Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Dave Giger (Parks): I don't know if the state can participate as a non-profit. I don't know <br />how it affects the Corps' lease we have. Confused with thought process, who handles the <br />contract to get the environmental and mitigation contract process. Hearing from CWCB <br />it has to be them until end of mitigation process. <br /> <br />Austin: Water users coming up with the water to pay for mitigation costs, this <br />organization would provide forum who develop the plans, writing the scope for the <br />consultants, getting them paid, whether it goes through CWCB or not, that's a detail to be <br />worked out. One question, state has owned shares of mutual ditch companies, so I think <br />it would work. <br /> <br />Rod: DOW owns a lot of stuff. <br /> <br />Austin: We make sure there will be nothing to cause problems, working on the articles of <br />incorporation, will need verybody's impyt. <br /> <br />Dave - State Parks: I am going to have to get my bosses, maybe the departments, how <br />this will affect the visitation of park, I can't make that decision. Talked with CWCB <br />earlier, several possibilities, CWCB does the contracting and we do the work, or CWCB <br />decides to do that, and we are the third wheel. If this changes in this process where you <br />are running it, I still get to be the third wheel, we have to understand that mitigation does <br />onsite, how recreation impacts the park. <br /> <br />Theresa(?) (Next to Rhonda): Write that into the specs. <br /> <br />Dave: Need to know who is hiring whom. More detail to come, but hiring consultants for <br />mitigation, how does that translate into people putting boats into the water. Is this <br />nonprofit hiring, or CWCB, and how much say do we have on this. <br /> <br />Theresa(?): Ultimately stops with CWCB. Whatever happens from there, if this entity <br />contracts, it will be to CWCB's liking. Buck stops here. <br /> <br />Dan: And without the statutory language we don't have authority to do it, we are dead <br />right now. Need authorization or we are done. <br /> <br />Rick: Did we beat it enough? Thanks, Dan. <br /> <br />Tom: Why don't we keep going, item 3 - Oversight committee Report. <br /> <br />3) Chatfield Oversight Committee Report <br /> <br />Rick: We have another two handouts. This was handed out last meeting last month. It <br />gives those of us working on budget for next year, some sense of what you might put into <br />a budget for consultant work for 2008, it's a guess. Could put in more, or less. For the <br />15 entities, and primarily, propose consultant work for 2008 halfway down the page. <br />Want to continue with lobbyist. Should be $84K. ERO Resources, this is relatively new <br />