Meeting Notes - 11-9-06 - Needs Assessment Wor

• Working Group: Needs Assessment
• Title: Meeting Notes
• Date: 11/9/2006
• Interbasin CC - Doc Type: Meeting Notes

The Working Group discussed its future tasks and composition. Its members decided
to ask the IBBC to discuss:

1. whether the composition of the group was adequate and broad enough to represent
the interests of all basins, without having someone from each basin on the group,
and

2. what composition for the Work Group will be desirable or necessary to have its
recommendations be widely perceived as fair, balanced and with a state
perspective in mind.

The Role and Tasks l?l the Work Group in providing input to the state regarding
task undertaken pursuant to the Technical Contract

Eric Hecox provided an update on his role to date in managing issues related to needs
assessment studies. He has asked roundtables to provide ideas for studies, their
priorities and timing, and to send this information to the DNR. He is not at this time
asking about preferences for sources of funding to conduct studies.

This data will be assembled into one matrix document and provided to the Needs
Assessment Work Group and others to use in its work.

It is expected that the Work Group, with input from the CWCB and others, will
review and discuss the studies proposed in the matrix document, and develop a
workplan that will recommend specific studies, prioritize task orders and the timing
of research. The Work Grou p will be asked for input on workplans and prioritization
if there are more requests for studies than can be accommodated in anyone fiscal
year.

A question was asked, "Does this mean that roundtables will have to wait until all
others have had input for their studies to be recommended and funded?" Eric H. says,
no. The State will probably will have enough requests and information to move
forward on some activities in early 2007. The State, IBCC and the Work Group will
not have to wait until every roundtable provides input.

A concern was raised about expenditures for very expensive studies and potential
impacts this might have on available funding for subsequent ones. A suggestion to
address this issue was to set a limit for each study, for example $50,000. If the
request is within that limit, it could be approved and funded. If the study was more
expensive, approval might have to wait until the proposal could be compared with
others that came in later.

Ultimately, a decision will have to be made by the State with input from the
roundtables, the working group and/or the IBCC about which task orders will be
funded and which might be re-worked as a SB-179 application. The Work Group
could provide recommendation and input to help make this kind of decision.