My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RGBRT Minutes of 11-14-06
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
Backfile
>
RGBRT Minutes of 11-14-06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 4:17:15 PM
Creation date
7/16/2007 1:41:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Basin Roundtables
Basin Roundtable
Rio Grande
Title
Minutes
Date
11/14/2006
Basin Roundtables - Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Steve — discussion of future IBCC mission and work plan still to be discussed as CWCB <br />has the basic responsibil i ty to approve projects. IBCC has to answer: “What are we <br />for?” <br /> <br />Ray — remember that in order for a project to be funded, any proposal must be approved <br />by the RT in the affected basin — so far not aware of any interb asin projects being <br />discussed <br /> <br />Note that once an application is approved by CWCB – then there will still be contracts to <br />be developed, at leas t another 45 to 60 days will likely be necessary for that. . <br /> <br />Mike G - reviewed his outline for project submissions and there was discussion about <br />how and when we should review applications here. <br /> <br />Ray — for the competitive grants, it will be more important to development projects that <br />will hold up state - wide and receive funding. <br /> <br />Cindy M - asked about who to ask questions of as developing application — who is the <br />equivalent of the “Program Officer” for these ? <br /> <br />Mike G will serve for this for the time being — with support from Eric and o thers at State <br />office — requests that applications be submitted at least 10 days prior to our lo cal RT <br />meeting <br /> <br />Steve V — thinks that a presentation of their proposal by the applicant would also be <br />helpful <br /> <br />Applications and guidelines were sent out to everyone – RT members, agency <br />representatives, and others who attend meetings -- and are available on th e DNR web <br />site. <br /> <br />Mike G reviewed the Q&A handout from Eric Hecox. He n oted that funds will be <br />available on a reimbursement basis. Also n oted that the Needs Assessment contract <br />with CDM is not completed as yet, so that process is not yet moving forward . <br /> <br />Noted that: Entities which are subject to TABOR, such as the SLV WCD and RGWCD <br />are currently NOT eligible to receive any of the SB 179 funding, as that money is state <br />funds. One solution could be for Districts to develop an “enterprise” – but those can o nly <br />receive 10% of their funds from state monies. <br /> <br />Question raised about the sub districts abili ty to access these funds as well? <br /> <br />Steve V — short term, the sub districts are part of RGWCD, so at this point are subject to <br />TABOR as well. Struggling to determ ine what entity could receive these funds. <br /> <br />Ray — believes that sub districts could borrow funds however. <br /> Page 2 of 7 RGBRT Minutes <br /> <br /> November 14 , 2006 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.