2000-10-26_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

SWSR Meeting Minutes June 29, 2000 Page Five review. We currently have six limited duration CREP applications that are pending ($26, 000). Staff recommends two options: 1) Fund the six applications we already have on the books. This is only fair to the landowners and SWCDs involved who were operating under the assumption that they would be funded come July 1. 2) Do not fund the six applications at this time. Wait until the next review and assessment by the RIM/CREP Advisory Committee. This will be in December or January. Refer to the following proposed policy. Policy Recommendation: No matter what is decided concerning the six limited duration applications we have already received, from this point forward BWSR operate under the following policy: "Limited duration easement applications received will be evaluated of a meeting of the RlM/CREP Advisory Committee on asemi-annual basis. Decisions to fund will be based on overall application numbers (both limited and perpetual and whether or not we're on pace towards our 100,000 acre CREP enrollment goa/s". This will make it clear that in light of our less than ideal bond appropriation, and the legislative priority for perpetual easements, that limited duration CREP easements applications canot be funded on the same non-competitive basis that perpetual applications currently are. Ran stated that staff recommend Option 1. Moved by Char Kahler, seconded by Clair Nelson, to adopt Option 1. Discussion followed. Allan Oehlke strongly suggested that board members think about things before making changes to the language. Chair Roer asked what in our policy needs to be fixed, or why do we need this new policy? Ron said that as of July 1 we will accept applications for all options without specific priority. Chair Roer stated that this policy supercedes the policy from one year ago regarding limited duration easements. Tabor Hoek suggested a pot of money up front. Wayne Edgerton stated that we should consider the concerns of FSA and stay with the current policy. Motion defeated. ** Discussion followed. Moved by Jim Dahlvang, seconded by Jerome Deal, to accept the 00-5o six pending applications we already have. Motion passed on a voice vote. ** Moved by Clair Nelson, seconded by Ginny Imholte, to continue with the policy as it 00-51 exists with perpetual easements as a priority and allocate up to $1.5M for limited duration easements, first-come, first-serve basis; with review of the policy revisited on a semi-annual basis with input from the RIM Reserve Advisory Committee. Motion passed on a voice vote.