Laserfiche WebLink
applicants meet the crite ria? Since the IBCC was involve d in developing criteria and <br />guidelines, should we periodically review the criteria and guidelines to make sure they <br />still fit? <br /> <br />General Discussion: Some Basins have chosen to review groups of applications at the <br />same time s o that they can evaluate which is the best and highest priority for Basin funds <br />and for Roundtable support f rom statewide funds. The Roundtables doing this feel it has <br />made the process work well. <br /> <br />Needs Assessment Task Order Requests and Technical Issues <br /> <br />Eric Hecox began a review of activities to further develop the Roundtable’s needs assessments <br />by stating that the c ommu nications aspects of the IBCC are essential to how State, staff, CWCB <br />and other entities are working together. The State will be put to gether a quarterly newsl etter. <br />The first quarterly newsletter was distributed to IBCC members and contains an introduction by <br />Harris Sherman and a review of WSRA and Needs Assessment activities. As we move forward, <br />staff and IBCC/roundtable members shoul d continue to think about how to best use this piece as <br />a vehicle to communicate with the broader IBCC and Roundtable community. <br /> <br />Eric welcomed ideas and suggestions from IBCC members and Roundtables, and invited <br />Roundtables that wish to have specific to pics presented in the newsletter to contact Eric, Rick or <br />CDM. Eric plans to make the newsletter available on the internet, and will mail hard copies to <br />those IBCC members that could not attend. The State has also created a document explaining <br />the Interb asin Compact P rocess, which serves as a basic information piece that can be distributed <br />widely. <br /> <br />Eric then gave an update of the status of needs assessment work. Each Roundtable now has <br />SWSI information in the form of a basin report. The Roundtables ha ve been asked to think about <br />other sources of information relevant to their basin, and think through what the holes are that <br />need to be addressed in a needs assessment. Each Roundtable sent a letter to DNR stating what <br />their information needs are, and wha t they would like the consult ant to help them accomplish. <br />Eric worked with CDM, the consultant , to determine what could be done with the resources <br />available, and this information was sent out to the Roundtables via email. This information is <br />summarized i n the quarterly newsletter . For the majority of basins , the CDM team will be <br />helping Roundtables put together work plans, due to the fact that a lot of the studies requested <br />are larger than what can be accomplish ed with the available consultant resources. Some <br />Roundtables have very specific needs that the team will be able to accomplish within the existing <br />budget. <br /> <br />In addition to the needs assessment report, Eric told the group that SWSI 2 draft papers are now <br />available, and he is working with Rick to f ind the best way to disseminate this information , and <br />incorporate it into the roundtable’s need assessment . He also asked for the group’s help in <br />coordinating the execution of the needs assessment tasks identified, and expressed the DNR’s <br />interest in maki ng sure that these tasks are completed in a way that matches the Roundtable’s <br />expectations. If the process receives an infusion of funding after this leg islative session, Eric <br />will work with the IBCC to determine the best way to allocate those resources. <br /> 7 <br />