Laserfiche WebLink
<br />who want to apply for state funds need to have their full application in for the January meeting. All <br />applications need to be in 60 days prior to the CWCB meetings. If the Roundtable approves applicatons <br />for state funds in January, those applications can be provided to the CWCB for consideration at their <br />March Board meeting. The CWCB will only consider State pool applications at their March and <br />September meetings but Basin pool applications will be considered at every CWCB meeting. <br /> <br />The roundtable was reminded that there is currently $10 million available per year for four years, broken <br />into two accounts as follows: 1) nine basin accounts at $1 million each ($500,000 Jan-July; after July 15t <br />another $500,000); and 2) the competitive statewide account of $31 million. There will be a review by <br />CWCB for additional funds each October to make any adjustments to the program. It was estimated there <br />would likely be 10-12 projects vying for funds at our January meeting. It was noted that the CWCB has <br />funding available - not much grant money, however, mostly loans. <br /> <br />A lengthy discussion ensued related to whether the roundtable was ready to start accepting applicants and <br />what evaluation criteria to use. The group appeared split on whether to start accepting applications. <br />Affirmative comments included: We just need to take a number of example projects and run them up to <br />the state real soon. We need to get started and get a few projects in the hopper. This group needs to <br />move forward and take some applications in January just to get something done. And, we shouldn't <br />preclude project submittals if they're ready to go. Opposing comments included: "I don't agree that we <br />are ready to start accepting projects." And the comment was made that the roundtable needs to determine <br />the basin needs first - what do we want the basin to look like/at in terms of water use goals? In the end it <br />was decided that the roundtable would start accepting applications at their January loth meeting. At least <br />three applications will be brought in for consideration at that meeting: Mancos Water Conservancy <br />District ($100,000); San Juan Water Conservancy District ($500,000); and Farmers Water Development <br />Company ($2 million). <br /> <br />It was suggested that a subcommittee be established to look at projects and use state criteria for <br />evaluating. The subcommittee would determine whether the application was complete. Another comment <br />related to the need to develop pre-screening criteria - need to get back to the process of a new way of <br />looking at water. Pat Page, with the Bureau of Reclamation, informed the group that evaluation criteria <br />were developed related to the Water Information Program that might be helpful. He offered it for use by <br />the group as a foundation. A subcommittee was not established. <br /> <br />A concern was raised over whether we should look at applicants at every meeting. Another comment <br />related to the process of reaching consensus. Neither of these issues was addressed. <br /> <br />The group was reminded that the roundtables were intended to help small projects get started and that <br />larger money projects should go to the state. A comment was made that basin money should be used for <br />seed money to leverage funds to move the process along and that the 1177 money was designed to get <br />things going at the local level. Therefore, the basin roundtables may want to consider putting a cap (i.e., <br />$50,000 to $100,000) on smaller projects/studies. A suggestion was made to put a $50,000 cap on level <br />one projects and a $50,000-$100,000 cap for the next level of projects. Another suggestion was to <br />distinguish between studies and projects, each with their respective caps. <br /> <br />A comment was made that neither the basin, nor the statewide funds are going to be enough for the <br />number of water projects needed. A comment relating to this was that perhaps the decision on whether <br />there would be BIG money available in the future may depend on how we handle this smaller amount of <br />money now. Related to this, a comment was made that we need to strategize on a long-range plan to see <br />that there's more money in 2010. "Lets not fight for the money, but plan for the money." <br /> <br />3 <br />