the administrative costs.
Bob Baker made a motion to table
Project 05004 until more information is received on matching funds. Dale Hanson seconded the motion and the
motion carried unanimously.
v
David Whaley mentioned that back in February or
April the group had talked about administrative costs, but he couldn’t find
where there had been an actual decision.
Randy Zwick was supposed to get back to the group on this. Now, Doug Gochnour will have to come back to
the group and review the decision on administrative costs.
v
The meeting adjourned at 4:12 p.m. and the next
meeting will be decided by contacting Doug Gochnour. It will either be on November 17 or December
1st. An agenda item for the
next meeting would be to address the issue on administrative costs.
v
Review of decisions at this meeting:
1.
Approval of RAC expenditures--$274.52 for lunch/refreshments; $31 for
the legal
notice; $176 per diem for a total of $481.52.
2.
To review dust abatement dust abatement projects at the final meeting of
the year. To
consider the applications not to exceed 20% of our carryover
balance. Each project
would be weighed one against the other for priority. We can try it one year (calendar
year) and see how it works. Then
discuss if we want to proceed the same way the next
year and that for fiscal year 04 the deadline would be March 1, 2005 and
that other
applications would be considered in conjunction with these abatement
projects. On
November 1, 2005 the decision on the projects would be made. Also we would relook
in a year to see how the process was going.
3. To change the meetings to every
other month—add a meeting in between if there were
a lot of projects
4.
Discuss later on in April if there should be another Workshop in Reno
5.
It was decided to keep the evaluation criteria the way it is.
6.
To deny Project 05001 (Southern Valley County Snowmobile Map) because it
did not
meet the intent of the program
7.
To deny Project 05002 (Paradise Valley Road Surfacing) due to the
committee’s
policy on not paying administrative costs.
8. To deny Project 05003 (Lightning Protection
East Mtn Communication Site) due to it
being a
Title 3 project
9. To fund Project 05007 (Kline Mountain Road
Restoration) upon the contingent of
receiving a 319 grant for the
administrative costs.
10. To fund Project 05006 (YCC Program) with an
amendment to add $1,000 in matching
funds under “other contributions”.
11. Project 05005 (Yellow Pine SSTs) was tabled
until ownership and maintenance
questions are answered.
12. Project 05004 (Landmark Airfield
Rehabilitation) was tabled until more information is
received
on matching funds.
